5. Other CEQA Considerations
5.1 Environmental Effects Found Not To Be Significant
5.2 Growth-Inducing Impacts
5.3 Significant Unavoidable Environmental Impacts 

Main DEIR Index

This section presents the evaluation of other types of environmental impacts required by CEQA that are not covered within the other chapters of this EIR. The other CEQA considerations include environmental effects that were found not to be significant, growth-inducing impacts or significant and unavoidable adverse impacts.  to index

5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT In the Initial Study completed in March 2001, five environmental issues were considered to have no impact and eight issues to have a less than significant impact. Three issues were identified as potentially significant (air quality, traffic, and noise) and would be evaluated further in the EIR. The issues to be considered in the EIR were expanded however as a result of public comments received at the scoping meeting held on March 20, 2001 and the review and consideration of technical reports.

After a more detailed evaluation of the environmental issues associated with this project, the EIR identified the following issues as having a less than significant impact or a less than significant impact after mitigation. These issues are listed below:

Less than Significant Less than Significant After Mitigation Geology and Soils Air Quality Land Use Hydrology and Water Quality Hazards and Hazardous Materials Noise Public Services and Utilities

Seven issues were not considered in this EIR. Aesthetics, biological resources, mineral resources, agricultural resources, cultural resources, recreation, and population and housing were eliminated from consideration in the Initial Study completed in March 2001. The reasons for not considering these issues are detailed in the Initial Study presented in Appendix A. Of these issues, cultural resources was identified as less than significant and the other four issues were identified as no impacts. (Although, additional information on cultural resources was provided in Appendix B to supplement the information presented in the Initial Study.) Other issues, such as geology and hazards, were also identified as having a less than significant impact on the environment in the Initial Study and would not have typically been evaluated in an EIR. They were evaluated, however, to respond to public comments. to index

5.2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15126.2( d) of the State CEQA Guidelines, an EIR must address whether a project will directly or indirectly foster growth. Section 15126.2( d) reads as follows: 

An EIR shall discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects, which would remove obstacles to population growth (a major expansion of wastewater treatment plant, might, for example, allow for more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may further tax existing community service facilities so consideration must be given to this impact. Also discuss the characteristic of some projects, which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

As discussed in this section, this analysis evaluates whether the proposed project will directly, or indirectly, induce economic, population, or housing growth in the surrounding environment.

5.2.1 Direct Growth-Inducing Impacts in the Surrounding Environment A project would directly induce growth if it would remove barriers to population growth such as a change to a jurisdiction's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance that allowed new residential development to occur. The goal of the LAUSD in constructing more schools is to provide a higher quality-learning environment for the students through the relief of existing and projected overcrowded conditions at these schools. The requirements for additional classrooms at LAUSD is due to several factors, including:

· Increased development within areas adding additional housing units with children requiring to be educated · Increased population growth due to projected growth increases associated with increased birth rates and in-migration

· Demographic trends associated with changes in birth rates creating "bubbles" in enrollment in various grade levels · Legislative mandated programs such as class size reduction.

The LAUSD has little control over these factors, but is mandated to educate those students residing in the District. Even with year round sessions, busing and large class size, it is becoming very difficult to meet the space needs to house existing and projected student enrollments. The construction of the proposed school is intended to relieve the current overcrowding conditions at other nearby schools and provide capacity for projected students who will live in its attendance areas. The new school would not induce more growth, but accommodate that which already has occurred and which will continue to occur over time.

5.2.2 Indirect Growth-Inducing Impacts in the Surrounding Environment A project would indirectly induce growth if it would increase the capacity of infrastructure in an area in which the public service currently met demand. Examples would be increasing the capacity of a sewer treatment plant, or a roadway beyond that needed to meet existing demand. There is currently a shortage of schools in the District. As evidenced by overcrowding conditions, the current demand for schools has not been met. As stated above, the construction of new schools would not induce more growth, but would meet 

the current and future demand of a population which will increase regardless of the number of schools in existence. to index

5.3 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The potentially significant adverse effects of the Valley New High School No. 1 are discussed in Section 3 of this report. The impact analysis identified potentially significant impacts with regard to hazards/ hazardous materials, hydrology/ water quality, public services/ utilities and transportation. Mitigation measures have been identified that would reduce many of the potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance.

The traffic study conducted for this project determined that this project would impact six intersections in the project area. The LAUSD has committed to install an Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control System to address these impacts. As presented in the traffic study, implementation of this traffic control system would mitigate impacts on five of the six intersections to a less than significant level. At the intersection of Zelzah Avenue and Nordhoff Street there are no measures available to reduce impacts. Therefore, the project will have a significant unavoidable impact at this one intersection.

Site investigations identified pesticide contamination in the soils. The DTSC has issued a Further Action letter on this project site. Under DTSC oversight, the LAUSD will conduct a removal action as part of the project construction. This removal action will address the impacts associated with contaminated soils. With the implementation of this removal action, impacts to hazards/ hazardous materials would be less than significant.

With the implementation of mitigation measures, most potentially significant impacts have been reduced to a less than significant level. However, the project will have a significant unavoidable impact on one intersection in the project area.  to index

To DEIR index