APPENDIX C-2. Traffic Study Supplemental Analysis Memo

Transcription

1 APPENDIX C-2 Traffic Study Supplemental Analysis Memo

2

3 The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions Memorandum To: From: Subject: Tomas Carranza, LADOT Matthew Simons Traffic Review - Revised 333 La Cienega Boulevard Project Date: October 13, 2015 A Traffic Study for the 333 La Cienega Project, in the Mid-City region of the City of Los Angeles, was originally submitted on March 17, At that time, the Project Description consisted of 162 apartments, 27,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail space to be used as supermarket and 3,560 sq. ft. of restaurant space. The analysis contained in that report showed that the proposed project was not expected to generate any significant traffic impacts. LADOT agreed with the findings of that report and provided an Approval Letter (see Attachment A) dated April 1, 2015 (DOT Case No. CEN ). The Applicant has made some amendments to the Project Description. There are two changes in terms of traffic: a reduction in land use quantities and therefore a reduction in the trip generation estimates for the project and a modification to vehicle operations expected at the four original driveway locations. Original March 2015 Project and Traffic Study Report The original March 2015 report was based on a Project Description of 162 residential apartments, 27,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail space to be used as a supermarket, and 3,560 sq. ft. of restaurant space. The report identified that the Project would generate 2,020 daily trips, 106 AM peak hour trips and 191 PM peak hour trips (see Table B.1, Attachment B). The report found that the Project would cause no significant traffic impacts, and that no traffic mitigations were necessary Von Karman Ave. Suite 580 Irvine, CA Phone: Fax:

4 The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions Amended October 2015 Project and Analysis The Applicant has amended the Project Description to include a reduction in both the total number of residential units and restaurant space. The Project has been reduced from a total of 162 residential apartments, approximately 27,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail space and 3,560 sq. ft. of restaurant space, as analyzed and approved in the March 2015 Traffic Study, to include a total of 145 residential apartment units, approximately 27,685 sq. ft. of commercial retail space to again be used as a supermarket and 3,370 sq. ft. of restaurant space. TMG prepared revised trip generation estimates (see Table B.2, Attachment B) showing that the number of trips generated by the proposed Project would be reduced when compared to the trips totals calculated in the Original March 2015 report. The daily trips are expected to be reduced by 73 trips from 2,020 trips to 1,947 trips. The AM peak hour trips are expected to decrease by five trips from 106 trips to 101 trips and PM peak hour trips are expected to decrease by eight trips from 191 trips to 183 trips. With the reductions in the expected trip generation estimates, it is clear that the change in the Project Description will not create any new significant impacts. Revised Driveway Operations Original Project The original March 2015 report stated that vehicle access into the Project Site was to be provided by four driveways along San Vicente Boulevard and two driveways along La Cienega Boulevard, as shown in Figure 1. The southernmost driveway on San Vicente Boulevard was to be reserved for residents and restaurant patrons and would allow inbound northbound right turns only. The second driveway on San Vicente Boulevard was for residents of the Project and patrons of the restaurant uses and would allow inbound left turns from southbound San Vicente Boulevard and outbound right turns. The third driveway on San Vicente Boulevard was for commercial deliveries and would only allow inbound left turns from southbound San Vicente Boulevard. The fourth driveway on San Vicente Boulevard was for patrons of the supermarket as a northbound exit and would only allow a right turn outbound. The southern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard was intended for use by commercial patrons. It is currently located at the signalized intersection of La Cienega Boulevard & Blackburn Avenue and was to remain at its current location. This driveway is currently a full-movement intersection with the exception of the eastbound and westbound through movements and the outbound left turn movement which would continue to be prohibited. The northern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard was a commercial delivery exit and would only allow outbound right turns to southbound La Cienega Boulevard. These driveway configurations and operations were conceptually approved by LADOT Von Karman Ave. Suite 580 Irvine, CA Phone: Fax:

5 N No Scale 10/8/15 Figure 1 Original Project Site Plan 333 S. La Cienega Boulevard Project The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions

6 The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions All driveway intersections, with the exception of the southern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard, would be unsignalized. A Level of Service (LOS) analysis for these unsignalized intersections was conducted using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method (see Table 1). Level of service worksheets are provided in Attachment C. The LOS for all driveway intersections was estimated to be LOS B or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. Revised Project In the Revised October 2015 Project, the location and operation of the some of the driveways would be changed. These changes are described here and shown on Figure 2. The southernmost driveway on San Vicente Boulevard would remain in the same location and operate in the same manner with the exception that this driveway will be restricted to residential valet use only. The second driveway on San Vicente Boulevard would remain in the same location. Changes to this driveway would include restricting access to residential use only and limiting access to right-in right-out from northbound San Vicente Boulevard. The previous northernmost driveway, to be used as an exit for commercial patrons, will be moved south of the delivery truck entrance and will be used for commercial patron ingress and egress. A southbound left-turn from San Vicente Boulevard and right-in right-out access from northbound San Vicente Boulevard will be permitted at this location. The previous delivery truck entrance from southbound San Vicente Boulevard will remain in the same location and operate in the same manner as described in the previous project. The southern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard will remain at Blackburn Avenue and will continue to operate in the same manner as it does today. This driveway will provide for residential and restaurant valet uses. The northern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard will remain unchanged and continue to operate as a delivery exit. These driveway configurations and operations were conceptually approved by LADOT. All driveway intersections, with the exception of the southern driveway on La Cienega Boulevard, would remain unsignalized. A Level of Service (LOS) analysis for these unsignalized intersections was conducted using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method (see Table 2). Level of service worksheets are provided in Attachment C. The LOS for all driveway intersections was estimated to be LOS B or better in both the AM and PM peak hours. While the change in driveway usage will create some differences in traffic ingress/egress in the immediate area surrounding the Project, it is not expected to change traffic patterns further away from the Project. The level of service and volume/capacity (V/C) ratios for the Future With Project conditions for the five study intersections located immediately adjacent to the Project Site for the Original Project are shown in Tables 3 and 4 and for the Revised Project in Tables 5 and 6. Level of service worksheets are provided in Attachment D Von Karman Ave. Suite 580 Irvine, CA Phone: Fax:

7 N No Scale 10/8/15 Figure 2 Revised Project Site Plan 333 S. La Cienega Boulevard Project The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions

8 The Mobility Group Transportation Strategies & Solutions As shown in Tables 5 and 6, the levels of service at the intersections located immediately adjacent to the Project Site are not expected to degrade as a result of the proposed changes to the driveway locations or operations. Any study intersections that were expected to operate under congested conditions are located on the periphery of the study area and will not be affected by the localized change in travel routes accessing the Project. Conclusion The proposed change in the Project Description is expected to result in a decrease in the overall number of vehicle trips the Project is expected to generate. Since no significant impacts were identified in the Original March 2015 study, no new significant impacts are expected to occur as a result of the change in the Project Description. Although proposed changes in the driveway locations and operations would change the manner in which project traffic travels though the five study intersections located immediately adjacent to the Project Site, a revised impact analysis shows that none of these intersections are expected to degrade in level of service. We therefore conclude that the change in Project Description will not create any new significant impacts and suggest that a new traffic study is not necessary. The Applicant requests a supplemental LADOT letter, describing the changes in the Project Description - and confirming the results of the localized traffic impact analysis and that there would still be no significant impacts. They are proceeding through Department of City Planning within the next few weeks, so they are requesting the supplemental letter at your earliest convenience. We appreciate your assistance on this project. You may call me at (949) x15 or e- mail me at msimons@mobilitygrp.com, if you have any questions Von Karman Ave. Suite 580 Irvine, CA Phone: Fax:

9 Table 1 Future With Project Conditions - Driveway Analysis Original Project AM & PM Peak Hours Future With Project AM Peak Hour Future With Project PM Peak Hour Intersections 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS South Driveway at San Vicente Blvd 1 Northbound Inbound Right Turn N/A N/A N/A N/A Central Driveway at San Vicente Blvd Southbound Inbound Left Turn Westbound Outbound Right Turn A B A B North Driveway at San Vicente Blvd 2 (Truck Only) Southbound Inbound Left Turn N/A N/A N/A N/A North Driveway at San Vicente Blvd Westbound Outbound Right Turn 11.6 B 11.2 B Driveway at La Cienega Blvd (signalized) A A 1. Only northbound inbound right turn allowed at this driveway. No delay for this movement. 2. Only truck trips allowed at this driveway. Negligible truck volume.

10 Table 2 Future With Project Conditions - Driveway Analysis Amended Project AM & PM Peak Hours Future With Project AM Peak Hour Future With Project PM Peak Hour Intersections 1 Delay LOS Delay LOS South Driveway at San Vicente Blvd 1 Northbound Inbound Right Turn N/A N/A N/A N/A Central Driveway at San Vicente Blvd Westbound Outbound Right Turn 11.5 B 11.0 B North Driveway at San Vicente Blvd 2 (Truck Only) Southbound Inbound Left Turn N/A N/A N/A N/A North Driveway at San Vicente Blvd Southbound Inbound Left Turn Westbound Outbound Right Turn A B A B Driveway at La Cienega Blvd (signalized) A A 1. Only northbound inbound right turn allowed at this driveway. No delay for this movement. 2. Only truck trips allowed at this driveway. Negligible truck volume.

11 Table 3 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service 10/13/2015 AM Peak Hour - Original Project No. Intersection Future Without Future With V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C Increase Significant Impact 11 San Vicente Blvd. & 3 rd St C C No 12 San Vicente Blvd. & Burton Way A A No 16 La Cienega Blvd. & 3 rd St C C No 17 La Cienega Blvd & Blackburn Ave A A No 18 La Cienega Blvd. & San Vicente Blvd C C No Table 4 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service PM Peak Hour - Original Project No. Intersection Future Without Future With V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C Increase Significant Impact 11 San Vicente Blvd & 3 rd St A B No 12 San Vicente Blvd & Burton Way B B No 16 La Cienega Blvd & 3 rd St C C No 17 La Cienega Blvd & Blackburn Ave A A No 18 La Cienega Blvd & San Vicente Blvd B B No F:\Projects 2014\333 La Cienega 14J-121\Traffic Study\Supplemental Analysis \[Tables 3 & 4 - FWP LOS Table (Surrouding Intersections) - AM & PM Peak 1

12 Table 5 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service 10/13/2015 AM Peak Hour - Amended Project No. Intersection Future Without Future With V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C Increase Significant Impact 11 San Vicente Blvd. & 3 rd St C C No 12 San Vicente Blvd. & Burton Way A A No 16 La Cienega Blvd. & 3 rd St C C No 17 La Cienega Blvd & Blackburn Ave A A No 18 La Cienega Blvd. & San Vicente Blvd C C No Table 6 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service PM Peak Hour - Amended Project No. Intersection Future Without Future With V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C Increase Significant Impact 11 San Vicente Blvd & 3 rd St A B No 12 San Vicente Blvd & Burton Way B B No 16 La Cienega Blvd & 3 rd St C C No 17 La Cienega Blvd & Blackburn Ave A A No 18 La Cienega Blvd & San Vicente Blvd B B No F:\Projects 2014\333 La Cienega 14J-121\Traffic Study\Supplemental Analysis \[Tables 5 & 6 - FWP LOS Table (Surrouding Intersections) - AM & PM Peak 1

13 Attachment A LADOT Approval Letter for Traffic Study Dated April 2015

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22 Attachment B Trip Generation Estimates Original and Amended Project

23 Table B S. La Cienega Blvd Project - Trip Generation Estimates Original Project 3/13/2015 Daily Trips Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units Daily Trip Rate Total Trips Existing Uses Department Store 2,3,4 ITE ,676 SF ,091 (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% 164 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Retail 50% Total Existing -464 Proposed Uses Apartments 5,6 ITE DU ,077 (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - Net Apartments 15% Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,000 SF ,760 (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -138 (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - 15% -393 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Supermarket 40% ,337 Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,560 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -16 (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - 15% -46 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Restaurant 10% Total Proposed 2,484 Total Net 2,020 AM Peak Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units AM Peak Hour Trip Rate Total Trips In Out Total In Out Total Existing Uses Department Store 2,3,4 ITE ,676 SF (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% Net Retail Total Existing Proposed Uses Apartments 5,6 ITE DU (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% Net Apartments Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,000 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 40% Net Supermarket Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,560 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 10% Net Restaurant Total Proposed Total Net

24 Table B S. La Cienega Blvd Project - Trip Generation Estimates Original Project 3/13/2015 PM Peak Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units PM Peak Hour Trip Rate Total Trips In Out Total In Out Total Existing Uses Department Store 2,3,4 ITE ,676 SF (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% Net Retail Total Existing Proposed Uses Apartments 5,6 ITE DU (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% Net Apartments Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,000 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 40% Net Supermarket Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,560 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 10% Net Restaurant Total Proposed Total Net ITE trip rates from Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2012 except otherwise noted. 2. Source: Average trip rate for ITE Department Store. 3. Department Store land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Department Store land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (50%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates,August Source: Average trip rate for ITE 220 -Apartments. 6. Residential land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Source: Average trip rates for ITE Supermarket. 8. Supermarket land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit,August Supermaket land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (40%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates,August Source: Average trip rate for ITE Quality Restaurant. 11.Restaurant land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Restaurant land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (10%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates,August Note: Some numbers do not add up perfectly due to rounding.

25 Table B S. La Cienega Blvd Project - Revised Trip Generation Estimates Amended Project 10/13/2015 Daily Trips Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units Daily Trip Rate Total Trips Existing Uses Department Store 2 ITE ,676 SF ,091 (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% 164 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Retail 50% Total Existing -464 Proposed Uses Apartments 2,3 ITE DU (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - Net Condominiums 15% Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,685 SF ,831 (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -142 (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - 15% -403 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Supermarket 40% ,372 Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,370 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -15 (Reduction for walk/transit trips) - 15% -43 (Reduction for pass-by trips) - Net Restaurant 10% Total Proposed 2,411 Total Net 1,947 AM Peak Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units AM Peak Hour Trip Rate Total Trips In Out Total In Out Total Existing Uses Department Store 2 ITE ,676 SF (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% Net Retail Total Existing Proposed Uses Apartments 2,3 ITE DU (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% Net Condominiums Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,685 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 40% Net Supermarket Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,370 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 10% Net Restaurant Total Proposed Total Net

26 Table B S. La Cienega Blvd Project - Revised Trip Generation Estimates Amended Project 10/13/2015 PM Peak Land Use Assumptions Source 1 & Code Quantity Units PM Peak Hour Trip Rate Total Trips In Out Total In Out Total Existing Uses Department Store 2 ITE ,676 SF (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% Net Retail Total Existing Proposed Uses Apartments 2,3 ITE DU (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% Net Condominiums Supermarket 7,8,9 ITE ,685 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 40% Net Supermarket Restaurant 10,11,12 ITE 931 3,370 SF (Reduction for internal trips) - 5% (Reduction for transit/walk trips) - 15% (Reduction for pass-by trips) - 10% Net Restaurant Total Proposed Total Net ITE trip rates from Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2012 except otherwise noted. 2. Source: Average trip rate for ITE 220 -Apartments. 3. Residential land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Source: Average trip rates for ITE Deparrtment Store. 5. Retail land use was adjusted to account for walk trips (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Retail land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (20%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates, August Source: Average trip rates for ITE Supermarket. 8. Supermarket land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit,August Supermaket land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (40%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates,August Source: Average trip rate for ITE Quality Restaurant. 11. Restaurant land use was adjusted to account for transit/walk trips (15%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit, August Restaurant land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (10%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment I - Pass-By Trip Rates,August Note: Some numbers do not add up perfectly due to rounding.

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37 Amended Project

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58 Amended Project

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68