361 N. La Brea Avenue (ENV-2024-5978-CE)
Summary
SCH Number
2025050074
Public Agency
City of Los Angeles
Document Title
361 N. La Brea Avenue (ENV-2024-5978-CE)
Document Type
NOE - Notice of Exemption
Received
Posted
5/1/2025
Document Description
The proposed project involves the demolition of an existing car rental facility and parking lot for the construction of a new 40,505 square foot, 75 foot tall (82-foot 2-inches as measured to the top of the elevator tower), 6-story, 40 unit, mixed-use building containing five (5) units set aside for Very Low-Income households. The project proposes 2,143 square feet of ground floor commercial area, 16 vehicular parking stalls, 43 bicycle parking spaces, and 4,832 square feet of Open Space. The project proposes the planting of 6 Street Trees. The project considered will assume the worst-case scenario of removal of all street trees. However, this analysis gives no right to the applicant to remove any street tree. No street trees may be removed without prior approval of Urban Forestry based on compliance with LAMC Section 62.169 and 62.170 and applicable findings.
Contact Information
Name
Bryant Wu
Agency Name
City of Los Angeles, Department of City Planning
Job Title
Planning Associate
Contact Types
Lead/Public Agency
Phone
Email
Name
Daniel Ahadian
Agency Name
nur Corporation
Job Title
Representative
Contact Types
Parties Undertaking Project
Phone
Name
Samuel Einhorn
Agency Name
361 North La Brea LLC
Job Title
Applicant
Contact Types
Project Applicant
Phone
Email
Location
Coordinates
Cities
Los Angeles
Counties
Los Angeles
Regions
Southern California
Cross Streets
La Brea Ave and Beverly Blvd
Zip
90036
Other Location Info
NAME OF APPLICANT / OWNER:
361 La Brea LLC | Samuel Einhorn
Notice of Exemption
Exempt Status
Categorical Exemption
Type, Section or Code
Section 15332 – Class 32
Reasons for Exemption
Categorical Exemptions are descriptions of types of projects which the Secretary of the Resources Agency has determined do not usually have a significant effect on the environment. There are exceptions to the exemptions depending on the nature or location of the project. Projects that meet the following conditions are considered exceptions and do not qualify for a Categorical Exemption:
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may 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.
The project is not utilizing Class 3, 4, 5, 6 or 11 and therefore does not meet this condition.
(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 cumulative impact analysis considers the potential impacts associated with implementation of the project in conjunction with other “related projects” within proximity of the project site. There are no related projects as identified by the City of Los Angeles within 1,500 feet of the project site8.
As discussed below, the project would not contribute to any significant cumulative impacts resulting from successive projects of the same type in the same place over time.
Land Use Plans and Zoning
The focus of this cumulative impacts analysis is on the combined impact of the project and the related projects, including consistency with land use plans and zoning. Development of the related projects is expected to occur in accordance with adopted plans and regulations.
It is also reasonably anticipated that most of the related projects would be designed and/or conditioned to be compatible with the zoning and land use designations of each related project site and its existing surrounding uses. In addition, it is reasonable to assume that the related projects under consideration in the surrounding area would implement and support local and regional planning goals and policies. Therefore, cumulative land use impacts would be less than significant.
Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species
The project site contains a fully built out urban use that is completely surrounded by urban uses. The project site has been subject to substantial disturbance associated with the construction of the existing structure. As such, the project site does not exhibit potential to support endangered, rare, or threatened plant species.
The project site is disturbed and fully built out, relative to the presence of natural habitats, and surrounding areas are entirely developed; therefore, the project site does not provide potential habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened animal species. Some examples of these disturbances that deter animals include complete absence of native habitats or vegetation, substantial vehicle traffic, artificial lighting, regular vegetation maintenance, domesticated and feral dogs and cats, and pest management.
No special status habitats are present on the project site and there is no potential to occur.
Traffic - Per the attached City of Los Angeles VMT Calculation Project Screening Criteria, the project generates less than 250 net daily trips, which is the threshold that determines whether a traffic study is required. DOT staff has reviewed and signed the DOT Referral Form on June 14, 2024 verifying that this information is accurate. As such, the project will not have any significant impacts relating to traffic.
OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA states the following
regarding cumulative traffic impacts:
Cumulative Impacts. A project’s cumulative impacts are based on an assessment of whether the “incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21083, subd. (b)(2); see CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(1).) When using an absolute VMT metric, i.e., total VMT (as recommended below for retail and transportation projects), analyzing the combined impacts for a cumulative impacts analysis may be appropriate. However, metrics such as VMT per capita or VMT per employee, i.e., metrics framed in terms of efficiency (as recommended below for use on residential and office projects), cannot be summed because they employ a denominator. A project that falls below an efficiency based threshold that is aligned with long-term goals and relevant plans has no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact, and vice versa. This is similar to the analysis typically conducted for greenhouse gas emissions, air quality impacts, and impacts that utilize plan compliance as a threshold of significance. (See Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 219, 223; CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(3).)
As discussed above, the project is screened out from further VMT analysis, as it is presumed the project would cause less-than-significant transportation impacts. For this reason, the project’s cumulative contribution to traffic impacts would also be less than significant.
Noise - The technical report9 prepared by DKA Planning analyzing potential noise impacts also analyzed potential cumulative impacts and reached a conclusion that no cumulative noise impacts would occur.
Air Quality - The technical report10 prepared by DKA Planning analyzing potential air quality impacts also analyzed potential cumulative impacts and reached a conclusion that no cumulative noise impacts would occur.
Water Quality - The project site and the related project are located in an urbanized area where all of the surrounding properties are already developed. The existing storm drainage system serving this area has been designed to accommodate runoff from an urban built-out environment. When new construction occurs, it generally does not lead to substantial additional runoff, since new development is required to control the amount, velocity, and quality of stormwater runoff coming from their respective site. Moreover, little if any additional cumulative runoff is expected from the project and the related project site, since the area is highly developed with impervious surfaces. Additionally, all new development in the City is required to comply with the City’s LID Ordinance and incorporate appropriate stormwater pollution control measures into the design plans to ensure that water quality impacts are minimized. Therefore, the cumulative water quality impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time would not be significant. With respect to construction impacts, it is unknown whether any of the other development projects in the vicinity would have overlapping construction schedules with the project. However, similar to the project, any related projects would be required to comply with the City Building Code, NPDES requirements, etc. Assuming compliance with these regulatory requirements, similar to the project, the cumulative water quality impact during construction would be less than significant.
County Clerk
Los Angeles
Attachments
Notice of Exemption
Disclaimer: The Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) accepts no responsibility for the content or accessibility of these documents. To obtain an attachment in a different format, please contact the lead agency at the contact information listed above. For more information, please visit LCI’s Accessibility Site.