Exhibit 25 — Cerritos City Council, July 27, 2026

MEMORANDUM
To: Amanda Acuna, Current Planning Manager; City of Cerritos From: Rachel Struglia, Project Manager, Nicole Greenberg, Environmental Task Lead; Dudek Subject: Categorical Exemption Class 32 Memorandum for the Dick’s House of Sport Project, City of Cerritos, California
Date: February 6, 2026
Attachments: A – Figures 1–3
B – VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment
C – Noise Technical Memorandum
D – Air Quality Technical Memorandum
E – Hazardous Waste Site Review
F – Asbestos Report
G – Historic Resources Assessment
1 Executive Summary
This memorandum describes the proposed Dick’s House of Sport Project in Cerritos, California, and determines that the Project is a “project” as defined by Section 21065(c) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) but is exempt from further review requirements pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061 and 15332 (Class 32, In-fill Development Exemption). The Project consists of the demolition of the two-story former Sears building and adjoining merchandizing building and loading dock at 100 Los Cerritos Center and potential replacement with a new two-story Dick’s House of Sport and related ancillary outdoor athletic field uses consisting of artificial turf on

4.65 acres of land in Cerritos, California (Project Site).

The Class 32 categorical exemption requires projects to be consistent with applicable general plans and zoning designations, located within a city’s limits on a site 5 acres or less, bordered by urban uses, and without significant impacts relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality (14 CCR 15332). The site must also be devoid of habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, and adequately served by public utilities and services. As detailed in this memorandum, the Project qualifies for a Class 32 categorical exemption because it meets all criteria (i.e., it is consistent with the applicable land use regulations of the City of Cerritos [City], is proposed on an infill site that is less than 5 acres in size, and is not anticipated to result in any significant environmental impacts) and it does not meet any of the exceptions to categorical exemptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

DUDEK
27271 LAS RAM BLAS, SUITE 340
MISSION VIEJO, CALIFORNIA 92691
T 949.450.2525
DUDEK.COM
Exhibit 25

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 2
FEBRUARY 2026
2 Environmental Setting and Project Description

2.1 Environmental Setting
The Project proposes an infill redevelopment on a 4.65-acre site at 100 Los Cerritos Mall in Cerritos, California, located within the Los Cerritos Center, replacing a previously occupied Sears main building and associated merchandizing building and loading dock with a new Dick’s House of Sport, an ancillary outdoor athletic field consisting of artificial turf, and associated site improvements.

Regional Location: Figure 1, Regional Location and Local Vicinity, provides the general location of the Project Site within the context of Los Angeles County (all figures can be found in Attachment A).

Project Site: The Project Site is a 4.65-acre area outlined on Figure 2, Project Site Boundary. The Project Site is defined by the area in which work associated with the Project’s demolition and new construction will take place. No demolition, new development, or other construction activity related to the Project would occur in the other portions of the Los Cerritos Center. The main Sears building is encircled by a concrete pedestrian walkway, and low ornamental shrubs are planted at corner locations around the building. The former Sears merchandise pickup and loading dock area is located on the southwest side of the Sears building and is separated by a covered sidewalk, with the canopy connecting both the Sears and merchandising buildings. The Project Site is accessed from 183rd Street and also can be accessed from adjoining parking lots and access roads within the Los Cerritos Center. The Project Site predominantly consists of buildings and parking areas and is impervious, except for select ornamental trees, shrubs, and grass areas scattered throughout the Project Site.

Adjacent Uses: As shown on Figure 2, immediately surrounding the Project Site to the north, east, and west are surface parking, internal drive aisles, and landscaped islands, as well as drive aisles providing access to surrounding streets. The former Sears automotive center is located to the northeast of the Project Site bordering 183rd Street and is positioned between two of the Los Cerritos Center entry drives. To the south and east of the Project Site is the Los Cerritos Center, which is an irregularly shaped, one-story enclosed shopping complex bounded by Interstate 605 (San Gabriel River Freeway) to the west, 183rd Street to the north, Gridley Road to the east, and South Street to the south. Land uses east and west of Gridley Road, north of 183rd Street, and south of South Street include commercial buildings, restaurants, and surface parking lots, with residential neighborhoods also present east of Gridley Road and south of South Street. Immediately west of Interstate 605 (San Gabriel River Freeway), the area is predominantly commercial, featuring automotive centers and car dealerships.

2.2 Project Description
The Project is an infill redevelopment on the 4.65-acre Project Site and includes the following elements:

Demolition: The Project proposes the removal of an existing Sears building (vacant except for temporary uses since 2019) and an adjoining merchandising building and loading dock totaling 277,559 square feet located within the Project Site. The existing main Sears building is connected at one entry to the northern portion of the Los Cerritos Center. This connection will be blocked off during demolition and construction of the Project with a temporary drywall barricade. Upon completion of construction, the temporary drywall barricade will be taken down, restoring the connection between the Los Cerritos Center and the new Dick’s House of Sport that previously existed with DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 3
FEBRUARY 2026
Sears. The existing Sears main building, merchandizing building, and loading dock being demolished are shown on Figure 2.

New Construction: Following demolition, the Project will include 160,500 square feet of new retail development, consisting of a 142,000-square-foot Dick’s House of Sport retail store with experiential sports zones and specialty areas, and an 18,500-square-foot outdoor athletic field adjoining the new retail building, accessible only from within the new store and to be used for the experiential use of sporting equipment and store-related activities. The Project would remove 66 existing parking stalls and add 11 new parking spaces, resulting in a net reduction of 55 on-site parking spaces.

The Project Site improvements will include underground utility upgrades, landscaping, deep soil mixing and earthwork, certified pad preparation, enhanced pedestrian connections, and adjustments to the interior ring road to accommodate the new use. Figure 3, Project Site Exhibit, illustrates the Project Site and depicts the proposed layout of the Dick’s House of Sport and field on the parcel.

2.3 Project Construction
The Project would be initiated in February 2026 and continue for approximately 16 months, with completion expected in May 2027 and the new Dick’s House of Sport opening in early 2028. The construction schedule is detailed in Table 1.

Table 1. Construction Phases and Duration
Construction Phases Duration (workdays)
Demolition 49
Site Preparation 0
Grading 30
Building Construction 255
Paving/Repaving 13
Architectural Coating 20
Source: Attachment D, Air Quality Technical Analysis.

Further details on the construction schedule and equipment projects can be found in Attachment C, Noise Technical Memorandum, and Attachment D, Air Quality Technical Memorandum. 3 Environmental Analysis Pursuant to CEQA
A project qualifies for a Class 32 categorical exemption if it satisfies the requirements for CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects), as detailed below:

Class 32 consists of projects characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described in this section.

A The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 4
FEBRUARY 2026
B The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

C The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

D Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

E The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The following analysis demonstrates the Project’s consistency with the Class 32 categorical exemption.

3.1 General Plan and Zoning Consistency
The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Land Use Consistency: The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation, all applicable general plan policies, and the applicable zoning designation and regulations.

Land Use and Zoning Designations
The Project Site comprises a portion of Assessor’s Parcel Number 7038-014-016 and, as of the date of this memorandum, is designated as Regional Commercial in the City of Cerritos General Plan (City of Cerritos 2004a).

The Regional Commercial designation applies to large retail centers serving a regional market and composes 6.6% of the City’s land use (City of Cerritos 2004a). Permitted uses include department stores, specialty retail, restaurants, offices, automobile dealerships, hotels, and other complementary uses, with auto sales allowed in specific zones. Due to high traffic volumes, these areas are typically located near freeways and away from residential uses. The Regional Commercial designation is compatible with the Regional Commercial zoning district.

The Project Site is currently not subject to an adopted Area Development Plan (ADP) or Specific Plan under the City of Cerritos General Plan (City of Cerritos 2004a). On December 11, 2025, the Cerritos City Council reviewed and considered a Development Code Amendment (DCA 2025-1), a General Plan Amendment (GPA 2025-1), and a Development Map Amendment (DMA 2025-1) for the establishment of three ADPs for three sites identified in the City’s 2021–2029 Housing Element. “Area development plans, as provided for in Chapter 22.10 of the Cerritos Municipal Code, are instruments for guiding, coordinating, and regulating the development of a property within a given area. Similar to a ‘specific plan’, area development plans establish site-specific development standards that are consistent with, and carry out, the provisions and objectives of a City’s General Plan” (City of Cerritos 2025a).

Accordingly, on December 11, 2025, the Cerritos City Council adopted GPA 2025-1, establishing the ADP-21 land use designation, and approved the first reading of the ordinances for DCA 2025-1 and DMA 2025-1. The ordinances were subsequently read for a second reading and adopted on January 12, 2026, thereby establishing the ADP-21 zoning district. ADP-21 encompasses approximately 19.53 acres and includes commercial uses and parking facilities that support Los Cerritos Center, including the 4.65-acre Project Site. ADP-21 permits all uses allowed within the Regional Commercial zoning designation, including department stores, specialty retail, restaurants, offices, automobile dealerships, hotels, and other complementary uses, while also allowing for the potential of residential development (City of Cerritos 2025b).

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 5
FEBRUARY 2026
Although the site is identified in the Housing Element as a potential opportunity site for residential development, the Project would not preclude future housing with the ADP. Residential development capacity would remain within the balance of the ADP-21 area, approximately 14.88 acres, allowing for the continued implementation of the City’s housing objectives. At the same time, the Project would support the establishment of Los Cerritos Center into a mixed-use “life style” center.

The City of Cerritos General Plan sets forth goals and policies that guide both Citywide and community-specific land use policies. The General Plan is composed of a variety of state-mandated elements, including, but not limited to, Land Use, Community Design, Noise, and Growth Management.

Land Use Element
The Land Use Element guides how the City will develop and redevelop over time by establishing the type, intensity, and distribution of land uses for housing, business, industry, open space, and public uses. It provides goals, policies, and a land use map to inform decision-making by both public officials and private citizens about future development and community character (City of Cerritos 2004a).

Goal LU-1: Preserve, promote and protect the existing high-quality physical development that characterizes the City and quality of life within the City of Cerritos.

Policy LU-1.1: Encourage high-quality design and construction for development that is a positive addition to and compatible with the City’s existing ambiance. Development shall enhance the character and unique identity of existing commercial, industrial and/or residential uses. Development shall be defined to include landscaping, parking, lighting, business identification signs and buildings.

Goal LU-2: Provide a balance of residential and non-residential development throughout the City.

Policy LU-2.2: Coordinate redevelopment and planning activities and resources to balance land uses, amenities and civic facilities in order to sustain or improve the quality of life.

Policy LU-2.4: Attract and maintain land uses that generate revenue for the City of Cerritos, while maintaining a balance of other community needs such as housing, open space and public facilities.

Goal LU-3: Promote and assist the growth and vitality of existing commercial centers.

Policy LU-3.1: Monitor the conditions and status of older neighborhood commercial centers and underutilized commercially-zoned parcels.

Goal LU-4: Adjacent land uses shall be compatible with one another.

Goal LU-5: Rehabilitate and/or remove abandoned buildings/facilities.

Goal LU-7: Promote infill development on vacant or underutilized parcels.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 6
FEBRUARY 2026
Policy LU-7.1: Ensure that infill projects contribute to the further development of the surrounding neighborhood (e.g., improve circulation, contribute to or provide neighborhood unity, eliminate a blighted area and enhance the existing quality of life).

Policy LU-7.4: Encourage the development of permanent infill commercial and/or office uses on vacant or underutilized sites greater than ½-acre in size, that are part of a larger commercial center, and zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial) or CC (Community Commercial). If the subject site is an existing commercial center that is in a state of decline, the City should consider the redevelopment or rezoning of the commercial center to a more appropriate use.

The Project is consistent with the City of Cerritos General Plan Land Use Element, which encourages high-quality redevelopment, removal of vacant buildings, and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized parcels in infill areas, and compatibility with surrounding uses. The goals emphasize economic vitality, a mix of commercial uses, and development that contributes positively to community character and functionality. By redeveloping the inactive Sears building with an active retail use and ancillary sports field, the Project revitalizes a fully developed site, enhances the regional commercial center, and provides community-serving amenities in line with the City’s longrange land use vision.

Community Design Element
The Community Design Element shapes the visual identity and quality of Cerritos by promoting high-quality, cohesive design in public and private development. It aims to enhance livability, preserve positive design features, and support a strong sense of place for residents and visitors (City of Cerritos 2004a).

Goal CD-1: Strengthen and maintain Cerritos’ image as a unique place by maintaining, enhancing and creating physical features that distinguish Cerritos from surrounding communities and distinguish it as a livable community.

Policy CD-1.6: Support measures that will enhance the identity of special districts and neighborhoods to create variety and interest in the built environment.

Goal CD-3: Ensure that buildings and related site improvements for private development are well designed and compatible with surrounding properties and districts.

Policy CD-3.1: Continue to place a high priority on quality architecture, landscape, and site design to enhance the image of Cerritos, and create a vital and attractive environment for businesses, residents and visitors.

Policy CD-3.2: Continue to use precise plans for all developments, (which should include architectural design, site plans, landscaping and signing) to review and evaluate projects prior to issuance of building permits to determine their compliance with the objectives and specific requirements of the Development Code, General Plan and appropriate zone or Area Development Plans.

Policy CD-3.4: Ensure that good project landscape and site design creates places that are well organized, attractive, efficient, safe and pedestrian friendly.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 7
FEBRUARY 2026
Policy CD-3.7: Ensure that buildings are appropriate to their context and designed to be compatible with surrounding uses and special districts.

The Project is consistent with the City Cerritos General Plan Community Design Element, which promotes high-quality design, a strong visual identity, and an improved physical environment. Redeveloping the underutilized Sears site with a modern Dick’s House of Sport and ancillary sports field enhances community character, economic vitality, and the functionality of the Los Cerritos Center. Ornamental landscaping and a pedestrian sidewalk further improve the site’s appearance and provide safe access, supporting the Community Design goals and policies. The Project will be subject to the City’s precise plan review process, which will ensure compliance with Cerritos Municipal Code design requirements.

Noise Element
The Noise Element establishes a framework to assess current and future noise conditions in Cerritos and guide land use planning to minimize noise conflicts and ensure compatibility between uses. It identifies major noise sources, considers sensitive receptors, and provides standards and mitigation measures to protect public health and welfare. The Element also offers guidance for complying with state noise insulation requirements and informs development and land use decisions (City of Cerritos 2004a).

Goal N-2: Develop measures to control non-transportation noise impacts.

Policy N-2.2: Strive to resolve existing and potential conflicts between noise generating uses and human activities.

Policy N-2.3: Ensure noise mitigation techniques are incorporated into all construction-related activities.

Goal N-3: Include noise considerations as a part of land use planning decisions.

Policy N-3: Enforce noise standards, as contained in the City’s Noise Ordinance.

Policy N-3.4: Consider noise impacts associated with the development of non-residential uses in the vicinity of residential uses.

The Project complies with the Noise Element goals and policies by incorporating measures to minimize non-transportation noise impacts and ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. Construction activities will implement standard noise mitigation techniques, and the design of the new Dick’s House of Sport, including building orientation, site layout, and landscaping, will reduce potential conflicts with adjacent uses. Noise levels associated with ongoing operations would be expected to remain within the City’s standards, supporting consistency with Goals N-2 and N-3 and their associated policies.

Growth Management Element
The Growth Management Element establishes goals and policies to ensure the City can accommodate growth and development while maintaining adequate infrastructure, public services, and long-term fiscal sustainability. It focuses on infrastructure capacity, service provision, transportation, emergency services, and coordinated planning to support both existing and future development needs.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 8
FEBRUARY 2026
Goal GM-1: Water and sewer service shall be adequate to meet the health and safety needs of residents and businesses in Cerritos.

Goal GM-1.4: Ensure that water and sewer infrastructure systems are adequate to accommodate any intensification of uses, as well as existing uses, particularly as development intensifies and/or redevelopment occurs in the City
Goal GM-2: Ensure storm water conveyance systems are adequate.

Policy GM-2.1: Ensure that new development provides sufficient analysis of potential drainage impacts.

Goal GM-6: Provide adequate transportation and circulation system to meet the needs of residents and businesses in Cerritos.

Policy GM-8.3: Promote the development and/or redevelopment of commercial retail facilities on vacant and/or underutilized properties within the City.

The Project aligns with the Growth Management Element goals and policies by redeveloping an underutilized commercial site. It will connect to existing water, sewer, and stormwater systems, which are sufficient to accommodate the Project’s proposed commercial use, in line with Goals GM-1, GM-1.4, and GM-2.1. Additionally, the Project supports Goal GM-6 and Policy GM-8.3 by revitalizing the property and enhancing the functionality of the Los Cerritos Center to meet the needs of visitors, employees, and the surrounding community.

3.2 Site Size and Location/Surrounding Land Uses
The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

Among other conditions, the Project would meet the Class 32 exemption qualifications if the Project Site is within City limits, is no more than 5 acres, and is substantially surrounded by urban uses. The Project Site is located within the City limits and thus meets the first criterion. The Project Site is not greater than 5 acres, as the Project Site is

4.65 acres in size, and therefore, the Project meets the second criterion. Regarding the Project Site’s relative location related to urban uses, California Public Resources Code Section 21071 defines an “urbanized area” as “(a) an incorporated city that meets either of the following criteria: (1) Has a population of at least 100,000 persons, or (2) Has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons.” The City has an estimated population of 48,340 residents (United States Census Bureau 2023a). The neighboring cities of Lakewood and Bellflower have estimated populations of 78,132 and 75,111 residents, respectively (United States Census Bureau 2023b, 2023c).

In addition, as noted in Section 2.1, Environmental Setting, above, the Project Site is surrounded by commercial uses, including the Los Cerritos Center, the former Sears automotive center, surface parking lot, and 183rd Street.

As such, the Project Site is located within an urbanized area and is substantially surrounded by developed institutional and residential uses. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with this condition.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 9
FEBRUARY 2026

3.2 Habitat for Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

The Project Site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. The Project Site is fully developed and located within a highly urbanized area. Surrounding land uses include a mix of commercial, office, and some residential uses. The Project Site is almost completely covered with existing pavement or structures, except for select ornamental trees, shrubs, and grass areas scattered throughout the Project Site. Under existing conditions, the Project Site contains a two-story 277,559-square-foot former Sears building and adjoining merchandizing building and loading dock. Vegetation on the site is limited to ornamental trees, shrubs, and grass areas scattered throughout the Project Site that are not known to support any candidate, sensitive, or special-status species. No native habitat is located on the Project Site or on adjacent properties. Furthermore, the site is not within mapped areas of potential critical habitat (CDFW 2025; USFWS 2025). Based on the urbanized nature of the Project Site and adjacent properties, in conjunction with a lack of suitable habitat for special-status species, the Project Site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species and thus meets the Class 32 categorical exemption criteria for lack of habitat. For these reasons, the Project has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.

3.4 Transportation, Noise, Air Quality, and Water
Quality Impacts
Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

The following analyses details the Project’s potential impacts to traffic, noise, air quality, and water quality and concludes that the Project would not result in significant impacts to any of these topics. Although CEQA does not require analysis of trip counts, trip counts have been provided for the Project using the 12th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers to support the air quality and noise analyses below, and are included in Attachment B, VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment.1 The trip count is based on a conservative trip generation analysis that assumes no pass-by, diverted, or internal capture trips and treats the athletic field as an ancillary use and therefore provides a worst-case scenario for analysis of air quality and noise impacts for purposes of determining if a Class 32 exemption is available.

Transportation
The city refers to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for evaluation of vehicles miles traveled (VMT) under CEQA to determine “whether a proposed project or plan adequately reduces total VMT” (LACDPW 2020). The Guidelines establish screening criteria for projects to determine whether further analysis of VMT is required. As described in detail in the VMT Screening and Trip 1 California Public Resources Code Section 21099(b) states that, upon certification of the revised guidelines for determining transportation impacts, “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Office of Planning and Research (now renamed the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation or LCI), identified vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the required CEQA transportation metric and beginning July 1, 2020. VMT (not level of service) is the only legally acceptable threshold for transportation-related environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 10
FEBRUARY 2026
Generation Assessment prepared by LLG (Attachment B), the Project meets the screening criteria for a determination of no significant impact due to its proximity to transit and satisfaction of the related criteria. Specifically:
 The Project Site is within a 0.5-mile radius of a High-Quality Transit Corridor (HQTC): the roadways adjoining Los Cerritos Center (183rd Street on the north, Gridley Road on the east, and South Street on the south) are all HQTCs.
 The Project’s Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 0.79, exceeding the minimum 0.75 requirement.  The Project will not add parking beyond City Code requirements and will result in a net reduction in parking at Los Cerritos Center of 55 parking spaces.
 The Project consists of retail uses consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and does not replace any residential units, including affordable housing.

As a result, the Project is screened out from further analysis and is determined to result in a less-than-significant VMT impact and therefore does not require further VMT modeling.

Under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project could have a significant transportation impact if the project would:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
b) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) c) Result in inadequate emergency access
The proposed site plan for the Project will maintain existing sidewalks and access to public transit; construct new pedestrian connections on site and with adjoining uses; modify an existing interior ring road to accommodate the Project; and meet City design standards regarding site access, multimodal connectivity within the internal site circulation system, emergency access, and on-site parking. The Project is not expected to increase hazards or affect emergency access. Therefore, the proposed Project does not have a significant traffic impact because it would not (1) conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy related to bicycle, pedestrian, and public transit; (2) substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature; or (3) result in inadequate emergency access. Additionally, as described above, the Project is screened out of further VMT analysis; it has been evaluated in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) and is not expected to result in any significant direct or indirect impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions or other environmental effects.

For the reasons identified above, the Project is not in conflict with the RTP/SCS, and the Project does not result in a significant impact related to VMT or result in other significant impacts under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

Additional details are provided in Attachment B.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 11
FEBRUARY 2026
Noise
A Noise Technical Memorandum has been prepared by Dudek (Attachment C). The analysis assesses potential noise impacts that could occur under the Project. The report included the following components: documentation of existing noise conditions, discussion of noise modeling methodology and procedure, and analysis of construction noise, traffic noise, and on-site stationary noise sources. Through noise modeling and analysis, the report concluded that noise impacts related to Project construction would be less than significant and that mitigation would not be required.

Potential noise and vibration impacts attributed to Project construction and operation were studied in the Noise Technical Memorandum and were categorized by the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G significance thresholds for noise. a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Construction noise associated with the Project was evaluated, including all phases of on-site work. Predicted worst-case noise levels at the nearest residences (approximately 790 feet to the northeast and 1,200 feet to the east of the site) ranged from approximately 31 to 62 A-weighted decibels (dBA) energy equivalent level (Leq) over an 8-hour period. Modeling results are provided in Attachment C, and noise levels are expected to remain within acceptable limits (not to exceed 80 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period, per the Federal Transit Administration), resulting in a less-than-significant temporary impact.

Temporary increases in roadway noise from construction-related traffic were also assessed, including worker and haul trips. These activities were found to result in minor increases over ambient conditions, with levels remaining well below thresholds for commercial and residential receptors (an increase of 3 dB). This potential minor increase due to Project construction traffic trips would be less than significant.

Long-term operational noise from building equipment and activities was evaluated. As detailed in Attachment C, predicted levels at nearby residences would remain below City standards (50–60 dBA Leq), resulting in a less-thansignificant impact to surrounding sensitive receptors.

Long-term roadway noise increases or decreases due to changes in roadway traffic volumes were evaluated. The change in roadway noise levels was predicted for two conditions: existing year and existing year plus Project utilizing and applying the conservative assumptions that the Project site is vacant and, because trip distribution is not known, that all LLG calculated trips (which are themselves conservative as they do not apply pass-by trips or use of alternative modes of transport) are applied to each studied roadway segment. As detailed in Attachment C, under the applicable Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) thresholds, an increase of less than 1.5 to 5 dBA over predicted ambient levels would be less than significant. As also detailed in Attachment C, Section 3.2, the calculated existing with Project traffic noise level for noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to studied Project roadways ranges from 0.3 to 1.0 dBA higher than the existing year traffic noise level. These predicted increases in traffic noise attributed to added Project trips are less than the FICON-based relative increase thresholds. Therefore, potential impacts to existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses along studied roadway segments near the Project with respect to Project-generated changes in traffic noise would be less than significant.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 12
FEBRUARY 2026
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction-related vibration was evaluated using California Department of Transportation thresholds of 0.3 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) for older residences and 0.5 inches per second PPV for modern commercial structures. Predicted vibration levels at nearby residences and commercial buildings are below these thresholds, indicating a less-than-significant impact.

Customers and service staff may occupy operating tenant spaces within the existing Los Cerritos Center buildings that are closer to the Project site than the off-site receiver samples presented in Table 15 of Attachment C. However, these Los Cerritos Center tenant space occupant exposures to Project construction groundborne vibration will be attenuated not only by horizontal distance per the California Department of Transportation mathematical expression appearing in Section 3.1.3 of Attachment C, but by additionally what Federal Transit Administration guidance refers to as “coupling loss” due to the mass of the building and its foundation. Such vibrational energy losses for “masonry”-type structures are substantial, and “in general, the heavier the building construction, the greater the coupling loss” (FTA 2018). The combination of distance propagation and these expected coupling loss effects are thus anticipated to yield interior vibration exposure levels (i.e., as experienced by tenant space occupants) that are less than the aforementioned California Department of Transportation guidance threshold for annoyance and are thereby less than significant.

The nearby facades of existing Los Cerritos Center buildings to remain would, on the basis of their proximity to the Project construction activities studied herein and using the same PPV calculation expression from Section 3.1.3 of Attachment C, potentially experience groundborne vibration levels higher than those presented in Table 15 of Attachment C during periods of use of certain machinery in close proximity to those facades. However, the magnitudes depend on the equipment involved, such as those listed in Table 8 of Attachment C and their reference PPV levels at distances of 25 feet, and the distances from the facade at which the activity occurs. For example, a vibratory roller could operate as close as 12 feet from a commercial facade, or a large dozer or excavator could work at just 5.5 feet away from the facade, or a jackhammer could work at 2.5 feet away and not be expected to cause groundborne vibration to exceed this 0.5 inches per second PPV value. Further, due to joint ownership of the Project Site and existing Los Cerritos Center buildings and good site management practices, the applicant will be able to address any potential impacts that could arise. Therefore, adverse effects to the remaining existing Los Cerritos Center structures are not anticipated. Impacts related to construction vibration would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potential impacts from nearby airports or airstrips were evaluated. The nearest, Long Beach Municipal Airport, is

4.3 miles southwest, with the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level contour largely on airport property. No airports are within 2 miles, and the Project would not be affected by aviation noise. Potential impacts due to airport noise would therefore have no impact.

The analysis concludes that noise impacts associated with Project construction, traffic, and ongoing operations would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Results of the noise analysis are included in Attachment C.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 13
FEBRUARY 2026
Air Quality
The following analysis is a summary of the findings contained within the Air Quality Technical Memorandum (Attachment D) prepared by Dudek for the Project.

Potential impacts of the Project on air quality were evaluated under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Project Site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties and all of Orange County, and is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).

SCAQMD administers the SCAB’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a comprehensive document outlining an air pollution control program for attaining all California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The most recent adopted AQMP for the SCAB is the 2022 AQMP, which was adopted by SCAQMD’s Governing Board in December 2022 (SCAQMD 2022).

The purpose of a consistency finding is to determine if a project is inconsistent with the assumptions and objectives of the regional air quality plans and, thus, if it would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. SCAQMD has established criteria for determining consistency with the currently applicable AQMP in Chapter 12, Sections 12.2 and 12.3, in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria are as follows (SCAQMD 1993):
 Consistency Criterion No. 1: The project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards of the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.  Consistency Criterion No. 2: The project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.

To address the first criterion, Project-generated criteria air pollutant emissions have been estimated and analyzed for significance and are addressed below. Detailed results of this analysis are included in Attachment A, CalEEMod Outputs, of Attachment D. As detailed below, construction and operation of the Project would not generate criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds. Therefore, the Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations. As such, the Project would not conflict with Consistency Criterion No. 1 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

The second criterion regarding the Project’s potential to exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of Project buildout and phase is primarily assessed by determining consistency between the Project’s land use designations and its potential to generate population growth. In general, projects are considered consistent with, and not in conflict with or obstructing implementation of, the AQMP if the growth in socioeconomic factors is consistent with the underlying regional plans used to develop the AQMP (per Consistency Criterion No. 2 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook). SCAQMD primarily uses demographic growth forecasts for various DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 14
FEBRUARY 2026
socioeconomic categories (e.g., population, housing, employment by industry) developed by SCAG for its RTP/SCS.2 The SCAG RTP/SCS, which is based on general plans for cities and counties in the SCAB, is used by SCAQMD to develop the AQMP emissions inventory.3 The SCAG RTP/SCS, Connect SoCal, and the associated Regional Growth Forecast are generally consistent with the local plans; therefore, the 2022 AQMP is generally consistent with local government plans (Attachment D).

The City designates the Project Site as a land use designation of Regional Commercial. The Regional Commercial designation is intended to apply to large retail shopping areas that serve a regional market area, such as the Project’s proposed uses. The Project would be consistent with the underlying land use designation, and no General Plan Amendment would be required. As the Project is consistent with the existing land use designation on site, the Project would not result in unanticipated growth that would exceed the growth forecasts associated with the land use designation on site. Overall, as the Project is consistent with the existing land use designation and implementation of the Project would not generate an increase in growth demographics that would conflict with existing projections within the region, the Project is consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS forecasts used in the SCAQMD AQMP development. Thus, the Project would not conflict with Consistency Criterion No. 2.

In summary, based on the considerations presented for the two criteria, impacts relating to the Project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable AQMP would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
a) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and SCAQMD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air quality standards. Based on these considerations, project-level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are relevant in the determination of whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) was used to estimate emissions from construction and operation of the Project (Attachment D). Further details regarding the input data and methodology are included in Attachment D.

Construction Emissions
Proposed construction activities would result in the temporary addition of pollutants to the local airshed caused by on-site sources (i.e., off-road construction equipment, fugitive dust from structure and earth movement, and volatile 2 While there is a newer version of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), adopted in 2024, the demographics from the 2020 RTP/SCS are still applicable for the purposes of the air quality analysis, since those are included and used in the current AQMP. 3 Information necessary to produce the emissions inventory for the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is obtained from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and other governmental agencies, including the California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and SCAG. Each of these agencies is responsible for collecting data (e.g., industry growth factors, socioeconomic projections, travel activity levels, emission factors, emission speciation profile, and emissions) and developing methodologies (e.g., model and demographic forecast improvements) required to generate a comprehensive emissions inventory. SCAG incorporates these data into its Travel Demand Model for estimating/projecting VMT and driving speeds. SCAG’s socioeconomic and transportation activities projections in their 2020 RTP/SCS are integrated in the 2022 AQMP (Attachment D).

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 15
FEBRUARY 2026
organic compounds [VOC] off-gassing) and off-site sources (i.e., on-road vendor trucks, haul trucks, and worker vehicle trips). Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity; the specific type of operation; and, for particulate matter, the prevailing weather conditions. Therefore, such emission levels can only be approximately estimated.

The Project would involve application of architectural coating (e.g., paint and other finishes) for painting the interior and exterior of the building as well as parking lot striping. The contractor is required to procure architectural coatings from a supplier that complies with the requirements of SCAQMD’s Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). Table 2 presents the estimated maximum daily construction emissions generated during construction of the Project. “Summer” emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the ozone (O3) season (May 1 to October 31), and “winter” emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the balance of the year (November 1 to April 30). Details of the emission calculations are provided in Attachment D.

Table 2. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions (Pounds per Day)
Summer
2026 2.44 41.11 28.75 0.18 9.86 3.89
2027 67.36 11.34 17.87 0.03 1.33 0.57
Winter
2026 2.43 27.17 24.79 0.07 6.08 1.82
2027 1.21 10.41 15.66 0.03 1.15 0.51
Maximum of Summer and
Winter Emissions

67.36 41.11 28.75 0.18 9.86 3.89
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Emissions include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and SCAQMD Rule 1113.

See Attachment D for complete results.

As shown in Table 2, Project construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD’s daily thresholds. Therefore, construction impacts associated with criteria air pollutant emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.

Operational Emissions
Operation of the Project would generate criteria air pollutant (including VOC, oxides of nitrogen [NOx], coarse particulate matter [PM10], and fine particulate matter [PM2.5]) emissions from mobile sources (vehicular traffic), energy (natural gas consumption), and area sources (consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment).

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 16
FEBRUARY 2026
The Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources. Table 3 summarizes the maximum daily estimated operational criteria air pollutant emissions that would be generated from the Project and compares estimated emissions to the respective SCAQMD operational thresholds.

Table 3. Project Estimated Maximum Daily Operation Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Emissions Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions (Pounds per Day)
Summer
Area 15.05 7.51 81.74 0.17 15.89 4.11
Energy 4.05 0.05 6.18 0.00 0.01 0.01
Mobile 0.01 0.23 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.02
Total 19.11 7.79 88.11 0.17 15.92 4.14
Winter
Area 14.87 8.19 79.55 0.16 15.89 4.11
Energy 3.04 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mobile 0.01 0.23 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.02
Total 17.93 8.41 79.74 0.16 15.91 4.13
Proposed Project Total
Maximum Daily
Emissions

19.11 8.41 88.11 0.17 15.92 4.14
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District; N/A = not available.

See Attachment D for complete results.

As shown in Table 3, the Project would not exceed SCAQMD’s mass daily regional significance thresholds during operations. Therefore, operational impacts associated with criteria air pollutant emissions would be less than significant.

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 17
FEBRUARY 2026
cumulative emissions from various sources of air pollutants and their precursors within the SCAB, including motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and commercial and industrial facilities. Construction of the Project would generate VOC and NOx emissions (which are precursors to O3) and emissions of PM10 and PM2.5. As indicated in Tables 2 and 3, Project-generated construction and operational emissions would be minimal and would not exceed SCAQMD’s emission-based significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide, PM10, or PM2.5. Therefore, impacts regarding cumulatively considerable net increases of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in nonattainment would be less than significant. As discussed in the analysis of the Project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan, the Project would not conflict with the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP. Additionally, criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction activity of future proposed projects would be reduced through implementation of control measures required by SCAQMD. Cumulative PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced because all future projects would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), which sets forth general and specific requirements for all construction sites in the SCAQMD.

Based on the previous considerations, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions of nonattainment pollutants, and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis
Construction activities associated with the Project would result in temporary sources of on-site fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions. A localized significance threshold (LST) analysis has been prepared to determine potential impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during construction of the Project. The impacts were analyzed using methods consistent with those in SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (SCAQMD 2008). According to the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, “Off-site mobile emissions from the project should NOT be included in the emissions compared to the LSTs” (SCAQMD 2008). Trucks and worker trips associated with the Project are not expected to cause substantial air quality impacts to sensitive receptors along off-site roadways since emissions would be relatively brief in nature and would cease once the vehicles pass through the main streets. Nonetheless, in an effort to conservatively capture potential vehicle activity within the Project boundary (i.e., fence line), a small portion (i.e., 0.25 miles) of the off-site vehicle travel for worker vehicles, vendor trucks, and haul trucks was conservatively treated as on-site emissions for the LST analysis.

The estimated maximum daily unmitigated on-site construction emissions generated by the Project are presented in Table 4 and compared to the applicable SCAQMD LST mass rate screening criteria. See Attachment D for supporting CalEEMod LST files.

Table 4. Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis for Project Construction – Unmitigated
Maximum On-Site Emissions
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Summer
2026 41.11 28.75 9.86 3.89
2027 11.34 17.87 1.33 0.57
DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 18
FEBRUARY 2026
Table 4. Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis for Project Construction – Unmitigated
Maximum On-Site Emissions
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Winter
2026 27.17 24.79 6.08 1.82
2027 10.41 15.66 1.15 0.51
Maximum Daily Emissions
(Summer or Winter)

41.11 28.75 9.86 3.89
SCAQMD LST Screening Criteria 57.00 585.00 73.93 34.93
LST Exceeded? No No No No
Source: SCAQMD 2008.

Notes: NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District; LST = localized significance threshold.

LSTs for NOx and CO were determined based on the values for a distance of 25 meters (82 feet) from the nearest receptor for a 1-acre disturbance. LSTs for PM10 and PM2.5 were determined based on the values for a distance of 240 meters (interpolated between 200 and 500 meters) for a 1-acre disturbance. The estimates reflect control of fugitive dust (watering two times daily) required by SCAQMD Rule 403.

As depicted in Table 4, the Project would not result in emissions of NOx, CO, PM10, or PM2.5 that would exceed the applicable SCAQMD LST screening criteria, and no mitigation measures are required. As such the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to construction LSTs.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Traffic-congested roadways and intersections have the potential to generate localized high levels of CO. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed federal and/or state standards for CO are termed “CO hotspots.” The transport of CO is extremely limited, as it disperses rapidly with distance from the source. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthy levels, affecting sensitive receptors. Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with severely congested intersections operating at an unacceptable level of service (level of service E or worse is unacceptable).

Projects contributing to adverse traffic impacts may result in the formation of a CO hotspot. Additional analysis of CO hotspot impacts would be conducted if a project would result in a significant impact or contribute to an adverse traffic impact at a signalized intersection that would potentially subject sensitive receptors to CO hotspots.

At the time that the SCAQMD Handbook (1993) was published, the SCAB was designated nonattainment under the CAAQS and NAAQS for CO. In 2007, the SCAB was designated in attainment for CO under both the CAAQS and NAAQS as a result of the steady decline in CO concentrations in the SCAB due to turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities. SCAQMD conducted CO modeling for the 2003 AQMP4 for the four worst-case intersections in the SCAB: (1) Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, (2) Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue, (3) La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard, and (4) Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway (Attachment D). At the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared, the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue was the most congested intersection in Los Angeles County, 4 SCAQMD’s CO hotspot modeling guidance has not changed since 2003.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 19
FEBRUARY 2026
with an average daily traffic volume of about 100,000 vehicles per day. The 2003 AQMP also projected 8-hour CO concentrations at these four intersections for 1997 and from 2002 through 2005. From years 2002 through 2005, the maximum 8-hour CO concentration was 3.8 parts per million (ppm) at the Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue intersection in 2002; the maximum 8-hour CO concentration was 3.4 ppm at the Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue in 2002. Accordingly, CO concentrations at congested intersections would not exceed the 1-hour or 8-hour CO CAAQS unless projected daily traffic would be at least over 100,000 vehicles per day.

As detailed in the traffic analysis prepared for the Project, the Project would result in 3,817 weekday daily trips and 5,618 Saturday daily trips (Attachment B), which are substantially below 100,000 trips per day at a given intersection. As such, the Project’s contribution to intersection volumes would be minimal, and Project-related trips would be dispersed across multiple intersections. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the Project would not contribute to a CO hotspot at nearby intersections. Additionally, available ambient CO levels most representative of the ambient air quality in the Project area are monitored at the North Orange County air quality monitoring station, within Source-Receptor Area 16. Ambient CO levels monitored at this representative monitoring station indicate that the highest recorded 1-hour concentration of CO is 2.5 ppm (the state standard is 20 ppm) and highest 8-hour concentration is 1.6 ppm (the state standard is 9 ppm) during the past 3 years of available data (SCAQMD 2026).

As discussed above, the highest CO concentrations typically occur during peak traffic hours, so CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis. Given the considerably low level of CO concentrations in the Project area, Project-related mobile emissions would not contribute to CO concentrations, and a CO hotspot is not anticipated to occur. In addition, due to continued improvement in vehicular emissions at a rate faster than the rate of vehicle growth and/or congestion, the potential for CO hotspots in the SCAB is steadily decreasing. Based on these considerations, the proposed Project would result in a less-than-significant impact to air quality with regard to potential CO hotspots.

Toxic Air Contaminants
A substance is considered toxic if it has the potential to cause adverse health effects in humans, including increasing the risk of cancer upon exposure, or acute (immediate) and/or chronic (cumulative) non-cancer health effects. A toxic substance released into the air is considered a toxic air contaminant (TAC). Adverse health effects associated with exposure to TACs may include carcinogenic (i.e., cancer-causing) and noncarcinogenic effects.

Noncarcinogenic effects typically affect one or more target organ systems and may be experienced on either short-term (acute) or long-term (chronic) exposure to a given TAC. TACs are identified by federal and state agencies based on a review of available scientific evidence. In the state of California, TACs are identified through a two-step process that was established in 1983 under the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act. This two-step process of risk identification and risk management and reduction was designed to protect residents from the health effects of toxic substances in the air. In addition, the California Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act, Assembly Bill 2588, was enacted by the legislature in 1987 to address public concern over the release of TACs into the atmosphere.

Examples of TACs include certain aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbons, certain metals, and asbestos. TACs are generated by a number of sources, including stationary sources such as dry cleaners, gas stations, combustion sources, and laboratories; mobile sources such as automobiles; and area sources such as landfills. Project construction would result in emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) from heavy construction equipment and trucks accessing the site. DPM is characterized as a TAC by the State of California. State law has established the framework for California’s TAC identification and control program, which is generally more stringent than the federal DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 20
FEBRUARY 2026
program and aimed at TACs that are a problem in California. The state has formally identified more than 200 substances as TACs, including the federal hazardous air pollutants, and has adopted appropriate control measures for sources of these TACs. The following measures are required by state law to reduce DPM emissions:
 Fleet owners of mobile construction equipment are subject to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles (13 CCR 2449), the purpose of which is to reduce DPM and criteria pollutant emissions from in-use (existing) off-road diesel-fueled vehicles.  All commercial diesel vehicles are subject to Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations, limiting engine idling time. Idling of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment and trucks during loading and unloading shall be limited to 5 minutes; electric auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible.

Project construction would result in emissions of DPM from heavy construction equipment and trucks accessing the site. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has identified carcinogenic and chronic noncarcinogenic effects from long-term exposure but has not identified health effects due to short-term exposure to diesel exhaust. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period for the maximally exposed individual resident; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the Project (16 months) (OEHHA 2015). The duration of proposed construction activities would only constitute a small percentage of the total long-term exposure period and would not result in exposure of proximate sensitive receptors to substantial TACs. After proposed construction is completed, there would be no long-term source of TAC emissions during operation. In addition, the Project would not require the extensive operation of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment, which is subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure for in-use diesel construction equipment to reduce DPM emissions, and would not involve extensive use of diesel trucks, which are also subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure.

Furthermore, as shown in Table 2, maximum daily particulate matter (i.e., PM10 or PM2.5) emissions generated by construction equipment operation and haul-truck trips during construction (exhaust particulate matter or DPM), combined with fugitive dust generated by equipment operation and vehicle travel, is minimal.

The Project is located on an existing infill site, with the closest sensitive receptors (residences) approximately 788 feet northeast of the Project Site. Emissions during construction would not be concentrated in one area of the site but would be spread over the entirety of the site. Emissions would not be continuous during construction hours and would cease once construction is complete. Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial quantities of TACs during construction. Impacts would be less than significant.

No residual TAC emissions and corresponding health risk are anticipated after construction, and no long-term sources of TAC emissions are anticipated during operation of the Project. CARB has published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB 2005), which identifies certain types of facilities or sources that may emit substantial quantities of TACs and therefore could conflict with sensitive land uses, such as “schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities.” The Air Quality and Land Use Handbook is a guide for the siting of new sensitive land uses, and CARB recommends that sensitive receptors not be located downwind or in proximity to such sources to avoid potential health hazards. The enumerated facilities or sources include the following: high-traffic freeways and roads, distribution centers, railyards, ports, refineries, chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and large gas-dispensing facilities. The Project would not include any of the above-listed land uses associated with generation of TAC DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 21
FEBRUARY 2026
emissions. Although the Project may emit DPM emissions during operation from mobile sources, these emissions would be minimal due to the infrequent use of diesel trucks for normal activities, such as deliveries and waste collection, and would not represent a substantial or continuous source of emissions. Furthermore, the emissions shown in Table 3 reflect the Project’s minimal level of particulate matter emissions. Potential impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to TACs would be less than significant.

It is expected that operation of the Project would not result in any non-permitted direct emissions (e.g., those from a point source such as diesel generators) that could be a TAC source. Therefore, the Project would not result in exposure of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project Site to substantial TAC concentrations due to either construction or operation, and impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial quantities of TACs during construction.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Health Impacts of Criteria Air Pollutants
Construction of the Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions; however, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD mass-emission thresholds.

The SCAB is designated as nonattainment for O3 for the NAAQS and CAAQS. Thus, existing O3 levels in the SCAB are at unhealthy levels during certain periods. The health effects associated with O3 generally relate to reduced lung function. Because the Project would not involve construction activities that would result in O3 precursor emissions (VOC or NOx) that would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, the Project is not anticipated to substantially contribute to regional O3 concentrations and associated health impacts. Similar to construction, no SCAQMD thresholds would be exceeded during operation.

In addition to O3, NOx emissions contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (since nitrogen dioxide is a constituent of NOx). Exposure to nitrogen dioxide can cause lung irritation, bronchitis, and pneumonia, and lower resistance to respiratory infections. As depicted in Table 2 and Table 3, neither Project construction nor operation would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for NOx emissions. Thus, the Project would not be expected to exceed the NOx standards or contribute to associated health effects.

CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can include dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions. CO hotspots were discussed previously as a less-than-significant impact. Thus, the Project’s CO emissions would not contribute to the health effects associated with this pollutant.

The SCAB is designated as nonattainment for PM10 under the CAAQS and nonattainment for PM2.5 under the NAAQS and CAAQS. Particulate matter contains microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they can get deep into the lungs and cause serious health problems. Particulate matter exposure has been linked to a variety of problems, including premature death in people with heart or lung disease, nonfatal heart attacks, irregular heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory symptoms such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing (EPA 2025). As with O3 and NOx, the Project would not generate emissions of PM10 or DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 22
FEBRUARY 2026
PM2.5 that would exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds. Accordingly, the Project’s PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are not expected to cause any increase in related regional health effects for these pollutants.

In summary, the Project would not result in any potentially significant contribution to local or regional concentrations of nonattainment pollutants and would not result in a significant contribution to the adverse health impacts associated with those pollutants. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Based on available information, the Project is not anticipated to result in other emissions that have not been addressed under the above analyses. As such, this analysis focuses on the potential for the Project to generate odors. The occurrence and severity of potential odor impacts depends on numerous factors. The nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; the wind speeds and direction; and the sensitivity of receiving location each contribute to the intensity of the impact. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be annoying and cause distress among the public and generate citizen complaints.

Odors would be potentially generated from vehicles and equipment exhaust emissions during construction of the Project. Potential odors produced during construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from tailpipes of construction equipment and asphalt pavement application. Such odors would disperse rapidly from the Project Site and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be less than significant.

Water Quality
Potential water quality impacts associated with Project construction and operation were evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 for Class 32 (Infill Development) categorical exemptions.

Water Quality Standards
Construction
The Project Site is located within a developed urbanized area and does not contain any streams, rivers, or waterbodies. Project demolition and construction activities would involve earthwork activities and soil disturbance, which could expose soils to the effects of wind and water erosion and associated sedimentation. In addition, pollutants associated with construction activity could be released from accidental spills or unauthorized releases.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 23
FEBRUARY 2026
Standard construction management practices, as required through the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit, would minimize construction-related impacts on water quality. The Construction General Permit, which is required for projects involving ground disturbance greater than 1 acre, such as the Project, requires implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) to address potential construction-related impacts on water quality. The SWPPP must specify the location, type, and maintenance requirements for best management practices necessary to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying construction-related pollutants into the City’s municipal storm drain system. Prior to construction, the applicant would submit a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit.

Similarly, Cerritos Municipal Code Chapter 6.32, Storm Water and Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Controls, mandates incorporation of a SWPPP and associated best management practices to prevent stormwater runoff from carrying construction-related pollutants into the City’s municipal storm drain system. The standard requirements contained in a SWPPP are sufficient to minimize the Project’s potential to violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction. Compliance with existing regulations would prevent violation of water quality standards and minimize the potential for contributing sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations would ensure that the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface quality from demolition and construction activities.

Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Operations
The Project Site is previously developed, consists predominantly of impervious surfaces, and currently drains to the City storm drainage system. Project development would result in similar areas of impervious surfaces and would have similar uses, although parking would be reduced from the current condition. Following construction, potential incidental spills of vehicle oils or other pollutants, such as from the loading dock, refuse area, gutters, and other outdoor periphery areas, would be conveyed by stormwater flows, which has the potential to adversely affect stormwater quality. However, all proposed improvements would adhere to existing drainage control requirements, including the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit, Order No. R4-2012-1075 (Municipal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit), and the Cerritos Municipal Code Chapter 6.32.

In accordance with the City Municipal Code, projects that fall into one of the “Priority Project” categories are required to incorporate low impact development measures into the project design. The Project is considered a “Priority Project.” As a result, the Project is required to include drainage control infrastructure to retain, on site, what is known as the Stormwater Quality Design Volume from a design storm event, prior to discharge into the City storm drainage system. As part of these requirements, the final construction plans would identify post-construction best management practices that are consistent with low impact development requirements and meet all applicable Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System and City Municipal Code requirements. Best management practices must be selected and designed to meet pollutant-specific benchmarks as required by the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit, thus minimizing water quality concerns during operations. Compliance with these existing regulatory requirements would reduce potential impacts related to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements to a less-than-significant level.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 24
FEBRUARY 2026
Stormwater Drainage Systems and Runoff
As noted above, the Project Site consists predominantly of impervious surfaces. Therefore, Project construction would not result in an increase in impervious surfaces and associated increase in stormwater runoff rates. Postconstruction runoff rates would decrease over existing conditions because the Project is required to include drainage control infrastructure to retain the Stormwater Quality Design Volume from a design storm event, as described above. Therefore, with adherence to the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System permit and local City drainage control requirements, the proposed changes to drainage patterns would not result in flooding on or off site or other adverse effects related to stormwater quantity or quality.

The Project Site is located approximately 2,200 feet east of the San Gabriel River levee. As a result, the Project Site is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency Zone X, which are areas protected by levees from 1% annual chance floods (i.e., 100-year floodplains); or areas of 0.2% annual chance flood (i.e., 500-year floodplain), with average depths of less than 1 foot. This flood designation is not unique to the Project Site, as much of Cerritos, Artesia, Lakewood, and Bellflower are within this Zone X designated area (FEMA 2025). Based on the limited flood threat, the Project Site is not a threat for impeding or redirecting flood flows. As a result, the Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Impacts would be less than significant.

Groundwater Management and Water Supply
There are no groundwater extraction wells currently on the Project Site (DWR 2025; City of Cerritos 2004b), and no extraction wells are proposed as part of the Project. The Project Site is not located within recharge basins or spreading grounds necessary for groundwater sustainability. Therefore, development of the Project Site will not have a direct impact on groundwater quality.

Cerritos overlies the Central Basin, which is an adjudicated groundwater basin administered by the Central Basin Watermaster Administration (DWR 2005). Water for the Project would be provided by the City, which derives its water supply in part from City wells within the Central Basin, which is actively managed by the Water Replenishment District of Southern California, which serves as the Central Basin Watermaster, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (City of Cerritos 2004b, 2022).

As is required by state law, the City issues urban water management plans (UWMPs) every 5 years. The most recent plan, the Cerritos 2020 UWMP, was approved by the City in 2022 and includes the Los Cerritos Center under its commercial and industrial land uses designation. The Sears retail store use terminated in 2019; therefore, water use for the Project site for 2020 is not available. However, the City’s water demands were projected in the 2020 UWMP based on a review of the Senate Bill X7-7 (the Water Conservation Act of 2009) calculations, including the Senate Bill X7-7 water use target for 2020. Pursuant to Senate Bill X7-7, the City calculated the baseline water uses and 2020 water use target (i.e., reduced water use goal) in its 2015 UWMP. The City’s service area has not changed (i.e., expansion or contraction) since the 2015 UWMP was prepared. Therefore, the City’s 2020 UWMP incorporates the baseline water uses and 2020 water use target calculated in the 2015 UWMP (City of Cerritos 2022). As a result, the 2020 UWMP takes into account greater water use at the Project site than would be anticipated for the Project based on its square footage and use. Based on the 2020 UWMP, it is anticipated the City will have sufficient DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 25
FEBRUARY 2026
water supplies available to meet projected demands, including demands from Central Basin groundwater (City of Cerritos 2022). As discussed below in Section 3.5, the Project would not be expected to increase water demand and is not located in an area where its construction would decrease availability of groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. As such, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality management control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant.

3.5 Utilities and Public Services
The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Potential impacts of the Project on utilities and public service systems were evaluated under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The Project Site is located within a fully urbanized area and is currently served by existing water, wastewater, stormwater, electric, natural gas, telecommunications, solid waste, police, and fire protection services.

Redevelopment of the site would utilize existing utility connections and infrastructure and would not require the construction or expansion of off-site utilities or public service facilities that could result in significant environmental effects. As described in Section 3.4 above, adequate water supplies and wastewater treatment capacity are available to serve the Project, and stormwater would continue to be managed in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Solid waste generated by the Project would be accommodated by existing facilities and would comply with all applicable waste reduction and management requirements. The Project is consistent with the General Plan land use and zoning designations, would not result in substantial unplanned population growth, and would not increase demand for expanded utilities or public services. Police services are provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and fire protection services by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Accordingly, the Project Site would be adequately served by utilities and public services and meets the Utilities and Service Systems considerations of Appendix G and the criteria for the Class 32 categorical exemption.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 26
FEBRUARY 2026

3.6 Conclusion
For the reasons described above, the Project meets all the criteria for a Class 32 categorical exemption. 4 Exceptions to the Use of Categorical Exemptions
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, certain exceptions must be considered in determining whether a project qualifies for a Class 32 exemption, as discussed below. (a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may have an impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

Class 32 categorical exemptions are not subject to this requirement. As such, this exception does not apply. (b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.

The Project is an existing permitted use under the City’s applicable land use regulations. Implementation of the Project would not require a General Plan Amendment or zone change. As such, the Project is an assumed land use for the site. The Project would not result in significant impacts related to transportation, noise, air quality, or water quality. The Project Site has not recently been developed. There is no evidence to conclude that significant impacts will occur based on past project approvals or that the proposed Project’s impacts are cumulatively considerable when evaluating any cumulative impacts. The Project, and all future projects, will be required to comply with all applicable local, regional, and state laws, regulations, and guidelines, and any potential impact cause by the Project’s construction and operation would continue to be less than significant and would not contribute significantly to regional cumulative impact in the broader project region. As such, this exception does not apply. (c) Significant Effect Due to Unusual Circumstances. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

The Project proposes infill development that includes demolition of a former Sears building and replacement with a new two-story Dick’s House of Sport and related ancillary outdoor athletic field in an area serving commercial uses in an area zoned and designated for such development. The surrounding area is developed with a mixture of predominantly commercial uses with some office and residential uses; as such, the proposed Project is not unusual in character for the area. The Project Site is 4.65 acres and almost entirely covered by impervious surfaces except for select ornamental trees, shrubs, and grass areas scattered throughout the Project Site. The Project would comply with applicable air quality plans, would not increase pollutants or affect sensitive receptors, and would not increase noise or vibration levels. As described above, the proposed Project has been studied for its potential to DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 27
FEBRUARY 2026
cause environmental impacts in a variety of categories, including air quality, noise, traffic, and water quality. No significant effects were identified in those categories.

As indicated above, the Project would not result in impacts to biological resources as none exist on the Project Site or in the surrounding area. Also, the Project Site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE 2025). The Project is located with a X Flood Zone as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA 2025). The Project Site is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency Zone X, an area with limited flood risk common throughout Cerritos and the surrounding cities, and, because it is not subject to significant flooding, the Project would not impede flood flows, alter drainage patterns, cause erosion or siltation, or exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. This zone designation, and its implications, does not represent an unusual circumstance. According to the California Department of Conservation’s online mapping tool, the Project Site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone but is within a mapped liquefaction zone (DOC 2025); however, the Project would be designed and constructed in compliance with the California Building Code, California Geological Survey requirements, and applicable local building codes, and therefore would not expose people or structures to substantial risk or result in a significant environmental effect.

There is no substantial evidence that this Project will cause a significant impact. The Project Site has been designated for commercial development by the City of Cerritos General Plan and is consistent with the policies and regulations contained in the City’s General Plan. The circumstances of the Project, which involve redevelopment of an underutilized commercial lot in an infill location in a complementary neighborhood also serving commercial uses, are no different than the general circumstances of other projects covered by this exemption classification. There are no distinguishing features of the Project that give rise to the reasonable possibility that the Project’s size, density and intensity, bulk and mass, and use will impact the environment as compared to other projects. Thus, there are no unusual circumstances that may lead to a significant effect on the environment, and this exception does not apply.
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.

There are no designated State Scenic Highways in the Project Site’s vicinity. Moreover, no highways within the Project Site’s vicinity are eligible for an official State Scenic Highway designation (Caltrans 2025). Therefore, the Project would not result in any impacts to scenic resources within an officially designated State Scenic Highway, and this exception does not apply.
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

The Cortese List, mandated under Government Code Section 65962.5, is a list of databases that compile information regarding hazardous waste sites. The California Environmental Protection Agency provides a list of hazardous waste site databases as detailed in this analysis. According to the California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor, the Project Site is not identified as a hazardous waste site (DTSC 2025).

Furthermore, no records (i.e., leaking underground storage tanks and cleanup program sites) were found on the Project Site according to the State Water Resources Control Board’s GeoTracker database (SWRCB 2025). Given DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 28
FEBRUARY 2026
this, the Project would not be located on a site identified in any of the Cortese List databases. Therefore, the Project Site is not identified as a hazardous waste site, and this exception does not apply. Results from the Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor and the State Water Resources Control Board’s Geotracker are shown in Attachment E, Hazardous Waste Site Review. Asbestos-containing materials, including fireproofing insulation and vinyl asbestos tile, were historically present within portions of the Project Site but were professionally abated, and post-abatement clearance testing confirmed the affected areas meet Environmental Protection Agency re-occupancy standards. The results of the asbestos report are included in Attachment F. (f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

Based on the findings of the Historic Resource Assessment prepared by Historic Preservation Consulting (Snow 2025) and the archival research conducted by Dudek, the Project will not cause a substantial adverse change or result in a significant impact on a historical resource. The assessment evaluated the historic-era Sears-related buildings within the Project Site and concluded that the Sears buildings do not appear individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources, nor are they located within or associated with any designated or potential historic district (Snow 2025). As such, the buildings do not meet the definition of a historical resource under CEQA. Results from the Historic Resource Assessment are included in Attachment G.

Dudek conducted a California Historical Resources Information System records search of the Project area and surrounding 1-mile radius at the South Central Coastal Information Center. The records search identified four previously recorded cultural resources within 1 mile of the Project area, none of which are located within the Project area. A Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File search was also conducted, and results were negative for Native American cultural resources within 1 mile of the Project area. Based on this, there is no reasonable possibility that the Project would cause a substantial adverse change to a historical resource, and the exception for historical resources under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(f) does not apply. 5 Conclusion
For the reasons described above, the Project meets all of the criteria for a Class 32 categorical exemption. 6 References
CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2025. “Fire Hazard Severity Zones.” Accessed December 2025. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/ fire-hazard-severity-zones.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2025. State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed December 2025. https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/47e2009986264718a5a13a2c81382774.

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. https://files.ceqanet.lci.ca.gov/221458-6/attachment/UNr-g159CWr0G4DR8q6daNdAKT3RJTd8gGQCfz4wqFfl-eNdZNQEqjf8tfls1x6Gsae7YqpXwtFIZBd0.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 29
FEBRUARY 2026
CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2025. BIOS 6 CNDDB QuickView Tool [Web application].

Accessed December 2025. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios6/?tool=cnddbqv.

City of Cerritos. 2004a. City of Cerritos General Plan. Accessed December 2025. https://www.cerritos.gov/ city-government/city-laws-codes-and-regulations/general-plan.

City of Cerritos. 2004b. Final General Plan Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by RBF Consulting, January 6, 2004. Accessed December 2025. https://www.cerritos.gov/media/hmcj3pi4/general-plan-eirbody.pdf.

City of Cerritos. 2022. Final 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Prepared by Stetson Engineers Inc. January 2022.

Accessed January 5, 2026. https://www.cerritos.gov/media/nvbmdeio/urban_water_management_plan.pdf.

City of Cerritos. 2025a. “Rezoning of Housing Element Sites A, 7, and B; DCA 2025-1, DMA 2025-1, and GPA 2025-1 (ADP 18, 19, and 21).” City Council meeting. November 5, 2025. Accessed January 7, 2026. https://cerritos.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2102&meta_id=164315.

City of Cerritos. 2025b. “Rezoning of Housing Element Sites A, 7, and B; DCA 2025-1, DMA 2025-1, and GPA 2025-1 (ADP 18, 19, and 21).” City Council meeting. December 11, 2025. Accessed January 7, 2026. https://cerritos.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=&event_id=2534&meta_id=165203.

DOC (California Department of Conservation). 2025. DOC Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed December 2025. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/.

DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2025. EnviroStor. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Accessed December 2025. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/ ?myaddress=100+Los+Cerritos+Center%2C+Cerritos%2C+CA+90703.

DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2005. Adjudicated Basin Annual Reporting. Accessed December 2025. https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/index.jsp?appid=adjbasin.

DWR. 2025. Water Data Library (WDL) Station Map. Accessed December 2025. https://wdl.water.ca.gov/.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2025. “Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM).” Last updated May 23, 2025. Accessed December 2025. https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-andenvironmental-effects-particulate-matter-pm.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2025. FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search By Address.

Flood Map 06037C1980F, effective 9/26/2008. Accessed December 2025. https://msc.fema.gov/ portal/search#searchresultsanchor.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. September 2018.

DUDEK

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION CLASS 32 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT, CITY OF

CERRITOS, CALIFORNIA
15847 30
FEBRUARY 2026
LACDPW (Los Angeles County Department of Public Works). 2020. Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. July 23, 2020. Accessed January 2026. https://dpw.lacounty.gov/traffic/docs/Transportation-ImpactAnalysis-Guidelines-July-2020-v1.1.pdf.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments 2015.

February 2015. http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2015/2015GuidanceManual.pdf. SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Accessed December 2025. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ceqa-air-qualityhandbook-(1993).

SCAQMD. 2003. Final 2003 AQMP Appendix V Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations. August 2003. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2003-airquality-management-plan/2003-aqmp-appendix-v.pdf.

SCAQMD. 2008. Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. Final. Revised July 2008.

SCAQMD. 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/cleanair-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022- aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16.

SCAQMD. 2026. Historical Data By Year – 2022, 2023, 2024. Accessed January 2026. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/historical-air-quality-data/historical-data-by-year. Snow, J. 2025.

Historic Resource Assessment, Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA. Prepared for the City of Cerritos, California. Report on file at Historic Preservation Consulting, Los Angeles, California.

SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2025. GeoTracker. Accessed December 2025. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=100+Los+Cerritos+Center% 2C+Cerritos%2C+CA+90703.

United States Census Bureau. 2023a. QuickFacts. City of Cerritos, California. Population Estimates, July 1, 2023, (V2023). Accessed December 2025. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US0612552-cerritos-ca/.

United States Census Bureau. 2023b. QuickFacts. City of Lakewood, California. Population Estimates, July 1, 2023, (V2023). Accessed December 2025. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/ 16000US0639892-lakewood-ca/.

United States Census Bureau. 2023c. QuickFacts. City of Bellflower, California. Population Estimates, July 1, 2023, (V2023). Accessed January 2026. https://censusreporter.org/profiles/16000US0604982- bellflower-ca/.

USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2025. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species [Web map]. ArcGIS Online. Accessed December 2025. http://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/ viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe09893cf75b8dbfb77.

DUDEK
Attachment A
Figures 1–3
Project Boundary
0 1,000 2,000
n Feet Date: 12/11/2025 User: jconway Path: Z:\Projects\j1584701\MAPDOC\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE.aprx Map: Project Location Layout: Figure 1 Project Location Portrait Lake
Forest
Huntington
Beach
Irvine
Westminster
Seal
Beach
Anaheim
Buena Park
Brea
Corona
Long
Beach
Carson
Chino
Hills
Manhattan
Beach
Bellflower
Gardena
South Gate Santa
Fe Springs
Bell Gardens
Inglewood
Diamond Bar
Culver City
Montebello
South El Monte
Alhambra Baldwin Park
Beverly
Hills
San Marino Irwindale
San Dimas
Pasadena Glendora
Glendale
Chino
Palos
Verdes
Estates
Redondo
Beach
Newport
Beach
Santa
Monica Los
Angeles
Tustin
ÄÆ57
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ73
ÄÆ91
ÄÆ22
ÄÆ170
ÄÆ55 ÄÆ133
ÄÆ142
ÄÆ107
ÄÆ187
ÄÆ213
ÄÆ66
ÄÆ71
ÄÆ72
ÄÆ2
ÄÆ90
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ1
ÄÆ19
ÄÆ60
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦710
§¨¦10
§¨¦105
§¨¦605
§¨¦405
L o s
A n g e l e s
C o u n t y
O r a n g e
C o u n t y
Project Site
!(
^
SOURCE: USGS National Map 2025
Dick's House of Sport Project
Regional Location and Local Vicinity
FIGURE 1
I

E ANDY ST
RDALE sr

SILVA ST
... ;!I ... :,. :,. <t <t ~ "' ... <t"' ~ s ~
u 0
~ 0 ~ ~
ARBOR RD 8 "'

ELSA ST

HENRILEE ST
RN ST
CJ l[
DUDEI<
D
...
:,.
<t ...
:,. !(? <t 0 ... ::, - 0 ~ 0 ~
~
...
:,.
<t
~ s:
)(
0 ~
0 c::
:i::.
0 z
....
t
~ i1I ~ <C
<t ' ~
<t <t
~Il l
Cerritos Coll

FALCON WAY

ARTESIA BLVD
□
~ r.
';;
"' ::.
0 "' l:
f:
195TH ST
Cl
... "'
...
~
"'
\
" \
\
\
~ <t
0 ~
0 :!:,I ~i
\
\
\
"' ?
-~11
L
CL ii t '=
J[ ,.I_60T
161STST
162Nos,.

Cl ~ ~ "' >- <t <t ... ... Cl a ~ "'
§JI u <t
~ \!)
763RD ST
764TH ST L
r
165TH ST
;r=::=rr=
118TH ST ROSES
Artesia
a,
11 186TH sr
~ ~ II~ ~ !i <t ,~ ~ II~ <t ... ... <t
~ 11
~ :::i ~ "' )(
<( "' ... 1i! - :,. ...... 0 ~
<t ..: JI "> Cl :i:
\:,
'o "' >-
...
a
ii:
\!) SOUTH ST
II
,.JI
HIBBIN
~ MEADO
BOS ST
<t
E BOSST 11
CARVE
~ ...
...
~ c:,
I
LJI
"' Li ~ !!a >- u <t
u >- <t
~ ~ ~ <t
~ ;:;: BERTHA ST
...
:,.
<t
>- w ...
"' "'
~
209TH ST
Former Sears
Automotive
Center
Stores
Cerritos
Auto Square
Former Sears
Former Railroad
Right-of-Way (Abandoned)
Former Sears
Merchandise Pick Up
Former Sears
Loading Dock A
ol r
a
Ave
Curry Ln
188th St
Wright Pl
Powell Pl
W Pl
Sheryl Ave
Gard Ave
185th St
Cro
s
sdale
Av
e
Dena St
176th St
Benfield Ave
Auto Square Dr
Maidstone Ave
Hibbing St
177th St
Allingham Ave
180th St
Acoro St
H
arve
s
t Av
e
Business Cir
E Felson St
Wiersma Ave
Summer Ave
Rose St
Mapes
Ave
Gra
y
s
t
o
ne Ave
Eric Ave
Candor St
178th St
Jersey
Av
e
Crusader Ave
Roseton Ave
§¨605
G
ridl
ey Rd
183rd St
186th St
187th St
Artesia Blvd
Studeb
a
ker
Rd
S St
San Gabriel River Fwy
Office
Buildings
Two Units
Service Stations
Auto, Recreation
EQPT, Construction
EQPT, Sales & Service
Banks Savings & Loan
Shopping Centers
(Regional)
Store Combination
Utility Commercial
& Mutual: Pumping Plants
State Assessed Pr
Professional
Buildings
Five or
more apartments
Churches
Shopping Centers
(Neighborhood,
community)
Homes For
Aged & Others
Stores
Project Boundary (4.65 acres)
0 350 700 n Feet Date: 12/16/2025 User: jconway Path: Z:\Projects\j1584701\MAPDOC\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE.aprx Map: Project Site Boundary Layout: Figre 2 Project Site Boundary SOURCE: ESRI 2025, Los Angeles County Parcel 2025, Open Street Maps 2019 Dick's House of Sport Project
Project Site Boundary
FIGURE 2
DUDEI<
Project Site Exhibit
Dick’s House of Sport Project
FIGURE 3
Path: Z:\Projects\

ATHLETIC
FIELD
183RD STREET
©
NORTH
LEGEND

PROJECT SITE
(4.65 AC) PROJECT SITE EXHIBIT

LOS CERRITOS CENTER
= ,, I , - z . '"~ . . ~ !Jl§
• C
©
WLL/t:l -wmm;D
; u;..;
ffff:Hf HMH#m - 1~-
o ~ ~nl-±--=i,,
0W55555HMf5Wf,9
«@~@«~«~
DUDEK
• cuo

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
LU 1i
Attachment B
VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment
December 22, 2025
Mr. Andy Greenwood
Macerich
401 Wilshire Boulevard
Santa Monica, CA 90401
LLG Reference: 2.25.5032.1
Subject: VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment for Dick’s House of Sport at Los Cerritos Center
Cerritos, California
Dear Mr. Greenwood:

As requested, Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) is pleased to submit this VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment for the proposed Dick’s House of Sport at Los Cerritos Center in the City of Cerritos, California (herein referred to as “Project”).

The Project is an urban infill project and is being considered for a Class 32 exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Consistent with CEQA requirements, this analysis reviews Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for the Project applying the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, dated July 23, 2020 (herein referred to as “County VMT Guidelines”), which the City of Cerritos applies as its governing VMT guidelines.

The County VMT Guidelines provide screening criteria for determining significant VMT impacts. Under those criteria, projects near a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor and meeting other identified criteria are presumed to have less than significant impacts, and in such cases, further analysis of project VMT impacts is not required.

CEQA does not require level of service analysis, but the traffic generation potential for the Project is provided on a conservative basis in this letter, as Project-generated trips need to be estimated as required inputs for VMT screening and evaluation of potential air quality and noise impacts caused by the Project. This letter applies the latest/most current trip rates available from the 12th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington, D.C., 2025].

LLG.
2 Executive Circle
Suite 250
Irvine, CA 92614
949.825.6175 T
949.825.5939 F
www.llgengineers.com
Pasadena
Irvine
San Diego
David S. Shender, PE
John A. Boarman, PE
Richard E. Barretto, PE
Keil D. Maberry, PE
KC Yellapu, PE
Dave Roseman, PE
Shankar Ramakrishnan, PE
An LG2WB Company Founded 1966
Mr. Andy Greenwood
December 22, 2025

Page 2 ends

N:\5000\2255032 - Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos\Report\5032 Trip Generation and VMT Screening Letter revised 12-22-25.docx

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project consists of the demolition of a 277,559-SF building that was formerly occupied by Sears, and the new construction of a 142,000-SF Dick’s House of Sport retail facility with an ancillary 18,500-SF outdoor athletic field adjoining the new retail building, accessible only from within the new store and to be used for the experiential use of sporting equipment and store-related activities.

The Project site is a 4.65-acre portion of the Sears Parcel (APN 7038-014-015) located on the northern portion of Los Cerritos Center, which is bound by 183rd Street on the north, South Street on the south, I-605 Freeway on the west, and Gridley Road on the east. Vehicular access for the Center is provided via one signalized driveway and two stop-controlled driveways on South Street, three signalized driveways and three stopcontrolled driveways on Gridley Road, and three signalized driveways and three stopcontrolled driveways on 183rd Street.

CEQA ASSESSMENT OF VMT, ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION, & PUBLIC

TRANSIT
The County of Los Angeles adopted thresholds of significance for determining significant transportation impacts consistent with the requirements of SB 743, and the following summarizes the CEQA Assessment consistent with the Los Angeles County Public Works Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 23, 2020). The County VMT Guidelines have the following four screening criteria applied to effectively screen development projects from detailed VMT modeling/impact analysis:
1: Non-Retail Project Trip Generation Screening Criteria 2: Retail (Local-Serving) Project Screening Criteria
3: Proximity to Transit Screening Criteria
4: Residential Project Screening Criteria
Given the Project’s characteristics and setting, Screening Method #3 would apply.

A project may be screened out from further analysis, and determined to have a lessthan-significant impact on VMT if it is located within a one-half mile radius of a major transit stop or an existing stop along a High-Quality Transit Corridor (HQTC), and the answer to each of the following four subsequent questions is a “no”:
 Does the project have a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) less than 0.75?  Does the project provide more parking than required by County Code? LLG.

Mr. Andy Greenwood
December 22, 2025

Page 3 ends

N:\5000\2255032 - Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos\Report\5032 Trip Generation and VMT Screening Letter revised 12-22-25.docx  Is the project inconsistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS?
 Does the project replace residential units set aside for lower income households with a smaller number of market-rate residential units? Based on Chapter 4.2 Implementation of the Sustainable Communities Strategy:

Section 21155 of the California Constitution Public Resources Code, Division 13.

Environmental Quality, a “high-quality transit corridor” is defined as a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.

Based on SCAG’s Connect SoCal: The 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Local Data Exchange (LDX) Process Data/Map Book for the City of Cerritos (excerpts contained in Appendix A), the roadways adjoining Los Cerritos Center (183rd Street on the north, Gridley Road on the east, and South Street on the south) are all HQTCs. Studebaker Road to the west of Los Cerritos Center and the I-605 Freeway has also been designated as a HQTC by SCAG. Appendix B contains a map showing that the Project is located within a onehalf mile radius of a HQTC.

Furthermore, the Project also meets the subsequent screening criteria for development projects located near a major transit stop or HQTC; specifically:
 The Project’s FAR is not less than 0.75 (the Project has a 0.79 FAR, calculated by dividing 160,500 SF by 202,554 SF).
 The Project does not provide more parking than required by City Code (County Code is not applicable) because it will not increase existing parking supply at Los Cerritos Center, resulting in a net reduction in spaces.
 The Project is retail use and is therefore not inconsistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS.
 The Project is retail use and does not replace residential units set aside for lower income households with a smaller number of market-rate residential units.

Based upon the above findings applying Screening Method #3 from the County VMT Guidelines, the Project is screened out from further analysis and determined to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

As detailed in the County VMT Guidelines, potential impacts to active transportation (pedestrian and bicycle) and public transit facilities and circulation can be evaluated by determining whether a project conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs LLG.

Mr. Andy Greenwood
December 22, 2025

Page 4 ends

N:\5000\2255032 - Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos\Report\5032 Trip Generation and VMT Screening Letter revised 12-22-25.docx regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreases the performance or safety of such facilities.

Under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project could also have a significant transportation impact if it detrimentally affects the existing multimodal network. Based on this, the proposed Project does not have a significant traffic impact because it would not: (1) conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy related to bicycle, pedestrian, and public transit; (2) substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature; or (3) result in inadequate emergency access. The proposed site plan for the Project will maintain existing sidewalks and access to public transit, construct new pedestrian connections on site and with adjoining uses, modify an existing interior ring road to accommodate the Project, and meet City design standards regarding site access, multimodal connectivity within the internal site circulation system, emergency access, and on-site parking.

For the reasons identified above, the Project is not in conflict with the SCS/RTP and the Project does not result in a significant impact related to VMT or result in other significant impacts under Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECASTS
Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation factors used in this traffic analysis are based on information found in the 12th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington, D.C., 2025].

Table 1 presents the ITE rates used in forecasting the vehicular trips, and the application of these trip rates to the Project. As a conservative step in estimating trips for the Project, no trip reductions attributable to internal trips (due to mixed-use interactions occurring on site at shopping centers like Los Cerritos Center), pass-by trips (to account for retail trips that are already in the everyday traffic stream on the adjoining streets), and use of alternative modes of transport (public transit, bicycles, walking) were applied in this analysis. Based on this, the trip generation estimates provided on Table 1 represent the worst-case scenario for the Project’s tripmaking potential. These Project-generated trip estimates would significantly overstate anticipated traffic conditions, and this estimate is prepared solely to allow for conservative analysis of whether Class 32 exemption is applicable, and should therefore not be relied upon for determining operational impacts to roadways.

Table 1 also provides additional trip comparisons that conservatively assume the athletic field (which is not a standalone use, and will operate as an ancillary component LLG.

Mr. Andy Greenwood
December 22, 2025

Page 5 ends

N:\5000\2255032 - Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos\Report\5032 Trip Generation and VMT Screening Letter revised 12-22-25.docx to the new retail building for the purpose of providing the same customers with experiential use of sporting equipment) would add incremental trips for the Project. In order to provide a more comprehensive comparison to existing entitlements for Los Cerritos Center, Table 1 also estimates the difference in trips between the proposed Project and prior Sears.

Conservatively presuming that the athletic field would generate additive trips, the Project would generate 3,817 weekday daily trips, 74 AM peak hour trips (58 trips inbound, 16 trips outbound), 336 PM peak hour trips (155 trips inbound, 181 trips outbound), 5,618 Saturday daily trips, and 641 Saturday midday peak hour trips (327 trips inbound, 314 trips outbound).

Presuming the more realistic scenario with the athletic field as ancillary use, the Project would generate 3,377 weekday daily trips, 65 AM peak hour trips (51 trips inbound, 14 trips outbound), 297 PM peak hour trips (137 trips inbound, 160 trips outbound), 4,970 Saturday daily trips, and 567 Saturday midday peak hour trips (289 trips inbound, 278 trips outbound).

The bottom portion of Table 1 indicates that, in comparison to the prior Sears, the Project (with the athletic field as ancillary) would result in 2,974 fewer weekday daily trips, 96 fewer AM peak hour trips (52 trips inbound, 44 trips outbound), 244 fewer PM peak hour trips (134 trips inbound, 110 trips outbound), 2,080 fewer Saturday daily trips, and 391 fewer Saturday midday peak hour trips (219 trips inbound, 172 trips outbound).

We appreciate the opportunity to submit this VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment. Please call us at 949.825.6175 if you have any questions or comments regarding this submittal.

Sincerely,
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers
Trissa (de Jesus) Allen, P.E., RSP
Senior Transportation Engineer
California Registration: Traffic 2231
Road Safety Professional (RSP) Certification: 981
LLG.

TABLE 1

PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Midday Peak Hour
Description Daily In Out Total In Out Total Daily In Out Total ITE Trip Generation Rates [a]:

Land Use 861: Sporting Goods Superstore (trips per 1,000 SF) 23.78 79% 21% 0.46 46% 54% 2.09 35.00 51% 49% 3.99 Land Use 875: Department Store (trips per 1,000 SF) 22.88 64% 36% 0.58 50% 50% 1.95 25.40 53% 47% 3.45 Proposed Project (Gross Trips inc. Athletic Field)
Dick's House of Sports (main building) 142,000 SF 3,377 51 14 65 137 160 297 4,970 289 278 567 Athletic Field (presumed as additive trips) 18,500 SF 440 7 2 9 18 21 39 648 38 36 74 Gross Project Trips (inc. Athletic Field): 3,817 58 16 74 155 181 336 5,618 327 314 641 Proposed Project (Gross Trips exc. Athletic Field)
Dick's House of Sports (main building) 142,000 SF 3,377 51 14 65 137 160 297 4,970 289 278 567 Athletic Field (presumed as ancillary use) 18,500 SF 0 0 0 0 0000000 Gross Project Trips (Athletic Field as ancillary use): 3,377 51 14 65 137 160 297 4,970 289 278 567 Project vs. Prior Sears (Net Trips inc. Athletic Field) Gross Project Trips inc. Athletic Field 160,500 SF 3,817 58 16 74 155 181 336 5,618 327 314 641 Less Prior Sears Department Store (277,559) SF (6,351) (103) (58) (161) (271) (270) (541) (7,050) (508) (450) (958) Project (inc. Athletic Field) vs. Sears Trip Difference: (2,534) (45) (42) (87) (116) (89) (205) (1,432) (181) (136) (317) Project vs. Prior Sears (Net Trips exc. Athletic Field) Gross Project Trips exc. Athletic Field 142,000 SF 3,377 51 14 65 137 160 297 4,970 289 278 567 Less Prior Sears Department Store (277,559) SF (6,351) (103) (58) (161) (271) (270) (541) (7,050) (508) (450) (958) Project (exc. Athletic Field) vs. Sears Trip Difference: (2,974) (52) (44) (96) (134) (110) (244) (2,080) (219) (172) (391) Note:
[a] Source: Trip Generation , 12th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2025).

Dick's House of Sport, Cerritos
Size
Typical Weekday Saturday
LLG
___________ 1 ___ 1 _ 1---- • - 1 - l -
-----------l - 1- 1- • - 1- 1- 1- 1- 1- 1- I -
___________ 1 _ 1 _ 1- • - 1- l - 1- l - • - • - I -
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-25-5032-1

APPENDIX A

EXCERPTS FROM CITY OF CERRITOS

SCAG LDX PROCESS DATA/MAP BOOK
NOVEMBER 2023
DRAFT PLAN RELEASE | NOVEMBER 2023

DATA/MAP BOOK

LOCAL DATA EXCHANGE (LDX) PROCESS
Connect SoCal
The 2024–2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy
for the City of

CERRITOS
Trabuco St
Beach St
"1ayfair High
School
II)
>
<(
0 en
11)
u
.c
u
"'O
QJ
0 <
rt>
a. "' )>
< "'
"'
183rd St
C rritos
Co munity
C liege
Gahr (Richard)
High School
Cerritos Best
Plaza
Los Cerritos
Center
Cerritos uto
Squar
i::,
·.:::
l?
~ Q)
11) > l? <(
Q)
C:

B
V)
i::,
11)
~
A
59ft
178th St ~
a
C:
....
~
"' )>
< "'
186th St
195th St
0 ::,
"' "' z .... 0
~ i < OJ Cl.

I
n 0
.... QJ
.... "' ~
"' )> Cl. < OJ
ii, "' )> - < "'
168th St
h St
0 ro
Alondra Blvd
Moore St
166th St 166th St
Cuesta St
i::,
er:
~
C:

II)
E
11)
u
._ _______ '"'ia Blvd
Cerritos Towne
Center
Shopping
Center
Artesia Blvd
Q)
Q) > > <(
<( QJ
QJ C:

C: QJ
l/l
<(
Artesia
-
~
II)
.n
~
m

0.,
::,
(1)
)>
<
(1)
Bertha St
Q)
>
<(
X
Q)
.n
"' OJ
<
C.

Cerritos
183rd St 183rd St
South St South St
195th St
Cerritos
Regional
County Park
Vl
:T
0 "' 3
QJ
"' "' ....
)>
< "'
Rose St
s:
0 0
C.
'<
Houston Ave
Andrew Dr
Q)
>
<(
Q)
>
<(
i::,
er:

Vl
~
;:; "'
i::,
LU
Artes ia Blvd
Fresca Dr
.....

Vl
3:
<II Panama Dr >
Thelma Ave >,
Q)
11)
>
Al
La Palma La Cien
,. , La Palma Ave o Lib f al6'3a Ave o s o
205th St ~ "' I n_______r----i Mil~ c
Arbor Rd Sft>V1Ce layer Crechts World Topographic Map City of Long Beach, County of Los Angeles, :aliforn1a State Parks. Esn HERE Garmin SafeGraph G~chnolog,es Inc ~ / ~ASA USGS, Bureau of land Man~gement, EPA, NPS, U5t_<t(t;~ 8efftu USDA World Htllshade Esn NASA NGA, USGS ~.,, -, ~ - ~-- "" . lo A7Ft <~
High Quality Transit Corridors in City of Cerritos
[Connect SoCal 2024 Plan Year 2050]
"v High Quality Transit Corridors (HQTCs)
Note: HQTCs included in this Data/Map Book are based on the 2050 pla n year transit network of Connect SoCal 2024 and are considered draft until the completion of Connect SoCal 2024.

Further explanation of the methodology for identifying HQTCs is included in the Connect SoCal 2024 Transit Technical Report Appendix. Please note that SCAG updates HQTCs with t he adoption of a new RTP/SCS, once every four years. However, t ransit planning studies may be completed by transit agencies on a more frequent basis than the RTP/ SCS is updated by SCAG.

This data is intended for planning purposes only, and SCAG shall incur no responsibility or liability as to the completeness, currentress, or accuracy of this information. SCAG assumes no responsibility arising from use of this information by individu;;ls, businesses, or other public entities. Users should consult with the appropriate transit provider(s) to obtain the latest information on transit routes, stop locations, and service intervals before making determinations regarding CEQA exemption or streaml ining.

Data Source: County Transportation Commissions, SCAG I Data Version: Connect SoCal 2024 Plan Year 2050 I Map Created: 9/27/2023 Disclaimer: This map was created as a part of SCAG Data/Map Books to solicit feedback from local jurisdictions during Connect SoCal 2024 Local Data Exchange (LDX) process. SCAG shall not be responsible for user's misuse or misrepresentation of this map. For the details regarding the data sources, methodologies and contents of this map, please refer to the SCAG Data/Map Book or contact [email protected].

V,
(")
J>
Q
0 J>
--I
J>
--:;::

J>
-u
CD
0 0
"
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-25-5032-1

APPENDIX B

ONE-HALF MILE RADIUS MAP

183rd St
Gridley Rd
South St
Studebaker Rd
Attachment C
Noise Technical Memorandum

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Kristin Aguila, Community Development Director; City of Cerritos From: Cole Martin, Environmental Acoustician, Carson Wong, Environmental Acoustician - Dudek Subject: Dick’s House of Sport Project Noise Technical Memorandum Date: January 13, 2026
cc: Nicole Greenberg, CEQA/NEPA Project Manager - Dudek Attachments: Attachment A – Figures 1 and 2
Attachment B – Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheets Attachment C – Project HVAC Noise Prediction
Attachment D - Roadway Traffic Noise Calculations
1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose
This technical memorandum provides a technical review of the existing outdoor sound environment and sounds generated by the proposed Los Cerritos Center (Project) located south of 183rd Steet and between the I-605 freeway and Gridley Road, in Cerritos, California (City). This technical memorandum includes an estimation of the baseline outdoor acoustical conditions in the vicinity of the Project site, predictions of Project construction-related and operational sound levels at vicinity noise-sensitive receptors, an evaluation of roadway traffic noise exposures to nearby residential components, an assessment of potential for vibration impacts, and an assessment of Project compliance with relevant City noise standards.

1.2 Project Description
The Project proposes an infill redevelopment of the 4.65-acre parcel at the north side of the Los Cerritos Center, replacing the long-vacant Sears with a new Dick’s House of Sport, an outdoor athletic field, and associated site improvements. Figure 1 provides the general location and the Project site boundary. The Project site is bounded the Interstate (I)-605 (San Gabriel River Freeway) to the west, 183rd Street to the north, Gridley Road to the east, and South Street to the south. The Project site is directly connected to the Los Cerritos Center, which is an irregularly shaped, one-story enclosed shopping complex. The mall is surrounded by expansive surface parking areas that are accessed from internal drive aisles and lined with landscaped islands containing trees and shrubs.

The former Sears property occupies its own parcel on the mall’s north side, with surface parking areas situated immediately north and west of the building. An additional structure on this parcel, the former Sears automotive center, borders 183rd Street and is positioned between two of the mall’s entry drives. The main Sears building is encircled by a concrete pedestrian walkway, and low ornamental shrubs are planted at corner locations around the building.

The existing Sears building (277,559 square feet), merchandise pickup building and loading dock, constructed in 1972 and vacant since 2019, would be removed and replaced with a 142,000-square-foot Dick’s House of Sport featuring experiential sports areas. The Project also includes an 18,500-square-foot outdoor athletic field accessible only from within the store. Site improvements include underground utility upgrades, landscaping, deep DUDEK.COM

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 2
JANUARY 2026 5
soil mixing and earthwork, certified pad preparation, enhanced pedestrian connections, and adjustments to the interior ring road to accommodate the new use.

Additional construction details, including the anticipated construction schedule, vehicle trips, and equipment type are included in Table 9, Construction Details, of Section 3.2, Assessment Results and Impact Discussion. 2 Assessment Framework
The following subsections provide the reader a summary of acoustical terminology and concepts that the following analyses will use to evaluate potential noise exposures associated with the Project.

2.1 Sound, Noise, and Acoustics
Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a liquid or gaseous medium (e.g., air) to a hearing organ, such as a human ear. Noise is defined as loud, unexpected, or annoying sound.

In the science of acoustics, the fundamental model consists of a sound (or noise) source, a receptor, and the propagation path between the two. The loudness of the noise source and obstructions or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path to the receptor determine the sound level and characteristics of the noise perceived by the receptor. The field of acoustics deals primarily with the propagation and control of sound.

2.1.1 Frequency
Continuous sound can be described by frequency (pitch) and amplitude (loudness). A low-frequency sound is perceived as low in pitch. Frequency is expressed in terms of cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz) (e.g., a frequency of 250 cycles per second is referred to as 250 Hz). High frequencies are sometimes more conveniently expressed in kilohertz (kHz), or thousands of Hertz. The audible frequency range for humans is generally between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz.

2.1.2 Sound Pressure Levels, Sound Power Levels and Decibels The amplitude of pressure waves generated by a sound source determines the loudness of that source. Sound pressure amplitude is measured in micro-Pascals (µPa). One µPa is approximately one hundred billionth (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric pressure. Sound pressure amplitudes for different kinds of noise environments can range from less than 100 to 100,000,000 µPa. Because of this huge range of values, sound is rarely expressed in terms of µPa. Instead, a logarithmic scale is used to describe sound pressure level (SPL) in terms of decibels (dB). The threshold of hearing for people is about 0 dB, which corresponds to 20 µPa.

Sound power level is the acoustic power radiated from a source and expressed in decibels with respect to a reference quantity of 10-12 watts. Unlike sound pressure (Lp) dB that will vary with environmental conditions and the distance between the source and a detection point, sound power level (Lw) depends only on the characteristics of the sound-emitting source. By way of analogy, a light bulb may be rated for 100 watts of light when operating in DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 3
JANUARY 2026 5
a room, but the measured luminosity (akin to Lp) will vary with detector distance and the light-absorbing properties of the room surfaces and contents.

2.1.3 Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are logarithmic units, SPL cannot be added or subtracted through ordinary arithmetic. Under the decibel scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3-dB increase. In other words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source under the same conditions. For example, if one automobile produces an SPL of 70 dB when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140 dB—rather, they would combine to produce 73 dB. Under the decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together produce a sound level 5 dB louder than one source.

2.1.4 A-weighted Decibels
The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Although the intensity (energy per unit area) of the sound is a purely physical quantity, the loudness or human response is determined by the characteristics of the human ear.

Human hearing is limited in the range of audible frequencies as well as in the way it perceives the SPL in that range.

In general, people are most sensitive to the frequency range of 1,000–8,000 Hz and perceive sounds within that range better than sounds of the same amplitude in higher or lower frequencies. To approximate the response of the human ear, sound levels of individual frequency bands are weighted, depending on the human sensitivity to those frequencies. Then, an “A-weighted” sound level (expressed in units of dBA) can be computed based on this information.

The A-weighting network approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to most ordinary sounds. When people make judgments of the relative loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A-scale sound levels of those sounds. Other weighting networks have been devised to address high noise levels or other special problems (e.g., B-, C-, and D-scales), but these scales are rarely used in conjunction with community noise management, including major stationary sources and highway-traffic noise.

Noise levels for community/environmental noise reports are typically reported in terms of A-weighted decibels or dBA. Table 1 describes typical A-weighted noise levels for various noise sources.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 4
JANUARY 2026 5
Table 1. Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels for Common Indoor and Outdoor Sources Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph 85 Food blender at 3 feet 80 Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Noisy urban area, daytime 75 —
Gas lawn mower, 100 feet 70 Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial area 65 Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60 —
55 Large business office
Quiet urban daytime 50 Dishwasher next room
45 —
Quiet urban nighttime 40 Theater, large conference room (background)
Quiet suburban nighttime 35 —
30 Library
Quiet rural nighttime 25 Bedroom at night, concert hall (background) Source: Caltrans 2013.

2.1.5 Structural Noise Attenuation (Outdoor to Indoor)
Structures provide noise reduction by insulating interior spaces from outdoor noise. The outside-to-inside noise attenuation provided by typical structures in California ranges between 17 to 30 dBA with open and closed windows, respectively, as shown in Table 2. With the advent of building code updates since 1971 that emphasize energy efficiency through increased insulation, modern buildings are assumed to provide greater overall outdoor to indoor attenuation than depicted in Table 2.

Table 2. Outside-to-Inside Noise Attenuation (dBA)
Building Type Typical Attenuation with
Open Windows
Typical Attenuation with
Closed Windows
Residences 17 25
Schools 17 25
Churches 20 30
Hospitals/offices/hotels 17 25
Theaters 17 25
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel.

As shown, structures with closed windows can attenuate exterior noise by a minimum of 25 to 30 dBA Source: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council 1971.

2.1.6 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
As discussed above, doubling sound energy results in a 3-dB increase in sound. However, given a sound level change measured with precise instrumentation, the subjective human perception of a doubling of loudness will usually be different than what is measured.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 5
JANUARY 2026 5
Under controlled conditions in an acoustical laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern 1-dB changes in sound levels, when exposed to steady, single-frequency (“pure-tone”) signals in the mid-frequency (1,000 Hz–8,000 Hz) range (Caltrans 2013). In typical noisy environments, changes in noise of 1 to 2 dB are generally not perceptible. However, it is widely accepted that people are able to begin to detect sound level increases of 3 dB in typical noisy environments, such as outdoors in an urban area. Further, a 5-dB increase is generally perceived as a distinctly noticeable increase, and a 10-dB increase is generally perceived as a doubling of loudness. Therefore, a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) that would result in a 3-dB increase in sound, would generally be perceived as barely detectable.

2.1.7 Noise Descriptors
Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time at varying rates. Various noise descriptors have been developed to describe time-varying noise levels. The following are the noise descriptors utilized in this analysis. ▪ Equivalent Sound Level (Leq): Leq represents an energy average of the sound level occurring over a specified period. Note that Leq is not an arithmetic average of varying dB levels over a period of time, it accounts for greater sound energy represented by higher decibel contributions. ▪ Percentile-Exceeded Sound Level (Lxx): Lxx represents the sound level exceeded for a given percentage of a specified period (e.g., L10 is the sound level exceeded 10% of the time, and L90 is the sound level exceeded 90% of the time).
▪ Maximum Sound Level (Lmax): Lmax is the highest instantaneous sound level measured during a specified period. ▪ Minimum Sound Level (Lmin): Lmin is the lowest instantaneous sound level measured during a specified period. ▪ Day-Night Level (Ldn): Ldn is the energy average of A-weighted sound levels occurring over a 24-hour period, with a 10-dB penalty applied to A-weighted hourly Leq sound levels occurring during nighttime hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
▪ Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): Similar to Ldn, CNEL is the energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring over a 24-hour period, with a 10-dB penalty applied to hourly Leq A-weighted sound levels occurring during the nighttime hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., and a 5-dB penalty applied to the hourly Leq A-weighted sound levels occurring during evening hours between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m.

2.1.8 Sound Propagation
When sound propagates over a distance, it changes in level and frequency content. The manner in which noise reduces with distance depends on the following factors. ▪ Geometric Spreading – Sound from a localized source (i.e., an ideal point source) propagates uniformly outward in a spherical pattern (or hemispherical when near the ground surface). The sound level attenuates (or decreases) at a rate of 6 decibels for each doubling of distance from a point source. Roadways consist of several localized noise sources on a defined path, and hence can be treated as a line source, which approximates the effect of several point sources. Noise from a line source propagates outward in a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate of 3 decibels for each doubling of distance from a line source.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 6
JANUARY 2026 5
▪ Ground Absorption – The propagation path of noise from a sound emission source to a receptor is usually horizontal and proximate to the ground. Under these conditions, noise attenuation from ground absorption and reflective-wave canceling can add to the attenuation associated with geometric spreading. For acoustically “hard” paths over which sound may traverse (i.e., sites with a reflective surface between the source and the receptor, such as a parking lot or body of water), no excess ground attenuation is assumed.

For acoustically absorptive or “soft” sites (i.e., those sites with an absorptive ground surface between the source and the receptor, such as fresh-fallen snow, soft dirt, or dense vegetative ground cover), an additional ground-attenuation value of +1.5 decibels per doubling of distance is normally assumed. When added to cylindrical spreading for line source sound propagation, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall drop-off rate of 4.5 decibels per doubling of distance. ▪ Atmospheric Effects – Receptors located downwind from a source can be exposed to increased noise levels relative to calm conditions, whereas locations upwind can have lowered noise levels. Sound pressure levels can also be increased at large distances (e.g., more than 500 feet) due to atmospheric temperature inversion (i.e., increasing temperature with elevation). Other factors such as air temperature, humidity, and turbulence can also have significant effects when distances between a source and receptor are large. ▪ Shielding by Natural or Human-Made Features – A large object or barrier in the path between a noise source and a receptor can substantially attenuate noise levels at the receptor. The amount of attenuation provided by shielding depends on the size of the object and the frequency content of the noise source. Natural terrain features (e.g., hills and dense woods) and human-made features (e.g., buildings and walls) can substantially reduce noise levels. Walls are often constructed between a source and a receptor specifically to reduce noise. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receptor will typically result in at least 5 dB of noise reduction. Taller barriers provide increased noise reduction. While a line of trees may visually occlude the direct line between a source and a receptor, its actual noise-reducing effect is usually negligible because it does not create a solid barrier. Deep expanses of dense wooded areas, on the other hand, can offer noise reduction under the right conditions.

2.1.9 Groundborne Vibration Fundamentals
Groundborne vibration is fluctuating or oscillatory motion transmitted through the ground mass (i.e., soils, clays, and rock strata). The strength of groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly over distance. Some soil types transmit vibration quite efficiently; other types (primarily sandy soils) do not. Several basic measurement units are commonly used to describe the intensity of ground vibration. The descriptors used by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are peak particle velocity (PPV), in units of inches per second (ips), and velocity decibel (VdB) that is based on a root-mean square (RMS) of the vibration signal magnitude. The calculation to determine PPV at a given distance is as follows:

PPVdistance = PPVref*(25/D)^1.1
Where:

PPVdistance = the peak particle velocity in inches per second of the equipment adjusted for distance PPVref = the reference vibration level in inches per second at 25 feet D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 7
JANUARY 2026 5

2.2 Existing Conditions
The Project proposes redevelopment of an existing of the existing Sears department store into a Dick’s House of Sport with an accompanying outdoor sports facility. The nearest noise sensitive land uses and their relative locations to the Project site are detailed below:
▪ Northeast: Residential uses northeast of the Project site within the Cerritos city limits. Approximately 800 feet to the northeast along Sharon Street.
▪ East: Residential uses east of the Project site within the Artesia city limits, approximately 1,200 feet east of the Project site on 184th Street.

The FTA has offered guidance on estimating existing outdoor ambient sound levels due to proximity to roadways and rail or based on an approximation formula with population density as the input parameter (FTA 2018). By way of example, the former of these techniques predicts that daytime Leq can be 65 dBA at a distance of 800 feet to an Interstate highway, and 75 dBA at a distance of only 50 feet. Similar estimates are offered by the FTA with respect to receptor proximity to operating railroads, parkways, and arterial roads. Previously conducted outdoor ambient sound level surveys for other cities in California, exhibited in a variety of published project studies that are publicly available, show daytime Leq values that are generally consistent with these estimates but also account for other acoustical contributors to the measured environment at a specific surveyed location.

Utilizing a combination of data from the aforementioned FTA guidance, the following Table 3, Estimated Outdoor Ambient Sound Level (dBA, CNEL) per FTA Guidance, provides a matrix from which the pre-existing outdoor ambient sound level, expressed as day-night sound levels (Ldn, which for purposes of this assessment, are considered equivalent to CNEL values) can be estimated.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 8
JANUARY 2026 5
Table 3. Estimated Outdoor Ambient Sound Level (dBA, CNEL) per FTA Guidance Population Density (people per square mile) in
Vicinity of Project
300–
1,000
1,000–
3,000
3,000–
10,000
10,000–
30,000
Distance to Interstate Highway 1,2 =
10–50 feet
75 75 75 75
50–100 feet 70 70 70 70
100–200 feet 65 65 65 65
200–400 feet 60 60 60 60
400–800 feet 55 55 55 60
800 or more feet 50 50 55 60
Parkway (55 mph) or City Streets (30 mph) 1,3 =
10–50 feet
70 70 70 70
50–100 feet 65 65 65 65
100–200 feet 60 60 60 60
200–400 feet 55 55 55 60
400 or more feet 50 50 55 60
Railway 1,4 = 10–30 feet 75 75 75 75
30–60 feet 70 70 70 70
60–120 feet 65 65 65 65
120–240 feet 60 60 60 60
240–500 feet 55 55 55 60
500–800 feet 50 50 55 60
800 or more 45 50 55 60
Notes:
1 Distances are perpendicular to transportation route centerline and do not include shielding from intervening rows of buildings. 2 Roadways with 4 or more lanes that permit trucks, with traffic at 60 mph. 3 Parkways with traffic at 55 mph, but without trucks, and city streets with the equivalent of 75 or more heavy trucks per hour and 300 or more medium trucks per hour at 30 mph.
4 Main line railroad corridors typically carrying 5-10 trains per day at speeds of 30-40 mph.

Source: FTA 2018
By way of example, the population density surrounding the Project is approximately 5,681 people per square mile as of 2020 (Census.gov 2025), which FTA guidance would suggest results in an outdoor ambient sound level of 60 to 70 dBA CNEL due to the proximity of City roadways.

2.3 Noise Regulation and Management

2.3.1 Federal

2.3.1.1 Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
Some guidance regarding the determination of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in a project vicinity above existing levels is provided by the 1992 findings of the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON 1992), which assessed the annoyance effects of changes in ambient noise levels resulting from aircraft operations.

The FICON recommendations are based upon studies that relate aircraft and traffic noise levels to the percentage DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 9
JANUARY 2026 5
of persons highly annoyed by the noise. Annoyance is a qualitative measure of the adverse reaction of people to noise that generates speech interference, sleep disturbance, or interference with the desire for a tranquil environment.

The rationale for the FICON recommendations is that it is possible to consistently describe the annoyance of people exposed to transportation noise in terms of Ldn. The changes in noise exposure that are shown below are expected to result in equal changes in annoyance at sensitive land uses. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to address aircraft noise impacts, they are used in this analysis to define a substantial increase in community noise levels related to all transportation noise sources and permanent non-transportation noise sources.
• Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is less than 60 dBA Ldn, then a project-attributed increase of 5 dBA or more would be considered significant;
• Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn, project-attributed increase of 3 dBA or more would be considered significant; and
• Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is greater than 65 dBA Ldn, then project-attributed increase of 1.5 dBA or more would be considered significant.

2.3.2 State

2.3.2.1 California Noise Control Act of 1973
Sections 46000 through 46080 of the California Health and Safety Code, known as the California Noise Control Act of 1973, declares that excessive noise is a serious hazard to the public health and welfare and that exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage. It also identifies a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in the urban, suburban, and rural areas. The California Noise Control Act declares that the State of California has a responsibility to protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise. It is the policy of the state to provide an environment for all Californians free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare.

2.3.2.2 California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR Title 24) In 1974, the California Commission on Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation standards for hotels, motels, dormitories, and multifamily residential buildings (CCR Title 24, Part 2). Title 24 establishes standards for interior room noise (attributable to outside noise sources). The regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a multifamily residential building or structure is proposed to be located in an area with CNEL (or Ldn) of 60 dBA or greater. Such acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to limit intruding noise to an interior CNEL (or Ldn) of at least 45 dBA (California’s Title 24 Noise Standards, Chap. 2-35).

2.3.2.3 California Department of Transportation
In its Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans 2020), the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recommends 0.5 inches per second peak particle velocity (ips PPV) as a threshold for the DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 10 JANUARY 2026 5
avoidance of structural damage to typical newer residential buildings and modern commercial/industrial structures exposed to continuous or frequent intermittent sources of ground-borne vibration For older structures, these guidance thresholds would be more stringent: 0.3 ips PPV for continuous/intermittent vibration sources. With respect to human annoyance, Caltrans guidance indicates that building occupants exposed to continuous groundborne vibration above 0.2 ips PPV would find it “annoying” and thus a likely significant impact. Although these Caltrans guidance thresholds are not regulations, they can serve as quantified standards in the absence of such limits at the local jurisdictional level.

2.3.3 Local
Local guidelines and standards can be found in the Cerritos Municipal Code and in the Artesia Noise Ordinance.

Excerpts for applicable portions of these two documents are provided below.

2.3.3.1 Cerritos Municipal Code
The City of Cerritos Municipal Code Section 22.80.480 sets limits on noise generated from a property to minimize impacts on surrounding areas. Sound levels measured at the property line may not exceed existing ambient noise levels, including traffic noise, by more than 5 dBA, or the applicable maximum standard, whichever is greater. Where properties with different zoning meet, sound levels at the shared boundary are limited to the average of the maximum allowable levels for the adjacent zones.

Table 4. Cerritos Land Use/Noise Guidelines
Zone or Development Area Maximum Noise Level (dBA)
Residential or Agricultural 50
Commercial 60
Industrial 70
Source: City of Cerritos Section 22.80.480, Municipial Code, 2025.

The noise limit provisions do not apply to occasional use of equipment for property or building maintenance or to construction activities conducted under a valid building permit between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The noise limits also do not apply to city-authorized public works activities or civic events.

2.3.3.2 Artesia Noise Ordinance
The City of Artesia Noise Ordinance, Chapter 5.2.03, establishes exterior sound level limits. Under this ordinance, no person may create or allow noise, sound, or vibration that causes noise levels at a residential property to exceed the higher of the existing ambient noise level or the specified allowable limits for more than 30 minutes in any hour, as measured at the property line. If the noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tones, speech, music, or any combination of these sources, the allowable noise level is reduced by 5 dB(A).

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 11 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 5. City of Artesia Exterior Noise Standards
Time Period Exterior Noise Level (dBA)
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50
Source: City of Artesia Noise Ordinance Section 5-2.03 (D), 2025.

Noise and vibration impacts from construction are regulated through CMC, Section 5-2.06, (F) (Prohibited Noise). Operating any construction tools or equipment are not allowed between 7:00 pm to 7:00 am on weekdays and anytime on Sundays or federal holidays.

2.4 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and the City of Cerritos and City of Artesia Municipal Code and will be used to determine the significance of potential noise impacts. Such potential noise and vibration impacts to the community would be considered significant if the proposed project would result in the following:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
b. Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels; or, c. Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport).

In light of these above significance criteria, this analysis uses the following standards to evaluate potential noise and vibration impacts.
▪ Construction noise – Through adherence to the limitation of allowable construction times provided in the both of the City noise ordinances, construction-related noise would be considered compliant with the noise ordinance for residential land uses within either City’s limits. However, to be consistent with CEQA expectations regarding “applicable standards of other agencies” this Project has adopted quantified construction noise thresholds per FTA guidance, which recommends a not to exceed threshold of 80 dBA 8-hour Leq at the exterior of a residence during daytime hours (FTA 2018). ▪ Off-site Project-attributed transportation noise – For purposes of this analysis, a noise impact due to transportation noise would be considered significant if predicted noise levels exceeded the FICON thresholds noted in Section 2.3.1.1. More specifically, an impact due to the project contribution to existing and future predicted ambient noise levels would be considered significant if it meets the following criteria:

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 12 JANUARY 2026 5
o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is less than 60 dBA Ldn, then a project-attributed increase of 5 dBA or more would be considered significant; o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn, project-attributed increase of 3 dBA or more would be considered significant; and o Outdoor ambient sound level without the project is greater than 65 dBA Ldn, then project-attributed increase of 1.5 dBA or more would be considered significant. ▪ Off-site Project-attributed stationary noise – For purposes of this analysis, a noise impact would be considered significant if noise from typical operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, and outdoor uses associated with the proposed Project exceeded 50 dBA hourly Leq at the property line of the nearest existing residential receptors, which would be equivalent to both City exterior noise thresholds for residential receptors as described in Sections 2.3.3.1 and 2.3.3.2 above. ▪ Construction vibration – Neither City establishes a quantitative threshold for construction vibration.

Guidance from Caltrans indicates that for the receiving structure itself, Section 2.3.2.3 recommends that a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV would represent the threshold for building damage risk. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV or higher would be considered significant. 3 Impact Assessment

3.1 Approach and Methodology

3.1.1 Construction Noise
Construction of the Project would result in the temporary generation of noise at the Project site. Construction would involve the use of heavy equipment and machinery, such as excavators, loaders, cranes, temporary generators, scrapers, and other equipment. Construction would generate levels of noise that can vary from hour to hour and day to day depending on the equipment in use, the operations being performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. Typically, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.

Table 6 provides a list of the sound levels generated by various powered equipment that could be associated with construction of the Project, measured at a distance of 50 feet using a “slow” response time constant (1 second).

Usually, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels over time that are less than the maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time. Sound source information was obtained from the Noise Source Database developed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program 25-49 (NCHRP 25-49), Development of a Highway Construction Noise Prediction Model (NCHRP 2018).

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 13 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 6. Selected Powered Equipment Noise Emission Levels Equipment
Average Sound Level (dBA Leq) –
50 feet from Source
Maximum Sound Level (dBA
Lmax) – 50 feet from Source
Air Compressor 66 67
Aerial Lift (Man Lift) 72 73
Backhoe 76 84
Compactor (Plate) — 75
Compactor (Roller) 82 83
Concrete Mixer 81 82
Concrete Saw 85 88
Crane, Mobile 74 76
Dozer 80 86
Forklift — 88
Generator 67 68
Grader — 79
Horizontal Bore Drill 87 88
Loader 72 81
Paving - Asphalt — 83
Paving - Concrete 85 88
Pump 73 74
Scraper — 92
Flatbed Truck — 74
Welding Machine 71 72
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level. “-“ = Equipment without average (Leq) noise levels are non-stationary and best represented only by maximum instantaneous noise level (Lmax).

Source: NCHRP 2018

3.1.2 Operational Roadway Traffic Noise
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model RD-77-108 was used to estimate potential noise impacts at adjacent noise-sensitive uses. Information used in the model included Average Daily Traffic (ADT), posted traffic speeds, truck mix percentage, and day/evening/night mix percentage.

Consistent with Caltrans guidance (Caltrans 2013), this analysis assumes 80% of the ADT occurs during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.), 5% during the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.), and 15% during the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). The future modeled traffic speed was assumed to be the anticipated speed limit for the studied future roads, which is 40 miles per hour (mph) for 183rd Street, Studebaker Road, and Gridley Road, and 35 mph for South Street. The truck percentages used in the noise model were 3% medium trucks and 2% heavy trucks. This truck mix is based on Caltrans Truck AADT Census Data (Caltrans 2023) for Interstate 605.

The Project is expected to generate an increase of 3,817 ADT to the roadway system on typical weekdays, and up to 5,618 ADT on Saturdays (LLG 2025). For purposes of this assessment, the existing ADT is referenced from the build-out conditions (year 2020) per the City’s General Plan Update traffic analysis (City of Cerritos 2003). Table 7 displays the existing and future ADT for the studied roadways. Conservatively, the predictive analysis herein DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 14 JANUARY 2026 5
assumes the Project Site is vacant. Additionally, as the distribution of the Project attributed trips amongst the studied roadway segments is not known at this time, this analysis conservatively applies the entirety of the LLGanticipated added weekday Project-attributed trips (or approximately seventy percent [70%] of the Saturday total) to each studied segment.

Table 7. Existing and Future ADT for Studied Project Roadways Studied Roadway Roadway Segment
Average Daily Traffic
Existing Year Existing Year with Project
183rd Street East of Studebaker
Road
14,700 18,517
South Street Studebaker Road to
605 Freeway
47,900 51,717
South Street 605 Freeway to
Gridley Road
50,800 54,617
Studebaker Road 183rd Street to
South Street
26,500 30,317
Gridley Road 184th Street to
South Street
17,000 20,817
Notes: Existing ADT per Cerritos General Plan - Circulation Element - Traffic Analysis - Table C-7 (City of Cerritos 2003) Source: Attachment D

3.1.3 Operational Non-Transportation Noise
Prediction of operation noise attributed to the Project involved creation of a sound propagation model using the Datakustik CadnaA sound model. CadnaA is a commercially available software program for the calculation, presentation, assessment, and prediction of environmental noise based on algorithms and reference data per International Organization of Standardization (ISO) Standard 9613-2, “Attenuation of Sound During Propagation Outdoors, Part 2: General Method of Calculation” (ISO 1996). The CadnaA computer software allows one to position sources of sound emission in a simulated three-dimensional (3-D) space having heights and footprints consistent with Project architectural plans and elevations.

Stationary Noise Sources
Dudek received site plan information that provided facility equipment locations that were used to help derive reference sound power levels for expected Project on-site operating noise-producing system components and features as summarized in the preceding paragraphs. Based on client-provided information and similar prior Dudek project noise study experience, expected sources of noise emission from within the boundary of the proposed Project include consideration of on-site electro-mechanical equipment. The following are descriptions of modeled sound sources, with Table 8 (presented later in this memorandum) exhibiting modeled sound power level (PWL) data at octave-band center frequency (OBCF) resolution.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 15 JANUARY 2026 5
Project Building Sources
Roof-Mounted Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) – The proposed Project building would be served by air-conditioning equipment that includes packaged air-handling units and air-cooled condensers that provide the expected cooling demand (expressed as refrigeration “tonnage”) for a given building. The HVAC reference sound power levels were calculated from a combination of inputs that include square footage values for the Project’s proposed building, Project applicant response to data requests, and manufacturer sound power level data. For the analysis of noise from HVAC equipment operation, HVAC units ranging from 14 to 15 tons were modeled for each floor of each Project building. Detailed information supporting these summary descriptions and quantities appear in Attachment C.

Athletic Field Activity – Project site plans and other client-provided information indicate that there will be an outdoor athletic field as well as outdoor seating. Potential sources of noise from activity field usage include seated and standing speech (Hayne 2006).

Speakers – Client-provided information included mounted speakers on the outdoor athletic field pointed towards the Project building. The sound power level was selected within the capable ranges of typical products (i.e., Mackie SRM350v3 and SRM450v3, or comparable) and so that conversational speech between outdoor area occupants could still occur and be reasonably understood, resulting in overall source levels appearing in Table 8.

Table 8. Sound Power Levels for Modeled Sources of Outdoor Noise Emission Source
Reference Source Sound Power Level (PWL, dBA)
per Octave Band Center Frequency (OBCF, Hz)
Overall
Sound
Level

31.5 63 125 250 500 1,000 2,000 4,000 8,000 (dBA)
RTU 1st Floor 49 49 62 68 75 76 70 68 62 80
RTU 2nd Floor 74 74 74 76 78 76 69 67 63 84
Outdoor Seating (speech) 62 62 63 64 64 62 56 49 44 71
Athletic Field (speech) 80 80 81 82 82 80 74 67 62 89
Outdoor Speaker (music) 85 85 86 87 87 85 79 72 67 94
Notes: RTU = roof-top unit; OBCF = Octave Band Center Frequency in cycles per second (Hertz [Hz]); dBA = A-weighted decibels.

These above-listed PWL values were used to define sources of sound emission in the CadnaA computer model. In addition to the above sound source inputs, the following assumptions, features, and parameters, which are included in this CadnaA-supported stationary noise source assessment:
• Ground effect acoustical absorption coefficient equal to 0.5, which intends to represent an average or blending of ground covers that are characterized by hard, reflective pavements along with existing building surfaces across the Project site and the surroundings; • Reflection order of 1, which allows for a single reflection of sound paths on encountered structural surfaces such as the modeled building masses;
• Conservatively, topography, off-site structures, and buildings have not been rendered in the model; • Calm meteorological conditions (i.e., no wind) with 68 degrees Fahrenheit and 50% relative humidity; and DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 16 JANUARY 2026 5
• All of the modeled noise sources are operating concurrently and continuously for a minimum period of 1 hour.

3.1.3 Construction Vibration
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration and ground-borne noise at local receptors, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures, and soil type. Caltrans has been assembling data for vibration and ground-borne noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment operation during the building of transportation projects for many years. The vibration and ground-borne noise levels from use of such equipment are representative for other types of construction efforts, not just transportation projects, and are therefore widely employed to assess vibration and ground-borne noise levels from heavy equipment use for any effort. According to Caltrans (2020b) reference data, the most important equipment relative to generation of vibration and ground-borne noise, and the vibration and ground-borne noise levels produced by such equipment, is illustrated in Table 9. Pile driving is not anticipated as a method of construction for this Project.

Table 9. Vibration Velocities for Typical Construction Equipment Equipment PPV at 25 Feet (Inches Per Second)
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozer 0.003
Note: PPV = peak particle velocity; Lv is rms velocity in decibels where VdB re 1 micro-in/sec.

Source: Caltrans 2020b and FTA 2018.

3.2 Assessment Results and Impact Discussion
Potential noise and vibration impacts attributed to Project construction and operation are studied in the following subsections that are categorized by the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G significance for noise. a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
On-Site Construction Noise
The California Air Resources Board CalEEMod was used to identify the construction equipment anticipated for development of the Project, including earthwork, utility trenching and equipment installation, and paving activities.

The equipment list is based upon the detailed Project description; CalEEMod identified the anticipated equipment shown in Table 10 for each phase of the Project construction.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 17 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 10. Construction Equipment Per Phase
Construction Phase On Site Equipment Types (and Quantities) One-Way Vehicle Trips
(by Type) per Day
Demolition (49 days)
Excavator, Rubber Tired Dozer (2),
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3), Concrete Industrial Saw
(1)
Autos (16), Vendor Trucks
(4), Haul Trucks (160)
Grading (30 days) Grader (1), Excavator (1), Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3), Rubber Tired Dozer (1)
Autos (16), Vendor Trucks
(4), Haul Trucks (317)
Building Construction
(255 days)
Crane (1), Forklift (3), Generator Set (1),
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (3), Welder (1)
Autos (46), Vendor Trucks
(24)
Paving (13 days) Cement Mixer (2), Paver (1), Paving Equipment (2), Rollers (2), Tractor/Loader/Backhoe (1)
Autos (20), Vendor Trucks
(4)
Architectural Coating
(20 days)
Air Compressor (1) Autos (10), Vendor Trucks
(4)
With the sound sources identified in Table 10 above, an analysis was performed with a Microsoft Excel–based noise prediction model using the National Cooperative Highway Research Program reference data shown in Table 6. Input variables include the equipment type (backhoe, crane, truck, etc.), the number of equipment pieces, the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (i.e., percentage of each hour the equipment typically works), and the distance from the sensitive receptor. Pile driving is not anticipated as a method of construction. Refer to Attachment B for the construction modeling inputs and results. Construction noise levels were predicted at the nearest sound-sensitive land uses (i.e., residences), based on the distance between the closest Project construction boundary and these residences. Aggregate sound emissions from Project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase of construction, were predicted for the worst-case construction activity occurring along the closest construction boundary to the off-site closest sensitive receptors.

Construction activities are limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. in compliance with the City of Cerritos Municipal Code and the City of Artesia Noise Ordinance. Neither City has any quantitative noise limits for construction; therefore, it is appropriate to employ a numeric standard adopted by another agency for daytime construction noise assessment. In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq over an 8-hour period (Leq8hr) when detailed construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences or other noise-sensitive land uses surrounding a project (FTA 2018). Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, many communities employ it as a quantified standard in the absence of such limits at the local jurisdictional level. Dudek compared predicted construction noise levels to the recommended FTA construction noise exposure limits and to measured ambient noise levels.

The nearest noise-sensitive uses in the general vicinity of the Project site include residences located approximately 790 feet to the northeast and 1,200 feet to the east of the site, as shown in Figure 1. Using the provided construction information and the distance identified from the edge of a future construction zone boundary to the closest receivers, the construction noise model was used to predict sound levels from on-site construction activities.

The construction noise was modeled at distances representative of the closest noise-sensitive receptors to the Project site, without taking shielding into account. The results are summarized in Table 11. Most of these residences are well shielded from the site by intervening commercial structures, which would provide 5 to 20 dB of additional DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 18 JANUARY 2026 5
reduction from the conservative noise levels given in Table 11. Attachment B contains the worksheets used for construction noise prediction.

Table 11. Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase (Unmitigated)
Task/Activity
Residences to
Northeast (790 feet)
Residences to East
(1,200 feet)
dBA Leq 8hr dBA Leq 8hr
Demolition (49 days) 59 55
Grading (30 days) 56 52
Building Construction (255 days) 54 49
Paving (13 days) 62 58
Architectural Coating (20 days) 35 31
Note: Leq 8hr = average noise level equivalent over an 8-hour period.

Source: Attachment B
Table 11 presents the results of the construction noise prediction assuming all equipment is simultaneously operating along the Project site boundary closest to the identified receiver, without taking shielding from intervening buildings into account. As indicated in Table 11, worst-case construction noise levels would range from 35 to 62 dBA Leq 8hr at residences to the northeast and 31 to 58 dBA Leq 8hr at residences to the east.

These worst-case levels are well below Federal Transit Administration construction noise level threshold of 80 dBA Leq -8h. Construction noise levels would be lower as equipment moves around the site or into shielded areas. As described above, any shielding from intervening structures would be anticipated to provide 5 to 20 dB of noise reduction.

Construction activities would comply with the FTA recommended construction noise limit of 80 dBA Leq 8hr and would be conducted during both City of Cerritos and City of Artesia allowable hours. As indicated in Table 10, the average noise levels at exterior areas would not be harmful, nor would they disturb sleep or present a deterrent to use of outdoor activity, yard, or patio areas. Residences shielded by intervening structures would experience sound levels that are 5 to 20 dBA lower than those described above. Further, interior sound levels would be anticipated to be 15 dB lower with windows open and 25 dB with windows shut. Consequently, on-site construction noise levels would result in a less than significant temporary noise impact.

For informational purposes, Table 12 compares the predicted construction noise levels per phase to estimated ambient noise levels. It is noted that residents in the area would have the option to remain indoors during construction hours to avoid potential annoyance or disruption of outdoor speech or other activities. Indoors, and after being attenuated by the process of exterior-to-interior noise intrusion through the envelope of a receiving enclosed structure, the resulting construction noise exposure levels would not be anticipated to exceed 45 dBA Leq, which would not interfere with conversations or other daytime indoor activities (FHWA 2011).

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 19 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 12 Highest Predicted Construction Noise Level Compared to Ambient Noise Levels
Estimated Noise Level
Leq (dBA)
Highest Predicted
Unmitigated
Construction Noise Level
Leq (dBA)
Amount of Largest
Increase – Unmitigated
Construction Noise
Levels Over Existing
(dBA)
55 62 7
60 62 2
65 62 -3
70 62 -8
75 62 -13
Source: Appendix A.

Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); dBA = A-weighted decibels Short-Term Off-Site Construction Noise
The Project would result in local, short-term increases in roadway noise as a result of construction traffic. Based on information developed as part of the Project’s air quality analysis, Project-related traffic would include workers commuting to and from the Project site as well as vendor and haul trucks bringing or removing materials. The highest number of average daily worker trips would be 46 trips, occurring during the building construction phase.

The highest number of average daily vendor truck trips would be 24 trips, occurring during the building construction phase. The highest number of total haul truck trips would be 317 trips, occurring during the grading phase. EAs displayed in Table 7, the lowest existing ADT for the studied Project roadways is 14,700 vehicles per day. In order for traffic noise to increase by 3 dB, a doubling (i.e. a 100% increase) of traffic volume is necessary. Traffic volumes in the Project area would not double as a result of Project construction traffic. Therefore, potential impacts at the nearest existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses due to Project-generated temporary construction traffic noise would be less than significant.

Operational Noise
Prediction of on-site Project operation noise (i.e., roof top mounted HVAC units and speech sources) at the property line and neighboring receiver properties involved creation of a sound propagation model using the Datakustik CadnaA software. The model was constructed to address a worst-case scenario where all the equipment is in continuous operation for a full hour (for comparison to ambient noise levels). Additional noise modeling data are included in Attachment C.

Table 13 presents the results of the modeling of on-site stationary noise sources at the property line and nearest noise-sensitive single family residential receptors to the northeast and east of the Project site. The City of Cerritos Municipial Code section 20.80.480 and the City of Artesia Noise Ordinance limits section 5-2.04 exterior noise by time of day and land use.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 20 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 13. Predicted Project Operational Noise at Vicinity Noise-Sensitive Receivers Modeled
Receiver ID
dBA Leq 1hr
Project Operational
Noise Level Exterior Noise Threshold Impact?
M1 36 50 No
PL – North 48 50 No
PL – West 49 50 No
PL – East 39 50 No
Source: Dudek 2025.

Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels. Leq = noise equivalent level. See Figure 2 of Attachment A for more details.

The CadnaA noise model predicts noise levels not only at discrete receiver points, but also across a continuous grid around the Project site. Noise contours representing the predicted Project operational noise levels extending outward from the Project site are illustrated in Figure 2 of Attachment A. As indicated in Table 13, predicted Project operational noise levels would be lower than the City of Artesia’s 50 dBA Leq over 1-hour exterior nighttime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) noise limit and is also under the city of Cerrito’s 60 dBA Leq sound level threshold at the property line of the shopping center and 50 dBA Leq sound level threshold at the property line of the noise sensitive residential receptors to the northeast of the site. Therefore, Project operational noise levels would be less than significant.

Off-Site Roadway Traffic Noise
The change in roadway noise levels was predicted for two conditions: existing year and existing year plus Project.

Based upon the FICON thresholds presented in Section 2.3.1.1 above, an increase of less than 5 dBA when the ambient sound level is less than 60 dBA Ldn/CNEL, less than 3 dBA when the ambient sound level is between 60 and 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL, or less than 1.5 dBA when the ambient sound level is greater than 65 dBA Ldn/CNEL would not be significant. Utilizing the traffic noise modeling worksheets found in Attachment D, Table 14 shows that the calculated existing with Project traffic noise level for noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to studied Project roadways ranges from 0.3 to 1.0 dBA higher than the existing year traffic noise level. These predicted increases in traffic noise attributed to added Project trips are less than the FICON-based relative increase thresholds. Therefore, potential impacts to existing off-site noise-sensitive land uses along studied roadway segments near the Project with respect to Project-generated changes in traffic noise would be less than significant.

Table 14. Predicted Roadway Traffic Noise Levels – With and Without Project Studied Roadway Roadway Segment
Predicted CNEL (dBA; at 50 feet from centerline)
Existing Year Existing Year with Project Change
183rd Street East of Studebaker
Road

68.8 69.8 1.0
South Street Studebaker Road to
605 Freeway

72.7 73.1 0.3
South Street 605 Freeway to
Gridley Road

73.0 73.3 0.3
DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 21 JANUARY 2026 5
Table 14. Predicted Roadway Traffic Noise Levels – With and Without Project Studied Roadway Roadway Segment
Predicted CNEL (dBA; at 50 feet from centerline)
Existing Year Existing Year with Project Change
Studebaker Road 183rd Street to
South Street

71.4 71.9 0.6
Gridley Road 184th Street to
South Street

69.4 70.3 0.9
Notes: Existing ADT per Cerritos General Plan - Circulation Element - Traffic Analysis - Table C-7 (City of Cerritos 2003). The indicated decibel Change may reflect value rounding (i.e., if difference between with and without Project is less than 0.1 dB).

Source: Attachment D
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels? The City does not have quantitative thresholds on construction vibration that would be applicable to the Project; therefore, it is appropriate to employ a numeric standard adopted by another agency. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans 2020) establishes a construction-related damage limit of 0.3 in/sec PPV for older residential structures, and 0.5 in/sec PPV for new residential and modern commercial/industrial structures. The applicable threshold for project-attributed construction vibration would be 0.3 in/sec PPV at the closest residences. and 0.5 in/sec PPV at the closest commercial building.

The closest residential structures to the Project site are residences located about 790 feet northeast of the Project boundary. Using the vibration source level of construction equipment provided in Table 15, the distance to the closest structures, and the equation supplied in the Caltrans (2020b) construction ground-borne noise assessment methodology (Section 3.1.3), Dudek calculated the Project construction-related vibration levels shown in Table 15.

Table 15. Construction Vibration Levels at Nearest Structures, in/sec PPV Equipment
Nearest Residential Structure
(790 feet)
Nearest Offsite Non-Residential
Structure (150 feet)
Vibratory Roller 0.005 0.029
Large Bulldozer 0.002 0.012
Loaded Trucks 0.002 0.011
Jackhammer 0.001 0.005
Small Bulldozer <0.001 <0.001
Note: PPV = peak particle velocity
As indicated in Table 15, Project construction would result in vibration levels that are below the 0.3 in/sec PPV damage threshold for residential structures and the 0.5 in/sec PPV damage threshold for commercial structures.

This is a less than significant impact.

The predicted construction vibration exposure levels in Table 15 are also far less than the 0.2 ips PPV annoyance standard for building occupants per Caltrans guidance as mentioned in Section 2.3.2.3; hence, on this additional basis impacts at the nearest offsite receivers would be less than significant.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 22 JANUARY 2026 5
Customers and service staff may occupy operating tenant spaces within the existing mall buildings that are closer to the Project site than the offsite receiver samples presented in Table 15. However, these mall tenant space occupant exposures to Project construction groundborne vibration will be attenuated not only by horizontal distance per the Caltrans mathematical expression appearing in Section 3.1.3, but by additionally what FTA guidance refers to as “coupling loss” due to the mass of the building and its foundation. Such vibrational energy losses for “masonry”-type structures are substantial, and “in general, the heavier the building construction, the greater the coupling loss” (FTA 2018). The combination of distance propagation and these expected coupling loss effects are thus anticipated to yield interior vibration exposure levels (i.e., as experienced by tenant space occupants) that are less than the afore-mentioned Caltrans guidance threshold for annoyance and thereby less than significant.

The nearby facades of existing mall buildings to remain would, on the basis of their proximity to the Project construction activities studied herein and using the same PPV calculation expression from Section 3.1.3, potentially experience groundborne vibration levels higher than those presented in Table 15 during periods of use of certain machinery in close proximity to those facades. However, the magnitudes depend on the equipment involved, such as those listed in Table 9 and their reference PPV levels at distances of 25 feet, and the distances from the façade at which the activity occurs. By way of examples, a vibratory roller could operate as close as 12 feet from a commercial façade; or, a large dozer or excavator could work at just 5.5 feet away from the façade; or, a jackhammer could work at 2.5 feet away and not be expected to cause groundborne vibration to exceed this 0.5 ips PPV value. Further, due to joint ownership of the Project Site and existing mall buildings and good site management practices, the applicant will be able to address any potential impacts that could arise. Therefore, adverse effects to the remnant existing mall structures are not anticipated and impacts related to construction vibration would be less than significant and not require mitigation. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The closest airport to the Project site is Long Beach Municipal Airport, located approximately 4.3 miles southwest of the Project site. Based on review of the airport’s noise data, the 60 dBA CNEL contour zone is mostly within the property boundary of the airport (Long Beach Airport 2025). There are no private airstrips or public airports located within 2 miles of the site. Therefore, potential aviation noise impacts on people residing or working in the Project area would be no impact.
4 Summary of Findings
The results of the analysis conducted for the proposed Project and as detailed above indicate that potential impacts due to construction noise and vibration would be less than significant. Offsite exterior noise impacts due to operation of the proposed Project (including traffic noise) would be less than significant. Vibration impacts would also be less than significant. Potential aviation noise impacts would be no impact. No mitigation is required.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 23 JANUARY 2026 5
5 References
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September.

Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California.

April.

Caltrans. 2023. Traffic Census Program: Truck Traffic Data. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/traffic-operations/documents/census/2023/2023-truck-aadt-a11y.xlsx City of Artesia. 2025. City of Artesia Noise Ordinance. https://ecode360.com/43217219#43217235 City of Cerritos. November 2025. Cerritos Municipial Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Cerritos/#!/Cerritos22/Cerritos2280.html#22.80.480 City of Cerritos. 2003. General Plan Update. Appendix B – Traffic Analysis. https://www.cerritos.gov/media/qken1zbx/appendix-b.pdf
DOT (U.S. Department of Transportation). 2006. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model: User’s Guide. Final Report. FHWA-HEP-06-015. DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. Final Report. August.

FHWA. 1978. Traffic Noise Model RD-77-108.

FHWA. December 8, 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Washington, D.C.

FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. FTA Report No. 0123.

September.

FICON. 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. August 1992.

Hayne, 2006. Prediction of Crowd Noise
https://www.acoustics.asn.au/conference_proceedings/AASNZ2006/papers/p46.pdf International Code Council (ICC). 2022. 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Chapter 5. First Printing. July 1, 2022. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAGBC2022P1/chapter-5- nonresidential-mandatory-measures
International Organization of Standardization (ISO). 1996. Standard 9613-2 (Acoustics – Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors – Part 2: General method of calculation). Geneva.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 24 JANUARY 2026 5
LLG Engineers (LLG). 2025. VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment for Dick’s House of Sport at Los Cerritos Center. December 22.

Mackie. 2025. SRMV3 Data Sheet. https://mackie.com/img/file_resources/SRM350v3_450v3_SS.pdf Transportation Research Board. 1971. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 117. Highway Noise: a Design Guide for Highway Engineers.
https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_117.pdf.

DUDEK

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847
JANUARY 2026

ATTACHMENT A
Figures 1 and 2
DUDEK
0 #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
SOURCE: Dudek 2025
Dick's House of Sport Project
FIGURE 1
Site Boundary Residential
1,200 Feet
DUDEK
0 #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! #REF! 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69 70
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 84
85 86
87 88
89 90
91 92
93 94
95 96
97 98
99 100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
129
SOURCE: Dudek 2025
Dick's House of Sport Project
FIGURE 2
0 89 178 Feet On-Site Operational Sound Levels
Sound
Pressure Level
(dBA)
PL - North
PL - East
M1
PL - West
DUDEK 6
> 50
c= > 55
- >60
- >65
- >70
- >75
- >80
- >85

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847
JANUARY 2026

ATTACHMENT B
Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheets
DUDEK
Dick's House of Sport Project Attachment B -- Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheets To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae Analysis Type Nearest
Source to barrier distance Varies 80
Receiver to barrier distance 778 8
Receiver height 10
Construction Activity Equipment Total Equipment
Qty
Reference Level (Leq or
Lmax) @ 50 ft. from FHWA
RCNM 2 Table
Air Quality/Client Equipment
Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
DistanceAdjusted Level
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to Barr.
("A") Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz. (ft)
Source to Rcvr.
("C") Horiz. (ft) "A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft) Path Length Diff. "P" (ft) Abarr (dB) Heff (with barrier) Heff (wout
barrier)
G (with
barrier)
G (without
barrier) ILbarr (dB)
Demolition Dozer 2 80.0 Rubber Tired Dozer 788 50.7 8 480 54 5.3 10 0 10 778 788 11.3 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.7 7.7 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 788 46.5 8 480 51 4.5 10 0 10 778 788 11.0 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Concrete Saw 1 85.4 Concrete/Industrial Saw 788 56.1 8 480 56 2.2 10 0 10 778 788 10.2 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 6.1 6.1 0.6 0.6 0.1

58.9 Grading Grader (passby) 1 78.5 Graders 788 49.3 8 480 49 6.0 10 0 10 778 788 11.7 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 8.0 8.0 0.6 0.6 0.1 Excavator 1 75.9 Excavator 788 46.6 8 480 47 6.2 10 0 10 778 788 11.8 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 8.1 8.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 788 46.5 8 480 51 4.5 10 0 10 778 788 11.0 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Dozer 1 80.0 Rubber Tired Dozers 788 50.7 8 480 51 5.3 10 0 10 778 788 11.3 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.7 7.7 0.6 0.6 0.1

55.8 Building Construction Man Lift 3 72.1 Fork Lifts 788 42.8 8 480 48 5.8 10 0 10 778 788 11.6 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.9 7.9 0.6 0.6 0.1 Generator 1 67.1 Generator Sets 788 37.8 8 480 38 4.5 10 0 10 778 788 11.0 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Crane 1 74.2 Cranes 788 45.0 7 420 44 7.7 10 0 10 778 788 12.6 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 8.9 8.9 0.6 0.6 0.1 Welding Machine 1 71.2 Welders 788 41.9 8 480 42 2.5 10 0 10 778 788 10.3 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 6.3 6.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 788 46.5 7 420 51 4.5 10 0 10 778 788 11.0 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1

53.5 Paving Paving - Asphalt (Paver + Dump Truck) 1 81.8 Pavers 788 52.5 8 480 53 5.0 10 0 10 778 788 11.2 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.5 7.5 0.6 0.6 0.1 Paving - Concrete (Placer + Slipform Paver) 2 87.2 Paving Equipment 788 58.0 6 360 60 9.0 10 0 10 778 788 13.5 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 9.5 9.5 0.6 0.6 0.1 Compactor (Roller) 2 82.4 Rollers 788 53.1 6 360 55 4.4 10 0 10 778 788 10.9 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.2 7.2 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 1 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 788 46.5 8 480 47 4.5 10 0 10 778 788 11.0 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Concrete Mixer Truck 2 81.1 Cement and Mortar Mixer 788 51.9 6 360 54 5.0 10 0 10 778 788 11.2 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.5 7.5 0.6 0.6 0.1

62.3 Architectural Coating Compressor 1 65.6 Air Compressor 788 36.4 6 360 35 4.3 10 0 10 778 788 10.9 778.1 788.0 0.00 0.1 7.2 7.2 0.6 0.6 0.1

35.1 Total for Paving Phase:

Total for Architectural Coating Phase:
magnitude of threshold (dBA) =
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged =
Total for Demolition Phase:

Total for Grading Phase:

Total for Building Construction Phase:

RCNM2-emulator_wschedule_v1_cw12225.xlsx Dudek Project No. 15847 Cerritos-NSR -

I I I I I I

I I I I I

I I I I I
I I ~ I I I I I I
f------1 I § § I I I I I I
f------1 I § § I I I I I I
Dick's House of Sport Project Attachment B -- Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheets Construction Schedule
Year
Month # Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Construction Phase
Demolition a a a
Grading a a a
Building Construction a a a a a a a a a
Paving a
Architectural Coating a a
Combined Construction Noise at Nearest Offsite Receptor:

Demolition 58.9 58.9 58.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Grading 0.0 0.0 55.8 55.8 55.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Building Construction 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 53.5 Paving 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 62.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Architectural Coating 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.1 35.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Concurrent Total (dBA) 59 59 61 56 63 0 0 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 09/09/25, MCS: to user--check that the construction phase list is complete, vis-à-vis what appears on "AllConcurrent", and that the phase log-sum values are properly referenced. 2026 2027
Scheduled for 2049 and 2050 (therefore, not concurrent) RCNM2-emulator_wschedule_v1_cw12225.xlsx Dudek Project No. 15847 Cerritos-NSR_combos

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Dick's House of Sport Project Attachment B -- Construction Noise Prediction Model Worksheets To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae Analysis Type Nearest
Source to barrier distance Varies 80
Receiver to barrier distance 1200 8
Receiver height 10
Construction Activity Equipment Total Equipment
Qty
Reference Level (Leq or
Lmax) @ 50 ft. from FHWA
RCNM 2 Table
Air Quality/Client Equipment
Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
DistanceAdjusted Level
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to Barr.
("A") Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz. (ft)
Source to Rcvr.
("C") Horiz. (ft) "A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft) Path Length Diff. "P" (ft) Abarr (dB) Heff (with barrier) Heff (wout
barrier)
G (with
barrier)
G (without
barrier) ILbarr (dB)
Demolition Dozer 2 80.0 Rubber Tired Dozer 1210 46.4 8 480 49 5.3 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.3 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.7 7.7 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1210 42.3 8 480 47 4.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.0 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Concrete Saw 1 85.4 Concrete/Industrial Saw 1210 51.9 8 480 52 2.2 10 0 10 1200 1210 10.2 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 6.1 6.1 0.6 0.6 0.1

54.7 Grading Grader (passby) 1 78.5 Graders 1210 45.0 8 480 45 6.0 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.7 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 8.0 8.0 0.6 0.6 0.1 Excavator 1 75.9 Excavator 1210 42.3 8 480 42 6.2 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.8 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 8.1 8.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1210 42.3 8 480 47 4.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.0 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Dozer 1 80.0 Rubber Tired Dozers 1210 46.4 8 480 46 5.3 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.3 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.7 7.7 0.6 0.6 0.1

51.6 Building Construction Man Lift 3 72.1 Fork Lifts 1210 38.6 8 480 43 5.8 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.6 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.9 7.9 0.6 0.6 0.1 Generator 1 67.1 Generator Sets 1210 33.5 8 480 34 4.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.0 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Crane 1 74.2 Cranes 1210 40.7 7 420 40 7.7 10 0 10 1200 1210 12.6 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 8.9 8.9 0.6 0.6 0.1 Welding Machine 1 71.2 Welders 1210 37.6 8 480 38 2.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 10.3 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 6.3 6.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 3 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1210 42.3 7 420 46 4.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.0 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1

49.3 Paving Paving - Asphalt (Paver + Dump Truck) 1 81.8 Pavers 1210 48.2 8 480 48 5.0 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.2 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.5 7.5 0.6 0.6 0.1 Paving - Concrete (Placer + Slipform Paver) 2 87.2 Paving Equipment 1210 53.7 6 360 55 9.0 10 0 10 1200 1210 13.5 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 9.5 9.5 0.6 0.6 0.1 Compactor (Roller) 2 82.4 Rollers 1210 48.8 6 360 51 4.4 10 0 10 1200 1210 10.9 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.2 7.2 0.6 0.6 0.1 Backhoe 1 75.8 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1210 42.3 8 480 42 4.5 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.0 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.3 7.3 0.6 0.6 0.1 Concrete Mixer Truck 2 81.1 Cement and Mortar Mixer 1210 47.6 6 360 49 5.0 10 0 10 1200 1210 11.2 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.5 7.5 0.6 0.6 0.1

58.0 Architectural Coating Compressor 1 65.6 Air Compressor 1210 32.1 6 360 31 4.3 10 0 10 1200 1210 10.9 1200.0 1210.0 0.00 0.1 7.2 7.2 0.6 0.6 0.1

30.8 Total for Building Construction Phase:

Total for Paving Phase:

Total for Architectural Coating Phase:
magnitude of threshold (dBA) =
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged =
Total for Demolition Phase:

Total for Grading Phase:

RCNM2-emulator_wschedule_v1_cw12225.xlsx Dudek Project No. 15847 Artesia-NSR -

I I I I I I

I I I I I

Demolition 54.7 54.7 54.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Grading 0.0 0.0 51.6 51.6 51.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Building Construction 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 49.3 Paving 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Architectural Coating 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.8 30.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 #REF! 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Concurrent Total (dBA) 55 55 56 52 59 0 0 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 49 09/09/25, MCS: to user--check that the construction phase list is complete, vis-à-vis what appears on "AllConcurrent", and that the phase log-sum values are properly referenced. 2026 2027
Scheduled for 2049 and 2050 (therefore, not concurrent) RCNM2-emulator_wschedule_v1_cw12225.xlsx Dudek Project No. 15847 Artesia-NSR_combos

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847
JANUARY 2026

ATTACHMENT C
Project HVAC Noise Prediction
DUDEK
Dick's House of Sport Project Attachment C -Project HVAC Noise Prediction with or without sound insulation? (enter Y/N): Y
ACCs (air-cooled chillers on rooftops): tons LWA 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Building Interior Comfort Bryant BH16-018 (no sound blanket) 1.5 67 66.2 66.2 63.9 63.8 62.3 58.4 56.4 50.3

1. Enter actual percent of GSF occupied (if rooms differ, make sure to edit equation in the "Avail. SF. Colum for each room), tag, room, and gsf Bryant BH16-024 (no sound blanket) 2 71 65 65 63.7 63.4 68.5 64.7 58.7 52.8

2. Choose with/without sound insulation (see cell K2; default is Y) Bryant BH16-036 (no sound blanket) 3 71 68.2 68.2 66.4 67.5 68.4 59.6 58.2 52.4

3. Choose comparable facility function from dropdown based on room type Bryant BH16-048 (no sound blanket) 4 71 68.4 68.4 67.7 69.7 67.6 59.4 56.4 50

4. Choose approximate quantity of ACCs Bryant BH16-060 (no sound blanket) 5 69 63.7 63.7 65.4 67.3 64.9 58.3 56.2 51.9

5. If needed, fill down for additional A-weighted values Daikin AGZ-E 30 (w/out sound insulation) 30 85 84 84 83 84 77 75 74 70 Daikin AGZ-E 40 (w/out sound insulation) 40 85 84 84 83 84 77 75 74 70 Daikin AGZ-E 50 (w/out sound insulation) 50 87 85 85 85 86 80 77 75 70 Project Project Building 141568 45 Daikin AGZ-E 60 (w/out sound insulation) 60 87 85 85 85 86 80 77 75 70 Daikin AGZ-E 70 (w/out sound insulation) 70 87 85 85 85 86 80 77 75 70 Daikin AGZ-E 80 (w/out sound insulation) 80 88 88 85 87 86 81 81 77 71 Daikin AGZ-E 90 (w/out sound insulation) 90 88 88 87 87 86 83 80 77 71 Daikin AGZ-E 120 (w/out sound insulation) 120 89 91 85 88 86 82 81 79 72 Daikin AGZ-E 240 (w/out sound insulation) 241 94 94 88 91 90 91 84 82 75 percent of GSF actually occupied (and need cooling):

Tag Room GSF Avail. SF comparable facility function
Avg. GSF per
ton* tons of refrig.

Approx. Qty. of
ACCs
tons per
ACC
Approx. Total
PWL (dBA)
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Overall
F1 1st Floor RTU's 70,807 67267 Dept. Stores-Main Floor 350 192.2 13 15 80 75 75 77 78 76 69 67 63 84 F2 2nd Floor RTU's 70,762 67224 Dept. Stores-Upper Floors 400 168.1 12 14 80 74 74 76 78 76 69 67 63 83 *based upon "lo" value per Loren Cook's "Engineering Cookbook", 1999 edition, pp. 59-60 26 13 9 3 0 -1 -1 1 adjustment
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Overall
49 62 68 75 76 70 68 62 80
48 61 67 75 76 70 68 62 80
95 unweighted PWL (dB) per OCBF (Hz) at full load (100%) - For CadnaA inputs A-weighted values (as needed for report or CadnaA inputs) unweighted PWL (dB) per OCBF (Hz) at full load (100%)
stat-ops-noise-source-CadnaA-inputs_v2_122225.xlsx Dudek Project No. 15847 bldg_AC I

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: DICK’S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT NOISE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847
JANUARY 2026

ATTACHMENT D
Roadway Traffic Noise Calculations
DUDEK
traffic-noise-est_mcs011226.xlsx Project #: 15847 - Los Cerritos Center (Dick's House of Sport) Exist-woutProj_CNEL_50ft Roadway Traffic Noise Prediction (CNEL)User Inputs are boxed cells splits from I-605* splits per Caltrans** (FHWA RD-77-108, using Calveno curves) Auto % 94.90% Day 80.00% Day Evening Nighttime Equivalent MT (%) 3.13% Evening 5.00% Auto 75.92% 4.75% 14.24% 233.3% Project: HT (%) 1.97% Nighttime 15.00% MT 2.50% 0.16% 0.47% 7.7% HT 1.58% 0.10% 0.30% 4.8%
Auto MT HT CNEL
Noise Noise Noise Total
(at 15m) (at 15m) (at 15m) (at 15m)
14,700 14,700 0 40 66.4 60.5 63.3 68.8
47,900 47,900 0 35 69.8 64.7 67.9 72.7
50,800 50,800 0 35 70.1 65.0 68.2 73.0
26,500 26,500 0 40 68.9 63.0 65.9 71.4
17,000 17,000 0 40 67.0 61.1 64.0 69.4
Notes:
*per Caltrans Census (Truck AADT 2023 data sheet); 2 axle = medium truck (MT), 3+ axles = heavy truck (HT) **per Caltrans 2013 Technical Noise Supplement ("TeNS" document) ***Existing ADT per Cerritos General Plan - Circulation Element - Traffic Analysis - Table C-7 (https://www.cerritos.gov/media/qken1zbx/appendix-b.pdf) ****assumes Sears traffic (or lack thereof) is part of existing ADT *****Speed limits per Cerritos, CA Muncipal Code - Chapter 10.04 (https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Cerritos/html/Cerritos10/Cerritos1004.html) Gridley Road 184th St. to South St.

Existing Year (without Project) 183rd Street east of Studebaker South Street
South Street
Studebaker to 605 Freeway
605 Freeway to Gridley
Studebaker Road 183rd St. to South St.

Traffic Percentages by Vehicle Type
Los Cerritos Center - Dick's House of Sport
Study Year or Condition Roadway
Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) Speed (mph)*****
Roadway Segment and Direction
of Traffic
Project Average
Daily Traffic
(ADT)****
Existing Average
Daily Traffic
(ADT)***
printed 1/12/2026 Dick’s House of Sport Project Noise Technical Memorandum -- Attachment D prepared by Dudek ._____11----1 ---------.ii .____I f------------1
traffic-noise-est_mcs011226.xlsx Project #: 15847 - Los Cerritos Center (Dick's House of Sport) Exist-withProj_CNEL_50ft Roadway Traffic Noise Prediction (CNEL)User Inputs are boxed cells splits from I-605* splits per Caltrans** (FHWA RD-77-108, using Calveno curves) Auto % 94.90% Day 80.00% Day Evening Nighttime Equivalent MT (%) 3.13% Evening 5.00% Auto 75.92% 4.75% 14.24% 233.3% Project: HT (%) 1.97% Nighttime 15.00% MT 2.50% 0.16% 0.47% 7.7% HT 1.58% 0.10% 0.30% 4.8%
Auto MT HT CNEL CNEL
Noise Noise Noise Total dB change
(at 15m) (at 15m) (at 15m) (at 15m) (at 15m)
14,700 18,517 3,817 40 67.4 61.5 64.3 69.8 1.0
47,900 51,717 3,817 35 70.1 65.0 68.3 73.1 0.3
50,800 54,617 3,817 35 70.4 65.3 68.5 73.3 0.3
26,500 30,317 3,817 40 69.5 63.6 66.5 71.9 0.6
17,000 20,817 3,817 40 67.9 62.0 64.8 70.3 0.9
Notes:
*per Caltrans Census (Truck AADT 2023 data sheet); 2 axle = medium truck (MT), 3+ axles = heavy truck (HT) **per Caltrans 2013 Technical Noise Supplement ("TeNS" document) ***Existing ADT per Cerritos General Plan - Circulation Element - Traffic Analysis - Table C-7 (https://www.cerritos.gov/media/qken1zbx/appendix-b.pdf) ****per LLG Dec. 22, 2025 Trip Generation Assessment, Table 1, net trips (project incl. athletic field vs. Sears) *****Speed limits per Cerritos, CA Muncipal Code - Chapter 10.04 (https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Cerritos/html/Cerritos10/Cerritos1004.html) Studebaker Road 183rd St. to South St.

Gridley Road 184th St. to South St.

Existing Year (with Project) 183rd Street east of Studebaker South Street Studebaker to 605 Freeway
South Street 605 Freeway to Gridley
Traffic Percentages by Vehicle Type
Los Cerritos Center - Dick's House of Sport
Study Year or Condition Roadway
Roadway Segment and Direction
of Traffic
Existing Average
Daily Traffic
(ADT)***
Average Daily
Traffic (ADT)
Project Average
Daily Traffic
(ADT)**** Speed (mph)*****
printed 1/12/2026 Dick’s House of Sport Project Noise Technical Memorandum -- Attachment D prepared by Dudek ._____11----1 ---------.ii .____I f------------1
Attachment D
Air Quality Technical Memorandum

AIR QUALITY MEMORANDUM
To: Amanda Acuna, Current Planning Manager; City of Cerritos From: Daria Sarraf, Air Quality Specialist; Dudek
Subject: Dick’s House of Sport Project Air Quality Technical Memorandum Date: January 7, 2026
Figures: Figure 1, Regional Location and Local Vicinity Figure 2, Project Site Boundary
Figure 3, Project Site Exhibit
Attachment: A, CalEEMod Outputs
Dudek is pleased to submit this air quality assessment to assist in the City of Cerritos’ (City’s) evaluation of the proposed Dick’s House of Sport Project (Project) located within the City. This memorandum estimates criteria air pollutant emissions from construction and operation of the Project and evaluates the Project’s potential air quality impact in accordance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD’s) thresholds of significance.

This analysis supports a Class 32 designation for a Categorical Exemption. The contents and organization of this memorandum are as follows: brief project description; approach and methodology; air quality assessment; summary of conclusions; and references.
1 Project Description
The Project proposes an infill redevelopment on a 4.65-acre site at 11238 183rd Street in Cerritos, California located within the north side of the Los Cerritos Center, replacing the a previously occupied Sears main building and associated merchandizing building and loading dock with a new Dick’s House of Sport, an ancillary outdoor athletic field, and associated site improvements. Figure 1, Regional Location and Local Vicinity, provides the general location of the Project site within the context of Los Angeles County. As shown on Figure 2, Project Site Boundary, the Project site is bounded the Interstate (I)-605 (San Gabriel River Freeway) to the west, 183rd Street to the north, Gridley Road to the east, and South Street to the south. The Project site is directly connected to the Los Cerritos Center, which is an irregularly shaped, one-story enclosed shopping complex. The mall is surrounded by expansive surface parking areas that are accessed from internal drive aisles and lined with landscaped islands containing trees and shrubs. The Project Site is predominantly comprised of buildings and parking areas and impervious, except for select ornamental trees, shrubs, and grass areas scattered throughout the Project Site.

The former Sears property occupies its own parcel on the mall’s north side, with surface parking areas situated immediately north and west of the building. An additional structure on this parcel, the former Sears automotive center, borders 183rd Street and is positioned between two of the mall’s entry drives. The main Sears building is DUDEK
225 SOUTH LAKE AVENUE
SUITE M210
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA 91101
T 626.204.9800
DUDEK.COM

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 2
JANUARY 2026
encircled by a concrete pedestrian walkway, and low ornamental shrubs are planted at corner locations around the building.

The Project proposes the removal of an existing Sears building (vacant other than for temporary uses since 2019) and an adjoining merchandising building and loading dock totaling 277,559 square feet located within the Project Site. The existing main Sears building is connected at one entry to the northern portion of the Cerritos Mall. This connection will be blocked off during demolition and construction of the Project with a temporary drywall barricade.

Upon completion of construction, the temporary drywall barricade will be taken down, restoring the connection between the Cerritos Mall and the new Dick’s House of Sport that previously existed with Sears. The existing Sears main building, merchandizing building, and loading dock being demolished are shown on Figure 2.

Following demolition, the Project will include a 160,500 square feet of new retail development, consisting of a 142,000-square-foot Dick’s House of Sport retail store with experiential sports zones and specialty areas, and a 18,500-square-foot outdoor athletic field adjoining the new retail building, accessible only from within the new store and to be used for the experiential use of sporting equipment and store-related activities. The Project would remove 66 existing parking stalls and add 11 new parking spaces, resulting in a net reduction of 55 on-site parking spaces.

The Project would include 20,168 square feet of landscaped area on-site. Figure 3, Project Site Exhibit, illustrates the Project’s site plan, showing the proposed layout of the Dick’s House of Sport on the parcel.

Additional construction details, including the anticipated construction schedule, vehicle trips, and equipment type are included in Table 2, Construction Details, of Section 3, Approach and Methodology. 2 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the SCAQMD. The SCAB is a 6,745-square-mile area bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The SCAB’s air pollution problems are a consequence of the combination of emissions from the nation’s second-largest urban area, meteorological conditions that hinder dispersion of those emissions, and mountainous terrain surrounding the SCAB that traps pollutants as they are pushed inland with the sea breeze (SCAQMD 2022).

Ambient Air Quality
Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants are defined as pollutants for which the federal and state governments have established ambient air quality standards (criteria) for outdoor concentrations to protect public health. The federal and state standards have been set, with an adequate margin of safety, at levels above which concentrations could be harmful to human health and welfare. These standards are designed to protect the most sensitive persons from illness or discomfort.

A brief description of the source and health effects of criteria air pollutants relevant to the Project is provided in Table 1.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 3
JANUARY 2026
Table 1. Criteria Air Pollutants
Pollutant Description Health Effects
Ozone (O3) O3 is a strong-smelling pollutant formed in the atmosphere by a photochemical process
involving the sun’s energy and O3 precursors.

The O3 that the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and CARB regulate as a criteria air
pollutant is produced close to the ground level,
where people live, exercise, and breathe.

Ground-level O3 is a harmful air pollutant that
causes numerous adverse health effects and is,
thus, considered “bad” O3. Stratospheric, or
“good,” O3 occurs naturally in the upper
atmosphere, where it reduces the amount of
ultraviolet light (i.e., solar radiation) entering the
Earth’s atmosphere.

O3 in the troposphere causes
numerous adverse health effects;
short-term exposures (lasting for a
few hours) to O3 at levels typically
observed in Southern California can
result in breathing pattern changes,
reduction of breathing capacity,
increased susceptibility to infections,
inflammation of the lung tissue, and
some immunological changes (EPA
2013). These health problems are
particularly acute in sensitive
receptors such as the sick, the
elderly, and young children.

Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
NO2 is a brownish, highly reactive gas that is
present in all urban atmospheres. NOx is formed
from fuel combustion under high temperature or
pressure and is an important precursor to acid
rain. The two major emissions sources of NOx are
transportation and stationary fuel combustion
sources, such as electric utility and industrial
boilers.

NO2 can irritate the lungs, cause
bronchitis and pneumonia, and lower
resistance to respiratory infections.

Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
CO is a colorless, odorless gas formed by the
incomplete combustion of hydrocarbon, or fossil
fuels. CO is emitted almost exclusively from
motor vehicles, power plants, refineries,
industrial boilers, ships, aircraft, and trains. In
urban areas, automobile exhaust accounts for
the majority of CO emissions. CO from motor
vehicle exhaust can become locally concentrated
when surface-based temperature inversions are
combined with calm atmospheric conditions,
which is a typical situation at dusk in urban
areas from November to February. The highest
levels of CO typically occur during the colder
months of the year, when inversion conditions
are more frequent.

The results of excess CO exposure
can include dizziness, fatigue, and
impairment of central nervous system
functions.

Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
SO2 is a colorless, pungent gas that is produced
from coal and oil used in power plants and
industries SO2 concentrations have been
reduced by the increasingly stringent controls
placed on stationary source emissions of SO2
and limits on the sulfur content of fuels.

SO2 is an irritant gas that attacks the
throat and lungs and can cause acute
respiratory symptoms and diminished
ventilator function in children. When
combined with particulate matter,
SO2 can injure lung tissue and reduce
visibility and the level of sunlight.

Coarse Particulate
Matter (PM10) and
Particulate matter pollution consists of very
small liquid and solid particles floating in the air,
which can include smoke, soot, dust, salts, acids,
PM2.5 and PM10 pose a greater health
risk than larger-size particles. When
inhaled, these tiny particles can
DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 4
JANUARY 2026
Sources: EPA 2025a, CARB 2025
While not noted as a criteria air pollutant in Table 1, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) (also referred to as reactive organic gases) are important criteria air pollutant precursors as they contribute to the formation of O3. VOCs are compounds that have a high vapor pressure and low water solubility. Sources of outdoor VOC include motor vehicle exhaust, burning fossil fuels, industrial processes, consumer products (paints, cleaning supplies, and aerosols), and waste disposal sites. High levels of VOCs in the atmosphere can interfere with oxygen intake by reducing the amount of available oxygen through displacement. While VOCs are a health concern indoors and outdoors, regulation of VOCs outdoors is mainly focused on their ability to create photochemical smog under certain conditions.

South Coast Air Basin Attainment Designation
Pursuant to the 1990 federal Clean Air Act Amendments, EPA classifies air basins (or portions thereof) as “attainment” or “nonattainment” for each criteria air pollutant, based on whether the NAAQS have been achieved.

Generally, if the recorded concentrations of a pollutant are lower than the standard, the area is classified as “attainment” for that pollutant. If an area exceeds the standard, the area is classified as “nonattainment” for that pollutant. If there is not enough data available to determine whether the standard is exceeded in an area, the area is designated as “unclassified” or “unclassifiable.” The designation of “unclassifiable/attainment” means that the area meets the standard or is expected to be meet the standard despite a lack of monitoring data. Areas that achieve the standards after a nonattainment designation are re-designated as maintenance areas and must have approved maintenance plans to ensure continued attainment of the standards. The California Clean Air Act, like its federal counterpart, called for the designation of areas as “attainment” or “nonattainment” but based on the CAAQS rather than the NAAQS. Table 2 depicts the current attainment status of the Project site with respect to the NAAQS and CAAQS.

Table 1. Criteria Air Pollutants
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
and metals. PM2.5 and PM10 represent fractions
of particulate matter. Coarse particulate matter
(PM10) consists of particulate matter that is 10
microns or less in diameter (about 1/7 the
thickness of a human hair). Major sources of
PM10 include crushing or grinding operations;
dust stirred up by vehicles traveling on roads;
dust from construction, landfills, and agriculture;
wildfires and brush/waste burning; industrial
sources; and windblown dust from open lands.

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) consists of
particulate matter that is 2.5 microns or less in
diameter (roughly 1/28 the diameter of a human
hair). PM2.5 results from fuel combustion (e.g.,
from motor vehicles and power generation and
industrial facilities), residential fireplaces, and
woodstoves.
penetrate the human respiratory
system’s natural defenses and
damage the respiratory tract. PM2.5
and PM10 can increase the number
and severity of asthma attacks, cause
or aggravate bronchitis and other
lung diseases, and reduce the body’s
ability to fight infections.

People with influenza, people with
chronic respiratory and
cardiovascular diseases, and the
elderly may suffer worsening illness
and premature death as a result of
breathing particulate matter. People
with bronchitis can expect aggravated
symptoms from breathing in
particulate matter. Children may
experience a decline in lung function
due to breathing in PM10 and PM2.5.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 5
JANUARY 2026
Table 2. South Coast Air Basin Attainment Classification Pollutant
Designation/Classification

NAAQS CAAQS
Ozone (O3), 1-hour No national standard Nonattainment
Ozone (O3), 8-hour Extreme nonattainment Nonattainment
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment Carbon monoxide (CO) Attainment/maintenance Attainment
Sulfur dioxide (SO2) Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment Coarse particulate matter (PM10) Attainment/maintenance Nonattainment Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) Serious nonattainment Nonattainment Lead (Pb) Nonattainment Attainment
Hydrogen sulfide No national standard Unclassified
Sulfates No national standard Attainment
Visibility-reducing particles No national standard Unclassified Vinyl chloride No national standard No designation
Sources: EPA 2025b (national); CARB 2023 (California).

Notes: NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; bold text = not in attainment; attainment = meets the standards; attainment/maintenance = achieves the standards after a nonattainment designation; nonattainment = does not meet the standards; unclassified or unclassifiable = insufficient data to classify; unclassifiable/attainment = meets the standard or is expected to be meet the standard despite a lack of monitoring data.

In summary, the SCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for federal and state O3 standards and federal and state PM2.5 standards. The SCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for state PM10 standards; however, it is designated as an attainment area for federal PM10 standards. The SCAB is designated as an attainment area for federal and state CO standards, federal and state NO2 standards, and federal and state SO2 standards. While the SCAB has been designated as nonattainment for the federal rolling 3-month average lead standard, it is designated attainment for the state lead standard (CARB 2023; EPA 2025b).

Despite the current nonattainment status, air quality within the SCAB has generally improved since the inception of air pollutant monitoring in 1976. This improvement is mainly a result of lower-polluting on-road motor vehicles, more stringent regulation of industrial sources, and the implementation of emission reduction strategies by SCAQMD. Despite continued population growth, air quality has improved significantly over the years, primarily because of the impacts of the region’s air quality control program. 3 Approach and Methodology
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) Version 2022.1.1.35 was used to estimate emissions from construction and operation of the Project (CAPCOA 2022). CalEEMod is a statewide computer model developed in cooperation with air districts throughout the state to quantify criteria air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions associated with construction activities and operation of a variety of land use Projects, such as residential and commercial land uses. CalEEMod input parameters, including the land use type used to represent the Project and its size, construction schedule, and anticipated use of construction equipment, were based on information provided by the applicant or default model assumptions if Project specifics were unavailable.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 6
JANUARY 2026

3.1 Construction Emissions
Criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction of the Project were estimated for the following emission sources: operation of off-road construction equipment, architectural coating, paving, dust generating activities (such as demolition and grading), on-road vendor (material delivery) trucks, on-road haul trucks, and worker vehicles. Project construction would be initiated in February 2026 and continue for approximately 16 months, with completion expected in May 2027 and the new Dick’s House of Sport opening in early 2028.

The anticipated construction schedule is included below, and more details are included in Attachment A of this Memorandum:
▪ Demolition (50 days)
▪ Grading (31 days)
▪ Building Construction (262 days)
▪ Paving/Repaving (14 days)
▪ Architectural Coating (20 days)
CalEEMod default values for worker trips were used. Vendor trips were added for each construction phase to reflect anticipated activity, including vendor trips for watering the Project site. For worker and vendor vehicle trip lengths, CalEEMod default values were used.

Construction would include approximately 13,323 tons of debris from the demolition of the existing Sears building and asphalt on-site, which would result in approximately 67 one-way trips of truck export per day during the demolition phase. Grading activities would require the import of 68,500 cubic yards of soil and the export of 10,160 cubic yards of soil and vegetation from the Project site, which would result in approximately 318 one-way truck trips per day during the grading phase. CalEEMod’s default trip length of 20 miles was used for haul truck trips.

The construction equipment mix and vehicle trips used for estimating the Project-generated construction emissions is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Construction Scenario Details
Construction
Phase
One-way Vehicle Trips Equipment
Average
Daily
Worker
Trips
Average
Daily
Vendor
Truck Trips
Average
Daily Haul
Truck
Trips Equipment Type Quantity
Usage
Hours
Demolition 16 4 67
Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8
Concrete/Industrial
Saws
1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
Grading 16 4 317
Graders 1 8
Excavators 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8
DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 7
JANUARY 2026
Table 3. Construction Scenario Details
Construction
Phase
One-way Vehicle Trips Equipment
Average
Daily
Worker
Trips
Average
Daily
Vendor
Truck Trips
Average
Daily Haul
Truck
Trips Equipment Type Quantity
Usage
Hours
Building
Construction 46 24 0
Cranes 1 7
Forklifts 3 8
Generator Sets 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7
Welders 1 8
Paving 20 4 0
Pavers 1 8
Paving Equipment 2 6
Rollers 2 6
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8
Cement and Mortar Mixers 2 6
Architectural
Coating 10 4 0
Air Compressors 1 6
Notes: See Attachment A for additional details.

3.2 Operational Emissions
Operation of the proposed Project would generate emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources, which are discussed below. Emissions from these sources were estimated based on CalEEMod default values and the Project’s VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment (LLG 2025) for operations of the proposed Project land uses. The Project would be operational following the completion of construction and was modeled to be in the year 2028.

Area Sources
CalEEMod was used to estimate operational emissions from area sources, including emissions from consumer product use, architectural coatings, and landscaping.

Consumer products are chemically formulated products used by household and institutional consumers, including detergents; cleaning compounds; polishes; floor finishes; cosmetics; personal care products; home, lawn, and garden products; disinfectants; sanitizers; aerosol paints; and automotive specialty products. Other paint products, furniture coatings, or architectural coatings are not considered consumer products (CAPCOA 2022). Consumer product volatile organic compound emissions were estimated in CalEEMod based on the floor area of buildings and default factor of pounds of volatile organic compound per building square foot per day. The CalEEMod default values for consumer products were assumed for the proposed Project.

Landscape maintenance includes fuel combustion emissions from equipment such as lawn mowers, rototillers, shredders/grinders, blowers, trimmers, chainsaws, and hedge trimmers. The emissions associated from landscape equipment use are estimated based on CalEEMod default values for emission factors (grams per square foot of DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 8
JANUARY 2026
building space per day) and number of summer days (when landscape maintenance would generally be performed) and winter days for the Project.

Energy Sources
As represented in CalEEMod, energy sources include emissions associated with building electricity and natural gas usage (non-hearth). Electricity use would contribute indirectly to criteria air pollutant emissions; however, the emissions from electricity use are only quantified for greenhouse gases in CalEEMod, since criteria pollutant emissions occur at the site of the power plant, which is typically off site. The energy use from residential land uses is calculated in CalEEMod based on the CEC’s 2018-2030 Uncalibrated Commercial Sector Forecast and the 2019 Residential Appliance Saturation Survey (CAPCOA 2022). The Project would include natural gas usage, which would result in operational emissions. Annual electricity and natural gas emissions were estimated in CalEEMod using default values for emissions factors for the City and Southern California Gas (SoCalGas), which provide energy to the Project site, respectively.

Mobile Sources
Following the completion of construction activities, the Project would generate criteria pollutant emissions from mobile sources (vehicular traffic) as a result of the full-time workers and visitors. According to the trip generation assessment prepared for the Project, the Project would generate 3,817 weekday daily trips and 5,618 Saturday daily trips (LLG 2025). CalEEMod was used to estimate emissions from proposed vehicular sources (refer to Attachment A). CalEEMod default data, including trip length, trip characteristics, and emissions factors, were used for the model inputs for the Project. Project-related traffic was assumed to include a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the associated use, as modeled within CalEEMod, which is based on the California Air Resources Board (CARB) EMFAC2021 model. Emission factors representing the vehicle mix and emissions for 2028 were used to estimate emissions associated with vehicular sources for the Project. 4 Air Quality Assessment

4.1 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the Project impacts to air quality are based on the recommendations provided in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For the purposes of this air quality analysis, a significant impact would occur if the Project would (14 CCR 15000 et seq.):

1. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

2. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

3. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

4. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) indicates that, where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to determine whether the Project would have a significant impact on air quality.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 9
JANUARY 2026
SCAQMD has adopted thresholds to address the significance of air quality impacts resulting from a project. A project would result in a substantial contribution to an existing air quality violation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for O3, which is a nonattainment pollutant, if the Project’s construction emissions would exceed SCAQMD’s VOC or NOx significance thresholds shown in Table 4.

These emission-based thresholds for O3 precursors are intended to serve as a surrogate for an “ozone significance threshold” (i.e., the potential for adverse O3 impacts to occur) because O3 itself is not emitted directly, and the effects of an individual project’s emissions of O3 precursors (VOC and NOx) on O3 levels in ambient air cannot be determined through air quality models or other quantitative methods. The SCAB is also nonattainment for the state PM10 and federal and state PM2.5 standards. While the SCAQMD does have a threshold for lead, the Project would not be a source of lead during construction or operation. Therefore, lead was not evaluated herein.

Table 4. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants Mass Daily Thresholds
Pollutant Construction (pounds per day) Operation (pounds per day) VOCs 75 55
NOx 100 55
CO 550 550
SOx 150 150
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
Leada 3 3
TACs and Odor Threshold
TACsb Maximum incremental cancer risk  10 in 1 million Chronic and acute hazard index  1.0 (project increment) Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants c NO2 1-hour average
NO2 annual arithmetic mean
SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards:

0.18 ppm (state)

0.030 ppm (state) and 0.0534 ppm (federal)
CO 1-hour average
CO 8-hour average
SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards:
20 ppm (state) and 35 ppm (federal)

9.0 ppm (state/federal)
PM10 24-hour average
PM10 annual average

10.4 g/m3 (construction)d

2.5 g/m3 (operation)

1.0 g/m3
PM2.5 24-hour average 10.4 g/m3 (construction)d

2.5 g/m3 (operation)
SO2
1-hour average and 24-hour
average

0.25 ppm (state) & 0.075 ppm (federal – 99th percentile) 0.04 ppm (state)
DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 10 JANUARY 2026
Table 4. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants Mass Daily Thresholds
Sulfate 25 µg/m3 (state)
Lead 1.5 µg/m3 (state) and 0.15 µg/m3 (federal)
Source: SCAQMD 2023.

Notes: SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District; VOC = volatile organic compounds; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; TAC = toxic air contaminant; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; ppm = parts per million by volume; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. a The phaseout of leaded gasoline started in 1976. Since gasoline no longer contains lead, the project is not anticipated to result in impacts related to lead; therefore, it is not discussed in this analysis. b TACs include carcinogens and noncarcinogens.
c Ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants are based on SCAQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2, unless otherwise stated. d Ambient air quality threshold is based on SCAQMD Rule 403.

Localized Significance Thresholds
A localized significance threshold (LST) analysis is prepared for this Project. Although LST analyses are not required for a Class 32 categorical exemption pursuant to SCAQMD guidance, it is provided herein for disclosure purposes.

LST analyses evaluate localized air quality impacts to receptors in the immediate vicinity of the Project because of construction activities. For project sites of 5 acres or less, SCAQMD Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Methodology (SCAQMD 2008) includes lookup tables that can be used to determine the maximum allowable daily emissions that would satisfy the localized significance criteria (i.e., the emissions would not cause an exceedance of the applicable concentration limits for NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5) without performing project-specific dispersion modeling.

The LST significance thresholds for NO2 and CO represent the allowable increase in concentrations above background levels in the vicinity of a project that would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the relevant ambient air quality standards, while the threshold for PM10 represents compliance with Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust).

The LST significance threshold for PM2.5 is intended to ensure that construction emissions do not contribute substantially to existing exceedances of the PM2.5 ambient air quality standards. The allowable emission rates depend on the following parameters:
▪ Source-receptor area in which the project is located
▪ Size of the project site
▪ Distance between the project site and the nearest receptor (any area where people can be situated for an hour or longer at a time)
The Project site is located in Source-Receptor Area 4 (South Coastal Los Angeles County). The SCAQMD provides guidance for applying CalEEMod to the LSTs. LST pollutant screening level concentration data is currently published for 1-, 2-, and 5-acre sites for varying distances. The maximum number of acres disturbed on the peak day was estimated using the Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds (SCAQMD 2014). During grading activities, fugitive dust can be generated from the movement of dirt on the Project site. CalEEMod estimates dust from dozers moving dirt around, dust from graders or scrapers leveling the land, and loading or unloading dirt into haul trucks. Each of those activities is calculated differently in CalEEMod, based on the number of acres traversed by the grading equipment. Only some pieces of equipment generate fugitive dust in CalEEMod. The CalEEMod manual identifies various equipment and the acreage disturbed in an 8-hour day. For example:

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 11 JANUARY 2026
▪ Crawler tractors, graders, and rubber-tired dozers: 0.5 acres per 8-hour day ▪ Scrapers: 1 acre per 8-hour day
The LST lookup tables that can be used to determine the maximum allowable daily emissions are provided at increments of 1 acre, 2 acres, and 5 acres. Therefore, the analysis applies the LSTs for a 1-acre disturbance area, which is presented in Table 5.

Per the SCAQMD’s Finalized LST Methodology, locations that an individual could remain for 24 hours (i.e., a residence, hospital, convalescent facility, hotel, etc.) should be considered to determine the threshold for PM10 and PM2.5 (SCAQMD 2008). The closest off-site receptors to the Project site’s construction activity are residences northeast of the Project site, approximately 240 meters (788 feet). For NOx and CO, distances where an individual could remain for 1 hour are considered. Therefore, a distance of 25 meters is used for NOx and CO, due to commercial uses immediately south of the Project site. Thus, the minimum-recommended distance of 25 meters has been used to determine LST receptor distance for emissions of NOx, CO, and 240 meters (interpolated between 200 and 500 meters) has been used for PM10, and PM2.5. Emissions from peak construction represent the most conservative emissions are compared to LSTs.

The LST values from the SCAQMD lookup tables for Source-Receptor Area 4 are shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Localized Significance Thresholds for Source-Receptor Area 4 Pollutant Threshold by Acres Disturbed Per Day (Pounds per Day) Localized Significance Thresholds for Peak Construction NO2 57.00
CO 585.00
PM10 73.93
PM2.5 34.93
Source: SCAQMD 2008.

Notes: NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter.

LSTs for NOx and CO were determined based on the values for a distance of 25 meters (82 feet) from the nearest receptor for a-1 acre disturbance. LSTs for PM10, and PM2.5 were determined based on the values for a distance of 240 meters (interpolated between 200 and 500 meters) for a 1-acre disturbance.

4.2 Impact Analysis

4.2.1 Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
The Project site is located within the SCAB, which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties and all of Orange County, and is within the jurisdictional boundaries of SCAQMD.

SCAQMD administers SCAB’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is a comprehensive document outlining an air pollution control program for attaining all CAAQS and NAAQS. The most recent adopted AQMP for the SCAB is the 2022 AQMP, which was adopted by SCAQMD’s Governing Board in December 2022 (SCAQMD 2022).

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 12 JANUARY 2026
The purpose of a consistency finding is to determine if a project is inconsistent with the assumptions and objectives of the regional air quality plans, and, thus, if it would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with federal and state air quality standards. The SCAQMD has established criteria for determining consistency with the currently applicable AQMP in Chapter 12, Sections 12.2 and 12.3, in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria are as follows (SCAQMD 1993):
▪ Consistency Criterion No. 1: The project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards of the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. ▪ Consistency Criterion No. 2: The project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project buildout and phase.

To address the first criterion, Project-generated criteria air pollutant emissions have been estimated and analyzed for significance and are addressed under Section 4.2.2. Detailed results of this analysis are included in Attachment A, CalEEMod Emissions Outputs. As presented in Section 4.2.2, construction and operation of the Project would not generate criteria air pollutant emissions that would exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds. Therefore, the Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations. As such, the Project would not conflict with Consistency Criterion No. 1 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

1. The SCAG RTP/SCS which is based on general plans for cities and counties in the SCAB, is used by SCAQMD to develop the AQMP emissions inventory (SCAQMD 2022).2 The SCAG RTP/SCS, Connect SoCal, and the associated Regional Growth Forecast are generally consistent with the local plans; therefore, the 2022 AQMP is generally consistent with local government plans.

The City designates the Project site as a land use designation of Regional Commercial. The Regional Commercial designation is intended to apply to large retail shopping areas that serve a regional market area, such as the Project’s proposed uses (City of Cerritos 2004). The Project would be consistent with the underlying land use designation and no General Plan Amendment would be required. As the Project is consistent with the existing land use designation on-site, the Project would not result in unanticipated growth that would exceed the growth forecasts associated with the land use designation on-site. Overall, as the Project is consistent with the existing land use 1 While there is a newer version of the SCAG RTP/SCS, adopted in 2024, the demographics from the 2020 RTP/SCS are still applicable for the purposes of the air quality analysis, since those are included and used in the current AQMP. 2 Information necessary to produce the emissions inventory for the SCAB is obtained from SCAQMD and other governmental agencies, including the California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and SCAG.

Each of these agencies is responsible for collecting data (e.g., industry growth factors, socioeconomic projections, travel activity levels, emission factors, emission speciation profile, and emissions) and developing methodologies (e.g., model and demographic forecast improvements) required to generate a comprehensive emissions inventory. SCAG incorporates these data into its Travel Demand Model for estimating/projecting vehicle miles traveled and driving speeds. SCAG’s socioeconomic and transportation activities projections in their 2020 RTP/SCS are integrated in the 2022 AQMP (SCAQMD 2022).

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 13 JANUARY 2026
designation and implementation of the Project would not generate an increase in growth demographics that would conflict with existing projections within the region, the Project is consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS forecasts used in the SCAQMD AQMP development. Thus, the Project would not conflict with Consistency Criterion No. 2.

4.2.2 Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and SCAQMD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air quality standards.

Based on these considerations, project-level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are relevant in the determination of whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality.

CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.35 was used to estimate emissions from construction of the Project. Internal combustion engines used by construction equipment, trucks, and worker vehicles would result in emissions of VOCs, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would also be generated by entrained dust, which results from the exposure of earth surfaces to wind from the direct disturbance and movement of soil. The Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 to control dust emissions generated during any dustgenerating activities. Standard construction practices that would be employed to reduce fugitive dust emissions include watering of the active dust areas two times per day, with additional watering depending on weather conditions. The CalEEMod default values were used for estimating fugitive dust emissions from grading on site.

The Project would involve application of architectural coating (e.g., paint and other finishes) for painting the interior and exterior of the building as well as parking lot striping. The contractor is required to procure architectural coatings from a supplier that complies with the requirements of SCAQMD’s Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). Table 6 presents the estimated maximum daily construction emissions generated during construction of the Project. “Summer” emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the O3 season (May 1 to October 31), and “winter” emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the balance of the year (November 1 to April 30). Details of the emission calculations are provided in Attachment A.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 14 JANUARY 2026
Table 6. Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions (Pounds per Day)
Summer
2026 2.44 41.11 28.75 0.18 9.86 3.89
2027 67.36 11.34 17.87 0.03 1.33 0.57
Winter
2026 2.43 27.17 24.79 0.07 6.08 1.82
2027 1.21 10.41 15.66 0.03 1.15 0.51
Maximum of Summer and
Winter Emissions

Emissions include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 and SCAQMD Rule 1113.

See Attachment A for complete results.

As shown in Table 6, Project construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD’s daily thresholds. Therefore, construction impacts associated with criteria air pollutant emissions would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.

Operational Emissions
Operation of the Project would generate criteria air pollutant (including VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5) emissions from mobile sources (vehicular traffic), energy (natural gas consumption), and area sources (consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment).

As discussed in Section 3.2, the Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources. Table 7 summarizes the maximum daily estimated operational criteria air pollutant emissions that would be generated from the Project and compares estimated emissions to the respective SCAQMD operational thresholds.

Table 7. Project Estimated Maximum Daily Operation Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Emissions Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions (Pounds per Day)
Summer
Area 15.05 7.51 81.74 0.17 15.89 4.11
Energy 4.05 0.05 6.18 0.00 0.01 0.01
Mobile 0.01 0.23 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.02
Total 19.11 7.79 88.11 0.17 15.92 4.14
- -
DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 15 JANUARY 2026
Table 7. Project Estimated Maximum Daily Operation Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Emissions Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Emissions (Pounds per Day)
Winter
Area 14.87 8.19 79.55 0.16 15.89 4.11
Energy 3.04 -- -- -- -- --
Mobile 0.01 0.23 0.19 0.00 0.02 0.02
Total 17.93 8.41 79.74 0.16 15.91 4.13
Proposed Project Total
Maximum Daily
Emissions

See Attachment A for complete results.

As shown in Table 7, the Project would not exceed SCAQMD’s mass daily regional significance thresholds during operations. Therefore, operational impacts associated with criteria air pollutant emissions would be less than significant.

As detailed above, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact, and as such, project-level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are used to determine whether a project’s individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality. If a project’s emissions would exceed the applied significance thresholds, it would have a cumulative contribution. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant (SCAQMD 2003). In considering cumulative impacts from the Project, the analysis must specifically evaluate a project’s contribution to the cumulative increase in pollutants for which the SCAB is designated as nonattainment for the CAAQS and NAAQS. If a project’s emissions exceed SCAQMD’s significance thresholds, it would be considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to nonattainment status in the SCAB. The basis for analyzing the Project’s cumulatively considerable contribution is if the Project’s contribution accounts for a significant proportion of the cumulative total emissions (i.e., it represents a “cumulatively considerable contribution” to the cumulative air quality impact) and consistency with SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP, which addresses cumulative emissions in the SCAB. The SCAB has been designated as a federal nonattainment area for O3 and PM2.5 and a state nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The nonattainment status is the result of cumulative emissions from various sources of air pollutants and their precursors within the SCAB, including motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and commercial and industrial facilities. Construction of the Project would generate VOC and NOx emissions (which are precursors to O3) and emissions of PM10 and PM2.5. As indicated in Tables 6 and 7, Project-generated construction and operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD’s emission-based significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SO2, PM10, or PM2.5. Therefore, impacts regarding cumulatively considerable net increases of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is in non-attainment would be less than significant. As discussed in the analysis of the Project’s potential to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan (Section 4.2.1, above), the Project would not conflict with the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP. Additionally, criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction activity of future DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 16 JANUARY 2026
proposed projects would be reduced through implementation of control measures required by SCAQMD. Cumulative PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced because all future projects would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), which sets forth general and specific requirements for all construction sites in the SCAQMD.

Based on the previous considerations, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions of nonattainment pollutants, and impacts would be less than significant.

4.3.3 Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis
Construction activities associated with the Project would result in temporary sources of on-site fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions. An LST analysis has been prepared to determine potential impacts to nearby sensitive receptors during construction of the Project. The impacts were analyzed using methods consistent with those in SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (SCAQMD 2008). According to the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, “Off-site mobile emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to the LSTs” (SCAQMD 2008). Trucks and worker trips associated with the Project are not expected to cause substantial air quality impacts to sensitive receptors along off-site roadways since emissions would be relatively brief in nature and would cease once the vehicles pass through the main streets. Nonetheless, in an effort to conservatively capture potential vehicle activity within the Project boundary (i.e., fence line), a small portion (i.e., 0.25 miles) of the off-site vehicle travel for worker vehicles, vendor trucks, and haul trucks were conservatively treated as on-site emissions for the LST analysis.

The estimated maximum daily unmitigated on-site construction emissions generated by the Project are presented in Table 8 and compared to the applicable SCAQMD LST mass rate screening criteria. See Attachment A for supporting CalEEMod LST files.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 17 JANUARY 2026
Table 8. Localized Significance Thresholds Analysis for Project Construction – Unmitigated
Maximum On-Site
Emissions
NO2 CO PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Summer
2026 41.11 28.75 9.86 3.89
2027 11.34 17.87 1.33 0.57
Winter
2026 27.17 24.79 6.08 1.82
2027 10.41 15.66 1.15 0.51
Maximum Daily Emissions
(Summer or Winter)

41.11 28.75 9.86 3.89
SCAQMD LST Screening
Criteria

57.00 585.00 73.93 34.93
LST Exceeded? No No No No
Source: SCAQMD 2008.

As depicted in Table 8, the Project would not result in emissions of NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 that would exceed the applicable SCAQMD LST screening criteria, and no mitigation measures are required. As such the Project would result in less than significant impacts related to construction LSTs.

CO Hotspots
Traffic-congested roadways and intersections have the potential to generate localized high levels of CO. Localized areas where ambient concentrations exceed federal and/or state standards for CO are termed “CO hotspots.” The transport of CO is extremely limited, as it disperses rapidly with distance from the source. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthy levels, affecting sensitive receptors. Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with severely congested intersections operating at an unacceptable level of service (LOS) (LOS E or worse is unacceptable).

At the time that the SCAQMD Handbook (1993) was published, the SCAB was designated nonattainment under the CAAQS and NAAQS for CO. In 2007, the SCAQMD was designated in attainment for CO under both the CAAQS and NAAQS as a result of the steady decline in CO concentrations in the SCAB due to turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities. The SCAQMD conducted CO modeling for the 2003 AQMP3 (SCAQMD 2003) for the four worst-case intersections in the SCAB: (1) 3 SCAQMD’s CO hotspot modeling guidance has not changed since 2003.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 18 JANUARY 2026
Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, (2) Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue, (3) La Cienega Boulevard and Century Boulevard, and (4) Long Beach Boulevard and Imperial Highway. At the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared, the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue was the most congested intersection in Los Angeles County, with an average daily traffic volume of about 100,000 vehicles per day. The 2003 AQMP also projected 8- hour CO concentrations at these four intersections for 1997 and from 2002 through 2005. From years 2002 through 2005, the maximum 8-hour CO concentration was 3.8 ppm at the Sunset Boulevard and Highland Avenue intersection in 2002; the maximum 8-hour CO concentration was 3.4 ppm at the Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue in 2002. Accordingly, CO concentrations at congested intersections would not exceed the 1-hour or 8-hour CO CAAQS unless projected daily traffic would be at least over 100,000 vehicles per day.

As detailed in the traffic analysis prepared for the Project, the Project would result in 3,817 weekday daily trips and 5,618 Saturday daily trips (LLG 2025), which are substantially below 100,000 trips per day at a given intersection.

As such, the Project’s contribution to intersection volumes would be minimal, and Project-related trips would be dispersed across multiple intersections. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the Project would not contribute to a CO hotspot at nearby intersections. Additionally, available ambient CO levels most representative of the ambient air quality in the Project area are monitored at the North Orange County air quality monitoring station, within Source-Receptor Area 16. Ambient CO levels monitored at this representative monitoring station indicate that the highest recorded 1-hour concentration of CO is 2.5 ppm (the State standard is 20 ppm) and highest 8-hour concentration is 1.6 ppm (the State standard is 9 ppm) during the past 3 years of available data (SCAQMD 2026).

As discussed above, the highest CO concentrations typically occur during peak traffic hours, so CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis. Given the considerably low level of CO concentrations in the Project area, project-related mobile emissions would not contribute to CO concentrations, and a CO hotspot is not anticipated to occur. Thus, Project-related mobile emissions would not contribute to CO concentrations, and a CO hotspot is not anticipated to occur. In addition, due to continued improvement in vehicular emissions at a rate faster than the rate of vehicle growth and/or congestion, the potential for CO hotspots in the SCAB is steadily decreasing. Based on these considerations, the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact to air quality with regard to potential CO hotspots.

Noncarcinogenic effects typically affect one or more target organ systems and may be experienced on either shortterm (acute) or long-term (chronic) exposure to a given TAC. TACs are identified by federal and state agencies based on a review of available scientific evidence. In the state of California, TACs are identified through a two-step process that was established in 1983 under the Toxic Air Contaminant Identification and Control Act. This two-step process of risk identification and risk management and reduction was designed to protect residents from the health effects of toxic substances in the air. In addition, the California Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act, Assembly Bill (AB) 2588, was enacted by the legislature in 1987 to address public concern over the release of TACs into the atmosphere.

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 19 JANUARY 2026
construction would result in emissions of diesel particulate matter (DPM) from heavy construction equipment and trucks accessing the site. DPM is characterized as a TAC by the State of California. State law has established the framework for California’s TAC identification and control program, which is generally more stringent than the federal program and aimed at TACs that are a problem in California. The state has formally identified more than 200 substances as TACs, including the federal hazardous air pollutants, and has adopted appropriate control measures for sources of these TACs. The following measures are required by state law to reduce DPM emissions:
• Fleet owners of mobile construction equipment are subject to the CARB Regulation for In-use Off-road Diesel Vehicles (13 CCR 2449), the purpose of which is to reduce DPM and criteria pollutant emissions from in-use (existing) off-road diesel-fueled vehicles. • All commercial diesel vehicles are subject to Title 13, Section 2485 of the California Code of Regulations, limiting engine idling time. Idling of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment and trucks during loading and unloading shall be limited to five minutes; electric auxiliary power units should be used whenever possible.

Project construction would result in emissions of DPM from heavy construction equipment and trucks accessing the site. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has identified carcinogenic and chronic noncarcinogenic effects from long-term exposure, but has not identified health effects due to short-term exposure to diesel exhaust. According to OEHHA, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 30-year exposure period for the maximally exposed individual resident; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the Project (16 months) (OEHHA 2015). The duration of proposed construction activities would only constitute a small percentage of the total long-term exposure period and would not result in exposure of proximate sensitive receptors to substantial TACs. After proposed construction is completed, there would be no long-term source of TAC emissions during operation. In addition, the Project would not require the extensive operation of heavy-duty diesel construction equipment, which is subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure for in-use diesel construction equipment to reduce DPM emissions, and would not involve extensive use of diesel trucks, which are also subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure. Furthermore, as shown in Table 6, maximum daily particulate matter (i.e., PM10 or PM2.5) emissions generated by construction equipment operation and haul-truck trips during construction (exhaust particulate matter or DPM), combined with fugitive dust generated by equipment operation and vehicle travel, is minimal.

The Project is located on an existing infill site, with the closest sensitive receptors (residences) are approximately 788 feet northeast of the Project site. Emissions during construction would not be concentrated in one area of the site but would be spread over the entirety of the site. Emissions would not be continuous during construction hours and would cease once construction is complete. Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial quantities of TACs during construction. Impacts would be less than significant.

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 20 JANUARY 2026
health hazards. The enumerated facilities or sources include the following: high-traffic freeways and roads, distribution centers, railyards, ports, refineries, chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and large gas-dispensing facilities. The Project would not include any of the above-listed land uses associated with generation of TAC emissions. Although the Project may emit DPM emissions during operation from mobile sources, these emissions would be minimal due to the infrequent use of diesel trucks for normal activities such as deliveries and waste collection, and would not represent a substantial or continuous source of emissions. Furthermore, the emissions shown in Table 7 reflect the Project’s minimal level of particulate matter emissions. Potential impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to TACs would be less than significant.

It is expected that operation of the Project would not result in any non-permitted direct emissions (e.g., those from a point source such as diesel generators) that could be a TAC source. Therefore, the Project would not result in exposure of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project site to substantial TAC concentrations due to either construction or operation, and impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial quantities of TACs during construction.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Health Impacts of Criteria Air Pollutants
Construction of the Project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions; however, the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD mass-emission thresholds.

In addition to O3, NOx emissions contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for NO2 (since NO2 is a constituent of NOx). Exposure to NO2 can cause lung irritation, bronchitis, and pneumonia, and lower resistance to respiratory infections. As depicted in Table 6 and Table 7, neither Project construction nor operation would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for NOx emissions. Thus, the Project would not be expected to exceed the NOx standards or contribute to associated health effects.

CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. CO competes with oxygen, often replacing it in the blood, reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of excess CO exposure can include dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions. CO hotspots were discussed previously as a less than significant impact. Thus, the Project’s CO emissions would not contribute to the health effects associated with this pollutant.

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 21 JANUARY 2026
coughing, or difficulty breathing (EPA 2025c). As with O3 and NOx, the Project would not generate emissions of PM10 or PM2.5 that would exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds. Accordingly, the Project’s PM10 and PM2.5 emissions are not expected to cause any increase in related regional health effects for these pollutants.

4.3.4 Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Based on available information, the Project is not anticipated to result in other emissions that have not been addressed under Thresholds 4.2.1 through 4.2.3. As such, this analysis focuses on the potential for the Project to generate odors. The occurrence and severity of potential odor impacts depends on numerous factors. The nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; the wind speeds and direction; and the sensitivity of receiving location each contribute to the intensity of the impact. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be annoying and cause distress among the public and generate citizen complaints.

Odors would be potentially generated from vehicles and equipment exhaust emissions during construction of the Project. Potential odors produced during construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from tailpipes of construction equipment and asphalt pavement application. Such odors would disperse rapidly from the Project site and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be less than significant.

Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food-processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities (SCAQMD 1993). There are no anticipated uses that are likely to result in odor complaints at the Project site. Furthermore, as stated above, the Project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which prohibits the release of odors which may cause annoyance to a considerable number of persons, as well as other SCAQMD rules related to odor generation from restaurant activities. The Project would not create any new sources of odor during operation. Therefore, Project operations would result in an odor impact that is less than significant.
5 Conclusions
The Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding the potential to conflict with or obstruction implementation of the SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP. Criteria air pollutant emissions generated during construction and operation of the Project would not exceed SCAQMD’s significance thresholds or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions, and impacts regarding the potential to result in cumulatively considerable net increases of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under and applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard would be less than significant. The Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding the potential to expose sensitive pollutant concentrations. Lastly, the Project would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, that would adversely affect a substantial number of people.

Therefore, the Project would result in less than significant impacts with regard to air quality.

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 22 JANUARY 2026
6 References
CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2022. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User’s Guide Version 2022.1. Prepared by Trinity Consultants and the California Air Districts.

April 2022. http://www.caleemod.com/.

CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm.

CARB. 2023. “Area Designation Maps/State and National.” Last updated November 2023. Accessed August 2025. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.

CARB. 2025. “Glossary of Air Pollution Terms.” CARB website. Accessed June 2025. http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/gloss.htm.

City of Cerritos. 2004. City of Cerritos Final General Plan. Adopted January 6, 2024. https://www.cerritos.gov/media/2f0nj3zn/general-plan.pdf.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2025a. “Criteria Air Pollutants.” August 16, 2021. Accessed June 2025. https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants.

EPA. 2025b. Monitor Values Report. Last updated January 2025. https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-qualitydata/monitor-values-report.

EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2025c. “Health and Environmental Effects of Particulate Matter (PM).” Last updated May 23, 2025. https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/health-and-environmental-effectsparticulate-matter-pm.

LLG (Linscott, Law, & Greenspan, Engineers). 2025. VMT Screening and Trip Generation Assessment for Dick’s House of Sport at Los Cerritos Center. December 11, 2025.

OEHHA (Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment). 2015. Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments 2015.

February 2015. http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/2015/2015GuidanceManual.pdf.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2020. 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Adopted September 3, 2020. https://scag.ca.gov/read-planadopted-final-connect-socal-2020.

SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Accessed January 2019. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ ceqa-air-quality-handbook-(1993).

DUDEK

AMANDA ACUNA, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF CERRITOS SUBJECT: DICK'S HOUSE OF SPORT PROJECT - AIR QUALITY TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 15847 23 JANUARY 2026
SCAQMD. 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/cleanair-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022- aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16.

SCAQMD. 2023. “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” Originally published in CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-11-A. Revised March 2023. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25.

SCAQMD. 2026. Historical Data By Year – 2022, 2023, 2024. Accessed January 2026. https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/historical-air-quality-data/historical-data-by-year.

DUDEK
Project Boundary
0 1,000 2,000
n Feet Date: 12/11/2025 User: jconway Path: Z:\Projects\j1584701\MAPDOC\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE.aprx Map: Project Location Layout: Figure 1 Project Location Portrait Lake
Forest
Huntington
Beach
Irvine
Westminster
Seal
Beach
Anaheim
Buena Park
Brea
Corona
Long
Beach
Carson
Chino
Hills
Manhattan
Beach
Bellflower
Gardena
South Gate Santa
Fe Springs
Bell Gardens
Inglewood
Diamond Bar
Culver City
Montebello
South El Monte
Alhambra Baldwin Park
Beverly
Hills
San Marino Irwindale
San Dimas
Pasadena Glendora
Glendale
Chino
Palos
Verdes
Estates
Redondo
Beach
Newport
Beach
Santa
Monica Los
Angeles
Tustin
ÄÆ57
ÄÆ39
ÄÆ60
ÄÆ73
ÄÆ91
ÄÆ22
ÄÆ170
ÄÆ55 ÄÆ133
ÄÆ142
ÄÆ107
ÄÆ187
ÄÆ213
ÄÆ66
ÄÆ71
ÄÆ72
ÄÆ2
ÄÆ90
ÄÆ241
ÄÆ1
ÄÆ19
ÄÆ60
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦710
§¨¦10
§¨¦105
§¨¦605
§¨¦405
L o s
A n g e l e s
C o u n t y
O r a n g e
C o u n t y
Project Site
!(
^
SOURCE: USGS National Map 2025
Dick's House of Sport Project
Regional Location and Local Vicinity
FIGURE 1
I

E ANDY ST
RDALE sr

SILVA ST
... ;!I ... :,. :,. <t <t ~ "' ... <t"' ~ s ~
u 0
~ 0 ~ ~
ARBOR RD 8 "'

ELSA ST

HENRILEE ST
RN ST
CJ l[
DUDEI<
D
...
:,.
<t ...
:,. !(? <t 0 ... ::, - 0 ~ 0 ~
~
...
:,.
<t
~ s:
)(
0 ~
0 c::
:i::.
0 z
....
t
~ i1I ~ <C
<t ' ~
<t <t
~Il l
Cerritos Coll

FALCON WAY

ARTESIA BLVD
□
~ r.
';;
"' ::.
0 "' l:
f:
195TH ST
Cl
... "'
...
~
"'
\
" \
\
\
~ <t
0 ~
0 :!:,I ~i
\
\
\
"' ?
-~11
L
CL ii t '=
J[ ,.I_60T
161STST
162Nos,.

ATHLETIC
FIELD
183RD STREET
©
NORTH
LEGEND

PROJECT SITE
(4.65 AC) PROJECT SITE EXHIBIT

LOS CERRITOS CENTER
= ,, I , - z . '"~ . . ~ !Jl§
• C
©
WLL/t:l -wmm;D
; u;..;
ffff:Hf HMH#m - 1~-
o ~ ~nl-±--=i,,
0W55555HMf5Wf,9
«@~@«~«~
DUDEK
• cuo

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
LU 1i
Attachment A
CalEEMod Outputs
Table of Contents
Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report_Output_2025_1212
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST_2025_1216 48 2 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 1 / 46
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report Table of Contents

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2026) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 2 / 46

3.11. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 3 / 46

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 4 / 46

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 5 / 46

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 6 / 46

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 7 / 46

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Construction Start Date 2/15/2026
Operational Year 2028
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.3
Precipitation (days) 8.0
Location 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 90703, USA County Los Angeles-South Coast
City Cerritos
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 4780
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility City of Cerritos
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.35

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Regional Shopping
Center
142 1000sqft 4.0 142,000 20,168 0.00 — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 8 / 46
City Park 0.43 Acre 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Parking Lot 11 1000sqft 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 67 41 29 0.18 0.94 8.9 9.9 0.88 3.0 3.9 — 24,877 24,877 1.3 3.5 49 26,002 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.4 27 25 0.07 0.94 5.1 6.1 0.87 0.95 1.8 — 8,737 8,737 0.42 0.78 0.29 8,980 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 4.3 9.8 9.4 0.03 0.29 1.6 1.9 0.27 0.43 0.70 — 4,124 4,124 0.20 0.43 2.8 4,261 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.78 1.8 1.7 0.01 0.05 0.30 0.35 0.05 0.08 0.13 — 683 683 0.03 0.07 0.47 705

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ------------------
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 9 / 46
Daily - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
2026 2.4 41 29 0.18 0.94 8.9 9.9 0.88 3.0 3.9 — 24,877 24,877 1.3 3.5 49 26,002 2027 67 11 18 0.03 0.36 0.97 1.3 0.33 0.24 0.57 — 4,131 4,131 0.17 0.17 4.6 4,189 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 2.4 27 25 0.07 0.94 5.1 6.1 0.87 0.95 1.8 — 8,737 8,737 0.42 0.78 0.29 8,980 2027 1.2 10 16 0.03 0.34 0.81 1.1 0.32 0.20 0.51 — 3,711 3,711 0.14 0.14 0.10 3,757 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 0.79 9.8 9.4 0.03 0.29 1.6 1.9 0.27 0.43 0.70 — 4,124 4,124 0.20 0.43 2.8 4,261 2027 4.3 5.4 8.2 0.02 0.18 0.42 0.60 0.16 0.10 0.27 — 1,942 1,942 0.07 0.07 0.87 1,967 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 0.14 1.8 1.7 0.01 0.05 0.30 0.35 0.05 0.08 0.13 — 683 683 0.03 0.07 0.47 705 2027 0.78 0.99 1.5 < 0.005 0.03 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.02 0.05 — 322 322 0.01 0.01 0.14 326

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 19 7.8 88 0.17 0.14 16 16 0.13 4.0 4.1 101 19,542 19,643 11 0.91 47 20,248 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 18 8.4 80 0.16 0.13 16 16 0.12 4.0 4.1 101 18,824 18,924 11 0.95 1.9 19,498 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 10 / 46
Unmit. 14 5.6 57 0.11 0.10 9.9 10 0.09 2.5 2.6 101 12,852 12,952 11 0.65 13 13,435 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.5 1.0 10 0.02 0.02 1.8 1.8 0.02 0.46 0.48 17 2,128 2,144 1.8 0.11 2.2 2,224

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15 7.5 82 0.17 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 17,410 17,410 1.2 0.85 47 17,738 Area 4.1 0.05 6.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25 25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25 Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 19 7.8 88 0.17 0.14 16 16 0.13 4.0 4.1 101 19,542 19,643 11 0.91 47 20,248 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15 8.2 80 0.16 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 16,717 16,717 1.2 0.89 1.2 17,014 Area 3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 18 8.4 80 0.16 0.13 16 16 0.12 4.0 4.1 101 18,824 18,924 11 0.95 1.9 19,498 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 11 / 46
Mobile 10.0 5.4 53 0.10 0.07 9.9 10.0 0.07 2.5 2.6 — 10,727 10,727 0.81 0.58 13 10,933 Area 3.7 0.04 4.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 17 17 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17 Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 14 5.6 57 0.11 0.10 9.9 10 0.09 2.5 2.6 101 12,852 12,952 11 0.65 13 13,435 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810 Area 0.68 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 Energy < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 334 334 0.03 < 0.005 — 335 Water — — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11
Total 2.5 1.0 10 0.02 0.02 1.8 1.8 0.02 0.46 0.48 17 2,128 2,144 1.8 0.11 2.2 2,224

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.3 21 22 0.04 0.88 — 0.88 0.81 — 0.81 — 3,873 3,873 0.16 0.03 — 3,886 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 3.7 3.7 — 0.55 0.55 — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 12 / 46
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.3 21 22 0.04 0.88 — 0.88 0.81 — 0.81 — 3,873 3,873 0.16 0.03 — 3,886 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 3.7 3.7 — 0.55 0.55 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.32 2.9 3.0 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 — 531 531 0.02 < 0.005 — 532 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.50 0.50 — 0.08 0.08 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.53 0.54 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 88 88 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 88 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.09 0.09 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.73 220 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 130 Hauling 0.07 5.4 2.1 0.03 0.06 1.2 1.3 0.06 0.34 0.40 — 4,532 4,532 0.25 0.72 10 4,764 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 13 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 206 206 0.01 0.01 0.02 208 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.01 130 Hauling 0.07 5.7 2.2 0.03 0.06 1.2 1.3 0.06 0.34 0.40 — 4,533 4,533 0.25 0.72 0.26 4,756 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 29 29 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 29 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17 17 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 18 Hauling 0.01 0.79 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.05 0.05 — 621 621 0.03 0.10 0.60 652 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.7 4.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.8 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.8 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.0 Hauling < 0.005 0.14 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 103 103 0.01 0.02 0.10 108

3.3. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.6 15 17 0.03 0.65 — 0.65 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,960 2,960 0.12 0.02 — 2,970 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 2.8 2.8 — 1.3 1.3 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 14 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 1.3 1.5 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 251 251 0.01 < 0.005 — 252 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.24 0.24 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.23 0.27 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 42 42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 42 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.73 220 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 130 Hauling 0.34 26 10 0.15 0.28 5.9 6.2 0.28 1.6 1.9 — 21,576 21,576 1.2 3.4 48 22,682 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18 18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 15 / 46
Vendor < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11 11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11 Hauling 0.03 2.3 0.87 0.01 0.02 0.50 0.52 0.02 0.14 0.16 — 1,833 1,833 0.10 0.29 1.8 1,924 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.0 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.8 1.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.8 Hauling 0.01 0.42 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 303 303 0.02 0.05 0.29 319

3.5. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.1 9.9 13 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.1 9.9 13 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.21 2.0 2.6 < 0.005 0.08 — 0.08 0.07 — 0.07 — 479 479 0.02 < 0.005 — 480 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 16 / 46
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.36 0.47 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 79 79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 79 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.17 0.18 3.0 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14 — 623 623 0.03 0.02 2.1 632 Vendor 0.02 0.82 0.40 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.22 0.01 0.06 0.06 — 748 748 0.03 0.11 2.0 783 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.17 0.20 2.5 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14 — 591 591 0.03 0.02 0.05 598 Vendor 0.02 0.86 0.41 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.22 0.01 0.06 0.06 — 749 749 0.03 0.11 0.05 781 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.03 0.04 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 120 120 0.01 < 0.005 0.18 121 Vendor < 0.005 0.17 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 149 149 0.01 0.02 0.17 156 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 20 20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 20 Vendor < 0.005 0.03 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25 25 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 26 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.7. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ------------------
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 17 / 46
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

1.0 9.4 13 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

1.0 9.4 13 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.53 4.9 6.7 0.01 0.17— 0.17 0.16— 0.16— 1,238 1,238 0.05 0.01— 1,243 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.10 0.89 1.2 < 0.005 0.03— 0.03 0.03— 0.03— 205 205 0.01 < 0.005— 206 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite—————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Worker 0.16 0.16 2.8 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14— 611 611 0.03 0.02 1.9 620 Vendor 0.02 0.79 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.06 0.06— 734 734 0.03 0.10 1.9 767 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 18 / 46
Worker 0.16 0.20 2.3 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14 — 580 580 0.01 0.02 0.05 586 Vendor 0.02 0.82 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.06 0.06 — 734 734 0.03 0.10 0.05 765 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.10 1.3 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.07 0.07 — 304 304 < 0.005 0.01 0.42 308 Vendor 0.01 0.43 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 379 379 0.02 0.05 0.43 396 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 50 50 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 51 Vendor < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 63 63 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 65 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.68 6.2 8.8 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 1,350 1,350 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving 0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 19 / 46
Off-Road 0.03 0.24 0.34 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 52 52 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52 Equipment
Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.04 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 8.6 8.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 8.6 Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.07 0.08 1.3 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.06 0.06 — 271 271 0.01 0.01 0.92 275 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 130 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 10.0 10.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 10 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.8 4.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.7 1.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.7 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.79 0.79 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.83 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 20 / 46

3.11. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.11 0.83 1.1 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
66 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.3 7.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.3 Architect
ural
Coatings

3.6 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 1.2 1.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.2 Architect
ural
Coatings

0.66 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 21 / 46
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 133 133 0.01 < 0.005 0.41 135 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 122 122 0.01 0.02 0.32 128 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.0 7.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.1 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.7 6.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.2 1.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.1 1.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 22 / 46
Regional
Shopping
Center
15 7.5 82 0.17 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 17,410 17,410 1.2 0.85 47 17,738 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 15 7.5 82 0.17 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 17,410 17,410 1.2 0.85 47 17,738 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
15 8.2 80 0.16 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 16,717 16,717 1.2 0.89 1.2 17,014 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 15 8.2 80 0.16 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 16,717 16,717 1.2 0.89 1.2 17,014 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center

1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 23 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,732 1,732 0.13 0.02 — 1,739
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 12 12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1,744 1,744 0.13 0.02 — 1,751 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,732 1,732 0.13 0.02 — 1,739
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 12 12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1,744 1,744 0.13 0.02 — 1,751 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.02 < 0.005 — 288
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.0 2.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 289 289 0.02 < 0.005 — 290

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 24 / 46
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center

0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 272 272 0.02 < 0.005 — 273 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 272 272 0.02 < 0.005 — 273 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center

0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 272 272 0.02 < 0.005 — 273 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 272 272 0.02 < 0.005 — 273 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
< 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 45 45 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 45 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 45 45 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 45

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 25 / 46
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

1.0 0.05 6.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25 25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25 Total 4.1 0.05 6.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25 25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total 3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

0.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.13 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 26 / 46
Total 0.68 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 27 / 46
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.07 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.07 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 28 / 46
City Park — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.01 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 29 / 46

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 30 / 46
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 31 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 32 / 46
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Avoided—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Sequest
ered
—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————
Annual—————————————————
Avoided—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Sequest
ered
—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————

5. Activity Data
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 33 / 46

5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 2/15/2026 4/24/2026 5.0 50 —
Grading Grading 4/25/2026 6/8/2026 5.0 31 —
Building Construction Building Construction 9/21/2026 9/21/2027 5.0 262 — Paving Paving 6/9/2026 6/26/2026 5.0 14 —
Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 4/19/2027 5/16/2027 5.0 20 —

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.0 8.0 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 33 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 0.00 8.0 36 0.38
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 84 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 148 0.41
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 36 0.38
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 84 0.37
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 367 0.40 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.0 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 82 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 14 0.74 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 46 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 7.0 84 0.37
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 34 / 46
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 84 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 81 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 89 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 36 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.0 37 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition Worker 16 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 67 20 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 16 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 317 20 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker 46 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 24 10 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving Worker 20 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 35 / 46
Architectural Coating Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 213,000 71,000 660

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Cubic
Yards)
Material Exported (Cubic
Yards)
Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 13,323 0.00
Grading 68,500 10,160 31 0.00 0.00
Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%

5.7. Construction Paving
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 36 / 46
Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Regional Shopping Center 0.00 0%
Paving City Park 0.00 0%
Paving Parking Lot 0.25 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2026 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Year VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Year Regional Shopping
Center
3,817 5,618 2,151 1,400,210 13,527 22,252 8,518 5,131,084 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Regional Shopping Center Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 37 / 46
Regional Shopping Center No Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Wood Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Gas Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Propane Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Electric Fireplaces 0 0
City Park No Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot No Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
— Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
undefined 0.00 0.00 213,000 71,000 660
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 38 / 46

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Regional Shopping Center 1,394,634 453 0.0330 0.0040 850,146 City Park 0.00 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
Parking Lot 9,636 453 0.0330 0.0040 0.00

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Regional Shopping Center 10,518,298 282,848
City Park 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Regional Shopping Center 149 0.00
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 39 / 46
City Park 0.04 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced Regional Shopping
Center
Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.0 4.0 18
Regional Shopping
Center
Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.0 4.0 18
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 40 / 46

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will continue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.

Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 7.5 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 4.1 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise — meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data (32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 41 / 46
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability to adapt.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 42 / 46
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 38
AQ-PM 69
AQ-DPM 93
Drinking Water 43
Lead Risk Housing 32
Pesticides 32
Toxic Releases 91
Traffic 95
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 12
Groundwater 76
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 82
Impaired Water Bodies 44
Solid Waste 53
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 43 / 46
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 23
Cardio-vascular 23
Low Birth Weights 71
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40
Housing 57
Linguistic 40
Poverty 32
Unemployment 61

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 78.9298088
Employed 58.62953933
Median HI 71.58988836
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 68.16373669
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 29.86013089
Transportation —
Auto Access 39.18901578
Active commuting 46.43911202
Social —
2-parent households 63.15924548
Voting 46.86256897
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 44 / 46
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.44693956
Park access 81.35506224
Retail density 54.63877839
Supermarket access 21.48081612
Tree canopy 36.05800077
Housing —
Homeownership 68.42037726
Housing habitability 27.89683049
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 47.06788143 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 47.38868215
Uncrowded housing 42.73065572
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 73.78416528
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 61.1
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 72.3
Cognitively Disabled 50.3
Physically Disabled 52.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 44.9
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 45 / 46
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 86.9
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 59.5
Elderly 9.0
English Speaking 58.1
Foreign-born 70.5
Outdoor Workers 80.4
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 20.8
Traffic Density 95.2
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 34.8
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 43.9

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 62
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports Detailed Report, 12/12/2025 46 / 46
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 62
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information

1.2. Land Use Types

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector

2. Emissions Summary

2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated

3. Construction Emissions Details

3.1. Demolition (2026) - Unmitigated

3.3. Grading (2026) - Unmitigated

3.5. Building Construction (2026) - Unmitigated

3.7. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated

3.9. Paving (2026) - Unmitigated
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 2 / 46

3.11. Architectural Coating (2027) - Unmitigated

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.6.1. Unmitigated

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.7.1. Unmitigated

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 3 / 46

4.8.1. Unmitigated

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.9.1. Unmitigated

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated

4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated

5. Activity Data

5.1. Construction Schedule

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies

5.5. Architectural Coatings

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 4 / 46

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies

5.7. Construction Paving

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.9.1. Unmitigated

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths

5.10.2. Architectural Coatings

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.11.1. Unmitigated

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.14.1. Unmitigated

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 5 / 46

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

6.1. Climate Risk Summary

6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 6 / 46

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores

7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores

7.4. Health & Equity Measures

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 7 / 46

1. Basic Project Information

1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Construction Start Date 2/15/2026
Operational Year 2028
Lead Agency —
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 2.3
Precipitation (days) 8.0
Location 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 90703, USA County Los Angeles-South Coast
City Cerritos
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 4780
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility City of Cerritos
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
App Version 2022.1.1.35

1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
Regional Shopping
Center
142 1000sqft 4.0 142,000 20,168 0.00 — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 8 / 46
City Park 0.43 Acre 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —
Parking Lot 11 1000sqft 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 — —

1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected

2. Emissions Summary

2.2. Construction Emissions by Year, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ------------------
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 9 / 46
Daily - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
2026 2.4 41 29 0.18 0.94 8.9 9.9 0.88 3.0 3.9 — 24,877 24,877 1.3 3.5 49 26,002 2027 67 11 18 0.03 0.36 0.97 1.3 0.33 0.24 0.57 — 4,131 4,131 0.17 0.17 4.6 4,189 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 2.4 27 25 0.07 0.94 5.1 6.1 0.87 0.95 1.8 — 8,737 8,737 0.42 0.78 0.29 8,980 2027 1.2 10 16 0.03 0.34 0.81 1.1 0.32 0.20 0.51 — 3,711 3,711 0.14 0.14 0.10 3,757 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 0.79 9.8 9.4 0.03 0.29 1.6 1.9 0.27 0.43 0.70 — 4,124 4,124 0.20 0.43 2.8 4,261 2027 4.3 5.4 8.2 0.02 0.18 0.42 0.60 0.16 0.10 0.27 — 1,942 1,942 0.07 0.07 0.87 1,967 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2026 0.14 1.8 1.7 0.01 0.05 0.30 0.35 0.05 0.08 0.13 — 683 683 0.03 0.07 0.47 705 2027 0.78 0.99 1.5 < 0.005 0.03 0.08 0.11 0.03 0.02 0.05 — 322 322 0.01 0.01 0.14 326

2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 19 7.8 88 0.17 0.14 16 16 0.13 4.0 4.1 101 19,542 19,643 11 0.91 47 20,248 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 18 8.4 80 0.16 0.13 16 16 0.12 4.0 4.1 101 18,824 18,924 11 0.95 1.9 19,498 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 10 / 46
Unmit. 14 5.6 57 0.11 0.10 9.9 10 0.09 2.5 2.6 101 12,852 12,952 11 0.65 13 13,435 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 2.5 1.0 10 0.02 0.02 1.8 1.8 0.02 0.46 0.48 17 2,128 2,144 1.8 0.11 2.2 2,224

2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15 7.5 82 0.17 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 17,410 17,410 1.2 0.85 47 17,738 Area 4.1 0.05 6.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 25 25 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 25 Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 19 7.8 88 0.17 0.14 16 16 0.13 4.0 4.1 101 19,542 19,643 11 0.91 47 20,248 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 15 8.2 80 0.16 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 16,717 16,717 1.2 0.89 1.2 17,014 Area 3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 18 8.4 80 0.16 0.13 16 16 0.12 4.0 4.1 101 18,824 18,924 11 0.95 1.9 19,498 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 11 / 46
Mobile 10.0 5.4 53 0.10 0.07 9.9 10.0 0.07 2.5 2.6 — 10,727 10,727 0.81 0.58 13 10,933 Area 3.7 0.04 4.2 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 17 17 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17 Energy 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 2,016 2,016 0.15 0.02 — 2,025 Water — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.68 0.68
Total 14 5.6 57 0.11 0.10 9.9 10 0.09 2.5 2.6 101 12,852 12,952 11 0.65 13 13,435 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810 Area 0.68 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 Energy < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 334 334 0.03 < 0.005 — 335 Water — — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29
Waste — — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47
Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.11 0.11
Total 2.5 1.0 10 0.02 0.02 1.8 1.8 0.02 0.46 0.48 17 2,128 2,144 1.8 0.11 2.2 2,224

3. Construction Emissions Details

2.3 21 22 0.04 0.88 — 0.88 0.81 — 0.81 — 3,873 3,873 0.16 0.03 — 3,886 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 3.7 3.7 — 0.55 0.55 — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 12 / 46
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

2.3 21 22 0.04 0.88 — 0.88 0.81 — 0.81 — 3,873 3,873 0.16 0.03 — 3,886 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 3.7 3.7 — 0.55 0.55 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.32 2.9 3.0 0.01 0.12 — 0.12 0.11 — 0.11 — 531 531 0.02 < 0.005 — 532 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.50 0.50 — 0.08 0.08 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.06 0.53 0.54 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 88 88 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 88 Demoliti
on
— — — — — 0.09 0.09 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.73 220 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 130 Hauling 0.07 5.4 2.1 0.03 0.06 1.2 1.3 0.06 0.34 0.40 — 4,532 4,532 0.25 0.72 10 4,764 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 13 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Worker 0.06 0.07 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 206 206 0.01 0.01 0.02 208 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.01 130 Hauling 0.07 5.7 2.2 0.03 0.06 1.2 1.3 0.06 0.34 0.40 — 4,533 4,533 0.25 0.72 0.26 4,756 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 29 29 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 29 Vendor < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17 17 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 18 Hauling 0.01 0.79 0.30 < 0.005 0.01 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.05 0.05 — 621 621 0.03 0.10 0.60 652 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.7 4.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 4.8 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.8 2.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.0 Hauling < 0.005 0.14 0.05 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 103 103 0.01 0.02 0.10 108

1.6 15 17 0.03 0.65 — 0.65 0.59 — 0.59 — 2,960 2,960 0.12 0.02 — 2,970 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 2.8 2.8 — 1.3 1.3 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 14 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.14 1.3 1.5 < 0.005 0.05 — 0.05 0.05 — 0.05 — 251 251 0.01 < 0.005 — 252 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.24 0.24 — 0.11 0.11 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.03 0.23 0.27 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 42 42 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 42 Dust
From
Material
Movement
— — — — — 0.04 0.04 — 0.02 0.02 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.06 1.0 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.05 0.05 — 217 217 0.01 0.01 0.73 220 Vendor < 0.005 0.14 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 130 Hauling 0.34 26 10 0.15 0.28 5.9 6.2 0.28 1.6 1.9 — 21,576 21,576 1.2 3.4 48 22,682 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 0.01 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 18 18 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 18 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 15 / 46
Vendor < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11 11 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11 Hauling 0.03 2.3 0.87 0.01 0.02 0.50 0.52 0.02 0.14 0.16 — 1,833 1,833 0.10 0.29 1.8 1,924 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 3.0 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.8 1.8 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.8 Hauling 0.01 0.42 0.16 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.09 0.10 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 — 303 303 0.02 0.05 0.29 319

1.1 9.9 13 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

1.1 9.9 13 0.02 0.38 — 0.38 0.35 — 0.35 — 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02 — 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment

0.21 2.0 2.6 < 0.005 0.08 — 0.08 0.07 — 0.07 — 479 479 0.02 < 0.005 — 480 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 16 / 46
Off-Road
Equipment

0.04 0.36 0.47 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 79 79 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 79 Onsite
truck

3.7. Building Construction (2027) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e ------------------
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 17 / 46
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

1.0 9.4 13 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

1.0 9.4 13 0.02 0.34— 0.34 0.31— 0.31— 2,397 2,397 0.10 0.02— 2,405 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.53 4.9 6.7 0.01 0.17— 0.17 0.16— 0.16— 1,238 1,238 0.05 0.01— 1,243 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual—————————————————
Off-Road
Equipment

0.10 0.89 1.2 < 0.005 0.03— 0.03 0.03— 0.03— 205 205 0.01 < 0.005— 206 Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite—————————————————
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
—————————————————
Worker 0.16 0.16 2.8 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14— 611 611 0.03 0.02 1.9 620 Vendor 0.02 0.79 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.06 0.06— 734 734 0.03 0.10 1.9 767 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00— 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 18 / 46
Worker 0.16 0.20 2.3 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.14 0.14 — 580 580 0.01 0.02 0.05 586 Vendor 0.02 0.82 0.38 0.01 0.01 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.06 0.06 — 734 734 0.03 0.10 0.05 765 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.08 0.10 1.3 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.07 0.07 — 304 304 < 0.005 0.01 0.42 308 Vendor 0.01 0.43 0.20 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.11 0.11 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 — 379 379 0.02 0.05 0.43 396 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 50 50 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.07 51 Vendor < 0.005 0.08 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 63 63 < 0.005 0.01 0.07 65 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.68 6.2 8.8 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.24 — 0.24 — 1,350 1,350 0.05 0.01 — 1,355 Paving 0.05 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 19 / 46
Off-Road 0.03 0.24 0.34 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 52 52 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 52 Equipment
Paving < 0.005 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.11 0.83 1.1 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 — 134 Architect
ural
Coatings
66 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.01 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 7.3 7.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.3 Architect
ural
Coatings

3.6 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.66 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 21 / 46
Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.03 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 133 133 0.01 < 0.005 0.41 135 Vendor < 0.005 0.13 0.06 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.04 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 122 122 0.01 0.02 0.32 128 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 7.0 7.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.1 Vendor < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.7 6.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.2 1.2 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.2 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.1 1.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4. Operations Emissions Details

4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use

4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 22 / 46
Regional
Shopping
Center
15 7.5 82 0.17 0.11 16 16 0.10 4.0 4.1 — 17,410 17,410 1.2 0.85 47 17,738 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot

1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.8 0.98 9.6 0.02 0.01 1.8 1.8 0.01 0.46 0.47 — 1,776 1,776 0.13 0.10 2.1 1,810

4.2. Energy

4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 23 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Summer
(Max)
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,732 1,732 0.13 0.02 — 1,739
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 12 12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1,744 1,744 0.13 0.02 — 1,751 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 1,732 1,732 0.13 0.02 — 1,739
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 12 12 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 12
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 1,744 1,744 0.13 0.02 — 1,751 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — — 287 287 0.02 < 0.005 — 288
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.0 2.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.0
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 289 289 0.02 < 0.005 — 290

4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 24 / 46
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center

0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 272 272 0.02 < 0.005 — 273 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 45 45 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 45

4.3. Area Emissions by Source

4.3.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 25 / 46
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products

3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

3.0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.55 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings

0.00 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt

0.13 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9 ------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 26 / 46
Total 0.68 0.01 0.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.9 2.9 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.9

4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use

4.4.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 20 91 111 2.1 0.05 — 178
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 27 / 46
Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 3.3 15 18 0.34 0.01 — 29

4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use

4.5.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.07 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
City Park — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.00 0.02 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.07 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 80 0.00 80 8.0 0.00 — 281
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Regional
Shopping
Center
— — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 28 / 46
City Park — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.01 Parking
Lot
— — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — 13 0.00 13 1.3 0.00 — 47

4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use

4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type

4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 30 / 46
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type

4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type

4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 31 / 46
Daily, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Winter
(Max)
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
------------------
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 32 / 46
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
—————————————————
Avoided—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Sequest
ered
—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————
Annual—————————————————
Avoided—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Sequest
ered
—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
Remove d—————————————————
Subtotal—————————————————
——————————————————

5. Activity Data
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 33 / 46

5.2. Off-Road Equipment

5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 2.0 8.0 367 0.40 Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 33 0.73
Demolition Excavators Diesel Average 0.00 8.0 36 0.38
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 84 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 148 0.41
Grading Excavators Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 36 0.38
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 84 0.37
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 367 0.40 Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 7.0 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 3.0 8.0 82 0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 14 0.74 Building Construction Welders Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 46 0.45 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Back
hoes
Diesel Average 3.0 7.0 84 0.37
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 34 / 46
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Back Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 84 0.37 Paving Cement and Mortar
Mixers
Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 10.0 0.56
Paving Pavers Diesel Average 1.00 8.0 81 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 89 0.36
Paving Rollers Diesel Average 2.0 6.0 36 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors Diesel Average 1.00 6.0 37 0.48

5.3. Construction Vehicles

5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition Worker 16 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 67 20 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading Worker 16 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 317 20 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction Worker 46 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 24 10 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
Paving Worker 20 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Paving Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Paving Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Paving Onsite truck — — HHDT
Architectural Coating Worker 10.0 19 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 35 / 46
Architectural Coating Vendor 4.0 10 HHDT,MHDT
Architectural Coating Hauling 0.00 20 HHDT
Architectural Coating Onsite truck — — HHDT

5.4. Vehicles

5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.

5.6. Dust Mitigation

5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%

5.7. Construction Paving
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 36 / 46
Phase Name Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
Paving Regional Shopping Center 0.00 0%
Paving City Park 0.00 0%
Paving Parking Lot 0.25 100%

5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Year and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Year kWh per Year CO2 CH4 N2O
2026 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005
2027 0.00 453 0.03 < 0.005

5.9. Operational Mobile Sources

5.10. Operational Area Sources

5.10.1. Hearths
Land Use Hearth Type Unmitigated (number) Mitigated (number) Regional Shopping Center Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 37 / 46
Regional Shopping Center No Fireplaces 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Regional Shopping Center Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Wood Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Gas Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Propane Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Electric Fireplaces 0 0
City Park No Fireplaces 0 0
City Park Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
City Park Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Wood Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Gas Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Propane Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Electric Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot No Fireplaces 0 0
Parking Lot Conventional Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Non-Catalytic Wood Stoves 0 0
Parking Lot Pellet Wood Stoves 0 0

5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250

5.11. Operational Energy Consumption

5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption

5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) Regional Shopping Center 10,518,298 282,848
City Park 0.00 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.13. Operational Waste Generation

5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
Regional Shopping Center 149 0.00
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 39 / 46
City Park 0.04 0.00
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00

5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment

5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment

5.15.1. Unmitigated

5.16. Stationary Sources

5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps

5.16.2. Process Boilers

5.17. User Defined

5.18. Vegetation
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 40 / 46

5.18.1. Land Use Change

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type

5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres

5.18.2. Sequestration

5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)

6. Climate Risk Detailed Report

Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 41 / 46
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (Radke et al., 2017, CEC-500-2017-008), and consider inundation location and depth for the San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California coast resulting different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four scenarios to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four scenarios are: No rise, 0.5 meter, 1.0 meter, 1.41 meters Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.

6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 1 1 1 2
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 42 / 46
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.

The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.

6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures

7. Health and Equity Details

7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 38
AQ-PM 69
AQ-DPM 93
Drinking Water 43
Lead Risk Housing 32
Pesticides 32
Toxic Releases 91
Traffic 95
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 12
Groundwater 76
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 82
Impaired Water Bodies 44
Solid Waste 53
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 43 / 46
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 23
Cardio-vascular 23
Low Birth Weights 71
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 40
Housing 57
Linguistic 40
Poverty 32
Unemployment 61

Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 78.9298088
Employed 58.62953933
Median HI 71.58988836
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 68.16373669
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 29.86013089
Transportation —
Auto Access 39.18901578
Active commuting 46.43911202
Social —
2-parent households 63.15924548
Voting 46.86256897
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 44 / 46
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 69.44693956
Park access 81.35506224
Retail density 54.63877839
Supermarket access 21.48081612
Tree canopy 36.05800077
Housing —
Homeownership 68.42037726
Housing habitability 27.89683049
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 47.06788143 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 47.38868215
Uncrowded housing 42.73065572
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 73.78416528
Arthritis 0.0
Asthma ER Admissions 61.1
High Blood Pressure 0.0
Cancer (excluding skin) 0.0
Asthma 0.0
Coronary Heart Disease 0.0
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 0.0
Diagnosed Diabetes 0.0
Life Expectancy at Birth 72.3
Cognitively Disabled 50.3
Physically Disabled 52.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 44.9
Mental Health Not Good 0.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 0.0
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 45 / 46
Obesity 0.0
Pedestrian Injuries 86.9
Physical Health Not Good 0.0
Stroke 0.0
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 0.0
Current Smoker 0.0
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 0.0
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 59.5
Elderly 9.0
English Speaking 58.1
Foreign-born 70.5
Outdoor Workers 80.4
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 20.8
Traffic Density 95.2
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 34.8
Other Decision Support —
2016 Voting 43.9

7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 62
Los Cerritos Center - Dicks House of Sports_LST Detailed Report, 12/16/2025 46 / 46
Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 62
Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) No Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) No Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.

7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.

7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.

7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.

8. User Changes to Default Data

8.1. Justifications
Screen Justification
Land Use data provided from applicant
Construction: Construction Phases provided by Applicant Construction: Off-Road Equipment CalEEmod defaults with input from applicant Construction: Trips and VMT CalEEmod default values - LST assumptions for on-site trips Construction: Architectural Coatings —
Operations: Vehicle Data from TIA
Operations: Architectural Coatings recreational building area is counted already Attachment E
Hazardous Waste Site Review
§¨605
Gr
i
d
ley Rd
183rd St
186th St
187th St
Artesia Blvd
S
tudeb
a
k
e
r Rd
S St
San Gabriel River Fwy
Project Boundary
1,000-foot Project Site Radius
Hazardous Waste and Clean Up Sites
Evaluation
DTSC Cleanup Program
GEOTracker LUST Cleanup
Date: 12/18/2025 User: jconway Path: Z:\Projects\j1584701\MAPDOC\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE\Los_Cerritos_Center_CE.aprx Map: DTSC'S Enviroster Layout: Figure 4 EnviroStor_Hazardous Waste 0 412.5 825 n Feet
SOURCE: ESRI 2025, EnviroStor 2025
Dick's House of Sport Project
Hazardous Waste and Clean Up Sites
FIGURE 4
□
,.. .J
DUDEI<
Attachment F
Asbestos Report

CERTIFICATE OF ABATEMENT COMPLETION
ProjectName: i-oS ~J fV/A;ll /f~/rflf ~f.e Project No.:~q~ Address: IO() ie, f ~(() f 1-f,+t,t-{ U/11.t!P{ IA • ftJ:fo.3 Owner Project No.: ___ _ Space No.: ~ r f if- l.Y< pi.PoJL Certificate No.: o1
Contractor: itf fL / "1 C- Date of Issuance:

Time oflssuance: ____ _
Consultant: ~ UJ/lf· /A · Cl{rlvf:;' J..-
Based on on-site observations and Project data, the following materials have been abated {Llst materials with quantity and location per spa~~- 32,90 >P' ~ ~ fty~ ;vwddr~ Y~"lk--f ~ 6-/1~ ~/ /3e.4,M.f JM4 ~Ul,fv1,.t,1,,> /1-1. f/14Jt ]: /~ - ~-,' Pl~r t,J~ M~ - Ayfrt!Y... f, ~ r;r 1- 4a1 r leuw 1tu v-&t()~ •
The following known ACM materials are still in place (List materials with quantity and location. If none. state so):
-A-,;.. flt(.. C+fJ.J {~ &/di t<,J~~ /YI fM!f ]lE I JJC /Jpvf{- ~~, ~ ~v ~ ~ !'d- Llf IvM1-..+ro- u,.,:fA-tK..1b1T·
m:onbnre
It bas been determined
with the Scope
to the
or
best
work
of the
and
Environmental
Specifications,
Consultant's knowledge, information and belief to be substantially complete in concentrations for the Work Area are within
indnding Clearance Testing analysis that documents that airborne fiber unprotected personnel) of an area
the piddines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for reoccupation (by that bas undergone asbestos-abatement, and that all Asbestos-Containing Waste Materials have been when
removed
included
from
in
the
the
project
Contract,
area.
and/or
As of
all
the Date of Issuance of this Certificate, Contractor may proceed with replacement material Work field close-out activities, u required.

Title/Certification No.
completed
The undersigned
in accordance
Contractor
with
certifies
the
to the
Documents
best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief, that Work identified above 1w bcc:n .
01126/10

CERTIFICATE OF ABATEMENT COMPLETION
Project Name: LOS CERRITOS MALL / SEATS STERE
Project No.: 104545
Address: 100 LOS CERRITOS MAL, CLARITOS, LA. 9O7O3 Orner Project No.::

Space No: Phase II fIX. 2'1 Flook Certificate No.:

Contractor: AIR_/AC- Date of Issuance:
02 7/7/202
Time of Issuance:

Consulan: TARBARA CORP. A. CHAVEZ
Based on on-site observations and Project data, the following materials have been abated (List materials with quantity and location per spaces - Appox. 32,500 SE OF ACM Fireprosting Insulation respond fron Celling Deck /Beams/columus in phiase II $ I - 24 Floor Work Area - Approx. 3005t ef ACM VET veroued:

The following known ACM materials are still in place (List materials with quantity and location. If none, state so):

Air inc. is still working in the Merchandise Bldy work trea - Regular Demo und Set up work trea contanayent.

It has been determined to the best of the Environmental Consultant's knowledge, information and belief to be substantially complete in accordance with the Scope of work and Specifications, including Clearance Testing analysis that documents that airborne fiber concentrations for the Work Area are within the guidelines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for reoccupation (by unprotected personnel) of an area that has undergone asbestos-abatement, and that all Asbestos-Containing Waste Materials have been removed from the project area. As of the Date of Issuance of this Certificate, Contractor may proceed with replacement material Work when included in the Contract, and/or all field close-out activities, as required.

Environmental Consultant's iN 142
Representative
CSST/04F 31032
Title/Certification No 7/7/1025
The undersigned Contractor certifies to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief, that Work identified above has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents.

Fernandesaran Superuiser 717625
01/26/10

CERTIFICATE OF ABATEMENT COMPLETION
Project Name: k>,.s ~'iF,S /11Atk If~ S-;tl-E
Address: lo~ Los- lf(lf1.ril1S t-f/1-U.1 ~ IA-· Cfb:fo::, Space No.: f/we lfrr ~ ,l v,/ .j=taJ,L
Project No.:-1..P!fsfS"
Owner Project No.: ____ _
Certificate No.: t) Z,.

Contractor: ~ /tl:C • Date of Issuance: U3: .. /z.t71
~
Time oflssuance: --- ------.:

Consultant· ~,i,+ &J,tf: / Jt-, Cl-/frt;EZ_
Bastd on on-site observations and Project data, the following materials have bttn abated (List materials with quantity and location per space): - ~,_. ?;~g}l) SF 0-f" 1cH fi~H~ /~tJ»/dt<Wt ~~ ~ c~t,7 ~ / 6t.JJNJ I eolt.twtVl~ 111 f Jlift 111- I If/;_ 2t.r Floor- b-1)~ ~q - Ayf rP'f-· 3w )t ~ ~ l/FT 10-Jo~'
The following known ACM materials are still in plate (List materials with quantity and loc.ation.. If none. state so):

A-(V" t ~tc- 1 s s~~ll w;a~,i 111 fly Ht~ s·-e B:J4 · too~ Arll1 - ¥r ~u, ,vvz:f Se,+= up ~ A-rd)I/ ~vi:h-tJ'/tft'vtr'
It has been determined to the best of the Environmental Consultant's knowledge, information and belief to be substantially complete in accordance with the Scope of work and Specifications, including Oearance Testing analysis that documents that airborne fiber concentrations for the Work Area are within the guidelines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for reoccupation (by unprotected personnel) of an a rea that has undergone asbestos-abattment, and that all Asbestos-Containing Waste Materials have beat removed from the project area. As of the Date of issuance of this Certificate, Contractor may proceed with replacement material Work when included in the Contract, and/or all field close-out activities, as required.

R.ep~entative
The undersigned Contractor certifies to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief, that Work identified above has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents.
01/26/10

CERTIFICATE OF ABATEMENT COMPLETION
ProjectName:~ CEU(Ti> ,vjl4U / ~s $70/U!'
Address: LOO Les Cd.tttfi'i MM,L---, &#fl$$/~-fo1D3
Space No.: H~4 ·
Contractor: .ltt.!5-J/-tC •
Project No.:~
Owner Project No.:
------
Certificate No.: 0 3
Date of Issuance: ::t/ Z-f / UJt,STime of Issuance: ------- Based on on-site observations and Project data, the following materials have been abated (List materials with quantity and location per space): ~)l• 'f,~ )f "'[" '4cM FI,tt~£":; /~,1 At_Je,u:b 'e>-/" ~ ~ Let lt7 ~ { ~ ,~ 1k 1ev~se t3/{1 •
- ~iC- -=f1BtfoSF tfi Ac#1 d~-tk ~c~·
The following known ACM materials are still in place (List materials with quantity and location. If none, state so):
~ · 80 Sf a..p AM'1 ~ ~~ (lo<e,,f;,eb-"71. t!Y~ sh'll lt1 f1µe'
It has been determined to the best of the Environmental Consultant's knowledge, information and belief to be substantially complete in accordance with the Scope of work and Specifications, including Clearance Testing analysis that documents that airborne fiber concentrations for the Work Area are within the guidelines established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for reoccupation (by unprotected personnel) of an area that has undergone asbestos-abatement, and that all Asbestos-Containing Waste Materials have been removed from the project area. As of the Date of Issuance of this Certificate, Contractor may proceed with replacement material Work when included in the Contract, and/or all field close-out activities, as required.

The undersigned Contractor certifies to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief, that Work identified above has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents.
01/26/10
MACE~CHMANAGEMENTCOMPANY

CERTIFICATE OF ABATEMENT COMPLETION
Project Name: Former Sears Store
Location: Los Cerritos Mall
Space: Sears Store
Address: Cerritos, CA
Contractor: AIR Inc
Project No.

Owner Project No.

Certificate No. 04
Date of Issuance 10/20/2025
Time of Issuance
O.S. Rep.

Based on on-site observations and Project data, the following materials have been abated:

Roof penetration ~ 80 s.f.

The following known ACM materials are still in place: (list with quantity; if none, please state so) __ _ NIA
It has been determined to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief to be substantially complete in accordance with the Scope of work and Specifications, that all Asbestos-Containing Waste Materials have been removed from the project area. As of the Date of Issuance of this Certificate, Contractor may proceed with replacement material Work when included in the Contract, and/or all field close-out activities, as required.

The undersigned Contractor certifies to the best of the Contractor's knowledge, information and belief that Work identified above has been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents.

Supervisor 10/20/2025
/ Contractor's Representative Title Date
Attachment G
Historic Resources Assessment
Jenna Snow ● Historic Preservation Consulting ● 323/317-3297 ● [email protected] Historic Resource Assessment
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center
Cerritos, CA
March 2025
Table of Contents
I. Introduction and Executive Summary 1
II. Methodology 2
III. Regulatory Setting 3
National Register 3
California Register 3
California Environmental Quality Act 4
City of Los Cerritos 5
IV. Property Description & History 6
Physical Description 6
Alterations 9
Property History 10
V. Historic Context 13
Neighborhood Development: History of Cerritos 15
Sears, Roebuck and Company History 14
Architect: Welton Becket and Associates 17
Architectural Design: Late Modern 19
VI. Historic Resource Assessment 21
Individual Eligibility 21
Historic District Eligibility 22
VII. Conclusion 23
VIII. Bibliography 24
Attachments
Attachment A: Contemporary Maps
Attachment B: Historic Maps & Aerials
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Attachment D: Historic Photos
Attachment E: Table of Permits
Attachment F: Qualifications
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 1
I. Introduction and Executive Summary
This report provides a historic resource assessment of the Sears building, along with the associated garden and automotive centers, located at 100 Los Cerritos Center (subject property or property, Assessor Parcel Number 7038-014-016) in Cerritos, California. The subject property, located on the north side of Los Cerritos Center, was constructed in 1972. The building has been vacant since 2019.

As the subject property has not been previously surveyed and is now 53 years of age, this report will evaluate it to determine if it is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register), or as a contributing resource to any potential historic district. The assessment in this report is also based on written guidance published by the National Park Service (NPS) for evaluating historic properties in National Register Bulletin #15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, as well as on guidance provided by the California Office of Historic Preservation, accepted professional practices, and experience with similar properties.

The report concludes that the subject property does not appear individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers, nor is there any designated or potential historic district to which it could contribute. In addition to its lack of significance - Los Cerritos Center mall is a very typical example of a single-story suburban mall built during the peak of suburban mall development – there have also been many alterations to the mall such that it hardly resembles what it looked like when it was constructed. As Los Cerritos Center mall is not a potential historic district, there is no historic district to which the subject property could contribute.

This report was prepared by Jenna Snow. Qualifications are included in Attachment F.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 2
II. METHODOLOGY
Ms. Snow visited the site on November 6, 2024. Current photographs are included in Attachment C:

Contemporary Photographs. Research was conducted in November 2024 – February 2025 and includes the following primary resources:

Building Permits: Historic building and alteration permits were requested and provided by the City of Cerritos Department of Planning. Available permits are referenced in this report and available data is included in Attachment E: Table of Building Permits.

Sanborn Maps: Historic Sanborn fire insurance maps depict early building footprints, land uses, and property addresses. No coverage is available for the subject property.

Aerial Photographs: Historic aerial photographs showing early building footprints and patterns of urban development are digitized and available online through the University of California Santa Barbara. Relevant coverage is included in Attachment B: Historic Aerials.

Historic Photographs: Historic photograph databases are available online through the Los Angeles Public Library, University of Southern California, California State Library, and the Huntington Library. In addition, historic photographs were searched through the online collection, Calisphere, a digital collection from over 300 libraries, archives, museums, historical societies, and other organizations in California. Although digitized historic photographs were not available through any of these sources, digital copies of printed historic photographs were obtained at University of California Los Angeles Special Collections in the Elliot Mittler collection of Welton Becket and Associates Photograph Archives. These images are included in Attachment D: Historic Photos.

Newspaper Articles: Historic newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, are digitized and searchable at newspapers.com. Relevant articles are referenced in this report.

Other Archival Materials: Archival materials of the firm Welton Becket and Associates, for the period when the firm was under the leadership of MacDonald Becket, were reviewed at the Getty Research Institute’s Special Collections. The holdings include albums of newspaper clippings, photographs, etc., arranged by year. Relevant information is referenced in this report.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 3
III. Regulatory Setting
National Register
The National Register of Historic Places is “an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups, and citizens to identify the nation’s cultural resources and indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment.”1 Administered by the National Park Service, the National Register is the nation’s official list of historic and cultural resources worthy of preservation. Properties listed in the National Register include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that are significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. Resources are eligible for the National Register if they meet one or more of the following criteria for significance:

A) are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or
B) are associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; or C) embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or
D) have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory.2 Once a resource has been determined to satisfy one of the above criteria, then it must be assessed for “integrity.”3 Integrity refers to the ability of a property to convey its significance. Evaluation of integrity is based on “an understanding of a property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance.” The National Register recognizes seven aspects or qualities of integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. To retain integrity, a property must possess several, and usually most, of these aspects.

Relationship to Project
The subject property is not listed in the National Register, and, for the reasons stated below, does not appear to meet National Register eligibility requirements for individual designation. In addition, as Los Cerritos Center mall is not currently listed in the National Register, nor is it eligible for listing in the National Register, there is no designated or potential historic district to which the subject property could contribute.

California Register
Based substantially on the National Register, the California Register is “an authoritative guide… used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected.”4 For a property to be eligible for listing in the California Register, it must be found by the State Historical Resources Commission to be significant under at least one of the following four criteria:
1 National Register Bulletin #16A: How to Complete the National Register Registration Form (National Park Service, 1997). 2 National Register Bulletin #15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National Park Service, 1990, revised 2002). 3 National Register Bulletin #15, How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National Park Service, 1990, revised 2002). 4 California Public Resources Code §5024.1(a), <http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PRC/1/d5/1/2/s5024.1>.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 4
1) is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; or
2) is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; or 3) embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual or possesses high artistic values; or
4) has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Also included in the California Register are properties which have been formally determined eligible for listing in, or are listed in the National Register; are registered State Historical Landmark Number 770, and all consecutively numbered landmarks above Number 770; and Points of Historical Interest, which have been reviewed and recommended to the State Historical Resources Commission for listing.

The primary difference between eligibility for listing in the National and California Registers is integrity. Properties eligible for listing in the National Register generally have a higher degree of integrity than those only eligible for listing in the California Register. There is, however, no difference with regard to significance.

Relationship to Project
The subject property is not listed in the California Register, and, for the reasons stated below, does not appear to meet California Register eligibility requirements for individual designation. In addition, as Los Cerritos Center mall is not currently listed in the California Register, nor is it eligible for listing in the California Register, there is no designated or potential historic district to which the subject property could contribute..

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
According to CEQA,
an historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources. Historical resources included in a local register of historical resources..., or deemed significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (g) of §5024.1, are presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of this section, unless the preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the resource is not historically or culturally significant (California Public Resources Code, PRC §21084.1).

California Public Resources Code §5024.1 (g) states:
(g) A resource identified as significant in an historical resource survey may be listed in the California Register if the survey meets all of the following criteria:
(1) The survey has been or will be included in the State Historical Resources Inventory.
(2) The survey and the survey documentation were prepared in accordance with [OHP]… procedures and requirements.
(3) The resource is evaluated and determined by the office to have a significance rating of category 1-5 on DPR [Department of Parks and Recreation] form 523.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 5
(4) If the survey is five or more years old at the time of its nomination for inclusion in the California Register, the survey is updated to identify historical resources which have become eligible or ineligible due to changed circumstances or further documentation and those which have been demolished or altered in a manner that substantially diminishes the significance of the resource.

Relationship to Project
As the subject property is not eligible for listing in the National or California Registers, either individually or as part of any designated or potential historic district, it is therefore not a historical resource for purposes of CEQA.

City of Cerritos
The City of Cerritos currently does not have a historic preservation ordinance and has no mechanism for local designation.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 6
IV. Property Description & History
Physical Description
Site (Maps 1-3)
The subject property is situated on the north side of Los Cerritos Center, a regional shopping center bounded by the I-605 (San Gabriel River Freeway) to the west, 183rd Street to the north, Gridley Road to the east, and South Street to the south. The area, roughly shaped like a right-angle trapezoid, features a large, irregularly shaped, one-story indoor shopping mall at its center. Smaller commercial buildings are clustered at the southwest corner of 183rd Street and Gridley Road, with additional stand-alone commercial structures spaced along Gridley Road. Surrounding the mall are paved surface parking areas, accessible via drive alleys and landscaped with trees and shrubs within irregularly shaped planters bordered by concrete curbs.

The Sears building, located on the north side of the mall, occupies a separate parcel with surface parking to its west and north. A second building on this parcel, which was constructed to house the Sears automotive center, faces 183rd Street and is positioned between two entrances to the mall property. A concrete walkway encircles the Sears building, with low shrubs planted near its corners.

Exterior (Figures 1-15)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, east (left) and north elevations, view southwest (Snow, 2024) The main building at the subject property is a massive, two-story former commercial building encompassing approximately 284,294 square feet of interior space, with dimensions of roughly 322- feet by 260-feet. Late Modern in style with echoes of Egyptian Revival style in its inward sloping, canted exterior walls, it features a rectangular plan with a rectangular garden center attached to the west side via a trellis. The flat roof is topped by a raised parapet. Exterior walls are finished in textured stucco scored in a rectangular grid. The building’s corners are clipped. Lack of fenestration creates a solid, monolithic appearance.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 7
East and north elevations of the building are composed of five unequal bays, with the center bay being the widest and slightly taller than the outer bays. Inset entries are located in the bays adjacent to the center bay. These entry bays are orthogonal rather than canted, forming triangular flanges that connect them to the neighboring canted sections. The entries are sheltered by an overhanging, cantilevered canopy. Above the entry canopy, an isosceles trapezoid panel adds visual interest, with its center section displaying a four-over-four grid of reflective, blind glazing, with thinner grids of blind glazing above and below. The only additional decorative elements on these elevations are small, simple light fixtures mounted three-quarters of the way up the canted walls.

The west elevation of the building is divided
into four bays. The two northern bays are
similar in design to the east and north
elevations, featuring an entrance in the second
bay from the north. Like the other entrances,
this inset entry is defined by an orthogonal wall
surface, a cantilevered canopy, and an isosceles
trapezoid panel above. The two southern bays
encompass three-quarters of the elevation and
are slightly taller than the north bays. At the
center, a wood trellis faced in textured stucco
connects the main store to the garden center
building via three large piers. The southernmost bay houses a loading dock, accessible by a driveway that slopes down to the basement level. The driveway is edged by a solid wall of the garden center to the north and a solid retaining wall to the south. A canopy extends over the loading dock. Three metal roll-up doors at the edge of the loading dock are surrounded by metal chain-link fencing. At the south side of the elevation, there is a single, solid, metal, service door. A ghost sign is visible near the roofline on the south side of the west elevation.

Approximately half of the south elevation is integrated into the interior space of the adjacent onestory mall, with the building’s two-story height rising above the mall’s roofline. This elevation includes one additional entrance, designed consistently with the others on the building.

The garden center is a secondary building located to the west of the main store and is significantly smaller, though it incorporates similar design elements. This one-story structure has a roughly rectangular plan, measuring approximately 205-feet by 70-feet, and features a flat roof with a raised parapet. Like the main building, it is finished in textured stucco and includes clipped corners. The north and west elevations alternate between canted, inward-sloping walls and orthogonal bays. On the north elevation, the second bay from the east includes fixed aluminum windows flanking a pair of double aluminum and glass doors, which are further complemented by glazed sidelights and a fixed glazed transom. The second bay from the west on the north elevation features only a pair of solid metal doors with no glazing. The west elevation includes a single metal door positioned toward its southern end. Both the south and east elevations are solid walls without any openings.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, north (left) and west (right) elevations, view southeast, note garden center at right (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 8
The automotive center, located at the northeast
side of the parcel, a short distance from the
main store building and adjacent to 183rd Street,
is roughly rectangular in plan and one story
high with a flat roof. Mirroring design features
of the main store and garden center, the
automotive center has canted, inward-sloping
walls finished in textured stucco at the north
and south sides of the building, as well as
clipped corners. Five service bays protected by
metal roll-up doors on both the east and west
elevations are protected by slightly projecting
canopies. The north elevation contains a wide,
slightly inset panel which may indicate an area of infill. A second slightly inset panel is located at the north side of the east elevation, also a possible area of infill. The main pedestrian entrance is located at the north side of the west elevation and consists of a pair of glass and aluminum doors with glazed sidelights and transom. A low enclosure composed of concrete block walls is constructed along the south elevation.

Interior (Figures 16-31)
The main store building is two stories high with a full basement below grade. The entries feature an aluminum and glass storefront system, with two pairs of aluminum and glass doors flanked by fixed glazed sidelights and topped by glazed transoms. The interior includes suspended acoustic ceilings on both the first and second floors, illuminated by contemporary fluorescent lighting. Flooring distinguishes different zones: tile flooring defines the main walkways or aisles, while former display areas feature a variety of finishes including contemporary carpet, vinyl flooring designed to mimic wood, and vinyl tile. Exterior walls are finished with drywall over metal furring.

The ground floor has an open-plan layout with minimal floor-to-ceiling demising walls, interrupted by a regular grid of columns. On the second floor, the south side continues the open-plan layout, while the north side is divided into specialty departments and management offices. A corridor running east-west separates the offices from the specialty areas. In contrast, the basement is unfinished with exposed reinforced concrete ceilings and floors, as well as visible electrical and mechanical systems.

Circulation throughout the building consists of a central set of escalators located along the northsouth axis, enclosed by glass railings on the second floor. Adjacent to each entry on the north, south, and west elevations, there are half-turn staircases. Vertical transport is further supported by three freight elevators positioned along the east-west axis, with one on each side of the building, and an additional freight elevator and a passenger elevator within the interior of the space along the same axis.

The interior of the garden center was not available for inspection at the time of the site visit.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, auto center, west elevation, view northeast (Snow, 2024)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 9
Alterations
The Sears building at the subject property, along with the garden center and automotive center, were constructed in 1972, designed by Welton Becket and Associates. While the Sears building retains its general shape and form, notable alterations have been made to its exterior (see Attachment D:

Historic Photos 1-6). The building’s interior has been substantially altered several times since it was completed in 1972.

One of the most major exterior changes involved modifications to the entrances and panels above the entry canopies. When the building first opened, a newspaper article described the entrances as featuring “gold colored glazed rough textured ceramic tile used to highlight and identify the store entrances.”5 Another article detailed the use of a “ceramic veneer tile with a yellow-toned glaze, developed especially for Sears.”6 Historic photos show that the entire panel above the entrance canopies was originally covered in textured ceramic tile, with additional ceramic tiles lining the canopy itself. It is unclear from permit records when the tile was replaced with panels of blind glazing, but this may have occurred as part of the 2010 “exterior entrance improvements for Sears.”7 It is not known when the small, simple light fixtures were installed on exterior elevations. Historic photos also show large individual-letter signage centered on the east, west, and north elevations – all of which have since been removed. The surrounding landscape has also changed, with the current low plantings near the building differing in species and extent from those originally planted in 1972.

When the store opened, a newspaper article described: “Inside the…store, terrazzo tile will cover the most-traveled areas with islands of carpeting in certain portions. On both sales levels, the ceiling will drop to define certain sections.”8 Neither the terrazzo tile nor islands of carpeting remains. As listed in a table of all available building permits (see Attachment EX), 9 the building’s interior has
5 “Sears’ Los Cerritos Center Store Near Completion,” Independent (Long Beach, CA), April 22, 1972. 6 Terrence M. Green, “$10-Million Sears Will Make Debut,” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1972. 7 City of Cerritos, “Minor Precise Plan Bldg Permit Receipt,” Permit #19559, issued November 1, 2010. 8 Terrence M. Green, “$10-Million Sears Will Make Debut,” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1972. 9 The table of alteration permits does not include mechanical, electrical, or plumbing permits.

Sears, east (left) and north elevations, view southwest, note glazed tile above entrance canopies (source: University of Southern California Special Collections, circa 1972)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 10
undergone multiple remodels over the years. The most extensive renovation occurred in 1985, completed for an estimated cost of $2,170,000.
10 No historic fabric remains on the interior.

Property History
The buildings at the subject property were constructed in 1972 as a Sears, Roebuck & Co. (hereinafter Sears) store, marking the third phase of the Los Cerritos Center development. Heralding its opening, a newspaper article highlighted the ample parking and described the store as “ultramodern, fully air-conditioned, with a heavy emphasis on fashion.”11 It further noted that this Sears location would be the final major addition to the 95-acre Los Cerritos Regional Shopping Center. This branch was the 26th Sears store in Los Angeles and Orange County metropolitan area. 12 Designed by the architectural firm Welton Becket and Associates, the development included the main store building, an automotive center, and a garden center. While the specific architect within the firm remains unknown – several different initials appear on the original drawings – Dick Cartozian signed the original permit.13 Dick Cartozian (1933–2023) was born in Seattle, Washington, into a family of rug merchants, with his father operating Dickran O. Cartozian and Sons.14 He pursued a bachelor’s degree in architecture at the University of Southern California. After serving in the U.S. Army, he joined the architectural firm Welton Becket and Associates in the 1950s.

The original permit specified that the main store would span 248,000 square feet and cost $4,425,000. The automotive center opened first in April 1972, followed by the main store a month later.15 At the time, it was estimated that the new Sears location would generate approximately 600 jobs in the Cerritos area.16
Describing the store’s architectural design, Terrence Green of the Los Angeles Times wrote, “the Becket firm chose a battered (sloping) wall design for the two-story main store, which ‘helps break up the formality and monotony of the strictly rectangular form,’ said Charles B. McReynolds, director of Becket’s Los Angeles office. ‘The new store will appear as four basic but individual elements linked by canopied entrances which will add color and depth to the large structure.’”17
10 County of Los Angeles, Building and Safety, “Application for Building Permit,” Permit #63496, February 7, 1985. 11 “Sears’ Los Cerritos Center Store Near Completion,” Independent (Long Beach, CA), April 22, 1972. 12 “Sears, Roebuck Opens Complete Store in Cerritos,” Daily News-Post (Monrovia, CA), May 11, 1972. 13 County of Los Angeles, Building and Safety Division, “Application for Building Permit,” Permit #5625, July 12, 1971. 14 Stephanie Cartozian, “Architect Cartozian a Backgammon Champion, Humorous with a Dry Wit,” Easy Reader & Peninsula, March 26, 2023, https://easyreadernews.com/architect-cartozian-a-backgammon-championhumorous-with-a-dry-wit/. 15 “Display Ad,” Independent (Long Beach, CA), April 13, 1972. 16 Terrence M. Green, “$10-Million Sears Will Make Debut,” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1972. 17 Terrence M. Green, “$10-Million Sears Will Make Debut,” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1972.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 11
A display ad, (at left), shortly after it opened highlighted notable features, such as:
“Completely Air Conditioned
Big Wide Aisles
Modern Elevators and Escalators
Luxurious Fitting Rooms
Automotive Service Center
Over 50 Merchandising Departments
Relaxing Coffee House
Shop by Phone Service
Acres of Free Parking”18
The subject property continued to function as a Sears until it closed in 2019.

Los Cerritos Center
The Los Cerritos Center was the first major undertaking of the newly formed Los Cerritos Redevelopment Agency in 1970, with the goal of bringing sales tax revenue to the City of Cerritos and, in the process, transforming former cattle-grazing land at the intersection of 183rd Street and Gridley Road. One of the area’s first shopping malls and one of the largest on the west coast when completed, the regional shopping complex was developed under the leadership of Ernest W. Hahn, Inc., a Hawthorn-based shopping center company, in collaboration with Homart Development, Co., a subsidiary of Sears, Roebuck and Co.

The overall aesthetic of the mall was designed by the firm Burke, Kober, Nicolais, Archuleta with Ernest W. Hahn, Inc. as the general contractor as well as developer. One article described how “every facet of Los Cerritos has been carefully designed and carried out with the shopper in mind. The architecture and landscaping come together to create the delightful effect of a park.”19 Many articles highlighted the abundant parking amidst a “park-like” environment, designed by landscape architect Lawrence Moline & Associates.20 It is unclear if the parking ever exuded a park-like ambience. The exterior of the mall was designed with “Spanish architectural influence”21 finished in “soft white adobe contrasted with native field stone walls.”22 Limited signage was permitted on exterior walls, except for anchor department stores. On the interior, the design centered around three distinct courts, each adjacent to an anchor department store. The centerpiece of the mall was its central court, “dominated by a 40- 18 “Display Ad,” Independent (Long Beach, CA), May 14, 1972. 19 “Los Cerritos Center Plans Opening Sept. 13,” Artesia Valley Enterprise, September 12, 1971. Also published in Orange County Call Enterprise, September 12, 1971; Herald-Enterprise (Bellflower, CA), September 12, 1971; Norwalk Call, September 12, 1971; and Lakewood Enterprise, September 12, 1971. 20 “Park-Like Center Under Way,” Los Angeles Times, May 2, 1971. 21 “Shopping hub (& Their Looks) Here to Stay,” California Business, October 18, 1971. 22 “Los Cerritos Center Plans Opening Sept. 13,” Artesia Valley Enterprise, September 12, 1971.

Display ad, notable features in bullet point
listed in text (source: Independent (Long
Beach, CA), May 14, 1972).
sears new
lJ@S CieP?P?iG®S
store
now open
• ~Jwc-a-.1
. ........ .bl,,,
• 1-1,,,,.a....... ... talolorl
•
-~,
c--c--r- ... -- •r .. 11omu...-cs..- •r .. rn.-"--I ·•-s....c- • 0..50 .......... 0.,.- •r-.-,r.._.-
•ca,1r...,..s.m.,_.._.
• IWu,oeCA.~
•!11.,.,.n...s.-
• C,...O.-W.
. ._.,r_,--,
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 12
foot glass dome skylight above a huge yellow and red tile sunburst.”23 Among the most salient selling points for the mall was not its design or individual stores, but that it was indoors and fully air conditioned.

The mall’s development unfolded in three phases and highlighted designs from the four largest and most prominent Los Angeles-based architectural firms. The grand opening took place in September 1971 with The Broadway and J.W. Robinson’s, along with 63 mall stores. The Broadway, designed by Charles Luckman & Associates, was constructed for an estimated $4.2 million, while Robinson’s, designed by William Pereira & Associates, was constructed for an estimated $4.5 million. The second phase saw the addition of Ohrbach’s, designed by Victor Gruen & Associates, distinguished by its “sparkling burgundy tile exterior.” 24 The final phase introduced the Sears store and 22 additional mall shops. Altogether, the enclosed portion of the mall exceeded $15 million in construction costs. By the time Los Cerritos Center opened in full, it housed 124 stores and was projected to generate $80 - $100 million in annual retail sales.

Since its completion in 1971, the Los Cerritos Center has undergone four major renovations. The first significant expansion came in 1981 with the addition of a two-level Nordstrom, bringing the mall’s total size to over two million square feet. A major renovation in 1994 brought substantial changes to the mall’s interior, including the removal of the original stained-glass skylights that had been a defining architectural feature. In 2008, the former Robinson’s-May building was demolished.

Other notable transformations include the conversion of the former Ohrbach’s, which had become Mervyn’s in 1987, into a Forever 21 in 2010. More recently, Sears closed in 2019. 23 “Los Cerritos Center Plans Opening Sept. 13,” Artesia Valley Enterprise, September 12, 1971. 24 Larry Lynch, “New Stores to Open at Los Cerritos Center,” Independent (Long Beach, CA), March 12, 1972.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 13
V. Historic Context
Neighborhood Development: History of Cerritos
Cerritos, originally incorporated as the “City of Dairy Valley” on April 24, 1956, was founded as an agricultural community dedicated primarily to dairy farming and poultry production. It became a California chartered city on February 17, 1959. The city’s history is closely intertwined with that of its neighboring city, Artesia, which was established in 1875. Artesia became a stop along the interurban railway line to Santa Ana, which opened in 1906. The Pacific Electric Railway fully acquired the line in 1911, with trains running until 1953 before transitioning to coach service and ultimately ending in 1958.25
The San Gabriel River runs a short distance to the west of the subject property and was prone to frequent flooding, especially during major storms. A significant flood in 1938 led to the channelization of the southern portion of the river by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers around 1965.
26 Frequent flooding remained a problem, leading to the construction of a drainage ditch along Gridley Road from 183rd Street to South Street.

Artesia became a major dairy hub in the 1930s, attracting Dutch and Portuguese immigrants who helped establish the city as one of the nation’s largest dairy capitals. Local dairy farms averaged around 10 acres and housed about 100 cows each. By the 1940s, the dairy industry in the area was producing half a million gallons of milk per month, generating an annual profit of $61 million.27 World War II brought significant changes to the region with the opening of the Douglas Aircraft Company in 1941 in Long Beach. This led to rapid population growth and a housing boom in the surrounding communities. By 1955, Artesia faced a push to incorporate and transition to nonagricultural development. Many dairy and poultry farm owners opposed this shift and instead established Dairy Valley as a city dedicated to agriculture. At its founding, Dairy Valley was home to 3,500 people, 32,000 cows, 83,000 chickens, 9,600 turkeys, and 105 acres of row crops.28 By 1962, over half of the city’s original dairies had disappeared, displaced in part by the construction of the I-605 and State Route 91 freeways. On July 1, 1966, the segment of the I-605 freeway adjacent to the future site of Los Cerritos Center opened. Efforts to rezone the city for residential development began in 1963, but an initial ballot measure to do so was defeated, preserving its agricultural character. Shortly thereafter, by June 1963, Los Angeles County’s chief dairy inspector reported in The Daily Breeze that “most dairy herds in Los Angeles are now concentrated in Dairy Valley and that, in the past 10 years, their number has decreased from approximately 600 to approximately 400.”29
Recognizing the inevitable shift toward urbanization, city leaders developed a master plan in 1964 and secured $3 million in municipal bonds to establish a new water system. In 1965, a county reappraisal doubled property values, making dairy farming increasingly expensive. In March of that 25 Laurence R. Veysey, A History of the Rail Passenger Service Operated by the Pacific Electric Railway Company Since 1911, (Los Angeles: Interurbans, 1958), 76-77.

Historical U.S. Geological Maps suggest the Artesia station stop was located on or near Pioneer Boulevard, approximately 0.5 miles from the subject property. 26 “Pack Awarded for San Gabriel River Project,” Press Telegram, March 17, 1965. 27 Cerritos Library, “Local History,” https://library.cerritos.gov/about-the-library/local-history/. 28 Cerritos Library, “Local History,” https://library.cerritos.gov/about-the-library/local-history/. 29 “Dairy Owners Stave Off Date for Removal of Herd,” The Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA), June 19, 1963.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 14
year, a vote to rezone from agricultural to residential use was approved by 57% of the electorate. In 1967, the city officially changed its name to Cerritos.

Although the mayor at the time of rezoning assured residents that dairies would remain “for 20 years or more,”30 the transition happened much faster. Even before the vote, ranches were being advertised for sale,31 and developers were positioning themselves for expansion. One such developer, Robert C. Kay, vice president of Stardust Lands, Inc., won a seat on the city council while his company owned 140 acres in the city, anticipating imminent housing development.32 Dairy Valley underwent a rapid transformation, with the population surging from 3,508 in 1960, to 15,858 in 1970, to 37,748 residents in a special census in 1972. 33 By 1986, 95% of the city was built out.

The Cerritos Redevelopment Agency was established in November 1970 and immediately created the Cerritos Redevelopment Project Area under Ordinance No. 290, which included the subject property. The agency’s primary objective was “to remedy and alleviate blighted conditions associated with undeveloped and unproductive vacant land, inadequate street and circulation systems, unsuitable land mixes, inadequate or the total lack of public street improvements and the existence of substandard and incompatible uses and structures.”34 The Redevelopment Agency took authority over 820 acres and agreed to invest $30 million for a large retail center and “auto mall.”35 Sears, Roebuck and Company History
The following history of Sears, Roebuck and Company is excerpted from the National Register nomination for the Sears, Roebuck and Company Mail-Order Warehouse and Retail Store in Minneapolis, MN:36
Sears, Roebuck and Company became the world’s largest retailer by the 1960s. When Sears built its Minneapolis facility, however, the company was just diversifying into retailing after establishing a successful mail-order operation. This evolution provides the context for evaluating the significance of the Minneapolis property.

The company was launched in North Redwood, Minnesota, by Richard Warren Sears, who managed the local railroad and express offices. In 1886, when a local jeweler refused a shipment of watches that Sears had delivered, the young 30 Ralph McClurg, “Dairy Valley Approves Residential Land Use,” Press-Telegram (Long Beach, CA), March 3, 1965. 31 “Classified Ad,” Press-Telegram (Long Beach), February 23, 1965. 32 Ralph McClurg, “Dairy Valley Approves Residential Land Use,” Press-Telegram (Long Beach, CA), March 3, 1965. 33 U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of population, 1960, Volume 1, (Washington, D.C. : U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1963); U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Population: 1970, Vol, I, Characteristics of the Population, Part 6, CaliforniaSection 1, (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973); City of Cerritos, Cerritos at 50; Celebrating Our Past and Our Future, (Virginia Beach, VA: The Donning Company Publishers, 2006), 78. 34 Cerritos General Plan, Land Use Element, LU-26. 35 City of Cerritos, Cerritos at 50; Celebrating Our Past and Our Future, (Virginia Beach, VA: The Donning Company Publishers, 2006), 79. 36 Elizabeth A. Gales and Charlene K. Roise, Hess, Roise and Company, “Sears, Roebuck and Company MailOrder Warehouse and Retail Store: National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,” listed July 29, 2005.

There are numerous buildings associated with Sears, Roebuck and Company that are listed in the National Register throughout the country, including the Mail Order Building located at 2650 East Olympic Boulevard in Los Angeles, CA. The Sears, Roebuck and Company Complex in Chicago, IL is listed as a National Historic Landmark. The history of the company is excerpted from this nomination for its clarity and comprehension.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 15
entrepreneur seized the opportunity and sold the watches himself Sears began regularly purchasing watches for retail sale. The R. W. Sears Watch Company moved first to Minneapolis and then, early in 1887, to Chicago. Sears searched for a watchmaker to handle repairs, hiring Alvah Curtis Roebuck from Indiana as his partner.

Sears sold the company in 1889, but within a year was back in Minneapolis, operating a watch business called the Warren Company from the sixth floor of the Globe Building. Sears rehired Roebuck, and by 1890 had about twenty employees.

The company name was changed to A. C. Roebuck by 1891, and to Sears, Roebuck and Company two years later. Fascinated by advertising and sales pitches that appealed to farmers, Richard Sears created an 80-page catalog filled with watches and jewelry, including pages of testimonials from satisfied customers. The firm soon expanded its offerings: the 322-page catalogue issued in 1894 included silverware, firearms and ammunition, sewing machines, bicycles, boys’ and men’s clothing, musical instruments, and sports equipment. Payment was cash-on-delivery.

In building the company, Richard Sears took advantage of contemporary business trends, particularly the growth of consumer capitalism as an emerging mainstay of the American economy. The Industrial Revolution and the urbanization of the population produced a substantial middle class for the first time in the nation’s history. Characterized by disposable income and unprecedented leisure time, the American consumer was born. Entrepreneurs responded with a landslide of newly improved goods, marketed with increasing sophistication. Mail-order businesses, almost 1,200 in number by the end of the nineteenth century, were important players in the new commercialism.

Sears, Roebuck and Company quickly distinguished itself from the competition. A branch office established in Chicago in late 1893 soon surpassed the Minneapolis location, prompting the company to relocate its headquarters to a five-story building on West Adams Street in Chicago in January 1895. Roebuck sold his interest in the company within the year, and Chicago businessman Aaron E. Nusbaum and his brother-in-law, Julius Rosenwald, became equal partners. It was Rosenwald, a moderately successful clothing merchant, whose leadership propelled Sears, Roebuck and Company into prominence in the early twentieth century. Rosenwald continued to run the company after Nusbaum cashed out in 1901 and Richard Sears retired in 1909.

Rosenwald built the giant $5 million Sears headquarters on Homan Avenue, five miles west of downtown Chicago, in 1905-1906. Sears became a public company in 1906 and prospered, with sales volume increasing from $10 million in 1900 to $50 million in 1907 and $235 million by 1920. Under Rosenwald’s leadership, the company first established branch mail-order plants in Dallas in 1906, Seattle in 1910, and Philadelphia in 1920.

In 1924 Rosenwald hired General Robert E. Wood, whose military experience in mass procurements and large-scale organization guided the expansion of Sears over the next four decades. Wood recognized the shift in the American population, Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 16
predominantly urban for the first time in 1920, and the rising number of automobile registrations, trends that significantly impacted the mail-order business and the location of retail stores. As vice president for factories and retail stores. Wood not only built additional mail-order warehouses, but also developed the retail stores that formed the basis of Sears’s future. He established a policy of siting retail stores outside of downtown business districts, where the company could purchase adequate land for convenient customer parking. Wood served as president of the firm from 1928 until his retirement in 1954, continuing as chairman of the board for another decade.

The first Sears retail outlet opened in the Chicago mail-order plant in 1925, quickly followed by seven more stores that year. Four—Seattle, Dallas, Philadelphia, and Kansas City—were located in mail-order plants. In the first year of operation, retail store sales totaled $11 million, about 4.5 percent of the company’s gross sales. A year later, with the addition of only one retail store in a mail-order plant in Atlanta, the combined retail sales doubled in dollar volume and achieved 8.5 percent of the company’s sales, a trend that continued for the next fifteen years.

Sears built mail-order plants in Memphis and Los Angles in 1926 and five more freestanding retail stores in 1927, bringing the number of retail stores to twenty-seven. In 1928…Sears launched more than six times as many stores as in the previous three years combined…The number of retail stores grew to 192 with sales of over $107 million, approximately 30 percent of the company’s gross, a massive growth for a division that had not even existed four years earlier.

By 1964, Sears had overtaken the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company (A & P) grocery chain as the world’s largest retailer. In 1973, Sears’s 837 retail stores, 12 catalog plants, and 2,647 catalog and telephone sales offices reported total sales of almost $11 billion. At that time, catalog sales accounted for only 22 percent of Sears’s total business. In 1974, Sears moved its headquarters to the one hundredstory Sears Tower at 233 South Wacker Drive in downtown Chicago.

Sears began losing market share by the mid-1970s and recovered slowly after a recession during that period. As America shifted from a manufacturing to a service economy. Sears diversified. The company purchased Allstate Insurance and Homart Development Corporation (for its shopping center projects) in the 1950s, and acquired investment house Dean Witter Reynolds and Coldwell Banker, the nation’s largest real estate firm, in 1981. The scale of the company’s restructuring in the late twentieth century was symbolized by the termination of its hallmark catalog in the 1990s and by relocation of its headquarters from the landmark skyscraper in downtown Chicago to suburban Hoffman Estates, Illinois.

Despite its diversification, the company continued to decline and was bought by KMart in 2005.

According to a New York Times article, Sears downward spiral was caused by a failure to innovate and Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 17
the company filed for bankruptcy in 2018.
37 In an effort to stabilize finances, the subject property, along with more than 142 other store locations, were closed in the beginning of 2019. 38 Architect: Welton Becket and Associates
By the time Welton Becket died at the age of 66 in 1969, he had created one of the nation’s largest architecture firms with its headquarters in Los Angeles and offices in San Francisco, New York, Houston, and Chicago. The firm designed a wide range of buildings and master plans that spanned residential, commercial, and institutional. His obituary called him “one of the giants of architecture.”39
Born in Seattle, Washington, Becket received his architectural training from the University of Washington and attended the Ecole de Beaux Arts in Paris before moving to Los Angeles in 1931.

In 1933, he partnered with an established Los Angeles architect, Charles F. Plummer and a classmate from the University of Washington, Walter Wurdeman. The firm primarily designed houses for movie stars but are best known for their award-winning Streamline Moderne design of the Pan Pacific Auditorium in 1935 (not extant). After Plummer died in 1939, the firm incorporated as Wurdeman and Becket.

By the time the United States entered World War II, Welton Becket had developed his theory of “Total Design,” which referred to having control over all “requirements demanded of an architectural problem: preliminary research, site selection, economic analysis, traffic surveys, and the actual design of the building or complex of buildings.”40 To achieve the Total Design, the firm employed not only architects, but mechanical and electrical engineers, landscape architects, and interior designers. Walter Wurdeman died in 1948 and the firm was renamed Welton Becket and Associates.

Among the earliest buildings constructed using the Total Design philosophy was Bullock’s in Pasadena (401 S. Lake Ave., 1947), which led the way for the post-World War II trend of suburban department stores, and the General Petroleum building (731-735 Wilshire Blvd., 1947), which helped “establish the principle of lightweight construction.”41 Welton Becket and Associates is responsible for the design of many, iconic Los Angeles buildings as varied as the Capitol Records Building (1955), the Cinerama Dome (1963), the master plan for Century City (1963), the Music Center (1964-1967), the master plan as well as numerous buildings for University of California Los Angeles (1948-1965) as well as the master plan for Panorama City (1947).

Architectural historian and architect Alan Hess writes that Becket’s “buildings captured so much of the personality of mid-century LA, they served as templates for so many other buildings, his pioneering planning ideas were so influential, that they established a norm.”42 However, Hess also 37 Michael Corkery, “Sears, the Original Everything Store, Files for Bankruptcy,” New York Times, October 14, 2018. 38 Nathan Bomey and Kelly Tyko, “Sears Store Closing List: 142 More Sears, Kmart Locations Closing in Chapter 11 Bankruptcy,” USA Today, October 15, 2018. 39 Ray Herbert, “Welton Becket, Noted Architect, Dies at 66,” Los Angeles Times, January 18, 1969, 21. 40 “Parker Center, Historic American Landscape Survey,” prepared for the Bureau of Engineering, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles, October 2005, 11. 41 Ray Herbert, “Welton Becket, Noted Architect, Dies at 66,” Los Angeles Times, January 18, 1969, 21. 42 Alan Hess, “Introduction,” Built By Becket; 100 Centennial Celebration, (Los Angeles: Modern Committee of the Los Angeles Conservancy, 2002).

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 18
acknowledged that “with a prolific output and an enormous staff…not all the office’s work was…fresh or innovative.”43
After Welton Becket’s death in 1969, ownership and control of the firm was taken over by his nephew, MacDonald Becket. While retaining the Total Design philosophy, as well as corporate structure of the firm, MacDonald Becket “geared the firm toward a more national posture” with a focus on “massive building complexes, [that] require a large, national, full-service architectural and engineering firm.”44 MacDonald Becket graduated from University of Southern California School of Architecture in 1952 and started working for his uncle while still in school, holding several positions within the firm. His most notable work, shortly after joining the firm, was coordinating the master plan for Century City. MacDonald Becket was Elected to the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1974. The firm was acquired by Ellerbe Incorporated in 1988 and became Ellerbe Becket.45 While some senior staff continued to work at the new firm, MacDonald Becket does not appear to have stayed on.46 He died in 2017.47 It is unclear how involved MacDonald Becket was in design after becoming CEO of the company in 1969. Mirroring the corporate architecture produced by the firm, the structure of the firm was also corporate. The Los Angeles office expanded in the early 1970s to 250, while the firm had “more than 550,” making it one of the largest architecture firm in the country. 48 William Dudley Hunt, Jr.,
in his treatise on Welton Becket and Associates entitled, Total Design; Architecture of Welton Becket and Associates, published in 1972, described the organization of the company as a whole as well as each of the five offices. As noted by Hunt, each office was “headed by a director, who is a member of the firm’s Corporate Executive Committee…[who] practices, in a sense, as if he were the sole principal of an individual architectural office.”49 Company policy held that the firm not disclose who had responsibility for a particular design, however Maynard Woodard served as “senior Vice President and Corporate Director of Design” from 1945 through 1971 and “functioned in the ex officio role of chief designer for all design.”50 Hunt also noted that “there exists no real WB&A style…it is probably inevitable that the overall quality of all of the projects will be good but not great. Very seldom if ever will a tour de force be produced.”51
Welton Becket and Associates designed several other mall and department stores at the same time as the subject property including the Emporium Department Store in San Bruno where the “open glass rail escalators” were “describe[d] as a ‘now’ look.”52 The firm was also responsible for designs of Best’s Apparel Company store at the Northgate Shopping Center in Seattle, WA (circa 1970), 43 Alan Hess, “Built By Becket,” L.A. Forum for Architecture and Urban Design, Issue 7: Late Moderns, 2015. 44 “Century City Profile: MacDonald Becket, A.I.A., Jet-Age Architect,” Century City Newsletter, Vol. 2, Num. 3, March 1971.

MacDonald Becket was on the board of directors for the Century City Chamber of Commerce. 45 “Ellerbe, Welton merger complete,” Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN), May 14, 1988. 46 Leon Whitson, “Ellerbe Becket President Sees Need for U.S. Architects to Become Bigger,” Los Angeles Times, June 19, 1988. 47 USC School of Architecture staff, “In Memoriam: architect MacDonald Becket, 89,” January 7, 2017, https://arch.usc.edu/news/in-memoriam-architect-macdonald-becket-89. 48 “Becket & Associates Expands LA Office,” Outlook (Santa Monica, CA), November 12, 1971. 49 William Dudley Hunt, Jr., Total Design; Architecture of Welton Becket and Associates, (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1972), 39. 50 Hunt, 48.
51 Hunt, 47.
52 “Emporium Announces July ’72 Opening of Northridge Store,” Salinas Californian, December 16, 1971.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 19
Worcester, MA Galleria Mall (1971)53, and White Plains Mall in White Plains, NY (1971).54 Welton Becket and Associates designed a handful of Bullocks’ Department Stores in the early 1970s, including Bullock’s Standford in Palo Alto (1972), Bullock’s Walnut Creek (1973), Bullock’s South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa (1974), Bullock’s Fashion Island in Newport Beach (1974), and Bullock’s West Covina (1975). While all of these store shared design qualities such as massive, windowless walls, the subject property most closely resembles Bullock’s Department Store at Northridge Fashion Center which opened in 1971. The Northridge store clearly influenced the massing and form of the Sear’s store at the subject property, which started construction later that same year. The two buildings share a similar massive form and canted walls while Bullock’s Northridge had “two freeform pyramidal columns at the entrance”55 Bullock’s Northridge was written about extensively in trade magazines and journals, as well as more popular publications. Architectural Forum in December 1971 notes “Bullock’s challenges ‘the static perpendicular and parallel lines’ of department store design…and uses pyramids for ‘dynamic power.’”56 In contrast, there was little critical attention in architectural periodicals of the Sears store at the subject property.

Architectural Design: Late Modern
With its massive, canted walls, geometric volumes, and lack of ornamentation including fenestration, the Los Cerritos Sears building is an example of Late Modern architectural style. While there has been little scholarly attention paid to the style, specifically its southern California varieties, what has been written on it has primarily focused on large, corporate office buildings. Charles Jenks, in his 1980 book on the subject simply titled Late-Modern Architecture, defines the style as “tak[ing] the ideas and forms of the Modern Movement to an extreme, exaggerating the structure and technological image of the building in its attempt to provide amusement, or aesthetic pleasure.”57 The style is contrasted with the simple forms of Modernism, as well as historical reference of Post-Modernism.

Alexandra Lang, in her essay on why Late Modern architecture is worthy of more critical attention, notes that “Late Modernism is a style without theory, practiced by architects who were trying to build their way out of the diminishing returns of Miesian copies.”58 Kazys Varnelis, making a case for Late Modernism in Los Angeles, writes that even though Late Modernism “worked to give physical form to big business and big government” the style became prevalent throughout southern California during this era, one in which “the Southern California landscape was reshaped more thoroughly…than during any previous or subsequent decades.”59 Late Modern architecture was popularly used in large-scale commercial and civic buildings. The style displayed many different forms, both focused on structure and glass skins as well as sculptural forms, which were described in an exhibit at the Museum of Modern Art in 1980 entitled, “Transformations in modern architecture.” The variety of forms taken by buildings designed in a Late Modern style reflected a new, younger generation of architects that succeeded their teachers and mentors who most often designed traditional Modern buildings, “signal[ing] a renewed 53 “City News: Worcester, MA has Downtown ‘Galleria,” Journal of Housing, September 1971. 54 Carter Horsley, “Church Acquires 1897 Landmark,” New York Times, June 27, 1971. 55 “Unique Integrated Ceiling System for Store,” American Journal of Building Design, December 1971. 56 “Photo standalone,” Architectural Forum, December 1971. 57 Charles Jenks, Late-Modern Architecture, (New York: Rizzoli, 1980), 8. 58 Alexandra Lange, “What is Late Modernism?” Curbed, January 5, 2017, https://www.curbed.com/2017/1/5/14165394/late-modernism-architecture-alexandra-lange. 59 Kazys Varnelis, “Embracing Late Modern,” L.A. Forum for Architecture and Urban Design, Issue 7: Late Moderns, 2015.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 20
experimentation.”60 This experimentation took forms as varied as slick mirror-glazed towers to sculptural reinforced concrete buildings.
60 Emily Bills, Wayne Thom Photographing the Late Modern, (New York: The Monacelli Press, 2020), 10.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 21
VI. Historic Resource Assessment
Individual Eligibility
Because eligibility criteria for National and California Registers align, the following evaluation considers eligibility under each of the criteria at federal and state levels under a single heading. • Criterion A/1: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history and cultural heritage.

The subject property is not individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers for a significant historic or cultural association. The Sears store, including its garden and automotive centers, has not played a significant role in the broad patterns of our history or cultural heritage.

Built in 1972 during Sears’ peak market dominance, it was one of 837 retail locations nationwide and the 26th Sears store in Los Angeles and Orange County metropolitan area. The Sears store at Los Cerritos Center does not stand out as particularly important or notable. Throughout its 47 years of operation, no significant events were recorded. Additionally, while Los Cerritos Center became a popular local gathering place, the store was merely one of four department stores within the mall.

Therefore, the subject property is not eligible under criterion A/1. • Criterion B/2: Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

The subject property is not individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers for an association with an important individual. In fact, no individuals are closely associated with the subject property. While there were many people who worked at the store over the years, including management, no individuals are highlighted in newspaper articles. Therefore, the subject property is not eligible under criterion B/2.
• Criterion C/3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual or possesses high artistic values.

The subject property is not individually eligible for listing in the National or California Registers based on its architectural design. The main Sears building, along with the garden and automotive centers, while an example of Late Modern architectural style, is not a distinctive example of the style nor does it possess high artistic values. As previously noted, this style was widely used in large-scale commercial projects throughout the 1970s. The main store building features inward sloping, canted exterior walls that faintly echo the Egyptian Revival style. However, the design of the subject property appears to have been copied from that of Bullock’s Northridge store, designed earlier the same year by Welton Becket and Associates. While Bullock’s Northridge store received much press and accolades, the subject property was largely overlooked, receiving little recognition beyond mentions of the Los Cerritos Center mall’s completion. At Bullock’s Northridge, pyramidal forms helped break up the building’s rectangular mass and were a major part of the recognition afforded to that building. In contrast, the subject property’s canted exterior walls, intended to evoke an Egyptian pyramid, only accentuate its massive, rectangular form. Furthermore, removal of the textured ceramic tile above the canopies – once the building’s only ornamentation – further diminishes its architectural interest.

Additionally, the main Sears building, designed by the architectural firm Welton Becket and Associates, is not considered among the firm’s significant works. Welton Becket, the firm’s founder and a notable Los Angeles architect, passed away in 1969. Following his death, leadership transitioned to his nephew, MacDonald Becket, who expanded the firm into one of the largest in the Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 22
country, with over 550 employees across multiple offices. The firm had a policy of not attributing specific designs to individual architects, and with multiple initials on the original drawings and another name listed on the building permit, the designer of the Sears building is unknown. Under MacDonald Becket’s leadership, the firm focused primarily on large commercial and civic buildings, nearly all in the Late Modern style. Around the same time as the Sears store, the firm also designed several other malls and department stores across the country. The subject property is neither a distinctive design expression for the firm nor a unique example of its building type. Therefore, the subject property is not eligible under criterion C/3.
• Criterion D/4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criterion D/4 typically applies to archaeological properties with the potential to yield important information about prehistory or history. Historic photographs indicate that prior to the development of Los Cerritos Center, the subject property was used for agriculture. However, given the property’s proximity to the San Gabriel River, potential connections to Native American tribes remain unknown. Evaluation of archaeological resources is beyond the scope of this report.

Historic District Eligibility
The subject property is not located within any existing or pending historic district. Los Cerritos Center mall is not eligible as a potential historic district. From the outset, the mall and anchor stores were all designed by different architectural firms resulting in a lack of a cohesive design. In addition, the mall has had four major renovations, with demolition of original buildings and construction of new ones. Some of its most notable design features, including the original stained-glass skylights, have also been removed. In addition to it not appearing as it did when it was completed, as a regional shopping mall, Los Cerritos Center has not been shown to be a significant example of the property type. Construction of shopping malls became prevalent in the 1960s and 1970s and Los Cerritos Center took the popular form of a one-story suburban development surrounded by abundant parking. As a grouping, Los Cerritos Center does not appear eligible for listing in the National or California Registers. Therefore, there does not appear to be any potential historic district to which the subject property could contribute.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 23
VII. Conclusion
The history of the subject property, as well as its alterations, was researched and evaluated in this report. This report concludes that the main Sears store, as well as the garden and automotive centers, are not eligible for listing in the National or California Registers. Furthermore, as a very common example of a suburban mall, Los Cerritos Center is not eligible as a potential historic district. Therefore, there does not appear to be any historic district to which the subject property would contribute. The subject property, therefore, does not qualify as an historical resource under CEQA.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 24
VIII. Bibliography
Books
Bills, Emily. Wayne Thom Photographing the Late Modern. New York: The Monacelli Press, 2020.

City of Cerritos. Cerritos at 50; Celebrating Our Past and Our Future. Virginia Beach, VA: The Donning Company Publishers, 2006.

Gane, John F. A.I.A. American Architects Directory, 3rd Edition, 1970 New York: R.R. Bowker Company, 1970.

Hess, Alan. “Introduction,” Built By Becket; 100 Centennial Celebration. Los Angeles: Modern Committee of the Los Angeles Conservancy, 2002.

Hunt, William Dudley Jr. Total Design; Architecture of Welton Becket and Associates. New York: McGrawHill Book Co., 1972.

Jenks, Charles. Late-Modern Architecture. New York: Rizzoli, 1980.

Veysey, Laurence R. A History of the Rail Passenger Service Operated by the Pacific Electric Railway Company Since 1911. Los Angeles: Interurbans, 1958.

City, County, and Federal Records
City of Cerritos. Cerritos General Plan, Land Use Element, adopted January 2024.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census of population, 1960, Volume 1. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1963.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Census of Population: 1970, Vol, I, Characteristics of the Population, Part 6, California-Section 1. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973.

Newspaper and Journal Articles
“$10-Million Sears Will Make Debut.” Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1972. “AIA Fellows.” Los Angeles Times, April 20, 1980.
“Becket & Associates Expands LA Office.” Outlook (Santa Monica, CA), November 12, 1971.

Bomey, Nathan and Kelly Tyko. “Sears Store Closing List: 142 More Sears, Kmart Locations Closing in Chapter 11 Bankruptcy.” USA Today, October 15, 2018.

Cartozian, Stephanie. “Architect Cartozian a Backgammon Champion, Humorous with a Dry Wit.” Easy Reader & Peninsula, March 26, 2023. https://easyreadernews.com/architect-cartozian-abackgammon-champion-humorous-with-a-dry-wit/. “Century City Profile: MacDonald Becket, A.I.A., Jet-Age Architect.” Century City Newsletter, Vol. 2, Num. 3, March 1971.

Chelin, Pamela. “The Inside Story.” Los Angeles Times, September 21, 2023. “City News: Worcester, MA has Downtown ‘Galleria.” Journal of Housing, September 1971. “Classified Ad.” Press-Telegram (Long Beach), February 23, 1965.

Corkery, Michael. “Sears, the Original Everything Store, Files for Bankruptcy.” New York Times, October 14, 2018.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 25
“Dairy Owners Stave Off Date for Removal of Herd.” The Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA), June 19, 1963.
“Display Ad.” Independent (Long Beach, CA), April 13, 1972. “Display Ad.” Independent (Long Beach, CA), May 14, 1972. “Ellerbe, Welton merger complete.” Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN), May 14, 1988. “Emporium Announces July ’72 Opening of Northridge Store.” Salinas Californian, December 16, 1971.

Herbert, Ray. “Welton Becket, Noted Architect, Dies at 66.” Los Angeles Times, January 18, 1969, 21.

Hess, Alan. “Built By Becket.” L.A. Forum for Architecture and Urban Design, Issue 7: Late Moderns, 2015.

Horsley, Carter. “Church Acquires 1897 Landmark.” New York Times, June 27, 1971.

Lenox, Barbara. “Guys and Galleys: James A. Meares.” Los Angeles Times, January 7, 1973. “Lives Remembered: Alan Rosen.” The Desert Sun (Palm Springs, CA), May 3, 2007. “Los Cerritos Center Plans Opening Sept. 13.” Artesia Valley Enterprise, September 12, 1971.

Lynch, Larry. “New Stores to Open at Los Cerritos Center.” Independent (Long Beach, CA), March 12, 1972.

McClurg, Ralph. “Dairy Valley Approves Residential Land Use.” Press-Telegram (Long Beach, CA), March 3, 1965.
“Pack Awarded for San Gabriel River Project.” Press Telegram, March 17, 1965. “Park-Like Center Under Way.” Los Angeles Times, May 2, 1971. “Photo standalone.” Architectural Forum, December 1971. “Sears’ Los Cerritos Center Store Near Completion.” Independent (Long Beach, CA), April 22, 1972. “Sears, Roebuck Opens Complete Store in Cerritos.” Daily News-Post (Monrovia, CA), May 11, 1972. “Shopping hub (& Their Looks) Here to Stay.” California Business, October 18, 1971. “Unique Integrated Ceiling System for Store.” American Journal of Building Design, December 1971.

Varnelis, Kazys. “Embracing Late Modern.” L.A. Forum for Architecture and Urban Design, Issue 7:

Late Moderns, 2015.

Whitson, Leon. “Ellerbe Becket President Sees Need for U.S. Architects to Become Bigger.,” Los Angeles Times, June 19, 1988.

Reports
Elizabeth A. Gales and Charlene K. Roise, Hess, Roise and Company. “Sears, Roebuck and Company Mail-Order Warehouse and Retail Store: National Register of Historic Places Registration Form,” listed July 29, 2005.
“Parker Center, Historic American Landscape Survey.” Prepared for the Bureau of Engineering, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles, October 2005.

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA 26
Websites
Cerritos Library. “Local History.” https://library.cerritos.gov/about-the-library/local-history/.

Lange, Alexandra. “What is Late Modernism?” Curbed, January 5, 2017, https://www.curbed.com/2017/1/5/14165394/late-modernism-architecture-alexandralange.

USC School of Architecture staff. “In Memoriam: architect MacDonald Becket, 89.” January 7, 2017, https://arch.usc.edu/news/in-memoriam-architect-macdonald-becket-89.

Attachment A: Current Maps and Aerials
Attachment A: Current Maps and Aerials
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Map 1: Current aerial, subject property circled (source: Google, 2025) N
Attachment A: Current Maps and Aerials
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Map 2: Current aerial zoomed in, subject property highlighted (source: Google, 2025) N
Attachment A: Current Maps and Aerials
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Map 3: Assessor parcel map, subject property highlighted (source: Los Angeles County Assessor, 2025) 7038 14 P. A. TRA
7037-8 197◄
SHEET
l0 15
lllli
t LINE LENGTH
LI s11·50'2r.v a1u2
l2 N11"011'3(-W 30,25
L3 s1r!o0'29'W sur LA N 11•09'3'-W 100.1•

1..5 N7r50'2e"E
NLNS0.1S-'CE112
[ NE1/"' SW1/4 SEC 36
____ --r=--=·=== 136.~
Da1ef>rinted 12/1CL'201◄2 33 <19PM
Date Saved: 12/10f2014 223:30 PM
0 DETAIL

NO SCALE

REVISED
811130206
2004071306001001 -28
2009100105002001 -28
2009100105002002-28
2Dl412Z)OZ00,00/-Z0
FR T 3 S APPROA
T4S
\

SEARCH NO OFFICE OF THE ASSESSOR

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
COPYRIGHT02002
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 1: 1928 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center circled (source:

University of California Santa Barbara)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 2: Detail of previous 1928 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center highlighted (source: University of California Santa Barbara) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 3: 1938 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center circled (source:

University of California Santa Barbara)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 4: Detail of previous 1938 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center highlighted (source: University of California Santa Barbara) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 5: 1953 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center circled (source:

University of California Santa Barbara)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 6: Detail of previous 1953 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center highlighted (source: University of California Santa Barbara) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 7: 1962 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center circled (source:

University of California Santa Barbara)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 8: Detail of previous 1962 historic aerial photograph, approximate location of future Los Cerritos Center highlighted (source: University of California Santa Barbara) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment B: Historic Aerials
Historic Aerial 9: 1976 historic aerial photograph, Los Cerritos Center highlighted, Sear store circled (source: University of California Santa Barbara) Attachment C: Contemporary Photos
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 1: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, east elevation, view west (Snow, 2024) Figure 2: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, east (left) and north elevations, view southwest (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 3: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, north (left) and west (right) elevations, view southeast (Snow, 2024) Figure 4: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, east elevation and north elevation of garden center (right), view southeast (Snow, 2024)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 5: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, north elevation of garden center, view south (Snow, 2024) Figure 6: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, detail of trellis between main building (left) and garden center (right), view south (Snow, 2024)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 7: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, entrance at west elevation, view east (Snow, 2024) Figure 8: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, west and south elevations of garden center and west elevation of main building beyond, view northeast (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 9: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, loading dock at west elevation, view east (Snow, 2024) Figure 10: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, west (left) and south (right) elevations, view northeast (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 11: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, south elevation inside mall, view northwest (Snow, 2024) Figure 12: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, south elevation, view northwest (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 13: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, south elevation, view northeast (Snow, 2024) Figure 14: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, south elevation (left) and east elevation (center), view northwest (Snow, 2024)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 15: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, auto center, west elevation, view northeast (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 16: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, basement (Snow, 2024) Figure 17: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, basement , view east from loading dock (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 18: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, first floor, view toward entry (Snow, 2024) Figure 19: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, first floor, note various floor materials and contemporary suspended ceiling (Snow, 2024)
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 20: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, first floor (Snow, 2024) Figure 21: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, first floor , note escalators at center of photo (Snow, 2024) I
! 1
L I \
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 22: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, second floor at escalators (Snow, 2024) Figure 23: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, second floor, view toward escalators (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 24: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, second floor, note open-plan layout (Snow, 2024) Figure 25: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, second floor, note entrance to specialty departments (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 26: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, typical fitting rooms, note contemporary materials (Snow, 2024) Figure 27: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, corridor separating offices from specialty departments (Snow, 2024) 1, 1 (/ --.....

Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 28: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, freight elevator at basement (Snow, 2024) Figure 29: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, passenger elevator at second floor (Snow, 2024) Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Attachment C: Contemporary Photographs
Figure 30: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, typical half-turn stair (Snow, 2024) Figure 31: Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, typical stair (Snow, 2024) Attachment D: Historic Photos
Attachment D: Historic Photos
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Historic Photo 1: Sears, rendering of proposed building before construction, north (left) and west (right) elevations, view southeast (source: Long Beach Independent, May 14, 1972) Historic Photo 2: Sears, rendering of proposed building before construction, north (left) and west (right) elevations, view southeast (source: University of California Los Angeles Special Collections , circa 1971) Attachment D: Historic Photos
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Historic Photo 3: Sears, east (left) and north elevations, view southwest (source: University of California Los Angeles Special Collections, circa 1972)
Historic Photo 4: Sears, east elevation, view southwest, note tile above entry canopies (source: University of California Los Angeles Special Collections, circa 1972) Attachment D: Historic Photos
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Historic Photo 5: Sears, east elevations, view northwest (source: University of California Los Angeles Special Collections, circa 1972) Attachment D: Historic Photos
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Historic Photo 6: Sears, south elevation within mall, view north (source: Los Cerritos Patch, December 30, 2011) Attachment E: Table of Permits
Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
5/10/1971 LACo 0153 Foundation only - ref to P.C.
#0142 - 5/10/71
$419,300 Welton Becket
& Associates
Ernest J Hahn Inc. Sears Roebuck
and Company
7/14/71
7/10/84 coo
LACo 5663
7128 coo
Two story, 248,000 sq. ft.
building for retail sales and
storage
[valuation
scratched out]
Welton Becket,
10000 Santa
Monica, Los
Angeles 90025
Not listed Sears Roebuck,
2650 E.

Olympic Blvd.,
Los Angeles
90054
1/26/72 LACo 2353 Main building signs (4 signs) $11,000 Welton Becket Heath & Co. Sears 7/23/79 4527A
0518-79
Wall metal studs / drywall
*Garden
$3,300 n/a Barr Construction
Inc.

Sears Roebuck
and Company
*Note this table does not include any mechanical, electrical, or plumbing permits.

Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
5/4/1983 62977
1413A
1516A
Interior alterations $5,000 Pacific Point
Construction
Marrs Construction
Co.

Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/7/1984 7128 B-2 Occupancy n/a n/a n/a Sears Roebuck
and Company
10/31/84 7496A 80 x 100 canopy for temporary
sales
n/a n/a n/a Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/7/85 63496 Interior remodeling $2,170,000 Bechtel
Construction
Bechtel Construction Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/7/85 7137A Snack bar $5,000 n/a n/a Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/7/85 7040A Merchandising walls $150,000 n/a Owner/builder Sears Roebuck and Company
7/17/85 63911 Interior alterations $100,000 Neil,
Wenklund,
Slomka
Swenson
Construction
Company
Sears Roebuck
and Company
7/19/85 1105A
1106A
A/C equipment screen $3,000 n/a Swenson
Construction
Company
Sears
8/9/85 1273A
1274A
2-set of c/m/ltrs reading
“Sears” & 2 s/f sign cans
reading business systems
$2,500 n/a National Neon Sears Business
Center
Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
6/10/86 64659 Canopy at Sears automotive $400 n/a Moine Bros. Sears 3/19/91 998
999
Interior tenant improvement $9,890 Snowden
Electric
Ramco Rigging &
Construction
Sears Inc.
2/11/92 626
1406
Convert 55% of existing
basement storage area into retail
store
$900,000 Herbert H.

Horowitz
n/a Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/11/92 2024 Demo existing fixtures
partitions & display walls on
first & second floors nonbearing
$25,000 n/a n/a Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/11/92 2658
2772
Build new partition and display
walls - replace flooring (2nd
floor)
$350,000 n/a R.D. Olson Sears Roebuck
and Company
2/11/92 2659
2773
Build new portion & display
walls & flooring
$350,000 n/a R D Olson
Construction
Sears Roebuck
and Company
5/1/91 1538
1559
Cooling tower replace $52,000 n/a Owner / builder Sears, Roebuck 5/1/91 1540 screening - cooling tower $40,000 n/a Emulus Facilities Sears, Roebuck 6/18/91 1987
2027
suspending canopy above candy
dept. on structural ceiling + 2
storage areas
$4,000 Johnson +
Neilsen
Associates
R.D. Olson Owner /
Builder
Blum’s of San
Francisco
Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
12/4/91
12/11/91
4093
4148
Interior partitions 14,000 sq. ft. $25,000 n/a Michael Nevius Sears Business Center
3/13/92 4884
5126
Tenant improvement remove
display wall
$15,000 Phillip M,
Leboy
Swenson
Construction
Sears
6/9/92 4899 Remove existing roof, replace
with new mechanically attached
single ply roof
$174,000 n/a Bligh Pacific Sears Roebuck
and Company
6/16/93 9215 Vacuum off exiting gravel and
install Bond Cote Roof system
“vented”
$307,305 n/a Owen Pacific Sears
Merchandise
Group
9/14/93
11/10/93
135
0799
Remove & reinstall display wall
- non bearing new tile
$30,000 Blake Shelters LMB Sears Roebuck
7/8/93 9434 Demo existing candy dept. 0 Sears E.L. Fisher Sears Roebuck 9/20/93 0207
0208
Install Sears demountable
partition
R+R carpet, install fitting room
$12,800 Sears E.L. Fisher Sears
9/2/93
9/15/93
0054
0152
Exterior signs $17,500 Acme Wiley
Corporation
Acme-Wiley Sears
2/9/95 5403 Demo free standing non bearing
partition walls
0 Blake Shelters Patten Co. Sears
Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
4/24/95 6052 Tenant improvement to existing
retail building. All three floors
will be involved.
$500,000 Blake Shelters RAS Sears
5/23/95 6321 TI to Auto Center and Annex
Building, includes exterior infill
$150,000 Blake Shelters RAS Builders Sears
7/18/95 6842
6843
Installation of store I.D. sign
(42 sf) (3 x 13.9)
$1,300 n/a Local Neon, Inc. Sears / HAHN
8/15/95 7199 Alter existing mall entry with
new finishes
$40,000 Architects
Pacifica
RAS Builders, Inc. Sears
2/13/2007 9124 Interior remodel of existing
optical store w/ minor electrical
and plumbing, located inside
Sears in LCC
$10,000 n/a RAS Contractors
(sic) Inc.

Sears Optical
11/1/2010 19559 Exterior entrance improvements
for Sears
$170,000 n/a Norm Wilson & Son
Inc.

Sears Roebuck
and Company
12/28/2018 38571 Building permit to attach beige
colored metal corrugated
powder coated panes to an
existing steel frame awning
above the existing oil storage
enclosure
$3,960 n/a William R Meixner
(sic) & Sons
Sears Roebuck
and Company
Attachment E: Table of Building Permits
Sears, 100 Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos, CA
Date Permit No. Description of Work Valuation of
Work
Architect/
Engineer
Contractor Owner
5/2/2022 45949 Building permit for interior
remodel to convert vacant space
for film purposes only to create
a movie set liquor store to
depict real life events in Miami
in 1979 for Netflix TV series
entitled Emerald. Remove
existing interior walls and add
new temporary walls.
$10,000 n/a Rutilios General
Contractors
Macerich
Cerritos, LLC,
239 Los
Cerritos Center,
Cerritos 90703
9/28/2022 46908 Building permit for temporary
tent structure related to
pumpkin patch at Los Cerritos
Center parking area near former
Sears department store.
$15,000 n/a Klutch Construction
Inc.

Macerich
Cerritos, LLC,
239 Los
Cerritos Center,
Cerritos 90703
8/10/2023 49533 Building permit for temporary
tents (2) and 13 bounce house
inflatables for pumpkin patch
event at Los Cerritos Center -
associated with city
$20,000 n/a Maul Construction Macerich
Cerritos, LLC,
239 Los
Cerritos Center,
Cerritos 90703
Attachment F: Qualifications

JENNA SNOW
In January 2015, Jenna Snow launched an independent historic preservation consulting practice with offices in Los Angeles. With nearly 25 years of professional experience, Ms. Snow has a strong and broad understanding of best historic preservation practice, including federal, state, and local regulations. Throughout her career, Ms. Snow has authored, co-authored, and/or served as project manager for well over 100 historic preservation projects, including a wide variety of historic resource assessments, National Register, California Register, and local nominations, as well as historic resources surveys. She regularly contributes to environmental impact reports, historic preservation certification applications, Section 106 reviews and other work associated with historic building rehabilitation and preservation planning.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Jenna Snow, Historic Preservation Consulting, January 2015-present Chattel, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, July 2002 – December 2014 International Council on Monuments and Sites, Transylvania Trust Foundation, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, Fall 2004
Neighborhood Preservation Center, New York, NY, Spring 2002 New York City Department of Design and Construction, Historic Preservation Office, New York, NY, Summer 2001
The Freedom Trail Foundation, Boston, MA, January 1999 - October 1999

SELECTED PROJECTS
Temple Ohave Israel (Brownsville, PA) – Prepared a National Register nomination for a 1919 synagogue located in a small, economically depressed town of western Pennsylvania. The synagogue, significant as an anchor for the small, but influential Jewish community of Brownsville, PA, was listed in the National Register in February 2016. Listing in the National Register makes the property eligible for state grants to maintain the building, including replacement of a much needed roof.

Hawk House (Los Angeles, CA) – Prepared a successful Historic Cultural Monument nomination for a 1939 single family residential house designed by renown Los Angeles architect Harwell Hamilton Harris for Stan and Ethyl Hawk.

The house severed as the headquarters for the furnishing company “Hawk House.” Chuey House (Los Angeles, CA) - Prepared a Historic-Cultural Monument nomination for a single family residence designed by one of the most influential Los Angeles architects, Richard Neutra, in 1956. As the property was for sale, the house was threatened with demolition. While the nomination was ultimately withdrawn, it served as a negotiation tool for the Los Angeles Conservancy.

Bank of America, Chinatown Branch (Los Angeles, CA) - Prepared a successful Historic Cultural Monument nomination for a 1971 bank branch located in Los Angeles’ Chinatown, designed by Chinese American architects Gilbert Leong and Richard Layne Thom. The first national bank to open a branch in Chinatown, the building underscored the growth and preeminence of the local Chinese community during an important period in its history.

Monday Women’s Club (Los Angeles, CA) - Prepared a historic resource assessment for a black women’s club in the Venice neighborhood. Moved to the site in 1926, the building on the property was proposed for demolition. Worked with the project team on a focused EIR that studied alternatives.

EDUCATION
Columbia University in the City of
New York, Master of Science in
Historic Preservation, 2002
Brandeis University, Bachelor of
Arts in Fine Arts, 1998

QUALIFICATIONS
Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications
Standards in Architectural History
AWARDS
Research Fellowship, Friends of
Residential Treasures: Los Angeles
(FORT:LA), June 2020-March
2023
Rosalind W. Levine Prize for
excellence in Fine Arts, June 1998

COMMUNITY

INVOLVEMENT
Secretary, South Carthay Historic
Preservation Overlay Zone Board,
2011-2016
Pick Leader, Food Forward, 2011-
2016
Los Angeles Conservancy
ModCom Working Group, 2013-
2014
Guest Editor, The Next American
City, Fall 2006, Issue 12
New Orleans recovery team from
Western Regional Office of the
National Trust for Historic
Preservation, February 2006
Jenna Snow ● Historic Preservation Consulting ● 323/317-3297 ● [email protected] Additional Projects:

Commodore Apartments (Los Angeles, CA) - Process Investment Tax Credit application for a 1926 Hollywood apartment building that completed a major rehabilitation project. The rehabilitation carefully restored the primary façade, which had experienced multiple alterations over the years.

West Los Angeles Veteran’s Affairs Building 205 and Building 208 (Los Angeles, CA) - Process Investment Tax Credit application and Section 106 review for two buildings out-leased to a nonprofit developer. The two buildings will be rehabilitated to house homeless veterans. Work completed in 2023. 1505 Crest Drive (Manhattan Beach, CA) - Prepared a successful local Landmark nomination for a 1964 A-frame residence. The house was the second local Landmark in Manhattan Beach and reflects the city’s growth in the post-World War II era and its beach culture.

Leone’s Castle (San Pedro, CA) - Prepared a successful Historic Cultural Monument nomination for an exuberant Chateauesque style 1936 apartment house. The 4-flat apartment house was designed by prominent architect Saul H. Brown for Leone Redding.

West Los Angeles Veteran’s Affairs (Los Angeles, CA) – Between 2010 and 2014, prepared Section 106 review and consultation for the first of 11 buildings that are undergoing seismic retrofit and limited rehabilitation. The buildings was reused to house veterans who are homeless. The rehabilitation won a Los Angeles Conservancy award. Also prepared a successful National Register nomination for the whole campus, which was listed in November 2014. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.

Boyle Hotel/Cummings Block (Los Angeles, CA) – Completed Investment Tax Credit Application and National Register nomination for 1898 hotel in Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles. The building has been reused to house low-income residents of Boyle Heights and has been a catalyst for economic rehabilitation in the neighborhood. The rehabilitation won a Los Angeles Conservancy award, as well as a National Preservation Honor Award. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.

Judson Rives Building (Los Angeles, CA)– Completed Investment Tax Credit Application for a 1908 office building in downtown Los Angeles, a contributing resource to the Broadway Historic District that was converted to residential use. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.

Hollywood Profession Building (Los Angeles, CA) - Completed Investment Tax Credit Application for a 1926 office building on Hollywood Boulevard. The building is significant not only for its distinctive Neo-Gothic style, but also with for its association with former United States President Ronald Reagan. The office building was converted to residential use. Work was done for Chattel, Inc.

Historic Resources Survey Update (Los Angeles, CA) - Served as the project manager for preparation of historic context statements and intensive-level historic resource survey. The survey were prepared in close coordination with the Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources to dovetail into SurveyLA. Surveyed approximately 3,000 properties, including property-specific research on approximately 400 of these properties. Attended several public hearings at both the beginning and end of the process, as well as presented at nearly a dozen neighborhood council meetings. Work was done with Chattel, Inc.

Residential Survey (Whittier, CA) - Prepared a historic context statement focusing on architectural contexts and themes connected with residential development in Whittier. Feld surveyed approximately 1,540 properties generally constructed prior to 1941 using an Access database incorporating GIS mapping to collect survey data in the field. The survey was prepared in close coordination with the City of Whittier staff and Historic Resources Commission and was adopted by the City of Whitter in 2015. Work was done with Chattel, Inc.

SurveyLA City of Los Angeles (Office of Historic Resources) – Participated in completing a historic resource survey of over 97,000 properties in South and Southeast Los Angeles. Co-authored historic context statement of Los Angeles’ industrial history. Work was done at Chattel, Inc.

Cerritos City CouncilJuly 27, 2026

Cerritos City Council
July 27, 2026