Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>

Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation 19 messages

Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:00 PMTo: "Alejandro Huerta (alejandro.huerta@lacity.org)" <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>Cc: "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>, Stephanie Eyestone­Jones<s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>

Hello Alejandro,

We are in the process of completing the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) Board Package for the CrossroadsHollywood Project (Proposed Project). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) requests that theDepartment of City Planning (Planning Department) confirm, by e­mail, the correct detailed scope (shown below) forthe Proposed Project. Your scope confirming e­mail will be included as part of the WSA, and the confirmed scope willbe used for calculating the water demand in the WSA.

LADWP has received the WSA Request Letter for the Proposed Project, dated March 31, 2016. The scope consideredin LADWP’s water demand calculations, as received in the WSA Request Letter and from the EIR consultant is asfollows:

Existing use to be removed*:

Existing Use Quantity

Residential ­ multi­family 80 du

Residential ­duplex 4 du

Office 79,107 sf

Commercial / Retail 26.690 sf

Restaurant 475 sf

Total 172,573 sf

*Crossroads of the World (50,000 sf) out of the total existing (172,573 sf) will be retained, but its uses will be convertedto retail and restaurant uses. Existing to be removed also includes surface parking lots.

Proposed**:

Proposed Use Quantity

Residential: Apartment / Condo

Studio 323 du

1 Bedroom 146 du

2 Bedroom 291 du

3 Bedroom 190 du

Residential Units Total 950 du

Residential Common

Interior Amenities (Fitness and Recreation) 11,800 sf

Residential Deck 75,123 sf

Pool 5,170 sf

Hotel Room 308 room

Hotel Common

Meeting Facilities 30,600 sf

Spa 8,620 sf

Fitness Room 5,580 sf

Pool 7,090 sf

Commercial

Office 95,000 sf

Retail 61,800 sf

Supermarket 40,000 sf

Food Service 83,200 sf

Coffee Shop (Serves Prepared Food) 416 seat

Restaurant: High Quality 1,123 seat

Restaurant: High Turnover 1,498 seat

Deck and Terrace 3,769 sf

Landscaping

Residential:

Low Water Use Shrubs (PF = 0.2) 20,562 sf

Medium Water Use Shrubs (PF = 0.5) 5,140 sf

Trees (PF = 0.5) 112 sf

Non­Residential:

Low Water Use Shrubs (PF = 0.2) 4,269.6 sf

Medium Water Use Shrubs (PF = 0.5) 1,067.4 sf

Trees (PF = 0.5) 356 sf

All proposed landscape IE is 0.81.

Subterranean Parking

1,191,339 sf

Cooling Tower

Chiller Capacity 5,760 ton

(Cooling Tower Ton) (7,200 tons)

Operating Hours 24 hrs/day, 365 days/yr

** Proposed Uses include 50,000 sf to be retained and converted to retail and restaurant uses.

du = dwelling unit sf = square feet PF = Plant Factor IE = Irrigation Efficiency

hrs = hours yr = year

The Proposed Project does not require a General Plan amendment, and is consistent with the 2012 RegionalTransportation Plan (RTP) demographic projection by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for theCity of Los Angeles.

If the above listed scope is accurate and consistent with the Proposed Project, please e­mail reply. If not, pleaseedit the scope accordingly and send back to me by e­mail.

Thank you.

Jin Hwang

Civil Engineering Associate

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

Water Executive / Water Resources

111 N. Hope St. Room 1468

Los Angeles, CA 90012

213­367­4845

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­Confidentiality Notice­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­This electronic message transmission contains information from the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which may be confidential. If you arenot the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the content of this information is prohibited. If you havereceived this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e­mail and delete the original message and any attachment without reading orsaving in any manner.

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:42 PMTo: Stephanie Eyestone­Jones <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>, "Madonna Marcelo (m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)"<m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Hi. Any concerns/edits on this scope below? Otherwise, I'll confirm with Jin that it's good to go.

Cheers, ALEJANDRO A. HUERTALos Angeles City Planning Environmental Analysis Major Projects213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden]

Madonna Marcelo <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com> Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:54 PMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>, Stephanie Eyestone­Jones <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>

Hi Alejandro,

The numbers seem to match what we have in the Project Descripon and all the materials and responses we havesent LADWP to date.

I would just correct the typo in the quanty for exisng commercial/retail – they put a period instead of comma, butthe total is correct.

Thanks!

Madonna

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 1:42 PMTo: Stephanie Eyestone­Jones; Madonna MarceloSubject: Re: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

Hi. Any concerns/edits on this scope below? Otherwise, I'll confirm with Jin that it's good to go.

Cheers,

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTA

Los Angeles City Planning

Environmental Analysis

Major Projects

213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:56 PMTo: Madonna Marcelo <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>Cc: Stephanie Eyestone­Jones <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>

Awesome.[Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:59 PMTo: "Hwang, Jin" <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com>

Hi. I confirm the scope. Just change the period to a comma in this below:

Commercial / Retail 26.690 sf

Sincerely,

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTALos Angeles City Planning Environmental Analysis Major Projects213•978•1454

On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> wrote: [Quoted text hidden]

Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:35 AMTo: "Alejandro Huerta (alejandro.huerta@lacity.org)" <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>Cc: "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>, Stephanie Eyestone­Jones<s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>

Alejandro,

Thank you for catching the decimal point error. I’ll revise the existing Commercial / Retail scope from “26.690 sf” to“26,690 sf”, and resend the request to confirm the scope.

Thank you.

Jin Hwang

Civil Engineering Associate

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

Water Executive / Water Resources

111 N. Hope St. Room 1468

Los Angeles, CA 90012

213­367­4845

From: Hwang, Jin Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 1:01 PMTo: Alejandro Huerta (alejandro.huerta@lacity.org)Cc: Moosbrugger, Earl; Kwan, Delon; Madonna Marcelo (m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com); Stephanie Eyestone­Jones Subject: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:52 AMTo: "Alejandro Huerta (alejandro.huerta@lacity.org)" <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>Cc: "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "StephanieEyestone­Jones (s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com)" <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Hello Alejandro,

We are in the process of completing the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) Board Package for the CrossroadsHollywood Project (Proposed Project). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) requests that theDepartment of City Planning (Planning Department) confirm, by e­mail, the correct detailed scope (shown below) for theProposed Project. Your scope confirming e­mail will be included as part of the WSA, and the confirmed scope will beused for calculating the water demand in the WSA.

LADWP has received the WSA Request Letter for the Proposed Project, dated March 31, 2016. The scope consideredin LADWP’s water demand calculations, as received in the WSA Request Letter and from the EIR consultant is asfollows:

Existing use to be removed*:

Existing Use Quantity

Residential ­ multi­family 80 du

Residential ­duplex 4 du

Office 79,107 sf

Commercial / Retail 26,690 sf

Restaurant 475 sf

Total 172,573 sf

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 7:56 AMTo: "Hwang, Jin" <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com>Cc: "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "StephanieEyestone­Jones (s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com)" <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Dear Ms. Hwang:

I confirm the scope in your email incorporated herein.

Graciously yours, ALEJANDRO A. HUERTALos Angeles City Planning Environmental Analysis Major Projects213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden]

Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 8:00 AMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>Cc: "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "StephanieEyestone­Jones (s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com)" <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Thank you.

Jin Hwang

Civil Engineering Associate

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

Water Execuve / Water Resources

111 N. Hope St. Room 1468

Los Angeles, CA 90012

213­367­4845

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 7:57 AMTo: Hwang, JinCc: Kwan, Delon; Moosbrugger, Earl; Stephanie Eyestone­Jones (s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com); Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com) Subject: Re: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 2:00 PMTo: "Hwang, Jin" <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com>Cc: "Kwan, Delon" <Delon.Kwan@ladwp.com>, "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>, "StephanieEyestone­Jones (s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com)" <s.eyestone@eyestoneeir.com>, "Madonna Marcelo(m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com)" <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

You're welcome. Attached, for your information, are the draft Crossroads Draft EIR sections on population, employmentand housing. [Quoted text hidden]

3 attachments

IV.J.1 Employment (clean).pdf 143K

IV.J.2 Housing (clean).pdf 152K

IV.J.3 Population (clean).pdf 99K

Hwang, Jin <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com> Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 2:46 PMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>

Thank you.

Jin Hwang

Civil Engineering Associate

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

Water Execuve / Water Resources

111 N. Hope St. Room 1468

Los Angeles, CA 90012

213­367­4845

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 2:01 PM

[Quoted text hidden]

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

Moosbrugger, Earl <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com> Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:24 AMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>Cc: "Hwang, Jin" <Jin.Hwang@ladwp.com>

Hello Alejandro,

Thanks for sending over the informave aachments which might help us understand determinaon of SCAGconsistency!

On p. IV.J.3‐11, top paragraph of Populaon aachment, it states that cumulave projects account for only 21.9% ofprojected growth, and projects impact is only 1.15%, and therefore not cumulavely considerable.

Does “not cumulavely considerable” equate to consistency with SCAG (with respect to populaon only)?

Could there be a point at which cumulave projects’ populaon growth would reach a significant enoughpercentage (100% or beyond) to be considered cumulavely considerable; In other words, is there a point at whichenough projects are planned so that the “cup is full” (cup meaning projected growth), and this would be a basis fornon‐consistency with SCAG?

I have not yet read other aachments but will do so when me permits.

Thanks,

Earl Moosbrugger

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 2:01 PM

[Quoted text hidden]

[Quoted text hidden]

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

[Quoted text hidden]

IV.J.3 Population (clean).pdf 99K

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:31 AMTo: Madonna Marcelo <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Hi. See below. Can you draft a response? [Quoted text hidden]

IV.J.3 Population (clean).pdf 99K

Madonna Marcelo <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com> Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:37 AMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>

Hi Alejandro,

I’ll need to talk to Laura and/or Stephanie and get back to you with a response.

Madonna

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 10:32 AMTo: Madonna MarceloSubject: Fwd: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

[Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:38 AMTo: Madonna Marcelo <m.marcelo@eyestoneeir.com>

Got it. [Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:49 PMTo: "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>

Hi Earl,

Sorry for the late reply. I have a deadline coming. Quickly, cumulative impact analyses under CEQA are complicated buthere's a good link to understand the general process: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/cumulative_guidance/ceqa_guidelines.htm.

Though applicable to transit, the guide can also be applied to other CEQA impact categories.

This training is also good at explaining the ins and outs of cumulative analyses under CEQA:

http://ascentenvironmental.com/files/9413/7228/6126/Cumulative_and_Alternatives_Impact_Analyses_Lightening_Rods_of_Controversial_EIRs.pdf

Best,

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTALos Angeles City Planning Environmental Analysis Major Projects213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden]

Moosbrugger, Earl <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com> Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 9:55 AMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>

Hello Alejandro,

I hope you are having a pleasant holiday!

Not to take up too much of your me, but I finally reviewed the links below and have one queson:

This queson is related specifically to populaon growth impacts, as they are most relevant to our water supplyanalysis.

In understanding a lile beer how SCAG consistency is determined, would its determinaon be related to thecumulave analysis, by choosing for the analysis cumulave projects (past, present, and projected) for an enreCommunity Plan area and using the growth projecons for the Community Plan as the baseline? Therefore, as theprojects are “added up” in that Community Plan area, for both individual and cumulave impacts, they are accountedfor?

I understand you feel it is not appropriate to answer the queson by e‐mail due to its complexity, but I thought that ifI was on the right track, it might help further our understanding of how our agencies’ funcons e into each other.

Thank you!

Earl Moosbrugger, PE

Resources Development and Supply Assessment Group

Water System Execuve Office / Water Resources Secon

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

111 N. Hope Street, Room 1450

Los Angeles, CA 90012

(213) 367­2527

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:50 PMTo: Moosbrugger, EarlSubject: Re: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

Hi Earl,

Sorry for the late reply. I have a deadline coming. Quickly, cumulative impact analyses under CEQA are complicated buthere's a good link to understand the general process: http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/cumulative_guidance/ceqa_guidelines.htm.

Though applicable to transit, the guide can also be applied to other CEQA impact categories.

This training is also good at explaining the ins and outs of cumulative analyses under CEQA:

http://ascentenvironmental.com/files/9413/7228/6126/Cumulative_and_Alternatives_Impact_Analyses_Lightening_Rods_of_Controversial_EIRs.pdf

Best,

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTA

Los Angeles City Planning

Environmental Analysis

Major Projects

213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]

Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org> Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:38 AMTo: "Moosbrugger, Earl" <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com>

Hello.

This may be confusing because there are two separate chapters that look at SCAG information. First, CEQA's requiredLand Use analysis is about how a project is consistent with land use policies. Second, CEQA's required Population chapterlooks at how a project might induce substantial population growth in an area.

The Population analysis requires a quantitative analysis for population growth and the Land Use analysis requires aseparate qualitative analysis of how the project is consistent with land use policies. So, for the Population analysis, EIRstake into account the population added by the individual project and then sees how this growth compares to SCAG'spopulation projections and then adds that to the cumulative population growth of other projects (usually, these projects aredefined within a certain geographic area and each individual EIR has to identify what that geography is and a list of"Related Projects"). For the second type of analysis, the project is screened to see how it is consistent with land use planslike SCAG's RTP, but this is about policy goals.

Call me if you have any question and see more answer below.

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTA City Planning Major Projects 213•978•1454

On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Moosbrugger, Earl <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com> wrote:

Hello Alejandro,

I hope you are having a pleasant holiday!

Not to take up too much of your me, but I finally reviewed the links below and have one queson:

This queson is related specifically to populaon growth impacts, as they are most relevant to our water supplyanalysis.

In understanding a lile beer how SCAG consistency is determined, would its determinaon be related to thecumulave analysis, by choosing for the analysis cumulave projects (past, present, and projected) for an enreCommunity Plan area and using the growth projecons for the Community Plan as the baseline?

Again, the project's individual population is calculated and that is compared to SCAG's regional and City populationprojections. Then the project's individual population contribution is added to the population growth from the list of RelatedProjects (which are new proposed projects in the project vicinity, not past projects in the overall Community Plan area).This cumulative population growth is compared to the SCAG City of Los Angeles population projections, not theCommunity Plan projections. [Quoted text hidden]

Moosbrugger, Earl <Earl.Moosbrugger@ladwp.com> Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:43 AMTo: Alejandro Huerta <alejandro.huerta@lacity.org>

Alejandro,

Thanks for providing a very clear explanaon below.

I might just call for a quick follow‐up for final clarificaon.

Thanks,

Earl Moosbrugger, PE

Resources Development and Supply Assessment Group

Water System Execuve Office / Water Resources Secon

Los Angeles Department of Water and Power

111 N. Hope Street, Room 1450

Los Angeles, CA 90012

(213) 367­2527

From: Alejandro Huerta [mailto:alejandro.huerta@lacity.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 10:39 AMTo: Moosbrugger, EarlSubject: Re: Crossroads Hollywood Project WSA­ Scope Confirmation

Hello.

This may be confusing because there are two separate chapters that look at SCAG information. First, CEQA's requiredLand Use analysis is about how a project is consistent with land use policies. Second, CEQA's required Population chapterlooks at how a project might induce substantial population growth in an area.

The Population analysis requires a quantitative analysis for population growth and the Land Use analysis requires aseparate qualitative analysis of how the project is consistent with land use policies. So, for the Population analysis, EIRstake into account the population added by the individual project and then sees how this growth compares to SCAG's

population projections and then adds that to the cumulative population growth of other projects (usually, these projects aredefined within a certain geographic area and each individual EIR has to identify what that geography is and a list of"Related Projects"). For the second type of analysis, the project is screened to see how it is consistent with land use planslike SCAG's RTP, but this is about policy goals.

Call me if you have any question and see more answer below.

ALEJANDRO A. HUERTA

City Planning

Major Projects

213•978•1454

[Quoted text hidden][Quoted text hidden]