IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS L. TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION, AND PARKING

Transcription

1 IV. NVIRONMNTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS L. TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION, AND PARKING INTRODUCTION The following summarizes the information provided in the traffic report prepared by Hirsch/Green Transportation Consulting, Inc. entitled, Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, Retail, Restaurant and Office Development, San Vicente Boulevard in Los Angeles, California, revised March This traffic report is included in Appendix K to this Draft IR. The Department of Transportation (DOT) completed its review of the traffic study on October 4, 2010, and determined that the traffic study adequately describes the project-related impacts of the proposed project. The DOT letter is also included in Appendix K to this Draft IR. NVIRONMNTAL STTING The project site is located in the Brentwood community of the City of Los Angeles, and is bounded generally by San Vicente Boulevard on the south, Saltair Avenue and existing commercial development on the west, and by existing residential and commercial development on the north and east. The area surrounding the site to the north, west, and south are developed primarily as single and multi-family residential uses, while a variety of uses are located along the south side of San Vicente Boulevard, including the Brentwood County Club, and Brentwood Science Magnet School to the west of Bundy Drive, and Brentwood Presbyterian Church and Schools to the east of Bundy Drive. Area Transportation Facilities The study area is served by two regional transportation facilities, the San Diego Freeway (I-405) and the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10), both of which provide ramp connections to the surface street network in the immediate project vicinity. Additionally, several major and secondary arterials serve the study area, as do a number of collector roadways and residential-access local streets. A number of public transit lines also serve the project site and/or general study vicinity, providing some alternatives to personal vehicular travel. The key transportation facilities in the project vicinity are identified on the following pages. Freeways The San Diego Freeway (I-405) The key north-south transportation facility on the west side of Los Angeles, this freeway, located approximately one mile east of the project site, serves the entire western portion of the Los Angeles basin, including the Los Angeles International Airport, from its departure from the Golden State Freeway (I-5) in the Sylmar community to the north to its merge back into the Golden State Freeway in the City of Irvine in Orange County. Through the study area, the San Diego Freeway generally provides five travel lanes per direction, plus additional lanes at ramps or interchanges. Surface street access ramps to and/or from the local street network are provided at Sunset Boulevard and Church Lane to the northeast of the project site, and at Wilshire Boulevard and Santa Monica Boulevard to the southeast; an additional northbound off-ramp is also available on Sepulveda Boulevard near Montana Page IV.L-1

2 Avenue. A full interchange with the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) is provided approximately two and three-quarter miles southeast of the project site. Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) The primary east-west transportation facility in the project vicinity, the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) is located approximately two miles south of the project site. This freeway connects to the Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1) along the western edge of the City of Santa Monica and continues eastward into San Bernardino County and beyond. In the project vicinity, the Santa Monica Freeway is generally an eight-lane facility, providing four through travel lanes in each direction, plus additional auxiliary lanes near ramp or interchange locations. The closest surface street ramp connections providing access to and from the project site are located at 20 th Street /Cloverfield Boulevard, Centinela Avenue, and Bundy Drive. Streets and Highways San Vicente Boulevard This generally east-west oriented roadway runs along the southern boundary of the project site, and serves as the access point for both project driveways. Within the immediate project vicinity, San Vicente Boulevard is classified as a Secondary Highway and provides a connection between Ocean Avenue in the City of Santa Monica and Wilshire Boulevard in West Los Angeles. Approximately two-thirds of a mile east of project site, the roadway curves toward the south to terminate at Wilshire Boulevard, although the roadway itself continues south of the intersection as Federal Avenue. San Vicente Boulevard is discontinuous between Wilshire Boulevard/Federal Avenue in West Los Angeles and Sunset Boulevard in the City of West Hollywood, where it is designated as a Major Highway, and travels in a generally northwest-southeast direction to its ultimate terminus at Venice Boulevard in the Mid-Cities area of the City of Los Angeles. San Vicente Boulevard is generally developed with a landscaped raised median island throughout its entire length, and within the immediate project vicinity, provides two westbound and two to three eastbound travel lanes, plus left-turn channelization at key intersections. On-street metered parking is generally permitted along both sides of the roadway throughout the study area, although parking is prohibited on the south side of the street from Bundy Drive to just east of Barrington Avenue during the AM peak period (7:00 to 9:00 AM) in order to provide the third eastbound travel lane. Bundy Drive This north-south oriented facility is located approximately one-tenth mile west of the project site, and provides a connection between the residential neighborhoods north of Sunset Boulevard and Stanwood Drive (south of National Boulevard) in the Mar Vista community of the City of Los Angeles, where the roadway changes names to become Centinela Avenue, continuing southward through the Del Rey and Westchester communities of the City of Los Angeles to its ultimate terminus at Florence Avenue in the City of Inglewood. Bundy Drive is generally designated as a Collector Street through the immediate project study area between its intersection with Kenter Avenue (south of Sunset Boulevard) and Wilshire Boulevard, although the segments north of Kenter Avenue are downgraded to Local Street status. South of Wilshire Boulevard, Bundy Drive becomes a Secondary Highway to Pico Boulevard, where it is upgraded to Major Highway status throughout the remainder of its length. Within the study area between Sunset Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard, Bundy Drive is generally striped to provide one travel lane per direction. On-street parking is typically permitted on both sides of the street throughout Page IV.L-2

3 the day, although parking is prohibited on the approaches to key intersections such as San Vicente Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard. Montana Avenue This east-west roadway is located to the south of the project site. Montana Avenue is generally designated as a Secondary Highway between Barrington Avenue and Ocean Avenue in the City of Santa Monica, although the portion east of Barrington Avenue is downgraded to Local Street status. The roadway is discontinuous through the Veterans Administration/VA Hospital site, although it reappears for a short length as a Local Street between the eastern boundary of the VA Hospital grounds and Sepulveda Boulevard, upgrading to Collector Street designation between Sepulveda Boulevard and Veteran Avenue, where it changes names to become Gayley Avenue, continuing southward along the western edge of the UCLA Campus to terminate at Wilshire Boulevard, opposite Midvale Avenue. In the immediate project vicinity, Montana Avenue provides various configurations, but typically is striped for one to two travel lanes, plus a median two-way left-turn lane transitioning to dedicated left-turn pockets at key intersections. On-street parking is also typically permitted on both sides of the street throughout the study area. Sunset Boulevard An east-west oriented Major Highway facility, Sunset Boulevard is located approximately one-half mile north of the project site. This roadway provides access between the Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1) in the Pacific Palisades community of the City of Los Angeles, through the West Los Angeles, Brentwood, Westwood communities of the City, and into and through the cities of Beverly Hills and West Hollywood, to continue through the Hollywood, Silver Lake, and cho Park communities into the northern portions of downtown Los Angeles. Sunset Boulevard changes names to become Cesar. Chavez Avenue at approximately Figueroa Street in downtown, and continues eastward, changing names again to Riggin Street at Atlantic Boulevard before ultimately terminating at Garfield Avenue in the City of Monterey Park. Through the vicinity of the project site, Sunset Boulevard is generally striped to provide two through lanes in both directions, plus left-turn channelization at key intersections. Onstreet parking is typically prohibited on Sunset Boulevard throughout the study area. Barrington Avenue Another generally north-south oriented roadway, Barrington Avenue is located approximately one-quarter mile to the east of the project site. This facility provides service between the residential community located immediately north of Sunset Boulevard and Federal Avenue/Indianapolis Street in the Mar Vista community to the south, where Barrington Avenue changes names to become McLaughlin Avenue, which continues southward to its ultimate terminus just south of Washington Boulevard. Through the immediate project vicinity, Barrington Avenue is designated as a Secondary Highway, and generally provides one travel lane per direction. Between approximately Olympic Boulevard and Navy Street (just south of National Boulevard), the roadway widens to provide two lanes per direction; south of Navy Street, the roadway is downgraded to Collector Street status, and reduces again to one lane per direction. Left-turn channelization is typically not provided within the study area, although left-turn lanes are provided at the intersections with Sunset Boulevard, Santa Monica Boulevard, and at all key intersections south of Olympic Boulevard. On-street parking is generally permitted on both sides of the street along all segments of this facility. Wilshire Boulevard This east-west Major Highway is located approximately two-thirds of a mile south of the project site. Wilshire Boulevard is a key thoroughfare through the western portion of Los Angeles, Page IV.L-3

4 providing access between Ocean Avenue in the City of Santa Monica and Grand Avenue in downtown Los Angeles, and serving the West Los Angeles and Westwood communities of the City of Los Angeles, the City of Beverly Hills, and the Mid-Cities area of the City of Los Angeles along the way. In the study area, Wilshire Boulevard exhibits a variable width due to localized dedications and widenings, but generally provides two travel lanes per direction west of Barrington Avenue and three travel lanes east of that intersection, although farther east of the study area, between the San Diego Freeway and Glendon Avenue in Westwood, the roadway provides four through lanes in each direction. Wilshire Boulevard is also striped to provide dedicated left-turn lanes at most intersections, and exclusive right-turn only lanes at some key locations. Off-peak hour on-street parking is generally permitted along both sides of the street west of Barrington Avenue, but is prohibited during the AM and PM peak hours in order to provide a bus-only lane. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the street at all times between approximately San Vicente Boulevard and Glendon Avenue. Federal Avenue This north-south roadway is located in the eastern part of the study area, and provides a connection between its northern terminus at Wilshire Boulevard, where it provides the southern extension of San Vicente Boulevard as described earlier, to its southern terminus at Charnock Road in the Mar Vista community. Although the roadway is discontinuous at multiple locations along its route, including interruption at the Santa Monica Freeway between Gateway Boulevard and Pearl Street. Federal Avenue is generally designated as a Local Street along its entire route, although within the immediate study area between Wilshire Boulevard and Idaho Avenue (and again for a short stretch in Mar Vista between Stanwood Drive and Barrington Avenue/McLaughlin Avenue), this roadway is upgraded to Collector Street status. Throughout its length, Federal Avenue typically provides one travel lane in each direction, although two lanes per direction are provided on the approach to Wilshire Boulevard. Left-turn channelization is also provided at most key intersections and on-street parking is generally permitted along both sides of the roadway on all segments of Federal Avenue. 26 th Street Located generally within the City of Santa Monica along the boundary with the City of Los Angeles approximately one and one-quarter miles west of the project site, 26 th Street connects San Vicente Boulevard on the north with Olympic Boulevard and Cloverfield Boulevard on the south, although it extends north of San Vicente Boulevard to connect to Sunset Boulevard in the City of Los Angeles as Allenford Avenue. This roadway is generally designated as a local roadway through much of the City of Santa Monica, although it is upgraded to arterial street status between Cloverfield Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard, while the Allenford Avenue portion of the roadway within the City of Los Angeles is designated as a Collector Street. Through the study area, 26 th Street typically provides one travel lane in each direction plus left-turn and/or right-turn channelization at key intersections, although the segment of the street between Colorado Avenue and Olympic Boulevard provides two travel lanes per direction, and the segment between Olympic Boulevard and Cloverfield Boulevard is configured as a oneway northbound roadway, providing two travel lanes. On-street parking is generally permitted along most segments of this roadway. Kenter Avenue This short, generally north-south oriented roadway is essentially an off-shoot of Bundy Drive, connecting with that roadway at approximately Rose Marie Lane about half way between Sunset Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard (where Bundy Drive turns easterly to intersect with Sunset Boulevard). It provides access between the southern portion of Bundy Drive and the residential Page IV.L-4

5 community located north of Sunset Boulevard. Kenter Avenue is designated primarily as a Local Street, although the segment between Sunset Boulevard and its intersection with and conversion to Bundy Drive is designated as a Collector Street. Throughout its length, Kenter Avenue typically provides one travel lane per direction, although additional left-turn and/or right turn lanes are provided at Sunset Boulevard and at Bundy Drive. On-street parking is generally permitted on both sides of the street along all segments of this facility. Saltair Avenue This short, generally north-south oriented Local Street is located along the west side of a portion of the project site. Saltair Avenue provides local access between the residential neighborhood north of Sunset Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard, although the roadway is not directly connected between Sunset Boulevard and Kearsarge Street. Additionally, although Saltair Avenue continues to the south of the study area, connecting Wilshire Boulevard and Idaho Avenue, the roadway is discontinuous and does not exist between San Vicente Boulevard and Wilshire Boulevard. Throughout the study area, Saltair Avenue provides one travel lane per direction, and on-street parking is generally permitted on both sides of the street. Public Transportation The study area surrounding the project site is currently served by a number of both local-serving and long distance commuter bus lines operated by a variety of providers. A map of the overall bus and rail transit service in the project vicinity is shown in Figure IV.L-1. One bus route, Route 4 operated by the Santa Monica Big Blue Bus (BBB), serves the project site directly. Two other bus routes, Route 3 and Route 14, also operated by BBB, are available within walking distance of the proposed development, providing stops on Montana Avenue at San Vicente Boulevard, approximately 0.2 miles southeast of the project site. While other bus lines are also evident within the larger study area, operated by BBB as well as by other transit providers such as the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority ( Metro ), Commuter xpress, and Santa Clarita Transit, these lines do not serve the site directly. These other bus lines are accessible via transfers from the BBB Route 3, 4, or 14 buses serving the immediate project vicinity, but they operate along more distant roadways such as Sunset Boulevard or Wilshire Boulevard. None of the bus lines operated by these other providers are located close enough to the project site to be used directly. However, these bus lines include many local-serving lines providing multiple stops throughout the project vicinity, as well as long distance commuter and express bus lines providing direct or convenient regional transit access between the project vicinity and the larger regional area. The three BBB bus lines serving the site are described in more detail below, and are shown in Figure IV.L-1. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 4 The one bus line serving the project site directly, Line 4 provides weekday, weekend, and holiday transit service through the study area. Line 4 begins in the City of Santa Monica with a loop along 4 th Street, Pico Boulevard, Main Street, and Olympic Drive before traveling along 4 th Street from Olympic Drive to San Vicente Boulevard. Continuing along San Vicente Boulevard, this route passes in front of the project site before accessing Montana Avenue and Bringham Avenue to travel through the Veterans Administration facilities to Sawtelle Boulevard before finally making a loop on Olympic Boulevard, Westwood Boulevard, Pico Boulevard, and Sawtelle Boulevard. This line utilizes the same general route for its return trip, with the exception of diverting from San Vicente Boulevard along 26 th Street and Carlyle Avenue before returning to San Vicente Boulevard via Page IV.L-5

6 7 th Street. Within the immediate project site vicinity, Line 4 provides an eastbound stop along San Vicente Boulevard at Bundy Drive (south approach) and westbound stops at both Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive. This line also serves the Santa Monica Civic Center, 3 rd Street Promenade, Westside Pavilion, and Santa Monica Place among other points of interest. During weekdays, Line 4 provides service from approximately 6:15 AM to 7:45 PM, with approximately 30 minute headways in both directions throughout the day. On weekends and holidays, Line 4 provides service from about 7:00 AM to 7:45 PM, although headways increase to approximately one hour in both directions. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 3 This route provides service generally between the UCLA Hilgard Terminal in Westwood and the Metro Green Line Aviation Station near Imperial Highway and Aviation Boulevard south of the Los Angeles International Airport. Line 3 travels along Hilgard Avenue, Wilshire Boulevard, San Vicente Boulevard, and Montana Avenue in the project site vicinity, and provides a westbound stop at San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue, just south of the project site; the nearest eastbound stops are located at Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive, and at San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, still within walking distance from the site, but slightly less convenient for project patrons or employees. Between the project site vicinity and the Metro Green Line Aviation Station, Line 3 continues west on Montana Avenue, then travels primarily along Lincoln Boulevard, although it diverts to 4 th Street in the City of Santa Monica between Wilshire Boulevard and Pico Boulevard. At Manchester Avenue in the Westchester community of Los Angeles, Line 3 turns east to travel along Sepulveda Boulevard, 96 th Street, Airport Boulevard, Century Boulevard, and Aviation Boulevard to reach the Metro Green Line Aviation Station. Line 3 provides weekday service between approximately 5:30 AM and 12:30 AM, with approximately 15 to 30 minute headways through the project site vicinity. Weekend service is also available on Line 3, operating between approximately 6:00 AM and 12:30 AM on both Saturday and Sunday, again with 15 to 30 minute headways. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 14 This line provides weekday and weekend service between Moraga Drive/Sepulveda Boulevard northeast of the project site and the Del Rey/Mar Vista communities of the City of Los Angeles, traveling primarily by way of Church Lane, Sunset Boulevard, Barrington Avenue, Montana Avenue, and Bundy Drive in the study area. Line 14 provides stops in the immediate project vicinity at San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue, and at Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive for both directions of its route. South of the study area, Line 14 continues along Bundy Drive and Centinela Avenue, to make a loop along Washington Boulevard, Inglewood Boulevard, and Culver Boulevard before returning to Centinela Avenue for the return trip north. On weekdays, Line 14 operates from approximately 6:00 AM to 9:30 PM, with travel headways of approximately 15 to 30 minutes. Weekend service is provided between approximately 6:30 AM to 9:00 PM, with headways of approximately 20 minutes throughout the day on both Saturday and Sunday. As shown in Figure IV.L-1 and described in detail above, the project site specifically and the study area in general are served by several public transportation providers, and it would not be unreasonable to expect that some of the proposed project s employees and patrons would utilize these public transit services for travel to and from the site on both local and regional/commute trips. However, in order to present the most conservative analysis of the potential traffic impacts of the proposed project, no significant use of public transportation was assumed beyond those nominal transit trips intrinsically included in the IT and WLA TIMP trip generation rates, which are described in greater detail below. Page IV.L-6

7 xisting Traffic Conditions Based on the analysis requirements of the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT), the existing (2010) and future forecast project completion year (2014), traffic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours were studied at a total of 12 intersections in the project vicinity. These intersections, listed below, represent the locations most likely to be affected by traffic generated by the proposed project. 1. Sunset Boulevard and Kenter Avenue 2. Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive 3. Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue 4. San Vicente Boulevard and 26 th Street 5. San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (east and west intersections) 6. Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue 7. Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive 8. San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue 9. San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue 10. Wilshire Boulevard and Bundy Drive 11. Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue 12. Wilshire Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard/Federal Avenue The locations of the study intersections selected for analysis are shown in relation to the project site in Figure IV.L-2. Traffic volume count data for the study intersections were obtained from counts performed for this study for Hirsch/Green in May and early June of While these data are considered to continue to accurately reflect traffic volumes and intersection operations within the study area for current conditions, the data were adjusted using a traffic growth factor of 1.0 percent, compounded annually (as described in detail later in this document) to reflect current (year 2010) conditions. The count data represent typical mid-week conditions, during weeks with no holidays or notable special events, and with area schools generally in normal operation. The existing (year 2010) peak hour traffic volumes at each of the 12 study intersections are shown in Figure IV.L-8 for the AM peak hour conditions and in Figure IV.L-9 for the PM peak hour conditions. The existing peak hour conditions at the study intersections are discussed in greater detail later in this section. Note that study intersection number 4, San Vicente Boulevard and 26 th Street, is located on the boundary between the City of Los Angeles and the City of Santa Monica, with the majority of the intersection (both Page IV.L-7

8 approaches of 26 th Street and the western leg of San Vicente Boulevard) within Santa Monica. As such, this location is under the operational jurisdiction of that City, and a supplemental evaluation of the operations at that intersection, based on the City of Santa Monica traffic analysis criteria, is provided for informational purposes in addition to the required City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) impact analyses. Additionally, study intersection number 5, San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive, consists of two offset signalized approaches of Bundy Drive. For purposes of this analysis, each approach was analyzed as a separate intersection in order to accurately determine the project s incremental effects at each location. However, both approaches are controlled by the same signal controller and, as such, these two locations are considered to be a single intersection. All of the study intersections are controlled by traffic signals, and are under the operational jurisdiction of the LADOT, with the exception of the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street, which is within the City of Santa Monica. The 11 intersections within the City of Los Angeles are currently equipped with the City s Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system and several locations, including Sunset Boulevard and Kenter Avenue, Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue, Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive, and the three intersections along Wilshire Boulevard (Bundy, Barrington, and San Vicente) are further improved with the next-generation Adaptive Traffic Control System (ATCS) traffic signal coordination software. These advanced traffic signal control programs enhances the overall capacity of a network of interconnected traffic signals by monitoring the traffic flow from adjacent intersections and adjusting signal timing and/or signal phasing in real time to maximize vehicular throughput at intersections and minimize delays along entire travel corridors. The intersection of San Vicente and 26th, within the City of Santa Monica, is not currently equipped with ATSAC/ATCS or any type of advanced traffic signal coordination. Based on LADOT s current traffic study policies, this study uses the Critical Movement Analysis ( CMA ) methodology for the analysis and evaluation of traffic operations at signalized intersections within the City of Los Angeles, as detailed in Circular Number 212 published by the Transportation Research Board. 1 This describes the operating characteristics of an intersection in terms of the "Level of Service", based on intersection traffic volume and other variables such as number and type of signal phasing, lane geometries, and other factors which determine both the quantity of traffic that can move through an intersection ( Capacity ) and the quality of that traffic flow ("Level of Service" or LOS ). The City of Santa Monica prefers to evaluate the operations of signalized intersections within its jurisdiction based on the signalized intersection analysis methodologies described in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2. This document, also published by the Transportation Research Board, provides analysis techniques that utilize much of the same intersection information regarding traffic volumes and lane geometries and configurations as the CMA methodology, but bases the intersection level of service assessments primarily on vehicle approach delays rather than volume-to-capacity utilization. Because the City of Santa Monica uses this alternative intersection operations evaluation methodology, LADOT recommended that, in addition to the CMA analysis, the intersection of San 1 2 Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Circular Number 212, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., Page IV.L-8

9 Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street also be evaluated using the HCM criteria in order to provide supplemental information to the City of Santa Monica regarding the operations of this location. Under both the CMA and HCM analysis methodologies, "capacity" represents the maximum total hourly volume of vehicles in the critical lanes that has a reasonable expectation of passing through an intersection under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. Critical lanes are defined generally as those intersection movement or groups of movements which exhibit the highest per lane volumes, thus defining the maximum amount of vehicles attempting to negotiate through the intersection during a specific time period. The capacity of an intersection also varies based on the number of signal phases for the location; more signal phases generally result in more lost or start up time, as vehicles exhibit slight driver reaction delays when signal indications change from red to green. Additional signal phases introduce more signal indication changes, creating more opportunities for lost time during the signal cycle, and reducing the efficiency and thus the capacity of an intersection. For the CMA methodology, the intersection capacities for various levels of service are based on the number of traffic signal phases, as shown in Table IV.L-1; the HCM analysis methodology expresses capacity in terms of a calculated saturation flow rate for the critical lanes, and the values shown in Table IV.L-1 are not applicable. For the intersection evaluation and planning purposes of this traffic study, LADOT policy requires that the maximum baseline capacity of an intersection (without ATSAC/ATCS traffic signal coordination upgrades, as described later in this section) equates to the value of Level of Service ( LOS ) shown in Table IV.L-1. This value represents the highest volume of traffic that can be adequately accommodated through urban area intersections without a breakdown in operations, resulting in unstable traffic flows, high levels of congestion, and long delays. Under the CMA analysis methodology, the Critical Movement indices at an intersection are determined by first identifying the sum of all critical movement volumes at that intersection. This value is then divided by the appropriate capacity value for the type of signal control at the study intersection to arrive at the CMA value for the intersection, which is roughly equivalent to the volume-to-capacity ratio for the location. However, field observations indicate that several of the key travel corridors through the study area, including San Vicente Boulevard, Sunset Boulevard, and Wilshire Boulevard, exhibit substantial traffic congestion at critical intersections during at least some portions of the peak periods. This congestion can result in unstable traffic flows along the entire corridor, producing secondary vehicular queuing and delays at other upstream intersections, often preventing vehicles at those locations from clearing the intersection. During these periods, impeded traffic flows at any of the intersections due to accidents, high pedestrian volumes, or other factors can result in congestion and delays at the remaining corridor intersections, producing gridlock conditions for brief to extended periods throughout the area. To account for these conditions, the baseline capacities at several of the study intersections were adjusted to reflect the observed reduced vehicular throughput. Intersection capacities were assumed to be reduced by 10 percent from the default capacities identified in Table IV.L-1 for intersections along Sunset Boulevard, and by 15 percent for those along the Wilshire Boulevard corridor. Capacity reduction adjustments were also assumed at several individual intersections, including Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive (30 percent), San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (20 percent), and San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue (15 percent) in order that the calculated intersection levels of service better Page IV.L-9

10 reflected the observed intersection conditions, or to provide consistency with operational conditions at adjacent intersections. No capacity adjustments were assumed for the remaining study intersections, as the basic CMA calculations were determined to accurately reflect the observed traffic conditions at these locations. Table IV.L-1 Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges per Level of Service Level of Maximum Sum of Critical Volumes (VPH) vs. Number of Signal Phases Service Two Phases Three Phases Four or More Phases A B 1,050 1, C 1,200 1,140 1,100 D 1,350 1,275 1,225 1,500 1,425 1,375 F Not Applicable For planning applications only. Not appropriate for operations/design applications. Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Level of Service describes the quality of traffic flow through the intersection, and this definition is applicable to both the CMA and HCM analysis methodologies. LOS A through LOS C provides good traffic flow characteristics, with little or no congestion or vehicle delay. LOS D typically is the level for which a metropolitan area street system is designed, and represents the highest level of smooth traffic flow. LOS represents volumes at or near the capacity of the intersection and can result in stoppages of momentary duration and unstable traffic flow at the upper reaches of this condition. LOS F occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. Note that the LOS definitions do not represent a single intersection operating condition, but rather correspond to a range of CMA or volume-to-capacity (for HCM calculations) values, as shown in Table IV.L-2. Using the procedures described above, the CMA or intersection vehicular delay value and the corresponding LOS for the existing traffic conditions at each of the study intersections were calculated. These baseline calculations were adjusted, however, to account for the operational improvements resulting from the existing ATSAC/ATCS traffic signal coordination enhancements, which are not considered in the basic CMA analysis methodology. LADOT has determined that intersections included within the ATSAC system experience an approximate seven percent increase in capacity as compared to non-atsac equipped locations, while locations equipped with the additional ATCS upgrades experience an approximate 10 percent increase in capacity as compared to non-atsac/atcs locations (or an additional three percent improvement above ATSAC-only equipped intersections). Therefore, per LADOT policy, the basic CMA values calculated using the standard methodologies were reduced by for intersections equipped with ATSAC, and by for intersections improved with both ATSAC Page IV.L-10

11 and the ATCS upgrades, in order to estimate the effectiveness of the resulting increases in intersection capacity. No specific intersection capacity enhancements were assumed for the City of Santa Monica intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street, since ATSAC/ATCS or other signal coordination systems have not yet been implemented by that City within the study area, although the traffic signal operations of this location were assumed to be optimized to maximize the efficiency of the individual intersection. CMA Value Table IV.L-2 Level of Service as a Function of CMA Value or Average Vehicle Delay Ave. Vehicle Delay (sec.) Level of Service Intersection Operation/Traffic Flow Characteristics < < 10 A No congestion; all vehicles clear in a single cycle. > 6.00 < >10 20 B Minimal congestion; all vehicles still clear in a single cycle. > < >20 35 C No major congestion; most vehicles clear in a single cycle. > < >35 55 D > < >55 80 > >80 F Generally uncongested, but vehicles may wait through more than one cycle; no short duration queues form on critical approaches. Increased congestion on critical approaches; long duration queues form at higher end of range. Over capacity; forced flow with long periods of congestion; substantial queues form. Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Therefore, based on the analysis methodologies and adjustment assumptions described above, the existing (year 2010) AM and PM peak hour intersection conditions were calculated, and are summarized in Table IV.L-3. As shown in this table, although six of the 12 study intersections (Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street, Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue, Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive, San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, and Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue) currently operate at acceptable urban levels (LOS D or better) during both of the peak commute hours, the remaining study intersections currently exhibit LOS or LOS F during one or both of the peak hours. Table IV.L-3 Critical Movement Analysis Summary xisting (2010) Conditions No. Intersection Peak Hour CMA (or Delay) a LOS 1 Sunset and Kenter AM PM D 2 Sunset and Bundy AM D Page IV.L-11

12 Table IV.L-3 Critical Movement Analysis Summary xisting (2010) Conditions No. Intersection Peak Hour CMA (or Delay) a LOS PM C 3 Sunset and Barrington AM PM D 4 San Vicente and 26 th Street (City of Santa Monica) AM PM (44.4) b C (D) (38.5) b C (D) c c 5 (a) San Vicente and Bundy (west intersection) AM PM D 5 (b) San Vicente and Bundy (east intersection) AM PM C D 6 Montana and Barrington AM PM A C 7 Montana and Bundy AM PM B D 8 Montana and San Vicente AM PM A 9 San Vicente and Barrington AM PM B C 10 Wilshire and Bundy AM PM Wilshire and Barrington AM PM B A 12 Wilshire and San Vicente/Federal AM PM D a City of Santa Monica HCM delay-based analysis included for informational purposes. b Delay reflects total intersection approach delay in seconds, per HCM methodology. c LOS based on total intersection approach delay, per HCM methodology. Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March It should also be noted that, although many of the study intersections are shown to exhibit LOS D or better conditions during one or both of the peak hours, these results should not be construed that no delays or congestion occur at any time at these locations. As described previously, field observations indicate Page IV.L-12

13 that several of these locations experience brief (15 to 20 minute) periods of heavy congestion and/or increased vehicle delays. However, these observations also indicate that both prior to and following these high-congestion periods, the operations of the intersections generally improve. As a result, the calculated levels of service shown in Table IV.L-3 for each of the study intersections is considered to accurately assess the overall operations of each location over the course of an entire hour during the peak commute traffic periods. Note that the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive actually consists of two offset signalized approaches of Bundy Drive located approximately 150 feet apart. For the purposes of this analysis, each approach was analyzed as a separate intersection in order to accurately determine the project s incremental effects at each location. However, both approaches are controlled by the same signal controller, and as such, these two locations are considered to be a single intersection. Consequently, even though the eastern portion of this intersection intersection 5(b) is calculated to operate at acceptable LOS C and LOS D conditions during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, the intersection as a whole is considered to operate at LOS D and LOS during these periods as shown for intersection 5(a). NVIRONMNTAL IMPACTS Thresholds of Significance Appendix G of the State CQA Thresholds Guide In accordance with guidance provided in Appendix G of the State CQA Guidelines, the proposed project could have a potentially significant impact related to traffic if it were to: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections). b) xceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). e) Result in inadequate emergency access. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). Page IV.L-13

14 West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan The project site is located within the boundaries of the West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (WLA TIMP) area. The WLA TIMP methodology requires an analysis of AM and/or PM-peak hour trips and payment of Transportation Impact Assessment fees. The Specific Plan also establishes thresholds for which the provision of a Transportation Mitigation Plan and/or a Transportation Demand Management Plan may be required. Certain projects may also be required to make applicable highway dedications and improvements as required by the Department of Transportation or to guarantee them pursuant to the Department of Public Works B-Permit procedures. The WLA TIMP provides for exemption of trips generated by Local Serving Uses, since this type of use serves a local community, generates trips of three miles or less, and does not substantially affect the Regional or Subregional transportation infrastructure. 3 (All of the uses proposed for the project fall under the definition of Local Serving Uses. ) Impact Significance Criteria LADOT LADOT defines a significant traffic impact attributable to a project based on a stepped scale, with intersections at high volume-to-capacity ratios being more sensitive to additional traffic than those operating with available surplus capacity. Thus, for intersections within the City of Los Angeles, a significant impact is identified as an increase in the CMA value, due to project-related traffic, of or more when the final ( With Project ) intersection Level of Service is LOS or F, a CMA increase of or more when the final Level of Service is LOS D, or an increase of or more at LOS C. No significant impacts are deemed to occur at LOS A or B, as these operating conditions exhibit sufficient surplus capacities to accommodate traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays. These intersection impact criteria are summarized in Table IV.L-4. Table IV.L-4 City of Los Angeles Significant Traffic Impact Criteria LOS Final (With Project) CMA Value Project-Related Increase in CMA Value A or B < No Impacts C > < > D > < > or F > > Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March City of Los Angeles, West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan, website: accessed on April 27, 2009, at page 3 (as numbered within the document). Page IV.L-14

15 City of Santa Monica The City of Santa Monica also utilizes a variable significance threshold to evaluate the significance of a project s incremental impact, although that jurisdiction s criteria are based on increases in intersection delay, rather than on increases in the volume-to-capacity ratios used by LADOT. The proposed project is located only within the jurisdiction of the City of Los Angeles. Therefore, City of Santa Monica thresholds are provided and analyzed for informational purposes only. For the single study intersection located within the City of Santa Monica (San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street), a significant impact is identified as an increase in either the intersection delay or the level of service, and is also dependent on the classifications of the streets comprising the intersection. Additionally, unlike the LADOT significance criteria, the City of Santa Monica does identify the potential for significant impacts at intersections operating at LOS A and B. The City of Santa Monica intersection impact criteria are summarized in Table IV.L-5. Without Project Level of Service Table IV.L-5 City of Santa Monica Significant Traffic Impact Criteria Roadway Classification With Project Condition Impact Significant If: Collector Average vehicle delay increases by 15 seconds or A, B, or C more; OR if LOS becomes D,, or F Arterial Average vehicle delay increases by 15 seconds or more; OR if LOS becomes or F Collector Any net increase in average vehicle delay D Average vehicle delay increases by 15 seconds or Arterial more; OR if LOS becomes or F Collector or Arterial Any net increase in average vehicle delay F Collector or Arterial HCM V/C increase of or more Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Project Impacts Trip Generation Traffic-generating characteristics of many land uses, including the retail, restaurant, and office uses and single-family residential uses comprising both the proposed project as well as the existing site development, have been extensively surveyed and documented in studies conducted under the auspices of the Institute of Transportation ngineers (IT). The most recent information is available in the IT 8th dition Trip Generation manual. 4 The trip generation rates and equations identified in the IT manual are nationally recognized, and are used as the basis for most traffic studies conducted in the City of Los Angeles. 4 Trip Generation, 8 th dition, Institute of Transportation ngineers, Washington, D.C., Page IV.L-15

16 The project site lies within an area under the jurisdiction of the WLA TIMP, which identifies traffic management and analysis strategies specifically tailored for the West Los Angeles area. The WLA TIMP defines PM peak hour trip generation rates for a variety of land uses, and LADOT requires the use of the WLA TIMP trip generation rates where applicable. Note that daily and AM peak hour trip generation rates are not identified in the WLA TIMP; LADOT recommends using the applicable 8 th dition IT rates and/or equations for the appropriate land uses to estimate trip generation during these time periods. As described in Section II, Project Description, the project s commercial component is comprised of a number of individual retail, restaurant, and office uses, located within an integrated site sharing a single parking facility and access, and surrounding a common pedestrian plaza from which all of the site s uses can be accessed. Based on these and other factors, the project in its entirety is considered to be a shopping center under the definition contained in the WLA TIMP (as well as under the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan, which also applies to the project site), and as such, would typically be evaluated for trip generation and associated traffic impacts based on this definition. However, in order to provide the most conservative assessment of the potential traffic impacts of the proposed development, LADOT determined that while the project is a shopping center, the retail, restaurant, and office components of the site should be evaluated as separate, stand-alone uses. Modest trip generation reductions for internal capture were permitted in recognition of the integrated nature of the site. The project was evaluated as a 58,500 square foot shopping center (which includes 7,000 square feet of storage), plus 10,500 square feet of restaurant area (including both the 6,800 square feet of enclosed floor area and the 3,700 square feet of outdoor dining space), and an additional 8,000 square feet of general office space. The proposed new single-family residence along Saltair Avenue was also evaluated as a separate component for trip generation purposes. These trip generation assumptions produce a worst case estimate of the number of trips resulting from the project, assuring that all potential project-related traffic impacts in the study area are identified. Based on these LADOT recommendations, the baseline trip generation rates utilized in this analysis are summarized in Table IV.L-6. The baseline IT trip generation rates shown in Table IV.L-1 are usually derived from actual counts of vehicles entering and exiting the driveways of the subject land uses, and do not generally account for factors that influence the amount of net traffic generation for the developments. For typical mixed-use retail/restaurant developments, the most significant of these factors involves the effects of internal interaction, or multi-purpose trips, pedestrian or walk-in patronage from nearby commercial developments or residential neighborhoods, and pass-by traffic on the estimates of net new traffic added to the area roadways. Page IV.L-16

17 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-1 Project Area Transit Service Map

18 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-18

19 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-2 Project Study Intersection Locations

20 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-20

21 Use Table IV.L-6 Project and xisting Uses Trip Generation Rates Rate General Retail (Shopping Center) = per 1,000 gross square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 820) Daily Trips T = (A) AM Peak Hour T = 1.00 (A); I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% PM Peak Hour b T = 8.03 (A); I/B = 48%, O/B = 52% a Restaurant (High-Turnover, Sit-Down) = per 1,000 gross square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 932) Daily Trips T = (A) AM Peak Hour T = (A); I/B = 52%, O/B = 48% PM Peak Hour b T = (A); I/B = 59%, O/B = 41% General Office = per 1,000 gross square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 710) Daily Trips T = (A) AM Peak Hour T = 1.55 (A); I/B = 88%, O/B = 12% PM Peak Hour b T = 2.84 (A); I/B = 17%, O/B = 83% Single-Family Detached Housing = per dwelling unit (IT Land Use 210) Daily Trips T = 9.57 (A) AM Peak Hour T = 0.75 (A); I/B = 25%, O/B = 75% PM Peak Hour b T = 1.01 (A); I/B = 63%, O/B = 37% Specialty Retail Center = per 1,000 square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 814) Daily Trips AM Peak Hour T = (A) T = 1.33 (A); I/B = 60%, O/B = 40% (3% of Daily, per SanDAG) PM Peak Hour b T = 5.00 (A); I/B = 44%, O/B = 56% Medical/Dental Office = per 1,000 square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 720) Daily Trips T = (A) AM Peak Hour T = 2.30 (A); I/B = 79%, O/B = 21% PM Peak Hour b T = 4.08 (A); I/B = 27%, O/B = 73% Nursery (Garden Center) = per 1,000 square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 817) Daily Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour b T = (A) T = 1.31 (A); I/B = 52%, O/B = 48% (directional split from AM Peak hour of generator) T = 3.73 (A); I/B = 51%, O/B = 49% (directional split from PM Peak hour of generator) Coffee/Donut Shop w/o Drive Through Window = per 1,000 square feet of floor area (IT Land Use 936) Daily Trips T = (A) AM Peak Hour T = (A); I/B = 51%, O/B = 49% Page IV.L-21

22 Use Table IV.L-6 Project and xisting Uses Trip Generation Rates PM Peak Hour b T = 9.60 (A); I/B = 50%, O/B = 50% T = Trip nds; A = Building Area in 1,000 sf; U = Number of Residential Units; I/B = Inbound Trip Percentage; O/B = Outbound Rate a Interpolated from WLA TIMP rates for 58,500 sf b PM Peak hour trip generation rates per WLA TIMP Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Internal interaction is typically expressed in the form of multi-purpose trips within strictly commercial developments (with no on-site residential component). This factor reflects the use of multiple on-site services and amenities by patrons of other uses of the site. For instance, it is expected that some of the retail patrons of the new development will choose to dine at one of the on-site cafes or restaurants, or vice versa, during a single trip to the project site. This patronage of multiple uses within the same site reduces the number of vehicle trips traveling to and from the site as compared to that of individual stand alone uses, as is generally identified in the IT data, as customers would not have to make separate trips for dining and shopping. The second trip adjustment factor, walk-in patronage, reflects that the project s proposed retail and restaurant components are intended to provide local-serving facilities within convenient walking distance of nearby commercial developments along San Vicente Boulevard, or for residents of the nearby neighborhoods. The ability of area residents or employees to conveniently walk to nearby retail and dining establishments also reduces vehicle traffic not only to and from the site, but throughout the area, as these project patrons would not need to drive to other more distant stores and restaurants. The final trip adjustment factor, pass-by trip activity, involves the capture of an existing trip passing by the project site. These trips are already on the area roadway network for other purposes, such as a trip to or from work, or perhaps to or from other shopping destinations, and as drivers pass by the project site, the shops, restaurants, amenities, or other factors present at the project site result in an impulse stop at the development. Such activity is considered to be an interim stop along a trip which existed without the development of the project, and therefore vehicles making these stops are not considered to be newly generated project-related traffic. This effect is anticipated to be particularly evident for the proposed project, which will provide a mixture of local-serving retail, commercial, and restaurant uses targeted toward the surrounding residential neighborhoods and/or non-local commute traffic passing by the project site along San Vicente Boulevard to or from their current destinations. Note, however, that no internal interaction, walk-in/pedestrian utilization, or pass-by trip reductions are considered applicable to the proposed single-family residence component of the project, although it is likely that the residents of this new home would walk to the project site to shop or dine. Page IV.L-22

23 LADOT staff was consulted regarding the internal interaction and walk-in patronage factors, since these trip adjustment characteristics are somewhat variable, and are highly dependent on the size, type, and mix of the land uses within the project itself, as well as on the location of the proposed project and the ability of nearby residents or commute traffic to conveniently access the site. Based on these factors, and a detailed review of the proposed project s commercial components, LADOT determined that the proposed retail and restaurant components would exhibit internal interaction factors of approximately five percent each (essentially sharing a total of 10 percent of the project s on-site patronage). Further, it was estimated that about five percent of the project s retail patronage and about 10 percent of the site s restaurant patronage would be the result of pedestrian walk-in activity from the nearby commercial and retail developments, as well as from the nearby residential neighborhoods in the project vicinity. However, no trip reductions were assumed in this analysis to account for patronage of the project s retail and/or restaurant uses by residents of the nearby neighborhoods that may be redirected to the project site from more distant or less convenient retail/restaurant facilities, although this factor is expected to result in additional traffic reductions beyond those specifically identified. Finally, although it is likely that some employees of the proposed office component would shop or dine on site, no internal interaction trip adjustments were assumed for this use. Walk-in or pedestrian patronage of the proposed office component is not applicable. Unlike the internal interaction and walk-in patronage adjustment factors, which can be variable depending on the specific characteristics of a development, LADOT has developed a series of recommended pass-by trip reduction percentages for various development types and sizes. These recommended pass-by reduction factors are considered to be generally applicable to the identified land uses for projects located throughout the City. Based on these recommendations, and discussions with LADOT staff, it is expected that the project s retail components would exhibit an approximately 40 percent pass-by trip reduction, while the proposed restaurant uses would experience approximately 20 percent of their traffic as pass-by trips. As with the walk-in or pedestrian trip reduction factors described previously, no significant pass-by trip activity was considered to be applicable to the proposed project s office component. The existing commercial and retail uses on the project site were also assumed to exhibit trip reductions similar to those discussed above, although the existing café/coffee shop use was assumed to exhibit a higher (15 percent) internal interaction component than the other existing or proposed site uses. Further, as with the proposed office component, the existing general office and medical office uses on the site were not assumed to exhibit any trip reductions, primarily because these types of commercial developments generally operate as destination uses, with little or no pass-by traffic or walk-in patronage. Similarly, no trip reductions were considered to be applicable for the two existing singlefamily residences on the site. Using the trip IT and/or WLA TIMP generation rates shown in Table IV.L-6, combined with the appropriate trip reduction factors described above, projections of the amount of net new traffic generated by the proposed project were derived and are summarized in Table IV.L-7. Once completed and occupied, the commercial portion of the project is expected to result in a total of approximately 1,465 net new daily trips including 77 net new trips (40 in, 37 out) during the AM peak hour, and 256 net new trips (143 in, 113 out) during the PM peak hour, including adjustments for the removal of the existing siterelated trips, and consideration of appropriate site-specific trip reduction factors, such as internal project Page IV.L-23

24 interaction, pedestrian/walk-in patronage, and pass-by trips. The residential component of the project the new single-family residence proposed for the Saltair Avenue frontage of the site would result in a net reduction of nine daily trips, including net reductions of one outbound trip during both the AM and PM peak hours, again adjusting for the removal of the two existing single-family homes occupying that portion of the project site. In total, the proposed project is expected to result in a net increase of approximately 1,456 daily trips, including 76 net new trips (40 in, 36 out) during the AM peak hour and 255 trips (143 in, 112 out) during the PM peak hour. However, per LADOT policy, trip credits for pass-by activity are not applicable to the study intersections immediately adjacent to or closest to the project site; this policy only effects the commercial components of the proposed and existing uses, as the trip estimates for the proposed and existing single-family residence(s) along Saltair Avenue do not assume pass-by trip activity. Therefore, the potential net project traffic additions associated with the commercial portion of the project at the site-adjacent study intersections were recalculated to remove the anticipated pass-by trips from the calculation (for both the proposed and existing uses). The results of this recalculation indicate that the site-adjacent intersections would experience project-related traffic increases of approximately 2,438 net new daily trips, including 111 net new trips (59 in, 52 out) during the AM peak hour, and 437 net new trips (234 in, 203 out) during the PM peak hour. Including the overall trip reductions previously identified for the single-family residence component of the site, the total project would result in a net increase of 2,429 net new daily trips, including 110 net new trips (59 in, 51 out) during the AM peak hour and 437 net new trips (234 in, 203 out) during the PM peak hour. These higher project-related trip values were used to assess the project s potential traffic impacts at the two site-adjacent intersections of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive, and San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue, while the previously described net project trips (including pass-by trip reductions) were used to determine project traffic impacts at the remaining 10 study intersections. The proposed project trip generation shown in Table IV.K-7, combines the commercial spaces together (51,500 sf retail and 7,000 sf storage) and combines the restaurant spaces together (6,800 sf restaurant and 3,700 sf outdoor dining area) because this results in the most conservative analysis. Note that the Pass-by trips for General Retail is 40% and Specialty Retail is 10% because of the difference in land uses. Table IV.L-7 Project Trip Generation Size/Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total Proposed Project 58,500 sf General Retail 2, (Less 5% Internal Project Capture) (126) (2) (1) (3) (12) (12) (24) (Less 5% Walk-In/Pedestrian Utilization) (119) (2) (1) (3) (11) (11) (22) (Less 40% Pass-by Trips) (907) (13) (9) (22) (82) (88) (170) Page IV.L-24

25 Table IV.L-7 Project Trip Generation Size/Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total Subtotal General Retail Trips 1, ,500 sf High-Turnover Restaurants a 1, (Less 5% Internal Project Capture) (67) (3) (3) (6) (4) (3) (7) (Less 10% Walk-In/Pedestrian Utilization) (127) (6) (6) (12) (8) (5) (13) (Less 20% Pass-by Trips) (228) (11) (10) (21) (14) (9) (23) Subtotal Restaurant Trips ,000 sf Office unit Single-Family Residential Subtotal Proposed Project Trips 2, Less xisting Development 13,496 sf Office (total) sf Medical/Dental Office ,430 sf Specialty Retail (total) (Less 5% Internal Project Capture) (34) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) (Less 5% Walk-In/Pedestrian Utilization) (33) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) (Less 10% Pass-by Trips) (62) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Subtotal xisting Retail Trips ,500 sf Nursery (plants) (Less 5% Internal Project Capture) (6) (1) 0 (1) (Less 5% Walk-In/Pedestrian Utilization) (6) (1) 0 (1) (Less 20% Pass-by Trips) (23) (1) 0 (1) (1) (1) (2) Subtotal xisting Nursery Trips sf Café/Coffee Shop (Less 15% Internal Project Capture) (29) (1) (1) (2) (1) 0 (1) (Less 5% Walk-In/Pedestrian Utilization) (8) (1) 0 (1) (Less 50% Pass-by Trips) (77) (3) (3) (6) (1) (1) (2) Subtotal xisting Café/Coffee Shop Trips unit Single-Family Residential Subtotal xisting Uses Trips Total Net New Project Site Trips 1, a Includes 6,800 sf restaurant and 3,700 sf outdoor dining area Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Page IV.L-25

26 Trip Distribution Next, the general geographic distribution of the project s trips was identified, based primarily on the relative distribution of the population from which patrons and employees of the proposed retail and restaurant facilities would be drawn, although local demographic information was also reviewed, and existing traffic patterns in the project area were analyzed. The local-serving characteristics of the uses proposed for the project site were also considered and, as such, it is expected that most of the project s trips would be generated within a radius of one to two miles of the site, although some regional travel to and from the project was also assumed. This and other information was used to estimate the overall geographic distribution of project trips throughout the local area and surrounding region, as summarized in Table IV.L-8. Traffic Assignment The assignment of the anticipated project traffic to the surrounding street and highway system was accomplished in several steps. First, the general geographic directional distribution percentages for the surface streets and freeways were assigned to key routes serving the project area. This step considered many factors influencing the project traffic s access routes to and from the site, including the completeness of the overall surface street system in the study area (accounting for any discontinuities in key travel routes) and the locations of freeway ramps in the project vicinity. The resulting general project traffic assignment percentages are shown in Figure IV.L-1; for purposes of this analysis, both the existing and proposed site uses were assumed to exhibit the same general geographic travel patterns. Table IV.L-8 Geographic Project Trip Distribution Percentages Direction Streets (%) Freeways (%) Total (%) North South ast 10 n/a 10 West 35 n/a 35 Totals Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March The next step in the project traffic assignment process involved the refinement of the general travel patterns described in Table IV.L-8 and shown in Figure IV.L-3, to identify the intersection-level turning movements along the key travel routes to and from the project site. This step considered such localized traffic factors as turning movement restrictions at various intersections in the project area and the locations of the proposed project s driveways in assigning project trip movements at the study intersections. The resulting turning-movement project trip assignment percentages at each of the 12 study intersections are shown in Figure IV.L-4. Page IV.L-26

27 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-3 Project Geographic Trip Distribtion Percentages

28 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-28

29 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-4 Project Trip Assignment Percentages

30 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-30

31 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-5 Net Project Trips AM Peak Hour

32 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-32

33 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-6 Net Project Trips PM Peak Hour

34 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-34

35 The final step was to calculate the number of net new project trips traveling through each of the study intersections, including both the addition of new project-related trips generated by the proposed uses and the removal of the trips associated with the existing site uses. The results of the project traffic assignment process provide the necessary level of detail to conduct the traffic analysis and to identify incremental project traffic impacts at the study intersections. The total net new project traffic volumes at each of the study intersections are shown in Figure IV.L-5 for the AM peak hour conditions and in Figure IV.L-6 for the PM peak hour conditions. Project Roadway Improvements The Los Angeles Municipal Code ( LAMC ) requires that all development projects within the City to improve the roadways and other transportation facilities adjacent to their respective sites to the rights-ofway and street widths appropriate to each street s designation as noted in the Transportation lement of the City of Los Angeles General Plan and per LADOT and City of Los Angeles Bureau of ngineering standards. The project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue, with frontages along both streets, and as such, the applicant would be responsible for improving both roadways to the necessary requirements. San Vicente Boulevard is designated as a Scenic Secondary Highway throughout the study area. This facility currently exhibits a variable total dedication of between 130 and 134 feet, including a consistent half-street dedication of 65 feet on the northern side (project side) of the street, and varying between 65 to 69 feet on the south side. Secondary Highways are typically required to provide a full roadway dedication of 90 feet; however, the Scenic designation provides for adjustments to the requirements based on the specific conditions of the roadway and/or area surrounding the facility. Preliminary consultation with the City of Los Angeles Bureau of ngineering has indicated that the project may be required to provide a four-foot dedication along its frontage of San Vicente Boulevard, resulting in a future half-street dedication of approximately 69 feet. San Vicente Boulevard within the dedicated rightof-way is currently developed to a total roadway width of approximately 106 feet, including two 34-foot one-way roadways (for the eastbound and westbound directions) separated by an approximately 38-foot wide landscaped median island, leaving a 12-foot sidewalk along the north side of the roadway, and between a 12 and 16-foot sidewalk on the south side. Although potential right-of-way dedication of four feet is anticipated, no roadway widenings along the project s approximately 350-foot frontage are expected. Similar to the dedications obtained along the south side of the roadway, the additional rights-of-way will be utilized to provide for wider sidewalks until such time as the remainder of the north side of San Vicente Boulevard can be appropriately dedicated, and meaningful roadway widenings throughout the subject segment of the roadway (between Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive) can be implemented. Local Streets such as Saltair Avenue typically require a total dedication of 60 feet (30-foot half right-ofway) and include a total improved roadway width of 36 to 40 feet (18 to 20-foot wide half roadway). Saltair Avenue adjacent to the project frontage is currently dedicated to the required 60-foot total width, although the roadway itself is only improved to a total width of approximately 34 feet, or about 17 feet on each side of the centerline. As such, the proposed project could be required by the Bureau of ngineering Page IV.L-35

36 to provide up to a three-foot widening to complete the required roadway improvements. However, Saltair Avenue in the immediate project vicinity is a low volume local access residential roadway, which to the north of the project site, exhibits further reduced roadway widths; curb-and-gutter and/or sidewalk improvements are also absent through many segments of the roadway in this area. Therefore, in order to maintain the existing low-volume residential characteristics of this street, it is recommended that no roadway widenings be required at this time, although appropriate curb-and-gutter and sidewalk improvements along the project frontage of Saltair Avenue should be implemented. Future Traffic Conditions Future (year 2014) traffic volumes in the project vicinity, and indeed throughout the region, are anticipated to increase as a result of a number of factors, although two factors contribute most significantly to area traffic growth. The first of these factors is the result of simple ambient increases in the number of vehicles on the roadway system. This ambient traffic growth occurs on both a local and regional basis due to a number of reasons, including but not limited to increases in population (not tied to development), additional vehicles for existing households (as children become driving age, or new multivehicle status for current single-vehicle families), economic factors such as new jobs creating new worker trips, and other factors. The second factor associated with future traffic growth is new traffic resulting from ongoing development. This factor is generally regarded as more localized than the ambient growth factor described earlier and is based on specific development activity within or in close proximity to the project area. A survey of such development activity indicated that there are a number of other projects currently either planned or under construction which will likely contribute to future traffic growth within the study area. Since the project is not expected to be built and occupied until the year 2014, the analysis of future traffic conditions in the project vicinity has been expanded to include potential traffic volume increases expected from both ambient growth and from traffic generated by projects that have not yet been developed. These Future (2014) Without Project volumes represent the forecast traffic conditions in the study area at the time the project is expected to be completed, but prior to its occupancy, and form the baseline conditions against which the effects of the project s incremental traffic additions (calculated earlier) are assessed. Without Project Traffic Forecasts The methodology for estimating future traffic volumes was as follows: First, the existing year (2010) traffic volumes described earlier were used to estimate future conditions (year 2014) through the use of an ambient traffic growth factor. This growth factor, compounded annually, was applied to all of the turning movement volumes at the study intersections to form the "baseline" traffic volume conditions for the future study year Although the annual growth factor is expected to fully represent all potential area traffic increases, for the purposes of conservative analysis, traffic generated from nearby related projects was also added to these future baseline traffic volumes, to form the basis for the Without Project conditions. Page IV.L-36

37 Ambient Traffic Growth Based on analyses of the trends in traffic growth in the study area over the last several years, as documented in the CMP, LADOT determined that an annual traffic growth factor of 1.0 percent is reasonable. In fact, as documented in the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP), actual anticipated traffic growth in the Westside area encompassing and surrounding the study vicinity, is forecast to be approximately 0.80 to 0.85 percent annually, inclusive of both ambient growth and traffic from cumulative area development, and as such, the assumed 1.0 percent annual growth factor is expected to be conservative. This ambient traffic growth factor is used to account for expected increases in traffic resulting from general ambient traffic growth in the study vicinity due to ongoing regional population growth, or from potential development projects not yet proposed or outside of the study area. The ambient growth factor, compounded annually, was applied to the 2010 traffic volumes to develop estimates of the future traffic volumes for the future year 2014 baseline conditions. Related Projects In addition to the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth rate, listings of specific projects located within the study area an approximately 2.0-mile radius from the project site were obtained from the LADOT and City of Santa Monica Planning Department. Additionally, a field survey of the study area was conducted to identify any other developments that may not have been included on these lists. As noted previously, the annual ambient traffic growth factor is expected to fully reflect all area traffic growth within the study period, and as such, the inclusion of additional traffic due to specific projects in the study area in addition to the ambient traffic growth may tend to overstate cumulative conditions. A review of the available information indicated that a total of 32 individual projects within the study area site might produce additional traffic at study intersections. Potential traffic from these prospective area developments was added to the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth to produce the estimates of the future 2014 study year traffic volumes. The locations of the 32 identified related projects assumed in this analysis are shown in Figure IV.L-10 and each project is individually listed and described in Table IV.L-9. stimates of the traffic generated by each of the 32 related projects were determined by applying the appropriate trip generation rates or equations from the 8th dition of the IT Trip Generation publication, or were obtained from LADOT or City of Santa Monica records. A summary of the trip generation rates and equations used for the related projects trip generation calculations (where LADOT or City of Santa Monica trip estimates were not available) is contained in the appendix. The related projects trip estimates are summarized in Table IV.L-10. The related project s traffic volumes identified in Table IV.L-10 were then distributed through the study area and assigned to the area roadway and freeway network, including each of the 12 study intersections, using assumptions and methodologies similar to those used to assign the trips generated by the proposed project. The results of the related project s trip assignment process at each of the analyzed study intersections are shown in Figure IV.L-11 for the AM peak hour and in Figure IV.L-12 for the PM peak hour. Page IV.L-37

38 Table IV.L-9 Related Projects Descriptions No. Land Use/Description Size/Units Address 1 Condominiums Office Retail Retail (removed) 49 du 41,000 sf 8,000 sf (12,000 sf) Wilshire Boulevard 2 Fast Food Restaurant 1,900 sf San Vicente Boulevard 3 Restaurant Office Retail 10,000 sf 2,000 sf 30,000 sf San Vicente Boulevard 4 Condominiums 44 du Walnut Lane Condominiums Live/Work Units Office Condominiums Condominiums Retail/Office Condominiums Retail 72 du 22 du 49,000 sf 49 du 95 du 15,000 sf 28 du 4,669 sf 1700 Sawtelle Boulevard Wilshire Boulevard 1164 Barrington Avenue Santa Monica Boulevard 9 Condominiums 36 du 1301 Brockton Avenue 10 Condominiums 28 du 1331 Amherst Avenue 11 Condominiums Apartments (removed) 91 du (25 du) Idaho Avenue 12 Retail (net new) 21,340 sf 1171 Gorham Avenue 13 Retail 1,140 sf Santa Monica Boulevard 14 YMVA at University High School a 65,000 sf 1466 S. Westgate Avenue Retail b Supermarket Restaurant Condominium Senior Housing Medical Office Office (removed) Teledyne (removed) Condominiums Retail Apartments (removed) Retail (removed) Office (removed) 59,317 sf 51,021 sf 9,500 sf 177 du 208 du 384,735 sf (69,000 sf) (166,283 sf) 68 du 10,000 sf (14 du) (4,500 sf) (7,800 sf) Northwest corner Olympic Boulevard and Bundy Drive Santa Monica Boulevard Page IV.L-38

39 Table IV.L-9 Related Projects Descriptions No. Land Use/Description Size/Units Address Restaurant Health Club (removed) Hotel Condominiums Commercial Retail (removed) Gas Station (removed) Retail Apartment Movie Theater (removed) Supermarket Retail Shopping Center (removed) 4,200 sf (4,200 sf) 134 rooms 10 du 16,500 sf (7,000 sf) (8 pumps) 7,000 sf 48 du (1,112 seats) 53,600 sf 11,700 sf (51,000 sf) San Vicente Boulevard Wilshire Boulevard 1130 Gayley Avenue Santa Monica Boulevard 21 Convenience Store 2,800 sf 900 Gayley Avenue 22 Condominium Retail Retail (removed) Residential (removed) 93 du 26,000 sf (26,000 sf) (26 du) Santa Monica Boulevard 23 Apartment 62 du Montana Avenue 24 Restaurant (Take Out) 1,000 sf Santa Monica Boulevard 25 Apartment Grocery 26 du 11,200 sf 2929 Wilshire Boulevard 26 ntertainment/post Production 151,000 sf 2834 Colorado Avenue Condominiums Creative Office Space Retail Condominiums Commercial Retail/Commercial Apartment 352 du 105,250 sf 7,700 sf 22 du 25,400 sf 11,259 sf 26 du 2930 Colorado Avenue 2300 Wilshire Boulevard 2919 Wilshire Boulevard 30 Affordable Housing 44 du 2601 Santa Monica Boulevard Residential Commercial Production Office Residential 10 du 12,280 sf 9,438 sf 10 du 3107 Santa Monica Boulevard 1630 Stewart Street Du = dwelling unit; sf = square feet a Traffic Study for Westside Family YMCA on University High School Campus, Crain & Associates, May b Page IV.L-39

40 Table IV.L-9 Related Projects Descriptions No. Land Use/Description Size/Units Address Traffic Impact Analysis Report, Proposed Mixed-Use Medical Office, Retail and Residential Project Near Olympic Boulevard and Bundy Drive in West Los Angeles, California, Hirsch/Green Transportation Consulting Inc., Revised March Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March The Future (2014) Without Project condition traffic volumes for this analysis were developed by combining the assumed 1.0 percent ambient traffic growth with traffic generated by the potential cumulative development in the vicinity of the project site. The resulting AM and PM peak hour traffic estimates for the Future (2014) Without Project conditions are shown in Figure IV.L-13 and Figure IV.L-14, respectively. These pre-project traffic estimates form the "benchmark" values for determining the incremental project traffic impacts on the street system. Finally, the net traffic volumes generated by the proposed project were combined with the benchmark Without Project volumes to produce the Future (2014) With Project" traffic volume estimates, as shown in Figure IV.L-15 and Figure IV.L-16 for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The future year (2014) traffic volume forecasts were then analyzed using the same CMA/HCM methodologies to produce estimates of the intersection operations under these future scenarios. Table IV.L-10 Related Projects Trip Generation stimates No. Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out 1 Condominiums Office Retail Retail (removed) 49 du 41,000 sf 8,000 sf (12,000 sf) Fast Food Restaurant 1,900 sf Restaurant Office Retail 10,000 sf 2,000 sf 30,000 sf 1, , , Condominiums 44 du Page IV.L-40

41 Table IV.L-10 Related Projects Trip Generation stimates No. Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out 5 Condominiums Live/Work Units 72 du 22 du Office Condominiums 49,000 sf 49 du Condominiums Retail/Office 95 du 15,000 sf Condominiums Retail 28 du 4,669 sf Condominiums 36 du Condominiums 28 du Condominiums Apartments (removed) 91 du (25 du) Retail (net new) 21,340 sf Retail 1,140 sf YMCA at University High School a 65,000 sf 1, Retail b Supermarket Restaurant Condominium 59,317 sf 51,021 sf 9,500 sf 177 du 208 du 20, ,125 Page IV.L-41

42 Table IV.L-10 Related Projects Trip Generation stimates No. Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out Senior Housing Medical Office Office (removed) Teledyne (removed) 16 Condominiums Retail Apartments (removed) Retail (removed) Office (removed) 384,735 sf (69,000 sf) (166,283 sf) 68 du 10,000 sf (14 du) (4,500 sf) (7,800 sf) Restaurant Health Club (removed) 4,200 sf (4,200 sf) 534 (138) 25 (3) 23 (3) 33 (10) 21 (8) Hotel Condominiums Commercial Retail (removed) Gas Station (removed) 19 Retail Apartment Movie Theater (removed) 20 Supermarket Retail Shopping Center (removed) 134 rooms 10 du 16,500 sf (7,000 sf) (8 pumps) 7,000 sf 48 du (1,112 seats) 53,600 sf 11,700 sf (51,000 sf) 1, (1,635) 3 11 (29) (4) 3, Convenience Store 2,800 sf 1, Condominium Retail Retail (removed) Residential (removed) 93 du 26,000 sf (26,000 sf) (26 du) Apartment 62 du Page IV.L-42

43 Table IV.L-10 Related Projects Trip Generation stimates No. Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out 24 Restaurant (Take Out) 1,000 sf Apartment Grocery 26 du 11,200 sf 173 1,145 1, ntertainment/post Production 151,000 sf 2, Condominiums Creative Office Space Retail 352 du 105,250 sf 7,700 sf 2,045 1, , Condominiums Commercial 22 du 25,400 sf 128 1, , Retail/Commercial Apartment 11,259 sf 26 du Affordable Housing 44 du Residential Commercial 10 du 12,280 sf Production Office Residential 9,438 sf 10 du Uses in italics are existing developments to be removed Page IV.L-43

44 Table IV.L-10 Related Projects Trip Generation stimates No. Use Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily Trips In Out In Out Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Highway System Improvements The existing roadway network serving the study area is already improved with a variety of measures to enhance traffic flow and reduce travel delays, including left-turn and/or right-turn channelization at key intersections throughout the study area, and ATSAC traffic signal coordination system at all of the signalized study intersections within the City of Los Angeles, with ATCS upgrades installed as several additional locations. As a result, the only significant highway system improvement planned for the area within the study timeline is LADOT s planned implementation of the ATCS upgrades throughout the study area, providing for further traffic monitoring and signal timing adjustment capability for ATSACequipped locations. According to the most recent information available from LADOT, installation of the remaining ATCS traffic signal coordination upgrades is slated to begin in the summer of Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the ATCS traffic signal coordination upgrades were assumed to be in place for the future year 2014 conditions at the six study intersections within the City of Los Angeles where ATCS is not currently installed (Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive, Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, and San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue). No other significant highway improvements within the study area were identified for implementation by the anticipated 2014 completion date of the proposed project. Therefore, the analysis of Future (2014) Without Project assumed that the future roadway network geometries and capacities would remain unchanged from the current conditions assumed in the analysis of xisting (2010) traffic conditions, with the exception of the implementation of the ATCS upgrades throughout the study area within the City of Los Angeles. As with the analysis of the existing conditions in the study area, no traffic signal coordination improvements were assumed to occur within the study timeline for the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street, which as noted earlier, is within the City of Santa Monica, and is not included in the City of Los Angeles San Vicente Boulevard corridor ATSAC/ATCS system. It should also be noted that, in addition to the programmed City/LADOT roadway improvements described in the preceding paragraphs, some or all of the related projects identified for this analysis may be required to implement localized roadway improvements or other roadway capacity enhancements to mitigate specific traffic-related impacts resulting from those projects. Page IV.L-44

45 As a result, some of the study intersections analyzed may receive future improvements that cannot at this time be identified, but which could improve localized and/or regional access traffic conditions. However, to provide a worst case assessment of potential future traffic conditions in the study area, no related projects mitigation improvements were assumed in this analysis. Analysis of Future (Year 2014) Traffic Conditions Both the Future (2014) Without Project and Future (2014) With Project traffic forecasts were evaluated using the same CMA and/or HCM evaluation procedures and assumptions described earlier in the analysis of the xisting (2010) traffic conditions, with the exception that each of the study intersections within the City of Los Angeles was assumed to include the programmed installation of ATSAC plus the ATCS signal coordination upgrades. As described earlier in the discussion of the analysis of the existing year 2010 conditions, the baseline CMA values for the City of Los Angeles ATSAC/ATCS equipped intersections were reduced by (an CMA reduction for ATSAC alone, plus an additional CMA reduction for the ATCS upgrades) for all future year 2014 traffic scenarios to account for the ATCS upgrades. These future year 2014 traffic analyses identified the forecast operational conditions and associated levels of service at each of the study intersections for both the Without Project and With Project scenarios; the With Project conditions were then compared to the Without Project conditions to determine the incremental traffic impacts directly attributable to the proposed development. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table IV.L-11. Table IV.L-11 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2014) Without and With Project Conditions No. Intersection 1 Sunset and Kenter 2 Sunset and Bundy 3 Sunset and Barrington 4 5 (a) 5(b) San Vicente and 26 th Street (City of Santa Monica) San Vicente and Bundy (west intersection) San Vicente and Bundy (east intersection) 6 Montana and Barrington Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Without Project CMA (or Delay) a LOS (46.3) b (46.3) b F D D (D) c D (D) c D C D B D With Project CMA (or Delay) a LOS Impact (46.9) b (48.1) b F D F D (D) c D (D) c D F C B D (0.6) b (1.8) b d d Page IV.L-45

46 Table IV.L-11 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2014) Without and With Project Conditions No. Intersection 7 Montana and Bundy 8 Montana and San Vicente 9 San Vicente and Barrington 10 Wilshire and Bundy 11 Wilshire and Barrington 12 Wilshire and San Vicente/Federal Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Without Project CMA (or Delay) a LOS a City of Santa Monica HCM delay-based analysis included for informational purposes. b Delay reflects total intersection approach delay in seconds, per HCM methodology. c LOS based on total intersection approach delay, per HCM methodology. C A C F F C C F F With Project CMA (or Delay) a LOS Impact d Indicates significant impact per LADOT or City of Santa Monica traffic impact criteria, as applicable C A F C F F C C F d d d Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March As shown in this table, ambient traffic growth and traffic increases from other development in and around the study area will result in worsening traffic conditions at all of the study intersections. By the year 2014, a total of nine locations are forecast to exhibit LOS or LOS F conditions during at least one of the peak hours under the anticipated future Without Project scenario. The future (2014) Without Project scenario includes three more intersections that are forecast to exhibit LOS or LOS F than current (year 2010) conditions: Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive, and San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. A total of three locations are forecast to operate at LOS F conditions during one or both of the peak hours as compared to no locations currently experiencing LOS F operations, with the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Kenter Avenue forecast to deteriorate from LOS to LOS F during the PM peak hour, the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Bundy Drive changing from LOS to LOS F during both peak hours, and the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard/Federal Avenue deteriorating from LOS to LOS F during the AM peak hour and from LOS D to LOS F during the PM peak hour. It is important to note that these forecast future conditions are considered to be a worst case projection of future conditions, since not all of the assumed related projects are expected to be built, or may be built to a lesser level than currently proposed, and the traffic generated by these potential new developments was not assumed to exhibit any trip linkages with other existing or new development Page IV.L-46

47 (similar to the internal interaction factor described earlier in relation to the project itself, but on an areawide scale). Traffic generated by the proposed project would add to the cumulative traffic increases expected in the project site vicinity, which could have an effect on the operations of the study intersections. As shown in Table IV.L-11, the proposed project is expected to result in incremental increases in the CMA (or HCM delay) values at each of the 12 study intersections to varying degrees, depending upon proximity to the project site, location along the anticipated project traffic travel routes, and the specific geometries and/or operations of the location. These incremental project traffic additions to the study area roadway system are not expected to produce any further deterioration in future levels of service beyond that expected due to forecast ambient growth and traffic generated by cumulative development at most of the study intersections, with the exception of the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, which could change from very high LOS to low LOS F during the PM peak hour, the intersection(s) of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive, which could be reduced from high LOS to low LOS F at the west intersection and from LOS D to LOS at the east intersection during the PM peak hour, and at Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, which could change from midrange LOS to low LOS F operations during the PM peak hour. Based on the impact evaluation criteria, the project s incremental traffic impacts summarized in Table IV.L-10 are considered to be significant at four of the 12 study intersections, as listed below: #5: San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (both the east and west intersections) #7: Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive #8: Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard #9: San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue All of these intersections are located within the City of Los Angeles; no significant impacts are anticipated to occur within the City of Santa Monica using either City of Los Angeles or City of Santa Monica criteria. Table IV.L-11 also indicates that each of the significant impacts would occur during the PM peak hour only since many of the uses proposed for the project are not expected to be highly utilized during the AM peak hour. Highway System Improvements Funding for implementation of the future ATCS upgrades assumed for the forecast future (year 2014) Without Project and With Project conditions at several of the study intersections within the City of Los Angeles (Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (east and west intersections), Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, and San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue) is guaranteed through the recently passed Proposition 1B, and that based on the availability of such finds, LADOT has scheduled the implementation of the Westwood/West Los Angeles ATCS project to begin the design phase in June 2011, with construction to begin in January As a result, if this anticipated schedule is implemented, Page IV.L-47

48 the ATCS upgrades will be installed and operational at all of the study intersections within the City of Los Angeles by the year 2014 date expected for completion and occupancy of the proposed project. However, although the mechanism funding the ATCS implementation is guaranteed through Proposition 1B, due to the recent economic downturn, State revenues have been diminished, and full funding and completion of the ATCS project within the above timelines may not occur. Therefore, a supplemental evaluation of potential future conditions at the affected intersections listed above was conducted, to determine the effects on these locations should ATCS not be implemented within the assumed timeframe. A review of the subject intersections reveals that, if the ATCS upgrades are not implemented for either the future year 2014 Without Project or With Project conditions, the overall changes to the results and conclusions of the traffic analysis would be minimal. For the Without Project conditions, the lack of the additional traffic signal coordination and resulting increases in intersection capacity attributable to ATCS would increase the Level of Service at several of the intersections during one or both peak hours from that identified in the traffic study; the intersection of Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue would change from LOS to LOS F during the PM peak hour, San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west) would change from LOS D to LOS during the AM peak hour and LOS to LOS F during the PM peak hour, and Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard would change from LOS A to LOS B during the AM peak hour. For the With Project conditions, it should be noted that the installation of ATCS does not change the previously identified incremental project impacts at any of the subject study intersections, although changes in the overall intersection Level of Service could affect whether such incremental impacts are considered significant. If the ATCS upgrades are not implemented within the anticipated timeframe, the With Project conditions at the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west) could change from LOS to LOS F during the PM peak hour, Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard would change from LOS A to LOS B during the AM peak hour, and San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue would change from LOS C to LOS D during the AM peak hour. The anticipated changes in the Levels of Service at these locations would not, however, result in any substantial changes to the findings or conclusions identified above. Although the change in operations at the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west) from LOS D to LOS during the AM peak hour would mean that the project s incremental impact at this location would then be identified as significant during this time period where it is not noted as such in the above analysis (with ATCS), it is important to note that this intersection is already identified as a significantly impacted intersection, due to a currently identified project impact during the PM peak hour. As such, this change does not result in an additional intersection impact beyond those already noted above, although there would be the additional AM impact at the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west). No other changes in significance of the project s impacts at the affected intersections would occur. The results of the supplemental No ATCS scenario at the affected intersections are summarized in Table IV.L-12. Page IV.L-48

49 Table IV.L-12 Future (2014) Peak Hour Conditions Assuming No Future ATCS Installation No. Intersection 2 Sunset and Bundy 3 Sunset and Barrington 5 (a) 5(b) San Vicente and Bundy (west intersection) San Vicente and Bundy (east intersection) 8 Montana and San Vicente 9 San Vicente and Barrington Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Without Project CMA (or Delay) LOS * Indicates significant impact per LADOT or City of Santa Monica traffic impact criteria, as applicable D F F C D B C With Project CMA (or Delay) LOS Impact D F F C F B F D * 0.043* * * * Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March Project Parking and Access Parking Requirements The LAMC requires general retail developments such as the one proposed to provide a minimum of 4.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, while restaurant uses require the provision of a minimum of 10.0 parking spaces for each 1,000 square feet of floor area, and general commercial office uses are required to provide a minimum of 2.0 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. However, the project site is also located within the boundaries of the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan, which identifies parking requirements for a number of land uses that were originally intended to supersede the general City-wide parking ratios specified in the LAMC. The Specific Plan requires that restaurant uses not located in a shopping center provide a minimum of 15 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area, including outdoor seating/dining areas. The Specific Plan is silent regarding parking requirements for restaurants located within a shopping center, but states that other commercial uses (not specifically defined, but interpreted by the City as including retail and office developments, as well as restaurant uses located within a shopping center) are required to provide parking at a minimum ratio of 1.0 space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. In a limited interpretation of the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan for purposes of the City of Los Angeles Zoning Manual, the Los Angeles City Attorney advised that, where parking provisions in the LAMC and Specific Plan differ or conflict with each other, the more restrictive provisions prevail. The original intent of the Specific Plan was to provide for additional off-street parking beyond that required by Page IV.L-49

50 the LAMC to address parking shortages experienced throughout the Brentwood community and along the San Vicente Boulevard corridor specifically. As such, when the Specific Plan was originally adopted in 1980, the parking requirements identified in the ordinance for some uses were deliberately set higher than the then-existing LAMC parking requirements, which generally identified a parking requirement of 2.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet for most commercial uses, including restaurants. Since that time, many of the LAMC parking requirements have been revised, including those associated with restaurant parking, which were increased from 2.0 spaces to 10.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. As a result, in his interpretation, the City Attorney indicated that these current LAMC parking requirements should be applied to restaurants located within shopping center developments located within the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan area; parking for restaurant uses not within shopping centers remains at the Specific Plan ratio of 15.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Therefore, since as described earlier, the project meets the definition of a shopping center in the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan, the current LAMC restaurant parking requirement of 10.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet were applied to the restaurant components of the proposed development. It should also be noted that, while the Zoning Manual interpretation was limited to restaurant parking, City staff has considered the City Attorney s finding to be applicable to other uses within the Specific Plan area as well. The current LAMC parking requirement of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet for retail uses is higher than the Specific Plan parking ratio of 1.0 space per each 300 square feet. As such, staff has indicated that the LAMC parking requirements should also be applied to the retail component of the project. However, the Specific Plan parking ratio for commercial office space, at 1.0 space per 300 square feet, is higher than the current LAMC parking ratio of 2.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet, and staff has generally applied the higher Specific Plan parking requirements to general commercial office uses located within the Specific Plan area. This assumption was also incorporated into the parking calculations. Finally, although not noted specifically in the previous calculations of the project s trip generation estimates, the site would include a total of approximately 7,000 square feet of storage space, to be utilized by both the retail and restaurant components. Although the storage areas were considered to be retail floor area for purposes of the trip generation calculations shown previously, in actuality, the storage space would, be subject to the lower general commercial parking ratios identified in the Specific Plan (1.0 space per 300 square feet) rather than the retail parking requirement of 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. This reduced parking reflects the lower utilization of the storage areas as compared to the retail sales floor areas. Based on the above, the parking requirements for the proposed project were calculated based on the LAMC parking requirements for the retail (4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet) and restaurant components, excluding outdoor dining areas (10.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet), and the Specific Plan parking requirement (1.0 space per 300 square feet) for the commercial office and storage areas. As shown in Table IV.L-13, the project would require a total of approximately 324 spaces, including 206 spaces for the project s retail components, an additional 68 spaces for the proposed restaurant uses, 27 spaces for the project s office component, and an additional 23 spaces for the storage space. Page IV.L-50

51 The project includes a total of approximately 427 parking spaces, or about 103 spaces in excess of the anticipated project parking requirements. Therefore, based on this assessment, no parking shortages or overflow parking into the adjacent residential or commercial areas are expected, and no significant project parking related impacts would occur. Component Table IV.L-13 Project Parking Requirements No. Units/Size Parking Ratios (Spaces/Unit Area) Parking Required Retail 51,500 sf 4.00 / 1,000 sf 206 spaces Storage Areas 7,000 sf 1.00 / 300 sf 23 spaces Restaurants 6,800 sf a / 1,000 sf 68 spaces General Office 8,000 sf 1.00 / 300 sf 27 spaces Total Project Parking Required. a Does not include 3,700 sf of outdoor dining area. Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March spaces Vehicular Access and Operations In addition to potential impacts on the area streets and intersections due to the addition of anticipated project-related trips, the operations of the project s driveways were also examined to assure that adequate entry and exit capacities would be available to accommodate the anticipated vehicular access demands of the project, thereby reducing potential traffic congestion on San Vicente Boulevard resulting from ineffective operations of the site driveways. Access to the site is currently planned via two driveways on San Vicente Boulevard, one located at each end of the project frontage; the northern/western driveway is proposed as entry only, while the southern/eastern driveway will provide exit-only travel. Due to the divided roadway configuration of San Vicente Boulevard along the project frontage, both driveways would access only the westbound lanes of this roadway and would therefore be restricted to right-turn entry/right-turn exit operations. The driveways provide direct access to and from the project s surface parking lot, while access to the subterranean parking garage would be provided via a one-way site-internal ramp system located along the northern edge of the project site, with the down ramp to the subterranean parking level located near the northeastern corner of the lot, and the up ramp from the subterranean garage near the northwestern corner. A preliminary review of this on-site vehicular circulation scheme with LADOT staff identified no significant concerns. As such, the layout of the on-site parking facilities is expected to operate acceptably. In order to evaluate the adequacy of the project s vehicular access, project-related traffic volumes at the driveways themselves were calculated. Similar to the adjacent intersection trip calculations, project driveway volumes do not include pass-by trip discounts described above, since even if a trip currently exists on the adjacent roadway and is not a new trip to the area, it would be a new trip accessing the site Page IV.L-51

52 itself. Additionally, the trip credits for removal of the existing site trips are also not applicable to the calculation of project driveway trips since the project s driveways would need to be designed to accommodate all of the project s traffic, not simply the net new trips associated with impact analyses on the area streets and intersections. However, the previously described internal interaction and walk-in patronage trip discounts are still considered to be applicable. These factors actually reduce the number of trips to and from the project site through multi-purpose utilization of the site during a single trip, or nonvehicular pedestrian patronage of the project. The AM and PM peak hour project driveway volumes are shown in Figure IV.L-7. Based on the conservative assumptions described above, the project driveways are expected to accommodate a total of about 3,496 daily trips, including 169 trips (98 in, 71 out) during the AM peak hour and 563 trips (278 in, 285 out) during the PM peak hour (for source calculations, see the Appendix section of the traffic study in Appendix K to this Draft IR). These trip values were used to assure that project driveway capacity was adequate to serve the anticipated traffic loads without resulting in unacceptable vehicular queuing and traffic delays on the adjacent streets or within the project site itself. The project site plans shown previously indicate that access controls (ticket dispensers and driveway control arms) are proposed for both the entry and exit driveways, in order to allow for on-site security and management of the parking facilities. At a minimum, the entry controls should provide approximately 60 feet of vehicle reservoir space; the proposed entry control gate is located approximately 160 feet interior to the site, and as such, a control gate at this location would provide adequate off-street vehicle storage. The proposed exit kiosk would be located about 70 feet south of the parking lot, or about 125 feet from San Vicente Boulevard. Typically, automated ticket-dispensing access controls (with gate arms) such as those anticipated for use in the project provide entry capacities of approximately 650 vehicles per lane per hour. Driveway exit capacities are also partially based on the type of operations of the exit gates (pre-paid, or manned), although automated exit gates can easily provide operational capacities equal to those of the entry controls. However, the effective capacity of any exit gate is limited by the amount of traffic and/or congestion on the fronting streets that site exiting drivers must negotiate in order to merge into the traffic flows on these facilities; driveways along higher volume facilities such as San Vicente Boulevard typically exhibit exit capacities of approximately 250 to 350 vehicles per lane per hour, although one-way traffic along the project frontage combined with the exit-only, right-turn only operations of the driveway will permit capacities near the higher end of this range, at between 300 and 350 vehicles per lane per hour. Note that although both the internal site entry and exit drive aisles connecting the driveways to the on-site parking lot are wide enough to accommodate two lanes, as shown on the site plans, it is recommended that both of the drive aisles be limited, through pavement striping or signage, to a single travel lane for safety and operational purposes. As such, the per lane operational capacities noted earlier were conservatively assumed to represent the total driveway capacities. A review of the peak project driveway volumes shown in Figure IV.L-9 indicates that the vehicular demand at the project driveways for both inbound and outbound traffic would be well below these capacity levels at all of the project s driveways during both peak hours. The highest volumes are anticipated during the PM peak hour, with approximately 278 entering and 285 exiting vehicles. Based Page IV.L-52

53 on these estimates, the entering vehicle demand (278 vehicles per hour) is expected to be substantially lower than the typical 650 vehicle per hour capacity of the entry driveway. As such, this project access location is expected to provide more than sufficient capacity to accommodate the expected vehicular demands of the project and would operate adequately with no external vehicular queuing onto San Vicente Boulevard. Similarly, the peak exiting vehicle demand (285 vehicles per hour) is also expected to be lower than the anticipated exit-gate s operational capacity of between 300 and 350 vehicle per hour and, as such, based solely on the anticipated gate capacities and traffic volumes along San Vicente Boulevard adjacent to the site, the project s exit-only driveway would provide adequate capacity to accommodate the expected outbound traffic demands of the proposed project. This preliminary assessment of the operations of the project s exit driveway does not consider the vehicular queuing that currently occurs along westbound San Vicente Boulevard from the nearby intersections of Bundy Drive or Saltair Avenue, particularly during the afternoon peak commute traffic periods. During these periods of heavy traffic demands and congestion, vehicular queuing can extend sufficiently eastward from Bundy Drive or Saltair Avenue that it occasionally blocks the project s exit driveway location for short periods. Additionally, such vehicular queues can also restrict the exiting capacity of the project s exit-only driveway regardless of whether the driveway itself is physically blocked by the queue; long vehicular queues that approach but do not block the project s proposed exit driveway location still limit the number of vehicles exiting the site that could be accommodated within the two travel lanes on San Vicente Boulevard between the project driveway and the end of the on street queue. During periods of vehicular queuing on westbound San Vicente Boulevard, the potential lack of sufficient space for project-related vehicles to exit the project site and enter the westbound traffic flow on San Vicente Boulevard could result in inadequate exiting capacity for the site. In such instances, vehicles unable to exit the site due to the queuing on San Vicente Boulevard could create internal queuing within the project s parking facilities of sufficient length to block vehicles from passing through the exit control gate. Blockages of the exit gate could result in vehicles queuing into the site s internal site circulation aisles, and potentially block access into the parking lot from the entry driveway access control location. If this should occur, the entry gates may not be able to adequately discharge entering vehicles into the onsite parking lot, resulting in vehicular queuing on the entry driveway that could ultimately back up vehicles into San Vicente Boulevard through traffic. Finally, such unmet project entering vehicle demands could then create latent traffic demands on San Vicente Boulevard that could add to congestion and delays for upstream intersections (such as at Montana Avenue). Therefore, during periods of high vehicular traffic flows on San Vicente Boulevard and high traffic demand from the proposed project, the potential blockage of the site s exit-only driveway, even for short periods, could result in cascade failures (failure in a connected system in which the failure of a part can trigger the failure of successive parts) of both the internal site circulation and traffic flows along San Vicente Boulevard in the project vicinity. As a result of these potential operational issues, the project applicant proposes to install an actuated traffic signal at the site s exit driveway in order to ensure that existing or future vehicular queuing along San Vicente Boulevard would not impede or disrupt site access. As envisioned, the new signal is not intended to control traffic flows along westbound San Vicente Boulevard other than to stop traffic on the boulevard as necessary to allow vehicles to exit the project site in the event that on-street traffic or congestion results Page IV.L-53

54 in disruptions of the operations of the project s parking lot and/or access driveways. As such, the signal would operate in actuated mode, controlled by vehicle detector loops placed in the project s exit driveway, only during the PM peak hours (4:00 to 7:00 PM); during the morning commute traffic peak and mid-day (off-peak) traffic periods, when project trips and/or on-street traffic and congestion are reduced, the signal would provide a solid green indication for westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic, and a flashing red Stop indication for exiting project traffic. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis San Vicente Boulevard and Project Driveway An evaluation was also conducted of the potential installation of a new traffic signal at the project s proposed exit-only driveway on San Vicente Boulevard. The potential for installation of a new traffic signal at this currently unsignalized location was evaluated using the signal warrant (e. g., technical volume and/or intersection operational) analysis methodologies identified in the current California edition of the Federal Highway Administration s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (CAMUTCD) 5. The CAMUTCD identifies a total of eight warrants for use in evaluating the potential need for installation of a new traffic signal at a currently unsignalized intersection; this publication is also the basis for Caltrans traffic signal warrants (note that Caltrans divides some of the CAMUTCD warrants into two or more separate warrants, resulting in a total of 11 separate warrants, although the warrant criteria themselves are identical to those identified in the CAMUTCD). The CAMUTCD traffic signal warrants are: Warrant 1 - ight-hour Vehicular Volumes Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volumes Warrant 3 - Peak Hour (Vehicular Volumes) Warrant 4 - Pedestrian Volumes Warrant 5 - School Crossing Warrant 6 - Coordinated Signal System Warrant 7 - Crash xperience Warrant 8 - Roadway Network A review of the potential traffic signal location indicated that most of the eight warrants listed above are not applicable to the proposed exit-only driveway on San Vicente Boulevard. First, although several schools are located in the immediate vicinity (Brentwood Green Magnet School, at the southwest corner of Bundy Drive and San Vicente Boulevard, and the Brentwood Presbyterian Church and Schools, on the south side of San Vicente Boulevard east of Bundy Drive), neither school traffic nor pedestrian crossings 5 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (FHWA s MUTCD 2003 dition, as amended for use in California, State of California Business, Housing and Transportation Agency [and] Department of Transportation, Sacramento, California, September 26, 2006 Page IV.L-54

55 are at issue. Adequate school crosswalks currently exist in the immediate project vicinity at both Bundy Drive and Montana Avenue, and new crosswalks across San Vicente Boulevard are neither envisioned nor recommended at the potential new driveway signal location; therefore, Warrant 5 is not applicable. Additionally, pedestrian volumes across the project driveway (pedestrians walking parallel to San Vicente Boulevard) are relatively nominal during the peak traffic periods in the area and do not create issues that would be resolved as a result of installation of a new traffic signal. Further, as no new crosswalks across San Vicente Boulevard are recommended at this location, Warrant 4 (Pedestrian Volumes) was not considered appropriate as a signal evaluation tool. The existing traffic signal network and general roadway system currently provides appropriately spaced traffic signals along San Vicente Boulevard (approximately 1,200 feet between the Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive signals) such that vehicles traveling along this route generally remain platooned or closely grouped. As such, management of traffic flows approaching the proposed exit-only driveway on San Vicente Boulevard location was not an issue, rendering both Warrant 6 (Coordinated Signal System) and Warrant 8 (Roadway Network) not applicable. Further, while accident data for the existing site driveway and San Vicente Boulevard intersection were not available for this analysis, observations of the activity at this location indicate that it would not exhibit accident characteristics that would be solvable through installation of a traffic signal; therefore, Warrant 7 (Crash xperience) was eliminated. Of the remaining warrants (Warrants 1, 2, and 3), a review of the traffic conditions creating the potential need for new traffic signal at the subject location (primarily, vehicular queuing) indicates that such conditions are of relatively short duration, typically occurring over the course of less than a two-hour period during either the AM or PM peak periods (especially since project traffic at the exit-only driveway itself is expected to be nominal during the AM peak hour). As a result, the project driveway location would not be expected to fulfill the minimum traffic volume requirements for the minor street approach identified in Warrant 1 (ight-hour Vehicular Volumes); this warrant requires each of the eight highest traffic hours of the day to meet or exceed the identified criteria. Similarly, the project s exit-only driveway would not be expected to meet the minimum approach volumes needed to satisfy Warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volumes) since the critical PM peak period project traffic generation is not be anticipated to remain high enough throughout the required four hour timeframe. Note that the conditions and application of the warrant criteria at the project driveway apply only to the forecast future year 2014 traffic volumes. Based on the above, of the eight traffic signal warrants identified in the CAMUTCD, only one Warrant 3 (Peak Hour [vehicular volumes]) was considered appropriate for more detailed evaluation of the potential need for new traffic signal installation at the project exit-only driveway location. As described in the CAMUTCD, Warrant 3, the Peak Hour vehicular volumes warrant, relies on conditions associated only with the highest one-hour period throughout the day. This warrant is designed primarily to evaluate conditions associated with the short-term need for a traffic signal at locations affected by substantial peak hour traffic loading conditions, such as near retail centers similar to the proposed project, that can potentially discharge large numbers of vehicles over a short period of time. Additionally, given the peak period vehicular queuing associated with this location due to the operation of the nearby Bundy Drive and San Vicente Boulevard intersection, the project s exit-only driveway location would experience the type of short-term traffic loading and operational issues for which this signal warrant is appropriate. Warrant 3 Page IV.L-55

56 contains two separate but associated conditions, either of which may be satisfied in order to fulfill the warrant. Part A of the warrant requires that the total vehicular delay for the minor street, STOP sign controlled approach equal or exceed four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach facility (such as the project s exit-only driveway), that the one-hour traffic volume for that same approach equal or exceed 100 vehicles per hour, and that the total volume of traffic entering the intersection (both San Vicente Boulevard traffic and driveway traffic) equal or exceed 800 vehicles per hour. Part B of Warrant 3 requires that the one-hour volumes at the subject location meet or exceed minimum requirements based on traffic on both the major street (San Vicente Boulevard) and minor street (project exit-only driveway) approaches. Since the proposed project s exit-only driveway would allow right-turn exit only operations due to the presence of the raised median island on San Vicente Boulevard, the primary issue facing exiting project traffic would be potential vehicular queuing along westbound San Vicente Boulevard preventing access to the traffic stream from the project driveway. This condition would be exacerbated somewhat by new traffic from the project itself, as inbound project vehicles slow to turn into the proposed project entry-only driveway located approximately 300 feet west of the exit driveway. The installation of a new, actuated traffic signal at the project driveway would provide vehicle clearance opportunities for exiting project traffic during peak traffic periods so that project traffic does not queue back into the project site sufficiently to cause a breakdown in internal site circulation. It should be noted that the evaluation of the project driveway intersection using the Warrant 3 peak hour volume and delay criteria utilized only the westbound traffic along San Vicente Boulevard since the existing raised median island separates the westbound and eastbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic and, as such, eastbound traffic does not affect the operations of the driveway intersection. Page IV.L-56

57 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-7 Project Net Commercial Site Driveway Volumes (Does not include proposed Saltair Avenue Single-Family Residence) AM/PM Peak Hours

58 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-58

59 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-8 xisting (2010) Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour

60 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-60

61 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-9 xisting (2010) Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour

62 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-62

63 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-10 Related Projects Locations

64 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-64

65 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-11 Related Projects Volumes AM Peak Hour

66 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-66

67 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-12 Related Projects Volumes PM Peak Hour

68 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-68

69 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-13 Future (2014) Traffic Volumes Without Project AM Peak Hour

70 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-70

71 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-14 Future (2014) Traffic Volumes Without Project PM Peak Hour

72 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-72

73 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-15 Future (2014) Traffic Volumes With Project AM Peak Hour

74 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-74

75 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-16 Future (2014) Traffic Volumes With Project PM Peak Hour

76 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-76

77 For the purposes of this signal warrant analysis, the traffic volumes on San Vicente Boulevard adjacent to the project s driveway locations were estimated based on the existing and forecast traffic volume data for the two intersections (San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive on the west, and San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue on the east) bracketing the project location. Note that, for this signal warrant analysis, the project driveway volumes were not adjusted to account for pass-by traffic reductions or for the removal of existing site-related trips, since the driveway(s) would need to accommodate all project trips entering and exiting the site, not just the net new traffic that would utilize the area s street system. The resulting existing and forecast future traffic volumes at the project s driveways are shown in Figure IV.L-17 for the AM peak hour, and Figure IV.L-18 for the PM peak hour. While these figures identify both the existing and future without project conditions traffic volumes on San Vicente Boulevard, the signal warrant analysis is applicable only the forecast future with project conditions. As shown in these figures, the forecast year 2014 traffic volumes along San Vicente Boulevard adjacent to the project site, including traffic generated by the proposed project, are expected to be highest during the PM peak hour; although the forecast without project traffic on westbound San Vicente Boulevard (prior to the addition of project-related trips) is similar for both of the peak hours, project traffic is expected to be relatively nominal during the AM peak hour. During the AM peak hour, westbound San Vicente Boulevard approaching the project site is forecast to carry approximately 1,255 vehicles per hour (including 98 vehicles entering the site), while the project s exit-only driveway would exhibit about 71 vehicles per hour. During the PM peak hour, the total westbound volumes on San Vicente Boulevard would be approximately 1,452 vehicles per hour (including 278 new project trips entering the project site), while the project exit-only driveway exhibits a total volume of about 285 vehicles per hour. These volume estimates were used to conduct the Warrant 3 evaluations. Part A of Warrant 3 is deemed to be satisfied if the intersection experiences a minimum of four vehiclehours of delay for at least one of the minor street approach legs. The CMA intersection methodologies used in this analysis to identify the existing and future operational conditions at the signalized study intersections do not calculate vehicle delays and, as such, is not useful in the determination of the information necessary for the completion of Part A of Warrant 3. The AM and PM peak hour conditions at the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and the project s exitonly driveway shown earlier in Figure IV.L-17 and Figure IV.L-18 were analyzed using the unsignalized intersection analysis techniques provided in the Transportation Research Board s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). This document, which also provided the analysis methodology used to evaluate the City of Santa Monica intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and 26th Street, identifies evaluation techniques applicable to the unique traffic flows and interactions that occur at unsignalized intersections. The unsignalized intersection analysis methodologies utilize much of the same intersection information regarding traffic volumes and lane geometries and configurations as the CMA methodology, but base the level of service assessments on vehicle delays rather than on the percentage of available capacity. The HCM analysis of the forecast future (2014) AM and PM peak hour with project conditions at San Vicente Boulevard and the project s exit-only driveway indicate that the average delay experienced by vehicles exiting the project site would be approximately 14.1 seconds per vehicle during the AM peak hour, and about 52.5 seconds per vehicle during the PM peak hour. These values represent the potential Page IV.L-77

78 average delays experienced by each individual vehicle on the applicable intersection approaches, from its entry into the back of the vehicular queue for project-site exiting vehicles to its arrival at the San Vicente Boulevard exit driveway itself, based on the number of vehicles using the subject approach, the number and arrival characteristics of vehicles along the major street approach, and associated number of gaps in traffic and ease of access into or across this conflicting traffic flow. However, as described previously, the evaluation of Part A of signal Warrant 3 is based on the total vehicular delay experienced by vehicles on the subject approach. The HCM unsignalized intersection calculations do not identify the total delays experienced along any of the intersection approaches. For purposes of this analysis, in order to estimate the magnitude of the potential total delay experienced by vehicles on the minor street (in this case, the project s exit-only driveway), the average per vehicle approach delay was multiplied by the total number of vehicles using the approach during the critical peak hours. Using this assumption, the total delay experienced on the project s exit-only driveway approach to San Vicente Boulevard during the AM peak hour would be approximately 0.28 cumulative hours, or only about 16.7 minutes (average delay of 14.1 seconds/vehicle x 71 vehicles). During the PM peak hour, the total delay would increase to approximately 4.16 cumulative hours (average delay of 52.5 seconds/vehicle x 285 vehicles). As such, the PM peak hour conditions at the project s exit-only driveway would satisfy Part A of Warrant 3, which requires a total approach delay of at least four vehicle hours. As described earlier, although Warrant 3 can be satisfied if either Part A or Part B of the warrant is fulfilled during any single hour of the day, further investigation was done to determine whether Part B of the warrant would also be satisfied for this location. Part B of the warrant requires that the traffic volumes at the subject location meet minimum levels for both the major (San Vicente Boulevard) and minor (project exit-only driveway) approaches. The forecast future year 2014 With Project condition traffic volumes at the project s exit-only driveway location shown earlier in Figures 14(a) and 14(b) were again used to evaluate the potential installation of a new signal at this location. Based on the forecast future westbound (only) peak hour traffic volumes on San Vicente Boulevard, a minimum of 100 vehicles per hour exiting the project s driveway are needed during either of the peak hours in order to satisfy Part B of Warrant 3. As shown in Figure 14(a), the 71 vehicles per hour exiting the site during the AM peak hour will not be sufficient to meet these minimum volume requirements. However, as shown in Figure 14(b), the anticipated 285 vehicles per hour exiting the project site during the PM peak hour would fulfill the requirements of Part B of Warrant 3. Therefore, since both Part A and Part B of Warrant 3 are satisfied during the PM peak hour, based on this evaluation, installation of a new traffic signal at the project s exit-only driveway would be acceptable. Page IV.L-78

79 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-17 Traffic Volumes San Vicente Boulevard and Project Driveways AM Peak Hour

80 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-80

81 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-18 Traffic Volumes San Vicente Boulevard and Project Driveways PM Peak Hour

82 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-82

83 In addition to the satisfaction of Warrant 3, the proposed project s exit-only driveway location would be located approximately mid-way between the existing traffic signals bracketing the proposed location, sufficiently distant from both the downstream Bundy Drive (northbound approach) intersection (approximately 700 feet) and the upstream intersection with Montana Avenue (approximately 500 feet) to allow for appropriate coordination with the existing traffic signals along San Vicente Boulevard. Therefore, based not only on the signal warrant analyses but on other conditions in the project vicinity, it is recommended that a new actuated signal be installed at the project s exit-only driveway. In order to minimize potential disruptions to traffic flow along westbound San Vicente Boulevard, it is recommended that the new signal initially operate in actuated mode only during the weekday PM peak period (4:00 PM to 7:00 PM) to provide necessary vehicle clearance opportunities for exiting project traffic so that it does not queue back into the project site sufficiently to cause a breakdown in internal site circulation). During the AM commute traffic peak period, when project-related activity is expected to be nominal, and during mid-day (off-peak) periods when area traffic volumes and congestion are reduced, the signal should provide a solid green indication for westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic, and a flashing red Stop indication for exiting project traffic; since no need is foreseen at this time for the new signal to operate during these time periods. It is further recommended that the operations of the signal be reevaluated after full occupancy of the project to determine whether extending its hours of operation would be beneficial to area traffic flow. Finally, it should be noted that the installation of a new traffic signal at the project s driveway is not a result of any potential traffic impacts caused by the project at that location and is therefore considered to be a project feature and not a traffic mitigation measure. Local/Residential Street Traffic Impact Analysis In addition to the potential intersection impacts summarized in the preceding sections, it is possible that some project traffic would utilize the local/residential streets in the area to access the project site. Given the local-serving nature of the proposed project s retail and restaurant components, it is expected that a portion of the project s traffic would actually be generated within the neighborhoods surrounding the project site, and will naturally use the local streets to access the project site. While such trips would not necessarily result in additional traffic on these roadways, for worst case analysis purposes, they were evaluated in this analysis as new trips that could increase traffic volumes on some of the local access streets. The assessment of project-related traffic impacts to local/residential streets is based on daily traffic volumes rather than peak hour volumes as were used to evaluate potential impacts to the area study intersections. The current City of Los Angeles guidelines for evaluating potential traffic impacts on local/residential streets utilize a variable scale to determine the significance of potential traffic additions, with impacts evaluated based on the project s traffic percentage of the total future ( With Project ) average daily traffic (ADT) volumes. These criteria are outlined in LADOT s Traffic Impact Analysis Policies and Procedures (Revised March 2002) for local/residential roadways. The impact criteria assumed for this analysis are summarized in Table IV.L-14 below. It should be noted that the current LADOT Policies and Procedures document identifies that, in general, local/residential streets located within the City of Los Angeles and exhibiting daily traffic volumes of Page IV.L-83

84 fewer than 1,000 vehicles per day (vpd) are considered to be significantly impacted if the total future With Project traffic volumes increase by 16 percent or more. However, the project site is located within an area under the jurisdiction of the WLA TIMP, which provides superseding criteria for evaluating roadways with fewer than 1,000 vpd; the WLA TIMP identifies a significant impact to local/residential streets with fewer than 1,000 vpd as a flat rate increase of 120 vehicles per day or more. This standard is applicable to the project vicinity. Table IV.L-14 Local/Residential Street Significant Impact Criteria a Project Future ADT (With Project Project-Related Increase in Future ADT Less than 1, trips or more b 1,000 to 1, percent or more 2,000 to 2, percent or more 3,000 or more 8 percent or more a Per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Revised March 2002, unless notes. b West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan criteria. Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March The significant threshold traffic volumes corresponding to the local/residential street impact criteria shown in Table IV.L-14 indicate that the proposed project must add a minimum of 120 or more vehicles per day to any of the nearby local/residential streets accommodating up to 2,000 vpd in order to produce a significant impact. Significance thresholds for local/residential streets with more than 2,000 vpd would require the addition of a minimum of 200 vpd for streets with between 2,000 and 2,999 vehicles per day (2,000 vpd ADT x 10 percent), and a minimum traffic addition of 240 vpd for roadways with 3,000 or more vpd (3,000 vpd ADT x 8 percent). An examination of the location of the proposed project and a review of the general traffic circulation patterns within the study area indicated that there are no local/residential streets providing direct access to the commercial portions of the project site, although Saltair Avenue would provide access to the one single-family residential home to be developed along that facility to the north of San Vicente Boulevard. Further, there are no local/residential roadways that would typically be used by non-local site-oriented ( cut-through ) traffic to travel between the project site and nearby arterial roadways, since none provides convenient alternative routes to the Major and/or Secondary Highways serving the project vicinity, and few provide connections between such facilities at all. As a result, it is not expected that the project would create or induce any new non-residential cut-through traffic in the surrounding residential neighborhoods as a result of its development. However, there are several local/residential streets in the project vicinity that would be expected to provide access to and from the project site for residents of the surrounding residential neighborhoods, including Saltair Avenue and Westgate Avenue to the north of the site, and Westgate Avenue and Granville Avenue to the south of the site. ach of these roadways was examined to determine whether Page IV.L-84

85 the proposed project could potentially produce a significant impact in the surrounding neighborhoods the project site. About five percent of the project s trips are expected to originate to the north of the project site within the residential neighborhood bounded by Bundy Drive/Kenter Avenue, Sunset Boulevard, Barrington Avenue, and San Vicente Boulevard/Montana Avenue, while an additional five percent could originate within the residential neighborhood bounded by Bundy Drive, San Vicente Boulevard/Montana Avenue, Barrington Avenue, and Wilshire Boulevard to the south of the project. Such locally generated trips would naturally use the available local street system to access the project site. It should be noted that many of the locally-originating trips anticipated to patronize the proposed project already exist as trips to and from the existing uses currently occupying the project site or to utilize other existing development along San Vicente Boulevard or other nearby retail and commercial facilities. As such, it is expected that many of these existing trips would divert to utilize the newer or more convenient services and facilities provided within the new project and, therefore, the project would not necessarily result in additional traffic on these local/residential roadways. Nevertheless, for the purpose of providing a conservative assessment of potential project traffic impacts to the nearby local/residential streets, all such locally generated project trips were valuated as new trips in the immediate project vicinity. Additionally, in order to assure a worst case assessment of the amount of project-related traffic that may utilize these local area residential streets, the pass-by trip reduction factors previously described were not included in the project trip generation estimates used to evaluate the potential impacts to the local/residential streets. This conservative assumption was considered appropriate, since neither the existing site use nor proposed project trips passing through these nearby residential neighborhoods would generally exhibit the type of trip-making characteristics typically associated with pass-by activity. As such, only the internal capture and pedestrian-oriented (walk-in patronage) trip reductions previously described were considered appropriate for the analysis of potential project impacts to local/residential streets in the project vicinity. These assumptions result in a net project trip generation estimate of approximately 2,429 new trips per day (assumed as 1,215 inbound vpd and 1,214 outbound vpd) that could utilize the local/residential street system in the area. Based on the project s assumed trip assignment percentages, Westgate Avenue north of the project site could be expected to experience an increase in new trips equal to approximately five percent of the project s inbound traffic; note that, as described previously, due to the project s limited access operations, inbound trips can access the site only from westbound San Vicente Boulevard and outbound trips can only exit the site along westbound San Vicente Boulevard and, as such, no outbound project trips would be able to access Westgate Avenue. Therefore, the assumed five percent inbound project traffic utilization of Westgate Avenue (north of San Vicente Boulevard) could potentially add a total of approximately 61 net new daily trips (1,215 vpd inbound x 5 percent), although due to the highly conservative assumptions used for this assessment of the potential for local/residential project impacts, actual trip additions are expected to be less. Similar project traffic additions (61 net new daily trips) to both Westgate Avenue and Granville Avenue south of the project site could also anticipated. Again, due to the project s limited access operations, Page IV.L-85

86 project-oriented trips along the affected local/residential streets would not be expected to travel along the same routes for inbound and outbound site access, except at or near their origin locations, minimizing any new traffic additions to these facilities. Based on this assessment, the project s worst case potential new traffic additions to Westgate Avenue (both north and south of San Vicente Boulevard) and to Granville Avenue and most other local/residential streets in the nearby vicinity would be less than the minimum 120 vehicles per day identified in the WLA TIMP and LADOT s Traffic Study Policies and Procedures memorandum as significant (regardless of the existing or future traffic volumes on these streets). As such, the effects of the anticipated level of project-related traffic additions to these local/residential roadways would not be considered to be significant. No locally-oriented inbound project traffic was assumed to use Saltair Avenue since such vehicles would not be able to directly access the project s commercial driveways from this street (such trips would need to utilize Westgate Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard to access the site driveways, as noted earlier). However, Figure IV.L-4 also shows that none of the locally-oriented outbound project traffic was assigned to Saltair Avenue for the return trip to the neighborhood north of the project site. This assumption was utilized in order to provide a worst case assessment of potential project traffic impacts to the nearby study intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive. Despite this assumption, it is acknowledged that this outbound travel route back to the neighborhood (San Vicente Boulevard to Bundy Drive to Coyne Street or Kearsarge Street) would be less convenient for local residents than the direct use of Saltair Avenue. Therefore, in order to provide a reasonable estimate of potential projectrelated traffic impacts to Saltair Avenue, the trip assignment percentages used for the analysis of potential intersection impacts was modified to reassign the five percent of project traffic generated within the residential neighborhood north of the project site to account for the potential use of Saltair Avenue by this locally-oriented traffic. Note that this reassignment does not invalidate the previous intersection analyses, but produces a worst case evaluation of potential project impacts. As discussed earlier, no non-local project trips are expected to utilize the local streets due to longer travel routes and potentially longer travel times (due to additional stops and more circuitous routes); however, approximately two percent of the project s trips are expected to originate on Bundy Drive north of Sunset Boulevard. Although these trips are anticipated to utilize Bundy Drive and San Vicente Boulevard as their inbound travel routes due to the project s driveway locations, it is possible that these trips could use Saltair Avenue to return home following a visit to the site in order to avoid traffic on Bundy Drive. Finally, Figure IV.L-4 shows that approximately six percent of the project s outbound traffic originates from the east of the project site along Sunset Boulevard or the north on Barrington Avenue and, again, it is possible that such trips could use Saltair Avenue in order to reach Sunset Boulevard rather than travel along Bundy Drive to do so. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the potential project-related traffic additions to Saltair Avenue north of San Vicente Boulevard could include all of these possible trips, resulting in a total project-traffic addition to Saltair Avenue of up to 13 percent of the net outbound project traffic (five percent locally-oriented, two percent with destinations on Bundy Drive north of Sunset Boulevard, one percent with destinations on Barrington Avenue north of Sunset Boulevard, and five percent with destinations on Sunset Boulevard to the east of Barrington Avenue), or approximately 158 net new trips per day. Since this worst case level of potential project traffic additions would exceed 120 trips as Page IV.L-86

87 discussed earlier, a further level of detail was included in the analysis of potential project impacts to Saltair Avenue. New 24-hour traffic counts were performed along the residential segment of Saltair Avenue, immediately north of the San Vicente Boulevard-fronting commercial developments, in order to establish existing traffic conditions. This location was selected since it is the most likely to exhibit the highest traffic volumes along Saltair Avenue due both to existing cut-through traffic, and would also be the location where all locally-originating traffic would travel before dispersing onto other residential streets in the area. The traffic count data indicates that Saltair Avenue carried a total of approximately 1,899 vpd in late August 2009; these volumes were increased by the previously noted one percent per year ambient traffic growth factor, resulting in an estimated 1,918 vpd for current (year 2010) conditions. Future (year 2014) traffic volumes utilizing this roadway were estimated using the same procedures and assumptions described previously in the development of the future intersection volumes, including the application of the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth factor, and the addition of traffic generated by the 32 related projects in calculating the Without Project traffic volumes, although as shown previously in Figure 10, due to the locations of the identified related projects, cumulative development traffic increases on Saltair Avenue are expected to be nominal. Using these traffic estimation procedures, future Without Project traffic volumes on Saltair Avenue are expected to be approximately 1,996 vehicles per day. Based on this level of forecast future traffic, the potential worst case addition of approximately 158 net project-related daily trips to Saltair Avenue would result in an increase of approximately 7.9 percent as compared to the future forecast Without Project conditions. When compared to the impact thresholds shown previously in Table IV.L-14, this potential increase in daily traffic would be less than the 10 percent increase considered to be significant. As such, no significant project-related traffic impacts to Saltair Avenue are expected, even using the most conservative analysis assumptions. As such, no mitigation is warranted. The results of the local/residential street impact analyses are shown in Table IV.L-15. Project Impacts on Regional Transportation System To address public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the CMP 6 was enacted. Metro, the local CMP agency, established a countywide approach to implement the CMP and provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. The CMP identifies a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County and establishes procedures for monitoring the network's Level of Service standards. The CMP traffic impact analysis (TIA) guidelines require analyses of all arterial monitoring intersections where the project could add a total of 50 or more trips and for freeway segments where a project could add 150 or more trips in either direction, during either peak hour Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Metropolitan TransportationAuthority, Los Angeles, Page IV.L-87

88 Table IV.L-15 Local/Residential Street Impact Analysis Summary Street/Segment Saltair Avenue, North of San Vicente Boulevard xisting (2010) ADT Future (2014) ADT Volumes Without Project Project Only With Project Impact Significance Threshold 1,918 1, , % 10.0% Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March CMP Monitoring Intersection Impacts The current CMP (2004) lists five arterial monitoring intersections within the study area (approximate 2.0-mile radius from the project site). Three are located within the City of Los Angeles: Wilshire Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard, Santa Monica Boulevard and Bundy Drive, and Santa Monica Boulevard and Westwood Boulevard. Two are located within the City of Santa Monica: Wilshire Boulevard and 26th Street, and Santa Monica Boulevard and Cloverfield Boulevard, as shown in Figure IV.L-19. All of these locations are outside the immediate project vicinity, and were not examined as part of the 12 previously studied intersections. Therefore, the CMP requires that analyses be conducted for any of these locations where the proposed project is anticipated to add 50 or more total trips during either the AM or PM peak hours. A review of the net project traffic additions to the study vicinity (Figure IV.L- 5 for AM and Figure IV.L-6 for PM), indicates that net new project traffic through the boundary intersections examined in this study (e.g., those locations representing the outermost study intersections) are substantially below the 50-trip threshold during both the AM and PM peak hours. As shown in these figures, project traffic volumes traveling to and from the east at the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and San Vicente Boulevard/Federal Avenue, potentially affecting the CMP intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard, would be about six vehicles per hour (vph) during the AM peak hour and about 18 vph during the PM peak hour. These figures are below the 50-trip threshold during both periods. Similarly, as shown in Figure IV.L-5 for AM and Figure IV.L-6 for PM, project traffic traveling to and from the west at the intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and Bundy Drive, potentially affecting the CMP intersection of Wilshire Boulevard and 26 th Street, is expected to be approximately four total vph during the AM peak hour and a total of about 12 vph during the PM peak hour, again less than the CMP threshold. Net project traffic traveling to and from the south of the study area, along either Barrington Avenue, Bundy Drive, or Federal Avenue, which could potentially effect the CMP arterial monitoring intersections along Santa Monica Boulevard (at Cloverfield Boulevard, Bundy Drive, and Westwood Boulevard), is also less than the CMP thresholds. Project traffic along Bundy Drive south of Wilshire Boulevard is expected to total approximately four vph during the AM peak hour and about 13 vph during the PM peak hour. South of Wilshire Boulevard along Barrington Avenue, project trips are anticipated to total about six vph during the AM peak hour, and about 20 vph during the PM peak hour, while only nominal project traffic is expected to travel along Federal Avenue to and from the south. Page IV.L-88

89 As described above, the net project traffic at the relevant study area boundary locations will not approach the CMP s 50-trip threshold level and, as such, project traffic volumes at the five CMP arterial monitoring intersections, which are more distant from the project site, would also be below the analysis threshold. Therefore, no significant project-related impacts would occur at any of the CMP arterial monitoring intersections, and no further analyses are warranted. CMP Freeway Segment Impacts An examination was also made of the potential for project-related freeway impacts within the project study area. As described previously, the CMP requires a detailed impact analysis of freeway mainline segments where a project could increase peak hour traffic in either direction by 150 or more vehicles per hour. The proposed project s net trip generation estimates (as shown in Table IV.K-7) indicate that the project would generate fewer than 150 net new directional trips during both the AM and PM peak hours, with a maximum of 143 net inbound and 112 net outbound trips during the PM peak hour; the project s AM peak hour directional trips are even lower, at approximately 40 inbound and 36 outbound net new trips. Additionally, due to the intended local-serving nature of the proposed development, only a fraction, approximately two to three percent, of the project s trips are expected to use either the San Diego (I-405) or Santa Monica (I-10) Freeways to as travel routes. As a result, net directional peak hour project trip additions to either of these facilities would be expected to be fewer than five (5) vehicles during either peak hour. These potential net project traffic additions are below the 150-trip threshold requiring any detailed analyses, and would not produce any measurable effects on any of the regional transportation facilities. Therefore, no further analysis of project-related traffic impacts to the area freeways is required. Conclusion The proposed retail, office, and restaurant project is anticipated to result in significant impacts at a total of four of the 12 study area intersections, prior to mitigation. All of the significantly impacted locations are located within the City of Los Angeles, as listed below. #5: San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (both the east and west intersections) #7: Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive #8: Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard #9: San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue The City of Los Angeles has established the WLA TIMP to address increasing traffic growth and congestion in the project vicinity and throughout the West Los Angeles area. The WLA TIMP identifies that new projects within its jurisdiction are subject to traffic impact mitigation fees, currently (valid as of January 1, 2010) set at $3,097 per applicable PM peak hour trip resulting from such projects. These fees are targeted toward a series of identified improvements designed to address the potential traffic effects resulting from both general ambient traffic growth as well as trips generated by ongoing cumulative Page IV.L-89

90 development in the WLA TIMP area, as well as establishing funding for general roadway infrastructure and operational improvements. The WLA TIMP provides for an exception to the fees for designated uses that are characterized as local serving, such as neighborhood or community retail developments, restaurants, and residential uses. These types of developments are considered by the WLA TIMP to aid in the goal of reducing traffic congestion by providing a better localized mix of housing, jobs, and service industries, which reduce or eliminate the need for longer trips to such facilities outside the WLA TIMP area. Although the proposed project contains both local-serving retail and restaurant uses, and as described in the preceding analyses, LADOT required that the project s potential trip generation and traffic impact analysis be conducted based on the individual retail and restaurant components of the proposed development. The project in its entirety (with the exception of the proposed 8,000 square foot office component) falls under the WLA TIMP definition of a shopping center (it also meets this definition under the San Vicente Scenic Corridor Specific Plan); shopping center developments are not exempt from the WLA TIMP trip fee assessments, and as such, the project would be subject to these fees. Based on this requirement, LADOT indicated that the project s WLA TIMP traffic impact fees should be calculated based on the shopping center definition for the proposed project s retail and restaurant areas, with additional fees assessed for the proposed office space. As noted above, the proposed single-family residence included in the project along Saltair Avenue is exempt from the WLA TIMP trip fees. Using these requirements, the project s WLA TIMP traffic impact fees were calculated in Table IV.L-16. The calculations shown in Table IV.L-16 are based primarily on the project trip generation estimates, although as noted earlier, the trips for the retail and restaurant components were recalculated based on LADOT s direction that these components together constitute a 69,000 square foot shopping center. Additionally, for purposes of the WLA TIMP trip fee assessments, LADOT does not consider tripreducing factors such as internal or mixed-use interaction, or pass-by trip activity. The project trip generation calculations were revised to adhere to the LADOT interpretation. Based on the WLA TIMP trip fee calculation policy, the project results in a total of approximately 317 net new WLA TIMP-applicable PM peak hour trips (all shopping center/retail trips plus the office component; the trips generated by the proposed single-family residence are exempt from the trip fee calculations) for a total assessment of approximately $981,749. Additionally, trip fee credits are also applicable under the WLA TIMP for the removal of existing uses in order to develop a project, and are assessed using the same methodologies and trip fees as for the proposed project uses. However, several of the existing site land uses are exempt from the fee and, as such, are not appropriate for consideration as credits against the project s trip fee amount. Only the removal of the existing general and medical office site development results in credits against the project trip fees, resulting in a total reduction of approximately $126,977. Therefore, based on these estimates, the project would result in a net WLA TIMP trip fee assessment of $854,772. Page IV.L-90

91 Table IV.L-16 West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee Calculation Size Proposed Project Use PM Peak Hour Total WLA TIMP Per Trip Fee WLA TIMP Trip Fee 69,000 sf General Retail a 294 $3, $910,518 8,000 sf General Office 23 $3, $71,231 4,520 sf Single-Family 1 xempt 0 xisting Site Development Removed b Project Trip Fees $981,749 13,496 sf Office (Total) 38 $3,097 -$117, sf Medical/Dental Office 3 $3,097 -$9,291 15,430 sf Specialty Retail (Total) 77 xempt 0 3,500 sf Nursery (plants) 13 xempt sf Café/Coffee Shop 5 xempt 0 2 unit Single-Family 2 xempt 0 xisting Site Uses Trip Fee Credits -$126,977 Net Project WLA TIMP Trip Fees $854,772 a Total floor area determined as 58,500 sf retail plus 10,500 sf restaurant (including 3,700 sf outdoor dining). The first 30,000 sf exempt. Trips based on WLA TIMP rate for 65,300 sf Shopping Center of 7.71 trips/1,000 sf. b Gross existing use trips. Source: LADOT traffic study assessment letter, October 4, As noted earlier, the WLA TIMP trip fees are designed to fund a series of regionally significant traffic signal, intersection, and corridor-level improvements within the specific plan area to address existing and anticipated future traffic operational issues. The project s trip fee amount would be applied toward construction of these improvements, several of which are located within the immediate project vicinity, as identified in Appendix C of the WLA TIMP, and listed below. Street or Highway Corridor Improvements Wilshire Boulevard Continue consistent Major Highway standards (6 lanes) between San Vicente Boulevard and Centinela Avenue Intersection/Traffic Signal Improvements Intersection Reconstruction/Restriping o o San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue Page IV.L-91

92 o o Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue Wilshire Boulevard and Federal Avenue/San Vicente Boulevard Traffic Signal Improvements o o Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue In addition to payment of the WLA TIMP trip fees, the City requires that private development projects mitigate their own traffic impacts where feasible, in order to provide more immediate relief for projectspecific traffic effects on the surrounding vicinity. However, a comprehensive review of the area roadway and intersection network indicated that no feasible physical roadway and/or traffic signal improvements are available for any of the four significantly impacted intersections, due to insufficient roadway width or other geometric conditions preventing restriping or reconfiguration of the intersections, lack of available rights-of-way to accommodate new roadway widenings, high utilization of on-street parking (preventing removal of on-street parking to implement additional lanes), and/or fully improved traffic signal operations (including traffic signal coordination at all of the City of Los Angeles study intersections). The DOT, in its review of the project traffic report, concurs with this conclusion. As a result, the project s impacts at each of the four intersections will remain significant and unavoidable. Discussion of the Optional Design Features: Proposed Median Alterations Although no feasible traffic impact mitigation improvements are available at any of the anticipated four significantly impacted study intersections, potential roadway and/or traffic signal improvements in the immediate project vicinity could be implemented to improve overall traffic flow along westbound San Vicente Boulevard and improve local accessibility for both the project site and for other nearby businesses. As described in Section II, Project Description, there are six concepts of various median alterations, of which one could be included as an optional project design feature. 7 The six concepts are as follows: Concept 1 involves construction of a new U-turn lane within the existing raised median island approximately opposite the project site to allow westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic to directly access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard between Montana Avenue and Saltair Avenue (shown in Figure II-14). 7 In the traffic impact analysis (included in Appendix K to this Draft IR), the proposed median alterations are referred to as Mitigation Measures. However, as the implementation of any of these concepts does not mitigate any significant traffic impact to less than significant, the proposed median alterations have been called Optional Project Design Features. See additional discussion in Section II, Project Description. Page IV.L-92

93 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-19 CMP Arterial Monitoring Intersection Locations

94 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-94

95 Concept 1(a) includes median U-turn lane from Concept 1, as well as a left-turn lane on San Vicente Boulevard that would allow traffic traveling eastbound on San Vicente Boulevard to turn left on Saltair Avenue, plus signalization of the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue (shown in Figure II-15). Concept 2 involves construction of a turn lane within the existing raised median island to allow westbound traffic to make a U-turn at Saltair Avenue onto eastbound San Vicente Boulevard. This concept also includes a left-turn lane in the existing median island that would allow traffic traveling eastbound on San Vicente Boulevard to turn left on Saltair Avenue, as well as the signalization of the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue (shown in Figure II-16). Concept 2(a) involves construction of a turn lane within the existing raised median island to allow westbound traffic to make a U-turn at Saltair Avenue onto eastbound San Vicente Boulevard, but does not provide the eastbound left-turn lane or signalization at Saltair Avenue (shown in Figure II-17). Concept 3 involves construction of a new U-turn lane within the existing raised median island east of the project site to allow westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic to directly access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard between Montana Avenue and Saltair Avenue, in addition to a U-turn lane constructed within the existing raised median island, to allow eastbound traffic to access westbound San Vicente Boulevard (shown in Figure II-18). This location would also be signalized. Concept 4 involves construction of a new U-turn lane within the existing raised median island east of the project site to allow westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic to directly access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard between Montana Avenue and Saltair Avenue, and construction of a left turn lane to allow eastbound traffic to access the project site directly via a full service driveway at the eastern edge of the project site. This driveway would accommodate both inbound and outbound project traffic, and permit both left and right turns exiting the site (shown in Figure II-19). This new median cut/project driveway location would be signalized. Concepts 1, 1(a), 2, 2(a) Concepts 1, 1(a), 2, and 2(a) all have the same general effects on project site access and area/project traffic redistribution. Therefore, the following analysis applies to all four of the mentioned concepts. Currently, traffic exiting from the existing developments along the north side of San Vicente Boulevard, including those from the project site, are subject to right-turn only restrictions (onto westbound San Vicente Boulevard) due to the presence of the raised median island separating the westbound and eastbound lanes of San Vicente Boulevard. As such, these vehicles must initially travel westbound on San Vicente Boulevard even if their ultimate destination is located to the east. While westbound U-turns are permitted at the existing signal at Bundy Drive, due to the short left-turn phase timing and tight turning radius required for this move, most drivers choose to make the U-turn at the unsignalized Page IV.L-95

96 intersection of Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard, although some will resort to an around-theblock path, turning south on Bundy Drive, then east on Montana Avenue, and finally, turning east again at San Vicente Boulevard. Both of these reorientation movements contribute to existing traffic congestion within the immediate project vicinity. First, the currently-allowed westbound-to-eastbound U-turn move at the unsignalized intersection of Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard creates congestion along westbound San Vicente Boulevard. Since there is insufficient vehicle storage space within the 38-foot width of the median island at that location to accommodate the approximately 100 vehicles per hour that currently attempt the U-turn move, such vehicles routinely queue beyond the available storage area, blocking the innermost westbound San Vicente Boulevard travel lane, and exacerbating heavy travel demands during the peak hours and creating periodic lengthy queues in the area for westbound traffic. Such high demands for the U-turn also utilize much of the available capacity at this intersection to accommodate outbound (southbound) traffic from Saltair Avenue wishing to access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard. With little opportunity to exit Saltair Avenue and queue within the vehicle storage area in the median island while awaiting a gap in eastbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic, long delays are created on southbound Saltair Avenue for both local residents and for employees and patrons of the two commercial buildings at the northwest and northeast corners of the intersection, both of which access their parking facilities from Saltair Avenue. Finally, those vehicles that do not attempt the westbound-toeastbound U-turn at Saltair Avenue and instead travel the more circuitous route along southbound Bundy Drive and eastbound Montana Avenue to reach eastbound San Vicente Boulevard (the assumed travel path of some of the proposed project s exiting traffic) increase traffic levels and congestion along Montana Avenue between Bundy Drive and San Vicente Boulevard. It is also of note that the proposed installation of a signal at the project s exit-only driveway, which is located nearly directly opposite the proposed start of the U-turn lane, will permit project traffic to utilize the proposed new U-turn lane without having to attempt an unaided crossing of both a parking lane and two lanes of westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic. While it is acknowledged that other existing developments located farther to the east along the north side of San Vicente Boulevard would also have to cross the existing parking lane and two travel lanes to access the proposed U-turn lane, these developments will have sufficient weaving distance to access the U-turn lane without difficulty. The availability of the potential new U-turn lane will allow both project-related and other existing and future area traffic that previously would have attempted to make a U-turn at the already-congested Saltair Avenue median break, or travelled the around the block route to access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard to reorient prior to reaching Saltair Avenue. This would eliminate some of the existing and future traffic from the Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard intersection, or along Bundy Drive and Montana Avenue to the west and south of the project site. In order to evaluate the effects of implementation of a new U-turn lane between westbound and eastbound San Vicente Boulevard, including the redistribution of the project s traffic to utilize this potential new facility (rather than make the around the block movement described previously), a supplemental analysis was conducted, assuming that the proposed U-turn lane was in place. Note that this supplemental analysis assumed only that the project-related trips would divert to the U-turn lane, including those Page IV.L-96

97 vehicles that wish to access eastbound San Vicente Boulevard as well as those vehicles that might use Bundy Drive to access eastbound Sunset Boulevard. While it is likely that some vehicles exiting the existing developments along the north side of San Vicente Boulevard also make the around the block travel path and would utilize the new U-turn lane, no redistribution of such vehicles was assumed (observations indicate that most of the existing vehicles wishing to make a U-turn between westbound and eastbound San Vicente Boulevard already do so at the median break opposite Saltair Avenue, as described in more detail later in this section). This supplemental analysis utilized the same CMA methodologies and assumptions, except that the new U-turn lane and associated redistribution of project trips were in place. The results of the analysis of the effects of the implementation of the U-turn lane (Concepts 1, 1(a), 2, and 2(a)) are summarized in Table IV.L-17. As shown in this table, implementation of these proposed San Vicente Boulevard median island U-turn lane concepts would reduce, but not eliminate (reduce to less-than-significant) the project-related PM peak hour impacts at the intersections of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (east intersection), and Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive. The proposed median U-turn lane would also reduce the already non-significant impacts at the intersections of Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, and Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue during both the AM and PM peak hours, but would have no measurable effect on the impact at San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west intersection) or to the project impact at San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, which would be unaffected by any traffic redistribution associated with the U-turn lane improvements. The proposed U-turn lane could result in a slight increase in the project s incremental impacts at Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue (by in the AM and in the PM peak hours), although the impacts at this location would continue to be less than significant. The U-turn lane would also slightly increase the already significant project impact at Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard during the PM peak hour (by 0.01). Concepts 3 and 4 Both concepts 3 and 4 have the same general traffic redistribution effects on the nearby intersections, although access to and from the project site itself would differ slightly between the two concepts. Therefore, the following analysis applies to both of these concepts. As described earlier, currently, traffic traveling westbound on San Vicente Boulevard can only make a U- turn at Saltair Avenue, where there is insufficient queuing length available to accommodate the U-turn easily. Similarly, traffic traveling eastbound on San Vicente Boulevard can only make a U-turn at Montana Avenue to travel westbound. Concepts 3 and 4 would both provide an eastbound U-turn lane between Montana Avenue and Saltair Avenue; Concept 3 would allow a westbound U-turn at the same location whereas Concept 4 would allow access directly to the project site. In order to evaluate the effects of implementation of these improvements, including the redistribution of the project s traffic to utilize this potential new facility, a supplemental analysis was conducted, assuming that the proposed improvements were in place. This supplemental analysis utilized the same CMA methodologies and assumptions, with the exception that the new improvements associated redistribution of project trips were in place. The results of the analysis of the effects of the implementation of the improvements are summarized in Table IV.L-18. As shown in this table, implementation of either concept Page IV.L-97

98 3 or 4 would reduce, but not eliminate (reduce to less than significant) the project-related PM peak hour impacts at the intersections of San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (east intersection), Montana Avenue and Bundy Drive, and San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue. Implementation of Concepts 3 and 4 would also reduce the already non-significant impacts at the intersections of Sunset Boulevard and Bundy Drive, and Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Avenue during both the AM and PM peak hours, but would have no measurable effect on the impact at San Vicente Boulevard and Bundy Drive (west intersection) or at San Vicente Boulevard and Barrington Avenue. The proposed Concept 3 and 4 improvements could result in a slight increase in the project s incremental impacts at Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue (by in the AM and in the PM peak hours), although the impacts at this location would continue to be less than significant. Although all of the optional project design features (Concepts 1, 1(a), 2, 2(a), 3, 4) could potentially result in slightly higher project impacts at the intersections of Montana Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard and Montana Avenue and Barrington Avenue than compared to the project s anticipated impacts without the proposed improvement, the potential overall benefits of these improvements could outweigh the potential nominal adverse effects of this measure, as described below. Benefits of the Optional Project Design Features: Proposed Median Alterations First, the proposed new U-turn lane would reduce existing and future congestion along westbound San Vicente Boulevard by removing (and prohibiting) the westbound U-turns at Saltair Avenue, thereby eliminating the U-turn vehicle overflow into the westbound lanes of San Vicente Boulevard and permitting better traffic flow along this portion of the corridor. Additionally, the removal of U-turn traffic from the Saltair Avenue crossover median opening will allow vehicles exiting from southbound Saltair Avenue to more easily access the median island storage area as they await gaps in eastbound traffic to enter the eastbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic low, reducing both congestion and delay along southbound Saltair Avenue, and enhancing access to and from both directions of San Vicente Boulevard. The second potential improvement in the study area is the installation of a new traffic signal at the intersection of Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard. This T intersection, located near the project site approximately 450 feet from the project s proposed exit-only driveway signal, is currently STOP sign controlled only along the southbound approach of Saltair Avenue. Vehicles entering or exiting Saltair Avenue often experience substantial delays due to blockages of the intersection by westbound San Vicente Boulevard traffic, which queues westward from the nearby intersection at Bundy Drive into the Saltair Avenue intersection during peak periods. During both the morning and afternoon peak commute periods, relatively high traffic volumes along westbound San Vicente Boulevard are controlled by a multi-phase signal with a relatively long cycle length (90 seconds) at Bundy Drive. This combination of high traffic volumes and multi-phased signal operational characteristics can and typically does result in the formation of substantial, albeit shortduration vehicular queues on the westbound approach of San Vicente Boulevard at Bundy Drive. These vehicular queues routinely exceed the approximately 200-foot distance between Bundy Drive and Saltair Avenue during the peak 15 to 30 minutes of the commute hours, restricting or preventing exiting Saltair Page IV.L-98

99 Avenue vehicles from accessing westbound San Vicente Boulevard, as well as affecting the ability of vehicles either inbound to Saltair Avenue from eastbound San Vicente Boulevard, or outbound from Saltair Avenue to eastbound San Vicente Boulevard to cross the westbound traffic flow during these periods. High utilization of the median island break at this intersection as a U-turn opportunity for San Vicente Boulevard traffic (as described briefly earlier) also creates further congestion not only within the intersection itself, but also along westbound San Vicente Boulevard. This exacerbates the delays along this portion of the corridor. As such, the installation of a new traffic signal at Saltair Avenue to create adequate gaps in traffic to allow better access to and from Saltair Avenue could be beneficial to area residents living in the neighborhood north of San Vicente Boulevard. A detailed traffic signal warrant analysis was prepared for this intersection, similar to the signal warrant study for the proposed new traffic signal at the project s exit-only driveway, utilizing the same methodologies and procedures as described in detail earlier. As discussed previously, only one of the eight CAMUTCD traffic signal warrants, Warrant 3, Peak Hour (vehicular volumes), would be applicable to this location., As with the previously analyzed project exit-only driveway location, traffic count data at the two adjacent intersections along San Vicente Boulevard bracketing the Saltair Avenue location, Bundy Drive to the west, and Montana Avenue to the east, were used to estimate peak hour traffic along the San Vicente Boulevard corridor at Saltair Avenue. Since this location was not one of the original study intersections, new traffic counts were also conducted at the intersection to identify traffic volumes entering or exiting Saltair Avenue during the AM and PM peak hours; these counts also identified the number of U-turning vehicles using the median break. These volumes were then used to estimate future (year 2014) traffic conditions at the intersection for both Without Project and With Project conditions, using the methodologies and assumptions described previously for forecasting the future conditions at each of the 12 signalized study intersections, including traffic increases resulting from both the 1.0 percent annual ambient traffic growth and from the 32 identified related projects, as well as trips generated by the proposed project itself. Page IV.L-99

100 No. Table IV.L-17 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2014) Without Project, With Project, and With Design Feature Concepts 1, 1(a), 2, 2(a) Intersection 2 Sunset and Bundy 3 Sunset and Barrington 5 (a) 5 (b) San Vicente and Bundy (west intersection) San Vicente and Bundy (east intersection) 6 Montana and Barrington 7 Montana and Bundy 8 Montana and San Vicente 9 San Vicente and Barrington Peak Without Project With Project With Project Plus Design Feature Concept 1, 1(a), 2, 2(a) Improvement (-)/ Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact CMA LOS Impact Degradation (+) AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM a Indicates significant impact per LADOT traffic impact criteria D D C D B D C A C Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Proposed Brentwood Town Green Project, revised March D F D F C B D C A F C a a a a a D F D F C B D C A F C a a a a a Page IV.L-100

101 No. Table IV.L-18 Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2014) Without Project, With Project, and With Design Feature Concepts 3, 4 Intersection 2 Sunset and Bundy 3 Sunset and Barrington 5 (a) 5 (b) San Vicente and Bundy (west intersection) San Vicente and Bundy (east intersection) 6 Montana and Barrington 7 Montana and Bundy 8 Montana and San Vicente 9 San Vicente and Barrington Peak Without Project With Project With Project Plus Design Feature Concept 3, 4 Improvement (-)/ Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact CMA LOS Impact Degradation (+) AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM a Indicates significant impact per LADOT traffic impact criteria Source: Hirsch/Green Transportation, Supplemental Analysis, October D D C D B D C A C D F D F C B D C A F C a a a a a D F D F C B D C A C a a a a a Page IV.L-101

102 The existing and forecast future traffic volumes at this intersection are shown in Figure IV.L-20 for the AM peak hour and in Figure IV.L-21 for the PM peak hour conditions. However, it should be noted that, for purposes of this evaluation, only the future With Project conditions were analyzed with respect to Warrant 3. Since this scenario represents the highest traffic levels anticipated to occur at the intersection, if installation of a new traffic signal cannot be warranted under these worst case conditions, a signal would not be recommended under either of the lesser volume ( xisting or Without Project ) scenarios. The highest one-hour future (2014) traffic volumes at this intersection occur during the PM peak hour, although the AM peak hour exhibits similar overall traffic volumes. During the PM peak hour, the total (two-way) traffic on San Vicente Boulevard is approximately 2,805 vehicles per hour (including all turning movements), while the southbound approach of Saltair Avenue exhibits a total volume of about 126 vehicles per hour. Similarly, during the AM peak hour, the total approach volumes on San Vicente Boulevard are approximately 2,452 vehicles per hour, while southbound Saltair Avenue exhibits a total of approximately 57 vehicles per hour. These volumes were used for the signal warrant analysis. As noted earlier in the analysis of the project s exit-only driveway, Part A of Warrant 3 will be satisfied if the intersection experiences a minimum of four vehicle-hours of delay for at least one of the minor street approach legs; in order to provide the necessary total vehicular delay calculations for Part A of the warrant analysis, the peak hour conditions at the intersection of San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue were analyzed using the same unsignalized intersection analysis techniques from the HCM. The results of the unsignalized intersection analysis of the forecast (2014) AM and PM peak hour conditions at San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue indicate that the average delay for vehicles on the southbound approach is expected to be approximately 28.0 seconds per vehicle during the AM peak hour, and approximately 88.4 seconds per vehicle during the PM peak hour. As noted previously, these values represent the potential average delays experienced by individual vehicles on the applicable intersection approaches, as the HCM calculations do not calculate the total delay for any of the intersection approaches. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, the potential total delay experienced by vehicles on Saltair Avenue was assumed to equate to the individual vehicular delays multiplied by the total number of vehicles on the approach during the peak hour. Using this methodology, the total delay experienced by the last vehicle in the queue on the southbound Saltair Avenue approach to San Vicente Boulevard during the AM peak hour would be approximately 0.44 cumulative hours (average delay of 28.0 seconds/vehicle x 57 vehicles). During the PM peak hour, the total delay could increase to approximately 3.09 cumulative hours (average delay of 88.4 seconds/vehicle x 126 vehicles). Therefore, neither the AM nor PM peak hour conditions at this intersection would satisfy Part A of Warrant 3, which as noted previously, requires a total approach delay of at least four vehicle hours. Although Part A of the warrant is not fulfilled, Part B of the warrant would be satisfied if the minimum one-hour traffic volumes on both the San Vicente Boulevard and Saltair Avenue approaches meet minimum levels. Based on the total forecast San Vicente Boulevard volumes, the Saltair Avenue approach of this intersection must accommodate a minimum of 100 vehicles per hour during either the AM or PM peak hours in order to satisfy Part B of Warrant 3. While the forecast future AM peak hour Page IV.L-102

103 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-20 Traffic Volumes Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard AM Peak Hour

104 This page intentionally left blank. Page IV.L-104

105 Source: Hirsch Green Transportation Consulting, Inc, January 13, Not to Scale Figure IV.L-21 Traffic Volumes Saltair Avenue and San Vicente Boulevard PM Peak Hour