YULA Boys High School Expansion

Environmental Review Section City Hall 200 N. Spring Street, Room 750 Los Angeles, CA 90012 RECIRCULATED TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION/PARKING CHAPTER WEST LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY PLAN AREA YULA Boys High School Expansion SCH No. 2008051066 Case No. ENV-2008-1799-EIR Council District No. 5 Project Description: Project Address: 9760 West Pico Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90035 The project substantially implements the campus expansion authorized by the existing Conditional Use Permit (CUP) issued in 1999 (Case Number ZA-1999-279-CU-ZV-PA1), (and accompanying Mitigated Negative Declaration, MND-99-0151), while requesting amendments to specific permit conditions. Among the specific amendments requested is the alteration of the enrollment composition, including an increase in the number of high school students, while retaining the total enrollment cap established by the 1999 CUP. The applicant also requests amendments to specific operating conditions in order to provide increased flexibility for typical high school activities. The project also includes a reduction of the site to eliminate approximately 7,153 square feet on the second and third floors of the project site known as the West Wing. The West Wing will be the subject of separate applications filed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The project proposes a subterranean parking garage that would provide 100 parking spaces, and a total of approximately 19,953 square feet of new construction. The project Applicant is requesting the following discretionary approvals: Site Plan Review Findings pursuant to LAMC Section 16.05-E; Conditional Use Permit/Modification; Parking Variance/Modification; and Haul Route(s) approval, as necessary. APPLICANT: YULA Boys High School PREPARED BY: Christopher A. Joseph & Associates May 2010

RECIRCULATED TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION/PARKING CHAPTER YULA Boys High School Expansion Project 9760 West Pico Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90035 Prepared for: The City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning Prepared By: May 2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION/SUMMARY...I-1 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS... II-1 FIGURES Figure Figure II-1, Study Intersections and Street Segments... Figure II-2, Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour... Figure II-3, Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour... Figure II-4, Project Trip Distribution Percentages... Figure II-5, Project Traffic Volumes (Net) AM Peak Hour... Figure II-6, Project Traffic Volumes (Net) PM Peak Hour... Figure II-7, Related Projects Location Map... Figure II-8, Total Related Projects Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour... Figure II-9, Total Related Projects Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour... Figure II-10, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes Without Project AM Peak Hour... Figure II-11, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes Without Project PM Peak Hour... Figure II-12, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project AM Peak Hour... Figure II-13, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project PM Peak Hour... Page II-6 II-12 II-13 II-26 II-27 II-28 II-34 II-35 II-36 II-39 II-40 II-41 II-42 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Table of Contents Page i

City of Los Angeles May 2010 TABLES Table Page Table II-1, Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges for Determining Levels of Service... II-7 Table II-2, Level of Service as a Function of CMA Values... II-7 Table II-3, Construction Trip Generation Rates and Equations... II-9 Table II-4, Project Trip Generation Rates and Equations Based Upon At Site Generation Rate Counts... II-10 Table II-5, CMA and LOS Summary - Existing (2008) Conditions... II-11 Table II-6, City of Los Angeles Significant Traffic Impact Criteria... II-18 Table II-7, Neighborhood Traffic Impact Criteria... II-18 Table II-8, Construction Workers Per Day Per Project Construction Phase... II-20 Table II-9, Construction-Related Trip Generation... II-20 Table II-10, Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary, Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Construction Trips... II-21 Table II-11, Neighborhood Construction Traffic Impact Analysis Summary... II-22 Table II-12, Project Trip Generation... II-22 Table II-13, Directional Trip Distribution... II-23 Table II-14, Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates... II-29 Table II-15, Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary, Future (2012) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Conditions and With Mitigation... II-38 Table II-16, Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis Summary... II-43 Table II-17, Parking Demand Estimate... II-44 Table II-18, Los Angeles Municipal Code Parking Requirement... II-45 Table II-19, On-Street Parking Occupancy Summary... II-46 Table II-20, Related Project No. 53 Construction-Related Trip Generation... II-47 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Table of Contents Page ii

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-21, Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Existing (2008) and Future (2012) Traffic Conditions Without and With Project Construction Trips... II-47 Table II-22, Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Without Cul-de-Sac Future (2012) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Conditions... II-49 Table II-23, Residential Street Impact Analysis for Without Cul-de-Sac Scenario... II-49 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC STUDY dated February 2009 APPENDIX B: APPENDIX C: APPENDIX D: Letter regarding the Yeshiva High School Traffic Monitoring Report to the LADOT dated July 1, 2009 Letter regarding the Yeshiva High School Traffic Report for Without Cul-de- Sac Scenario to the LADOT dated November 30, 2009 Interdepartmental Correspondence from the LADOT to the Department of City Planning dated December 17, 2009 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Table of Contents Page iii

I. INTRODUCTION TO RECIRCULATED TRAFFIC/TRANSPORTATION/PARKING CHAPTER INTRODUCTION The City of Los Angeles (City) is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed YULA Boys High School Expansion Project (Proposed Project) (Case No. CPC-2009-1049-ZV-CU-PAD). A Draft EIR (Case No. ENV-2008-1799-EIR/State Clearinghouse No. 2008051066) was prepared for the Proposed Project and made available for public review for a 45-day period, from February 26, 2009 through April 13, 2009. The Draft EIR was also circulated to State agencies for review through the State Clearinghouse of the Governor s Office of Planning and Research. The NOA was published in the Los Angeles Times and copies of the Draft EIR were available for review at the City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning, Central Library, Robertson Branch Library, West Los Angeles Branch Library, and via internet at www.lacity.org/pln. In response to the questions and comments received during the circulation period for the Draft EIR, additional traffic analysis was prepared for the Proposed Project. The additional traffic analysis included the study of traffic generation from the existing school, revaluation of projected traffic based upon the actual traffic generation of the existing school, and recommended new mitigation. As requested by the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, the additional traffic analysis included analysis of potential traffic impacts of both the Proposed Project and the Without Cul-de-Sac scenario (to update the previous analysis included as Appendix E to the Traffic Study in the Draft EIR). After reviewing the foregoing information, the Department of Transportation determined that such analysis and mitigation recommendations should supersede the previous traffic analysis and mitigation recommendations presented in the Draft EIR. Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) requires a lead agency to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after notice is given as to the availability of the Draft EIR for public review, but before certification. Guidelines Section 15088.5(c) provides that, if the revision is limited to a few chapters or portions of the EIR, only the chapters or portions of the EIR that have been modified need be recirculated. To allow the public opportunity to comment upon the revised traffic analysis and mitigation recommendations summarized above, it was determined that the Traffic/Transportation/Parking chapter of the Draft EIR should be revised to present the revised traffic analysis and mitigation recommendations and that such revised Traffic/Transportation/Parking chapter should be recirculated ("Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter"). No other chapters of the Draft EIR are being recirculated. There are no changes to the Proposed Project as described in the Draft EIR. YULA Boys High School Expansion I. Introduction Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Page I-1

City of Los Angeles May 2010 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS The Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter will be circulated for public and agency review and comment for a period of 45 days, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15087 and 15105. During this review period written comments on the scope and adequacy of this Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter can be submitted to the City Planning Department. All comments on the Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter should be sent no later than May, 2010 to the attention of: Diana Kitching City Planning Department, EIR Unit 200 North Spring Street, City Hall, Room 750 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(f)(2), the City requests that reviewers limit their comments to this Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter. Please be advised that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(f)(2), responses to new comments that relate to chapters or portions of the Draft EIR that are not being recirculated will not be responded to. Following the 45-day public review period for this Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter, the City will prepare a Final EIR, which will consist of the following documents: The Original Draft EIR (including Appendices); The Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter (including Appendices); Comments and Responses to Comments on the original Draft EIR received during the public comment period, February 26, 2009 through April 13, 2009; Responses to Comments on the Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter; and Corrections and Additions, if any, to the original Draft EIR and the Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter. The Final EIR will provide the basis for City decision-makers, such as the Deputy Advisory Agency, the City Planning Commission and the City Council to consider the environmental implications of the Proposed Project as well as possible ways to mitigate any identified potentially significant environmental impacts. Prior to making a decision on the Proposed Project, the City must certify that the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA, was presented to the City s decision making body, that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR and that the information in the Final EIR reflects the lead Agency s independent judgment and analysis. YULA Boys High School Expansion I. Introduction Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Page I-2

City of Los Angeles May 2010 This Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter is available for review at the following locations: City of Los Angeles Department of City Planning, 200 N. Spring Street, Rm 720 Los Angeles Central Library, Robertson Branch Library, West Los Angeles Branch Library, and via internet at http://www.cityplanning.lacity.org/ YULA Boys High School Expansion I. Introduction Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Page I-3

II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS TRAFFIC / TRANSPORTATION / PARKING The following section supersedes and replaces the corresponding Traffic/Transportation/Parking section found in the originally published Draft EIR. This section summarizes and incorporates by reference the information provided in the following documents; Traffic Impact Study for Yeshiva University of Los Angeles Boys High School Phase II Project at 9760 West Pico Boulevard, City of Los Angeles prepared by Crain & Associates in February 2009 (Traffic Study), a letter regarding the Yeshiva High School Traffic Monitoring Report to the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) prepared by Crain & Associates dated July 1, 2009 (July 2009 Letter), a letter regarding the Yeshiva High School Traffic Report for Without Cul-de-Sac Scenario to the LADOT prepared by Crain & Associates dated November 30, 2009 (November 2009 Letter), and interdepartmental correspondence from the LADOT to the Department of City Planning dated December 17, 2009 (December 2009 LADOT Memo). These documents are provided as Appendices to this Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The proposed project is located in the West Los Angeles Community Plan Area of the City of Los Angeles. The project site is located at the southwest corner of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue. The project site is located in the vicinity of several major transportation corridors that connect the project area to the regional transportation system. Area Transportation Facilities The project area is served by both local and regional transportation facilities. The San Diego Freeway (I- 405) and the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) are approximately two and one-half miles away, and one and three-quarter miles away, respectively, from the project site. Both freeways provide ramp connections to the surface street network in the project vicinity. In addition to the regional freeway facilities, several major and secondary arterials serve the project vicinity, as does a well-developed local street grid. The key transportation facilities in the project vicinity are discussed below. Freeways San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) The San Diego Freeway (I-405) is a north-south oriented freeway located approximately two and one-half miles west of the project site. This facility typically provides four mainline travel lanes per direction, although additional auxiliary lanes are present between on- and off-ramps. A southbound high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane also exists in the Sepulveda Pass area, and a northbound HOV lane has been approved for construction. The San Diego Freeway provides a west side alternative route across the Santa Monica Mountains to the Ventura Freeway (US-101) and the Golden State Freeway (I-5). The San Diego Freeway also provides direct access to other area freeways, including an interchange with the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) approximately two and one-half miles southwest of the project site. Access to the project area surface street network is provided by full sets of on- and off-ramps at Santa Monica YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-1

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Boulevard, a northward directed half set of ramps for Olympic/Pico Boulevards and a southward directed half set of ramps from National Boulevard. According to the most current (2007) data available through the Caltrans Website, the traffic volumes on the San Diego Freeway between Santa Monica Boulevard (State Route 2) and Wilshire Boulevard is approximately 291,000 vehicles per day (VPD). Santa Monica Freeway (Interstate 10) The Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) is the primary east-west freeway in Los Angeles County. This facility, located approximately one and three-quarter miles south of the project site, provides a continuous route from the City of Santa Monica through Downtown Los Angeles, continuing eastward as the San Bernardino Freeway through San Bernardino and Riverside counties. The Santa Monica Freeway provides four mainline travel lanes in each direction, with auxiliary lanes between some ramp locations. Surface street access is provided at Overland Avenue, National Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard. As previously mentioned, the Santa Monica Freeway has a full interchange with the San Diego Freeway approximately two and one-half miles southwest of the project site. Between National Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard, the traffic volume is approximately 276,000 VPD on the Santa Monica Freeway. Streets and Highways Major/Arterial Highways Pico Boulevard is an east-west Major Highway Class II that forms the northern boundary of the project site. This roadway provides access from the City of Santa Monica to Central Avenue in downtown Los Angeles. In the study vicinity, Pico Boulevard provides three through lanes in each direction and left-turn channelization at most intersections. On some portions of Pico Boulevard, on-street parking during nonpeak hours is permitted. However, some portions have parking restriction at all times. At Castello Avenue and Roxbury Drive, restrictions on Pico Boulevard prohibit right turns in the eastbound direction during the PM peak hour. Beverly Drive is designated as a Major Highway Class II north of Pico Boulevard and a Local Street south of Pico Boulevard. This north-south oriented roadway extends from Franklin Canyon Drive in the north to Harlow Drive in the south. In the project vicinity, one through lane in each direction is provided with left-turn channelization at most intersections. Olympic Boulevard is a major east-west Major Highway Class II that extends from the City of Montebello, through Downtown Los Angeles, to its western terminus in the City of Santa Monica. Olympic Boulevard is located less than one mile north of the project site. In the project vicinity, this roadway provides three through lanes in each direction with left-turn channelization. Some segments on Olympic Boulevard permit on-street parking during non-peak hours while others have parking restrictions at all times. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-2

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Secondary/Collector Highways Robertson Boulevard is a north-south Secondary Highway that extends from the City of Beverly Hills to the City of Culver City. Robertson Boulevard is located two miles east of the project site. In the project vicinity, this roadway provides two through lanes in each direction with left-turn channelization. Onstreet parking during non-peak hours is permitted along Robertson Boulevard. Century Park East, designated as a Secondary Highway, extends from Santa Monica Boulevard in the north to Pico Boulevard in the South. In the project vicinity, Century Park East has one to two through lanes in each direction, with left-turn channelization at major intersections. Roxbury Drive is designated as a Collector Street. This north-south oriented roadway transitions from Hartford Way in the City of Beverly Hills and extends discontinuously to just north of Sawyer Street. In the vicinity of the project site, Roxbury Drive has one through lane in each direction. On-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2-hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM, Monday to Saturday. Beverwil Drive is a Collector Street located east of the project site. It is a north-south oriented street which connects with Beverly Drive in the north and eventually becomes Castle Heights Avenue at Kincardine Avenue. Near the project site, Beverwil Drive has two through lanes in each direction and left-turn channelization at key intersections. Local Streets Cashio Street is an east-west oriented Local Street located south of the project site. This roadway transitions from Roxbury Drive in the west to its eastern terminus at Crescent Heights Boulevard. East of Beverwil Drive, Cashio Street is designated a Collector Street. Near the project vicinity, this roadway provides one through lane in each direction. On-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2-hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM, Monday to Saturday. Castello Avenue is a designated Local Street that forms the eastern boundary of the project site. This north-south roadway extends from Peck Drive and Newman Street in the north to Horner Street in the south. This roadway provides one travel lane in each direction. On-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2-hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM, Monday to Saturday. Public Transportation The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) provides an extensive system of bus lines throughout the project area. Current regional transit information available through Metro indicates that two bus routes have stops within a reasonable walking distance (approximately one-half mile or less) of the project site. In addition, Santa Monica also provides two Big Blue Bus routes near the project site. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-3

City of Los Angeles May 2010 In addition to the routes below, additional public bus and rail opportunities are available via transfers to other lines and/or transit providers. When transfer opportunities are considered, the greater Los Angeles region is readily accessible from the project site by the transit system. Although public transportation is available, to provide a conservative analysis, no project trip generation reduction due to public transit has been assumed. Metro Bus Service Line 28/328 provides east-west service between Century City and Downtown Los Angeles via Olympic Boulevard. In the project vicinity, a stop is provided on Olympic Boulevard at Camden Drive. Weekdays, Line 28/328 has headways of approximately 8 to 15 minutes. Saturday service on Line 28 has headways of approximately 7 to 18 minutes. Line 28 has headways of approximately 10 to 20 minutes on Sundays and holidays. Line 328 does not operate on weekends or holidays. Line 14 provides east-west service between Downtown Los Angeles and Beverly Hills via Beverly Boulevard. Near the project site, Line 14 travels on Pico Boulevard, with a stop at Beverly Drive. Weekday headways are approximately 10 to 12 minutes. Weekend and holiday service has headways of approximately 12 to 15 minutes. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 5 provides service between Santa Monica, Century City and Rimpau Transit Center (at Rimpau Boulevard and Pico Boulevard) via Pico Boulevard, Olympic Boulevard and Colorado Avenue. In the project vicinity, Line 5 travels along Pico Boulevard with a stop provided at Beverly Drive. Service is provided Monday through Friday with headways of approximately 20 minutes. Saturday, Sunday and holiday services operate on longer headways of approximately 30 minutes. Line 7 operates between Santa Monica and Rimpau Transit Center, with limited-stop service provided by the express, Super 7 Line, during peak hours. Stops for Line 7 near the project site are provided along Pico Boulevard at Roxbury Drive and Beverwil Drive. Near the project site, a stop for the Super 7 Line is provided along Pico Boulevard at Beverly Drive. Line 7 buses operate on weekday headways of approximately 10 to 15 minutes while the Super 7 Line operates on weekday headways of approximately 20 minutes. Weekend and holiday schedules are provided with headways of approximately 15 to 20 minutes. The Super 7 Line does not operate on weekends or holidays. Study Intersections and Forecast Scenarios The following five study intersections and one street segment locations were selected in consultation with LADOT. Except as noted, all intersections are signalized. The locations of these study intersections and street segment are depicted in Figure II-1, Study Intersections and Street Segments. 1. Pico Boulevard and Roxbury Drive (Signalized); 2. Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue (Two-Way Stop Controlled); YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-4

City of Los Angeles May 2010 3. Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive (Signalized); 4. Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive (Signalized); and 5. Cashio Street and Beverwil Drive (Signalized). All of the four signalized study intersections are currently operated under the City s Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system and ATCS (Adaptive Traffic Control System). The ATSAC and ATCS signal enhancements, which provide computer monitoring of traffic demand and modify traffic signal timing in real time to maximize capacity and decrease delay, have been recognized to increase intersection capacities by approximately seven to ten percent, respectively, at installed locations. Methodology The traffic analysis was performed through the use of established traffic engineering techniques. The methodology used to determine the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) and evaluate traffic operations at the study intersections is based on procedures outlined in Circular Number 212 of the Transportation Research Board, consistent with LADOT policies. This methodology describes the operating characteristics of an intersection in terms of the Level of Service, which is based on intersection traffic volume and other variables such as number and type of signal phasing, lane geometrics, 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). Capacity represents the maximum total hourly volume of vehicles in the critical lanes, which 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. The intersection capacities for various levels of service, based on the number of traffic signal phases, are show in Table II-1, Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges for Determining Levels of Service. For intersection evaluation and planning purposes, the capacity of an intersection equates to the value of LOS E, which represents the highest level of traffic through urban area intersections that can be adequately accommodated without a breakdown in operation resulting in stop-and-go conditions. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-5

Legend Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Figure II-1 Study Intersections and Street Segments

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-1 Critical Movement Analysis Volume Ranges for Determining Levels of Service a Maximum Sum of Critical Volumes (VPH) Level of Service Four or More 2 Way Stop Two Phase Three Phase Phases Controlled A 900 855 825 720 600 B 1,050 1,000 965 840 700 C 1,200 1,140 1,100 960 800 D 1,350 1,275 1,225 1,080 900 a: 4 Way Stop Controlled E 1,500 1,425 1,375 1,200 1,000 F Not Applicable For planning applications only, i.e., not appropriate for operations and design applications. Capacity equates to the value of LOS E. Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. 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. Intersections operating at LOS A through LOS C provide 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 E 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 roadway is overloaded and is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. The LOS definitions do not represent a single intersection operation condition, but rather correspond to a range of CMA values, as shown in Table II-2, Level of Service as a Function of CMA Value. Level of Service Table II-2 Level of Service as a Function of CMA Values Description of Operating Characteristics Range of CMA Values A Uncongested operations; all vehicles clear in a single cycle. < 0.60 B Same as above >0.60 <0.70 C Light congestion; occasional backups on critical approaches. >0.70 <0.80 D Congestion on critical approaches, but intersection functional. Vehicles required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks. No >0.80 <0.90 long-standing lines formed. E Severe congestion with some long-standing lines on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for >0.90 <1.00 protected turning movements. F Forced flow with stoppages of long duration. >1.00 Notes: CMA = Critical Movement Analysis; LOS = Level of Service Source: Crain and Associates, February 2009. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-7

City of Los Angeles May 2010 The basic CMA calculations for each forecast scenario were adjusted to account for traffic signal enhancements that are not considered in the CMA methodology. As noted, the City s ATSAC system has been implemented at all of the signalized intersections in the study area. This system monitors traffic volumes and demands at a network of intersections, and adjusts signal phasing programs and timing in real time to maximize the capacity of the intersections in the system. The LADOT has determined that intersections connected to the ATSAC system experience an approximate seven percent increase in capacity as compared to non-atsac locations. Therefore, per LADOT policy, the basic CMA value calculated using the standard methodology was reduced by 0.070 for intersections equipped with ATSAC (existing signalized study intersections), and 0.10 for the signalized intersections with ATSAC and ATCS where appropriate, in order to estimate the effectiveness of the resulting increase in intersection capacity. In addition to the intersection impacts discussed above, it is possible that construction traffic may utilize some of the local neighborhood streets surrounding the project as alternative travel routes to and from the project site (although construction parking is prohibited on neighborhood streets). Therefore, a residential street traffic analysis was also conducted to determine the potential impact of project construction traffic on the residential street segment listed below. This selected location is considered the most appropriate indicator of traffic impacts that project construction could have on the surrounding residential street system. 1. Castello Avenue between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. Per LADOT policy, the determination of a residential street traffic impact is based on daily traffic volumes traversing the study street segment. Daily traffic counts for the residential street segment were conducted on May 30, 2007 (while local schools were in session). An annual ambience growth factor of 1.0 percent was compounded and applied to the 2007 volume to represent existing volume for the year 2008. The traffic count data is provided in Appendix A of the Traffic Study. These daily traffic volumes were used as the basis for the residential street impact analysis. For the analysis of future traffic volume on residential streets, future traffic volume was estimated using the same procedures and assumptions described previously in the development of future intersection volumes. The Future Without Project Daily Traffic Volume (VPD) was based on the ambient traffic growth and related projects volumes. The Future With Project VPD included the addition of maximum project construction traffic. The 1999 CUP (Condition 75) includes installation of a cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway as a condition of Phase 2. The applicant proposes no change to Condition 75, and the Traffic Study therefore assumed the cul-de-sac would be constructed before the proposed project, and did not assume any project trips along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. However, because members of the public have expressed an interest in understanding the potential effects of eliminating the cul-de-sac, Appendix E of the Traffic Study provided a "without" cul-de-sac scenario, which has been updated to reflect revised project trip generation rates in the November 2009 Letter. The traffic-generating characteristics of various land uses have been surveyed and documented in many studies conducted under the auspices of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The most recent YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-8

City of Los Angeles May 2010 information is provided in the 7th Edition of the ITE Trip Generation manual which was used as the basis for calculating the vehicle trips associated with the construction of this project. The daily, AM and PM peak hour trip rates used for determining the project s construction trip generating potential are established to be approximately the same or less than that for General Light Industrial worker with the rates shown in Table II-3. Land Use General Light Industrial (per worker) Table II-3 Construction Trip Generation Rates and Equations ITE Land Use Code Daily Trip Ends AM Peak Hour b I/B % O/B % Trip Ends PM Peak Hour a I/B % O/B % Trip Ends 110 3.02 83% 17% 0.44 21% 79% 0.42 Notes: I/B = inbound, O/B = outbound. Daily and PM peak hour rates are based on Trip Generation, 7th Edition, ITE, 2003. Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008 The Traffic Study for the original DEIR utilized ITE Land Use Code 530 to calculate daily and PM peak hour project trips, and West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (TIMP) trip generation rates for the AM peak hour. Based on comments received during the public comment period for the original DEIR, additional traffic analyses were conducted to determine the actual current site generation for the school. Count surveys were conducted by Crain & Associates on Thursday, April 23, 2009 which represented a typical general school day at Yeshiva High School. The 15-minute interval counts were collected from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM in order to cover the periods for the ITE manual trip generation rates which were used in the DEIR Traffic Study. The counts established that the actual trip generation for the school exceeded that predicted by ITE Land Use Code 530 and TIMP trip generation rates. Accordingly, it was determined that the actual trip generation rates should be utilized to project trips in the revised impact analysis which is presented in this recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking chapter. The daily, and AM and PM peak hour trip rates and equations used for determining the project s trip generation are shown in Table II-4. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-9

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Land Use High School Table II-4 Project Trip Generation Rates and Equations Based Upon At Site Generation Rate Counts ITE Land Use Code 1 Daily Trip Ends a I/B % AM Peak Hour O/B % Trip Ends I/B % PM Peak Hour O/B % Trip Ends 5.465 60% 40% 1.097 35% 65% 0.661 Junior/Community College c 540 0.6 0% 0% 0 0% 0% 0 Notes: I/B = inbound, O/B = outbound. Daily, AM and PM peak hour rates are based on traffic counts conducted by Crain & Associates on April 23, 2009. The Junior/Community College rates were modified to reflect the University that classes are currently restricted to the evening hours and the proposed project would not modify class start times. Thus, the University portion of the project would not generate any AM or PM peak hour trips. This was conservatively assumed to as one-half of the usual decrease in daily trips. Source: Crain & Associates, July 2009. Existing (Year 2008) Traffic Volumes In order to determine the existing baseline traffic conditions in the project area, an analysis of existing (2008) weekday AM and PM peak-hour traffic conditions was performed at the five study intersections and one street segment locations. Peak-hour traffic counts at four of the study intersections were conducted in May 2007 by National Data & Surveying Services and Crain & Associates, during the weekday AM and PM peak periods. The remaining study intersection (Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue) was counted in February 2008 by Traffic Solutions during the weekday AM and PM peak periods. All weekday counts were gathered manually from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM in the morning and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM in the afternoon and were conducted when local schools were in session. The peak-hour and corresponding traffic volumes for both AM and PM peak periods were identified individually for each intersection based on the combined four highest consecutive 15-minute volumes for all vehicular movements at the intersection. An annual ambience growth factor of 1.0 percent was compounded and applied to the 2007 volumes to represent existing volumes for the year 2008. Existing peak-hour volumes at the five study intersections are illustrated in Figures II-2, Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour, and II-3, Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour. The traffic count data sheets and the lane configurations and traffic controls are included in Appendix A and B, respectively, of the Traffic Study. Analysis of Existing (Year 2008) Traffic Conditions The existing (2008) AM and PM CMA values and corresponding LOS are shown in Table II-5. As indicated by the values in Table II-2, most study intersections in the project vicinity are experiencing 1 AM and PM peak hour trip generation is based on generation factors derived from actual counts of existing school operation. See July 2009 Letter and December 2009 LADOT Memo. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-10

City of Los Angeles May 2010 relatively good LOS (LOS A to C). The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive is currently operating at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour. Table II-5 CMA and LOS Summary - Existing (2008) Conditions No. Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS 1 Pico Boulevard and Roxbury Drive 0.713 C 0.622 B 2 Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue 0.712 C 0.773 C 3 Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive 0.776 C 0.779 C 4 Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive 0.814 D 0.902 E 5 Cashio Street and Beverwil Drive 0.635 B 0.440 A Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Regulatory Framework As discussed in Section IV.D, Land Use Planning of the DEIR, the project site is located in the West Los Angeles community of the City of Los Angeles. As such, the project site is subject to the applicable transportation policies of several local and regional plans. Regional Plans and Regulations 1996 Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) was adopted in 1996 by the member agencies of SCAG to set broad goals for the Southern California region and identify strategies for agencies at all levels of government to use in guiding their decision-making. It includes input from each of the 13 subregions that make up the Southern California region (comprised of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Imperial and Ventura Counties). The RCPG serves as a policy document that sets broad goals for the Southern California region and identifies strategies for agencies at all levels of government to use in guiding their decision-making with respect to the significant issues and changes, including growth management, that can be anticipated by the year 2015 and beyond. Adopted RCPG policies related to land use are contained primarily in Chapter 2 of the RCPG, entitled Growth Management. The purpose of the Growth Management Chapter is to present forecasts which establish the socio-economic parameters for the development of the Regional Mobility and Air Quality Chapters of the RCPG, and to address issues related to growth and land consumption by encouraging local land use actions that would help minimize development costs, save natural resources, and enhance the quality of life in the region. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-11

Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Figure II-2 Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour

Source: CA Crain & Associates, February 2009. Figure II-3 Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes PM Peak

City of Los Angeles May 2010 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan In response to SCAG s Regional Council s 2002 directive in the 2002 Strategic Plan to develop a regional, holistic, strategic plan for defining and solving the region s inter-related housing, traffic, water, air quality, and other challenges, the 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) was drafted by SCAG and other key stakeholders. 2 The RCP was designed to consider additional steps required to further promote policies that would assist in greening the region, thereby laying the framework for a more robust update of the scheduled 2012 update of the Regional Transportation Plan. The 2008 RCP is closely linked to SCAG s Compass Blueprint and Regional Transportation Plan. The RCP recommends goals, policies, and objectives designed to further integrate resource planning, and is designed to assist local governments with General Plan updates, municipal code amendments, design guidelines, incentive programs, and other actions. The RCP features nine chapters that focus on specific areas of planning and resource management: Land Use and Housing; Open Space and Habitat; Water, Energy; Air Quality, Solid Waste; Transportation; Security and Emergency Preparedness; and Economy. SCAG took action in October 2008 to accept the RCP, which will serve as an advisory document for local governments within the SCAG region. However, it should be noted that while accepted, the RCP has not yet been adopted by SCAG. Making the Connections: 2008 Regional Transportation Plan Making the Connections is the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for the SCAG region. The RTP is a multi-modal plan to address the region s transportation system and growth pattern beyond the year 2038. The RTP provides the basic policy and program framework for long-term investment in the SCAG region s transportation system. The goals of the RTP are to maximize mobility and accessibility, ensure safety and reliability, preserve the existing transportation system, maximize productivity of the transportation system, protect the environment, and encourage land use and growth patterns that complement the transportation system. The RTP also includes policies which reflect the transportation priorities for the SCAG region, and serve to guide plan development. The 2008 RTP ended its public comment period, which commenced in December 2007 and ended on February 19, 2008. The Final 2008 RTP was adopted by the Regional Council on May 8, 2008. 3 Congestion Management Program (CMP) To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the Congestion Management Program (CMP) was enacted by Proposition 111. The intent of the CMP is to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A countywide approach has been established by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), the local CMP agency, designating a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County. The Level of 2 3 Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Comprehensive Plan, 2008. Southern California Association of Governments, Making the Connections: 2008 Regional Transportation Plan, website: http://www.scag.ca.gov/rtp2008, May 2008. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-14

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Service at each CMP monitoring station is supervised by local jurisdictions in order to implement the statutory requirements of the CMP. If Level of Service standards deteriorate, then local jurisdictions must prepare a deficiency plan to meet conformance standards outlined by the countywide plan. The CMP for Los Angeles County is intended to address vehicular congestion relief by linking land use, transportation, and air quality decisions. The CMP also seeks to develop a partnership among transportation decision-makers to devise appropriate transportation solutions that include all modes of travel, and to propose transportation projects which are eligible to compete for state gas tax funds. Within Los Angeles, Metro is the designated congestion management agency responsible for coordinating the CMP. The proposed project s potential impacts with respect to the CMP are analyzed later in this section. Local Plans and Regulations City of Los Angeles General Plan State law requires that every city and county prepare and adopt a long-range comprehensive General Plan to guide future development and to identify the community s environmental, social, and economic goals. The City of Los Angeles General Plan (General Plan) addresses community development goals and policies relative to the distribution of public and private land use. The General Plan integrates the citywide elements and community plans, and gives policy direction to the planning regulatory and implementation programs. Transportation Element The Transportation Element of the General Plan sets forth goals, objectives, and policies which establish a City-wide strategy to achieve long-term mobility and accessibility within the City of Los Angeles. The General Plan states that not all of the policies set forth in the Transportation Element can be achieved in any given action, and in relation to any specific decision on a proposed project. 4 City decision-makers are to decide how to best implement the adopted policies of this element so as to best serve the health, safety, mobility, and general welfare of the public on a case-by-case basis. General Plan Framework Element The City of Los Angeles General Plan Framework Element (the Framework Element ) is a strategy for long-term growth that sets a citywide context to guide the update of the community plan and citywide elements. Transportation Chapter 8, Transportation, of the Framework Element has a vision that includes a multimodal transportation system that provides choices and accessibility to everyone in Los Angeles. Though 4 City of Los Angeles General Plan, Transportation Element, first page of Chapter IV. Objectives and Policies. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-15

City of Los Angeles May 2010 this chapter identifies transportation issues; transportation goals, objectives, and policies as well as related implementation programs are set forth in the Transportation Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan. West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (TIMSP) The project site is located within the West Los Angeles TIMSP area. The West Los Angeles TIMSP is intended, in part, to provide a mechanism to fund specific transportation improvements due to transportation impacts generated by the projected new development within the area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Thresholds of Significance As discussed earlier, the 1999 CUP was approved following the approval of the 1999 MND, which concluded that with mitigation the campus expansion and operation authorized by the 1999 CUP would result in less than significant traffic and transportation impacts. As the previously approved project was subject to final CEQA review, and the existing facilities constructed to date are actively operating under the conditions of the 1999 CUP and MND, CEQA directs that the analysis should identify the impact differences between the project approved under the 1999 CUP and MND and the modifications proposed by the Applicant. However, although not required by CEQA, for simplicity of analysis this Section evaluates the traffic and transportation impacts of the project from the existing baseline conditions, rather than the incremental difference between approved project and the modifications proposed by the Applicant. Therefore, the traffic and transportation analysis of this chapter overstates the impact of the modifications proposed by the Applicant. As discussed in the Project Description Chapter of this Draft EIR, with respect to evaluation for traffic and transportation purposes, the primary features of the proposed modifications are as follows: 1) The additional construction activity required by the modifications proposed by the Applicant; 2) The proposed alteration of the permitted 450 student enrollment mix: 350 high school students (100 more high school students than permitted by the 1999 CUP); and 100 JSI/YOLA University students (100 less adult education students than permitted by the 1999 CUP); 3) The proposed increase in parking supply from 85 surface and subterranean spaces to 100 subterranean parking spaces; and 4) The foreseeable increase total daily trips resulting from the amendments to specific permit conditions requested by the Applicant, including but not limited to, increased flexibility as to the number and nature of events conducted at the project site, extended evening hours for various activities, extended use of the facilities by YULA Girls High School, and extended use of the facilities for orthodox religious services. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-16

City of Los Angeles May 2010 In accordance with Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines, a significant traffic impact may occur if the Project would result in any of the following conditions: (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) Exceed, 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; and (g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). As discussed in Section IV.A, Impacts Found to be Less Than Significant in the Draft EIR, the project would have no potential impacts with respect to Thresholds (c) and (e) listed above. As such, the following analysis focuses on Thresholds (a), (b), (d), (f), (g), and (h). Intersection Impact Significance Criteria The 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. A significant impact is identified as an increase in the CMA value, due to project-related traffic, of 0.010 or more when the final (with project) Level of Service (LOS) is E or F, a CMA increase of 0.020 or more when the final LOS is LOS D, or an increase of 0.040 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 large traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays. These criteria are summarized in Table II-6, City of Los Angeles Significant Traffic Impact Criteria. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-17

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-6 City of Los Angeles Significant Traffic Impact Criteria LOS Final (With Project) CMA Value Project-Related Increase in CMA Value A or B 0.700 No Impacts C >0.700 0.800 0.040 D >0.800 0.900 0.020 E or F >0.900 0.010 Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Neighborhood Traffic Impact Significance Criteria Neighborhood traffic impacts, unlike the intersection analyses, are based on daily traffic volumes. City of Los Angeles guidelines for the evaluation of project traffic impacts on local streets uses a variable scale to determine the significance of potential traffic additions (see Table II-7, Neighborhood Traffic Impact Criteria). Table II-7 Neighborhood Traffic Impact Criteria a Projected Future ADT Project-Related Increase in (With Project) Final ADT 0 to 999 120 trips or more 1,000 to 1,999 12 percent or more 2,000 to 2,999 10 percent or more 3,000 or more 8 percent or more a West LA Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (TIMSP) adopted March 8, 1997. Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Neighborhood Traffic Construction Impact Significance Criteria Construction impacts are relatively short-term effects, but there may be situations where such impacts could, nevertheless, be considered significant and should be quantitatively assessed. The LADOT construction traffic impact criterion is as follows: A quantitative analysis of construction-related traffic impacts attributable to a project shall be required, provided all of the following criteria have been determined to be applicable: o o The project is a hillside development where hillside residential streets proximate to the construction site are expected to provide primary access for construction-related traffic; That the duration of the construction period, including site preparation, clearance and/or grading, is expected to exceed 12 months; and YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-18

City of Los Angeles May 2010 o That a total of 120 or more average construction-related trips per day (in Passenger Car Equivalents or PCE) are expected to be generated at the site driveway(s) or on the street(s) abutting the site, prior to any mitigation. The construction period for the project is expected to exceed 12 months; therefore, a residential street construction trip traffic impact analysis was prepared. With exception of impacts to residential streets, neither the LADOT nor the Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide have established significance thresholds for traffic impacts resulting from construction activity. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the impact criteria cited above shall also be utilized for impacts associated with traffic generated during construction of the proposed project. Project Impacts Construction Traffic Haul Route The haul location (destination of exported site materials) has not been determined at this time. However, once determined, it is anticipated that haul vehicles would travel to the specified landfill via Pico Boulevard, through the City, to eventually arrive at and utilize I-10 as the regional haul route. Haul trucks would also utilize this route to deliver construction and other materials to the project site. Staging Areas Staging areas are locations where vehicles await access to a construction site. These vehicles are typically summoned to the construction site by radio when needed. Staging areas for project construction and haul vehicles, as well as the final haul route itself, are subject to a hearing conducted by the Department of Building and Safety. Approximately 12 haul trucks per day (based on trucks with a haul capacity of 20 cubic yards, hauling for 66 days) are anticipated to be used for soil export activities for the proposed project with a maximum of three truck trips arriving on site during the AM peak hour and a maximum of three truck trips departing the site in the PM peak hour. The location of the staging area has not been determined at this time. It will be determined once construction plans are prepared and contractors are identified. The staging area would be reviewed prior to approval by the Department of Building and Safety at the time a haul route permit is applied for. Trip Generation and Traffic Impacts To reflect the maximum construction traffic generation at the site and on the surrounding streets, it was assumed that all construction-related vehicles, including construction worker vehicles, would access and park, or be stored, on-site throughout the construction process. As discussed in Section II, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, the construction activities for the project involve three phases: grading/site prep, building construction, and finishing/paving. The number of construction workers on-site per day per construction phase is shown in Table II-8. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-19

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Although it is expected that on-site construction activity would fluctuate on a weekly basis, depending largely on the number of workers and trucks needed for the activities during each construction phase, to remain conservative, the phase that resulting in the highest daily construction-related traffic was assumed to represent all other phases. Therefore, as the building construction and finishing/paving phases may overlap resulting in a maximum of approximately 30 workers on-site daily, the trip generation of these two phases combined was used to analyze the impact during all phases. Table II-8 Construction Workers Per Day Per Project Construction Phase Construction Phase Workers/Per Duration of Day Phase* Grading/Site Prep 10 66 Building Construction 20 330 Finishing/Paving 10 132 * - Approximate number of work days per construction phase. Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008 Construction Trip Generation In order to categorize the traffic impacts of construction trucks, each truck trip was given a Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) via a standardized multiplier. According to Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Circular Number 212, the type of truck trips anticipated during project construction have a PCE multiplier of 2.0. Using all of the above assumptions, a construction-related trip generation estimate was calculated and is illustrated in Table II-9. Table II-9 Construction-Related Trip Generation Type Size Unit Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour I/B O/B Total I/B O/B Total Building Construction & Finishing/Paving Phases 30 workers 91 11 2 13 3 10 13 Delivery Trucks a 5 trucks 10 5 0 5 0 5 5 Total Maximum Daily Construction Trips 101 16 2 18 3 15 18 Notes: I/B = inbound, O/B = outbound. Assumes 2 peak hour passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips per day in addition to 3 truck trips per day. Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008 Trip Distribution Since construction workers are expected to live throughout the Los Angeles region, they are also expected to arrive to the project site from all directions. As such, the construction trip distribution is assumed to be YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-20

City of Los Angeles May 2010 the same as the project distribution (as discussed subsequently), as school students and employees are also assumed to live throughout the Los Angeles region. Construction Impacts The project s construction impacts on the existing conditions were calculated and are summarized in Table II-10. Based on the LADOT thresholds, impacts associated with construction-related traffic generated during project construction would be less than significant at all study intersections. Table II-10 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Construction Trips No. Intersection Without Project Peak With Project Construction Construction Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact 1 Pico Boulevard and AM 0.713 C 0.713 C 0.000 No Roxbury Drive PM 0.622 B 0.623 B 0.001 No 2 Pico Boulevard and AM 0.712 C 0.713 C 0.001 No Castello Avenue PM 0.773 C 0.788 C 0.015 No 3. Pico Boulevard and AM 0.776 C 0.780 C 0.004 No Beverwil Drive PM 0.779 C 0.781 C 0.002 No 4 Pico Boulevard and AM 0.814 D 0.816 D 0.002 No Beverly Drive PM 0.902 E 0.905 E 0.003 No 5 Cashio Street and AM 0.635 B 0.635 B 0.000 No Beverwil Drive PM 0.440 A 0.441 A 0.001 No Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008 Neighborhood Traffic Construction Impact Analysis As noted, the 1999 CUP and the project include the cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, which would be constructed before the proposed project. Therefore, no project trips were assumed along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. Therefore, impacts to the residential street segment analyzed would be less than significant. The results of the residential street impact analysis are summarized in Table II-11, Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis Summary. (Note: because members of the public have expressed an interest in understanding the potential effects of eliminating the cul-de-sac, Appendix E of the Traffic Study provided a "without" cul-de-sac scenario, which has been updated to reflect revised project trip generation rates in the November 2009 Letter. The analysis of this condition can be found immediately following the Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis section.) YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-21

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Street Segment Table II-11 Neighborhood Construction Traffic Impact Analysis Summary Existing (2008) Without Construction Future (2012) ADT Construction With Traffic Construction % Project Significant Impact? Castello Ave between Alcott St and Cashio St 636 662 0 662 0.0% No Note: vpd = vehicles per day Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008 Parking During Construction In accordance with the 1999 CUP and MND construction parking would be in a project provided off-site facility with shuttles or other connections or on site (as the subterranean garage is completed). There would be no parking or storage of construction equipment, or construction worker parking on local residential streets. A maximum of 30 workers is anticipated on-site at any one time. For a conservative analysis of construction impacts, an analysis was prepared assuming that all construction-related vehicles, including construction worker vehicles, would access and park, or be stored, on-site. Operational Traffic and Transportation Trip Generation For the purpose of assessing the project's traffic and transportation impacts, 200 students (the enrollment permitted by the 1999 CUP) is assumed as the existing baseline. As shown in Table II-12, the enrollment amendments proposed by the project (i.e. increased enrollment to 350 high school students) would generate approximately 820 net daily trips, including 164 AM peak hour trips and 99 PM peak hour trips. Table II-12 Project Trip Generation Land Use Size Unit Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour I/B O/B Total I/B O/B Total Proposed Use High School 350 students 1,913 231 152 383 81 150 231 Junior/Community College a 100 students 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 Synagogue Expansion a 100 persons 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Proposed Project 2,053 231 152 383 81 150 231 Less Existing Use High School 200 students 1,093 132 87 219 46 86 132 Junior/Community College a 200 students 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 Synagogue Expansion a 25 persons 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Existing Uses 1,233 132 87 219 46 86 132 Net Project Trips 820 99 65 164 35 64 99 Notes: I/B = inbound, O/B = outbound. a - Operates in the evening only during weekdays. Source: Crain & Associates, November 2009. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-22

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Trip Distribution Estimation of the directional distribution of project trips was determined by considering the proposed land use, existing traffic movements, characteristics of the surrounding roadway system, the geographic location of the project site and its proximity to freeways and major travel routes. In addition, student enrollment data based on zip codes was used to estimate the directional distribution from the location of student residences. The 1999 CUP (Condition 75) includes installation of a cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway as a condition of Phase 2. The applicant proposes no change to Condition 75, and the Traffic Study therefore assumed the cul-de-sac would be constructed before the proposed project, and did not assume any project trips along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. However, because members of the public have expressed an interest in understanding the potential effects of eliminating the cul-de-sac, Appendix E of the Traffic Study provided a "without" cul-de-sac scenario, which has been updated to reflect revised project trip generation rates in the November 2009 Letter. A neighborhood improvement at the intersection of Pico Boulevard/Beverwil Drive was approved and is currently under construction. This improvement measure includes median improvement that is being made as part of the Neighborhood Traffic Program. This improvement is proposed to decrease the size of the southbound travel lanes south of Pico Boulevard to reduce the cut-through traffic. In light of this improvement, Beverwil Drive is not treated as a main access route for project trips. Based on these factors, the generalized trip distribution shown in Table II-13 was estimated for the project. Table II-13 Directional Trip Distribution Direction Percentage of Project Trips North 15% South 15% East 40% West 30% Total 100% Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Project Traffic Generation The assignment of project traffic to the street and highway systems was accomplished in two steps. First, using the general geographic directional distribution percentages for the project area shown in Table II- 13, the number of trips in each direction was calculated. The next step was to assign these trips to specific routs within the project area, including surface streets and freeways, using the percentages shown in Figure II-4, Project Trip Distribution Percentages. The assignment of these trips to specific routes was based on traffic directly accessing the project site. Project traffic volumes at the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hour, based on the net volumes shown in Table II-12 and illustrated in Figures II-5, Project Traffic Volumes (Net) AM Peak Hour, and II-6, Project Traffic Volumes (Net) PM Peak Hour. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-23

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Future (Year 2012) Traffic Conditions To forecast year 2012 pre-project conditions, the Traffic Study utilizes two separate, though overlapping, techniques in accordance with LADOT practices and policy. First, the Traffic Study assumes that existing traffic volumes will grow by a factor of 1 percent each year until 2012 when the Project is completed. While the 1 percent factor is intended to account for all reasonably foreseeable traffic growth, in addition to the 1 percent annual growth factor, the Traffic Study also assumes the build-out of all identified related development projects proposed in the project area. The use of these two factors results in an overstatement of potential future conditions, as the 1 percent growth factor is intended to account for traffic growth from new development and other sources. Finally, in accordance with LADOT practice and policy, the Traffic Study assumes that the related projects will not be accompanied by any traffic mitigation measures. In actuality, however, most major projects are accompanied by traffic mitigation because of the requirements of CEQA. The intention of this methodology is to provide a worst case scenario against which to assess potential traffic impacts and identify mitigation measures. This methodology is likely to significantly overstate future traffic conditions in the vicinity of the project. Highway System Improvements Many traffic improvements have been implemented at key locations in the project area in order to utilize the existing street system more effectively and efficiently. For purposes of this study, no changes to the existing striping and traffic signal conditions were assumed for the future year analyses. The 1999 CUP (Condition 75) includes installation of a cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway as a condition of Phase 2. The applicant proposes no change to Condition 75, and the Traffic Study therefore assumed the cul-de-sac would be constructed before the proposed project, and did not assume any project trips along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. The cul-de-sac would be constructed before the proposed project. The implementation of the cul-de-sac is therefore assumed for future conditions. The existing eastbound No- Right Turn 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM sign at the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue would no longer be necessary after construction of the cul-de-sac and would be removed to facilitate access to the project site from Pico Boulevard during the PM peak hour. The construction of a major transportation improvement to Santa Monica Boulevard within the City of Los Angeles was completed in January 2007. The dual roadway configuration of Santa Monica Boulevard and Little Santa Monica Boulevard was replaced by a single roadway as part of the Santa Monica Boulevard Transit Parkway Project. The reconstructed roadway configuration extends from the San Diego Freeway to Moreno Drive in the City of Beverly Hills. The Office of the Mayor of the City of Los Angeles released the Olympic-West Pico-East plan in November 2007. The plan proposes to ensure consistent rush hour parking restrictions along both Olympic and Pico Boulevards, to create preferential signal timing to allow commuters to move quickly along Olympic Boulevard heading west and Pico Boulevard heading east, and to add more westbound lanes on Olympic Boulevard and more eastbound lanes on Pico Boulevard. The three-phase project is intended to speed up the flow of traffic and reduce congestion on Olympic and Pico Boulevards along the YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-24

City of Los Angeles May 2010 seven-mile stretch between La Brea Boulevard and Centinela Avenue. The implementation of the plan is anticipated to increase the capacity of the street system in the project area, especially for eastbound and westbound traffic. The details of the plan, including lane configurations and the signal improvements have not been determined at the present time. In addition, the City's preliminary approval of the plan was set aside by the Los Angeles Superior Court on May 5, 2008 for failure to comply with CEQA. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Olympic-West Pico-East will be the subject of a separate traffic study and CEQA review that will assess cumulative conditions before such project is further considered or approved. Because none of the relevant details of the plan are known at this time, the plan is not assumed in the analysis of the future conditions. A neighborhood improvement at the intersection of Pico Boulevard/Beverwil Drive was approved and is currently under construction. This improvement measure is being made as part of the Neighborhood Traffic Program and includes the installation of a landscaped median on Beverwil Drive in order to reduce the southbound travel lanes south of Pico Boulevard to reduce the cut-through traffic. These improvements were assumed in the future traffic conditions for both the Without Project and With Project scenarios. Related Projects In addition to the use of the ambient growth rate, listings of potential projects located in the study area (related projects) that might be developed within the study time frame were obtained from the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), and recent studies of projects in the area. A review of this information indicated that 61 related projects (including, but not limited to the adjacent Related Project No. 53) could contribute significant traffic volumes to the five study intersections. As noted previously, the ambient traffic growth factor is expected to accurately represent all area traffic growth within the study period and, as such, the inclusion of the 61 related projects in addition to the assumed background traffic growth may tend to overstate cumulative traffic volumes. The locations of the related projects are illustrated in Figure II-7, Related Projects Location Map, with their descriptions and trip generations shown in Table II-14. Daily, AM, and PM peak hour trips were estimated by applying trip generation rates from the ITE manual, Trip Generation, 7th Edition. These trip generation rates and equations are included in Appendix C of the Traffic Study. The existing phase one entitlement allows enrollment of 200 high school students, however, during the 2007 school year, enrollment was 186 high school students. Therefore, the difference between the existing condition and the phase one entitlement condition was added as related project number 61. The Future (2012) Without Project condition traffic volumes were developed by assigning the related projects trip generation to the study area circulation system, using methodologies similar to those previously described for project trip assignment. The cul-de-sac would not generate any new trips. The total related projects traffic volumes assigned to the study intersections are illustrated in Figures II-8, Total Related Project Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour, and II-9, Total Related Project Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-25

Legend Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Figure II-4 Project Trip Distribution Percentages

Source: Crain & Associates,12/16/2009. Figure II-5 Project Traffic Volumes (Net) AM Peak Hour

Source: Crain & Associates, 12/16/2009. Figure II-6 Project Traffic Volumes (Net) PM Peak Hour

City of Los Angeles May 2010 4. 10131 Constellation Avenue [3] Table II-14 Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates Map AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily No. In Out Total In Out Total 1. 10201 W. Pico Boulevard [1] 360,000 sf Studio (remainder estimate) 4,439 474 30 504 65 219 284 2. 2055 Avenue of the Stars 147 du Condominium (St. Regis) 861 11 54 65 51 25 76 763,900 sf Office 16,012 sf High-turnover Restaurant 16,011 sf Quality Restaurant 19,214 sf Retail 10,675 sf Cultural Center (332,856) sf Office (to be removed) (1,751) st Cinema (to be removed) 3. 2000 Avenue of the Stars [2] (2,250) st Shubert Theatre (to be removed) (11,357) 101 (181) (80) (683) (216) (899) (117,212) sf High-turnover Restaurant (to be removed) (39,071) sf Quality Restaurant (to be removed) (61,970) sf Retail (to be removed) (44,277) sf Health Club (to be removed) 483 du Condominium (9,150) sf Bank (to be removed) (6,700) sf Office (to be removed) (1,636) (37) 85 48 (49) (105) (154) (19,754) sf Restaurant (to be removed) 5. 10000 Santa Monica Boulevard 6. 9900 Wilshire Boulevard [4] (220,000) sf 7. 9876 Wilshire Boulevard 300 du Condominium 1,758 22 110 132 105 51 156 252 du Condominium 15,600 sf Retail 4,800 sf Quality Restaurant Department Store (to be removed) 50 rm Hotel (net change) 120 du Condominium (net change) 11,500 sf Restaurant 95,000 sf Office 8. 9844 Wilshire Boulevard [5] (9,633) sf Retail (to be removed) (321) 52 80 132 (6) (18) (24) 2,574 95 118 213 135 83 218 1,090 131 (4) 127 21 140 161 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-29

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Map No. 9. Table II-14 Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total 84,000 sf General Office 9748-9766 Wilshire 9,000 sf Specialty Retail Boulevard [6] 7,000 sf Restaurant 1,668 91 16 107 60 102 162 (26,000) sf General Office (to be removed) 14. 231 N. Beverly Drive [9] 10. 129 S. Linden Drive 76 du Senior Congregate Care Facility 154 3 2 5 7 6 13 11. SEC Wilshire Boulevard & 60 du Condominium Peck Drive [7] 12,000 sf Specialty Retail 884 16 32 48 36 30 66 40,000 sf Office 12. 257 N. Canon Drive 15,000 sf Retail 1,741 96 42 138 62 94 156 5,000 sf Restaurant 202-240 N. Beverly Drive [8] 214 rm Hotel 13. 25 du Condominium 203-241 N. Canon Drive 27,000 sf Commercial/Retail 2,586 79 78 157 133 132 265 33,279 sf Public Garden 177,225 sf Office 22,875 sf Retail 4,081 332 79 411 126 330 456 8,000 sf Restaurant 54 du Condominium 15. 9200 Wilshire Boulevard [10] 5,600 sf Quality Restaurant 8,400 sf Retail 950 10 23 33 51 31 82 16. 140-144 S. Oakhurst Drive 11 du Residential 74 1 5 6 5 2 7 360 st Private School 17. 9001-9041 W. Pico Boulevard 9,615 sf Specialty Retail 1,527 183 129 312 49 57 106 31 du Apartment 18. 1333 S. Beverly Green Drive 5 du Condominium 29 Nominal 2 2 2 1 3 19. 2263 S. Fox Hills Drive 15 du Condominium 88 1 6 7 5 3 8 20. 552-558 N. Hillgreen Drive 9 du Condominium 53 1 3 4 3 2 5 21. 428-430 Smithwood Drive 1 du Apartment 7 0 1 1 1 0 1 22. 432-436 S. Beverly Drive 9,325 sf Church Expansion 85 4 3 7 3 3 6 9,000 sf Synagogue 23. 9090 Olympic Boulevard 207 23 13 36 7 8 15 10,000 sf Private School 24. 156-168 N. La Peer Drive 16 du Condominium 94 1 6 7 5 3 8 25. 313-317 Reeves Drive 10 du Condominium 59 1 3 4 3 2 5 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-30

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-14 Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates Map AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily No. In Out Total In Out Total 26. 261-283 S. Reeves Drive 23 du Condominium (24) du Condominium (to be removed) (6) 0 (1) (1) 0 0 0 27. 125 S. Camden Drive 40 du Condominium 134 3 15 18 14 7 21 28. 150 El Camino 66 st Screening Room 116 1 Nominal 1 4 1 5 29. 144 Reeves Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 30. 131-191 N. Crescent Drive 88 du Residential 9355-9373 Wilshire Blvd 40,000 sf Office/Retail 1,031 64 43 107 46 69 115 31. 201 N. Crescent Drive 80 du Assisted Care Facility 278 6 7 13 8 7 15 32. 265 N. Beverly Drive 45,000 sf Office 1,123 103 30 133 44 119 163 33. 338 N. Canon Drive 11,900 sf Retail 527 8 6 14 14 18 32 34. 9378 Olympic Boulevard 14,996 sf Shopping Center 14,996 sf Office 809 29 9 38 31 47 78 35. 456 N. Camden Drive 1,750 sf Retail Expansion 78 1 1 2 2 3 5 36. 9730 Wilshire Boulevard 204 rm Hotel 1,667 70 44 114 64 56 120 37. 150 Lasky Drive 42 rm Hotel 346 15 9 24 13 12 25 38. SWC Wilshire Boulevard/Santa Monica Boulevard [11] 120 du Condominium 522 du Condominium/Hotel 12,270 sf Restaurant 649 1 15 16 45 12 57 Existing Hotel Credit 39. 8800 Burton Way 14,570 sf Retail 1,942 30 19 49 84 92 176 40. 8800 Wilshire Boulevard [12] 7,285 sf Office 7,285 sf Retail 1,317 30 14 44 55 67 122 60,856 sf Office 41. 8767 Wilshire Boulevard 11,260 sf Retail 2,693 127 44 171 106 166 272 3,000 sf Restaurant 42. 8600 Wilshire Boulevard 4,800 sf Retail 25 du Residential 381 7 12 19 16 13 29 43. 8536 Wilshire Boulevard 24,890 sf Medical Office 899 49 13 62 25 68 93 44. 9001 Olympic Boulevard [13] 78 st Vehicle Service Center 1,042 117 19 136 81 141 222 39 du Apartment 45. 8525 Pico Boulevard 1,911 30 32 62 88 85 173 11,327 sf Retail 46. 469 N. Crescent Drive 34,000 sf Cultural Center 778 34 21 55 16 40 56 47. 9601 Wilshire Boulevard 30,000 sf Gym 988 15 21 36 62 60 122 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-31

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-14 Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates Map AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily No. In Out Total In Out Total 48. 326 N. Rodeo Drive 4,550 sf Retail 202 3 2 5 5 7 12 49. 133 Spalding Drive 4 du Condominium 23 0 2 2 1 1 2 50. 115 N. Swall Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 51. 50 N. La Cienega Boulevard 14,000 sf Medical Office (14,000) sf Office (to be removed) 352 9 4 13 10 21 31 52. 317 Elm Drive 25 du Condominium 100 1 6 7 6 3 9 (8) du Condominium (to be removed) 53. 9786 Pico Boulevard [14] 100,000 sf Museum 500/800 st Special Events 1,713 139 103 242 131 118 249 69,477 sf Less Existing Uses 54. 300 Wetherly Drive [15] 140 du Condominium 820 11 51 62 49 24 73 55. 9735 Durant Drive 11 du Condominium 64 1 4 5 4 2 6 56. 221 S. Hamilton Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 57. 221 S. Hamilton Drive 23 du Condominium 27 0 2 2 1 1 2 (16) du Apartment (to be removed) 58. 505 N. Rodeo Drive 120 st Private School 298 58 37 95 9 11 20 59. 301 N. Beverly Drive 2,500 sf Retail 111 2 1 3 3 4 7 358,881 sf Shopping Center 60. 10250 Santa Monica Blvd [16] 262 du Condominium (289,460) sf Office (to be removed) 5,922 (235) 58 (177) 290 74 364 61. 9760 Pico Boulevard [17] 200 st 1999 CUP Phase One Entitled Enrollment 1,093 132 87 219 46 86 132 (186) st Existing Enrollment (2007) (1,017) (123) (81) (204) (43) (80) (123) Net change 77 9 6 15 3 6 9 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-32

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-14 Related Projects Trip Generation Estimates Map AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily No. In Out Total In Out Total Sources: [1] Trip generation rates based on Traffic Impact Analysis for the Renovation and Expansion of Fox Studio Facilities, Century City, Crain & Associates, Revised October 1991. [2] Traffic Impact Study for Office, Commercial and Cultural Use Project at 2000 Avenue of the Stars, Century City, Crain & Associates, June 2002. [3] Draft Traffic Study for 10131 Constellation Boulevard Residential Project, Century City, Kaku Associates, Inc., October 2005. [4] Draft EIR for 9900 Wilshire Boulevard, Impact Sciences, Inc., August 2007. [5] Draft Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Beverly Hills Gateway Project at 9844 Wilshire Boulevard, City of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, December 2002. [6] Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Mixed-Use Project at Wilshire Blvd. & Spalding Dr. of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, March 2008. [7] Traffic Impact Study for Proposed Mixed-Use Project at Southeast Corner of Wilshire Boulevard & Peck Drive, City of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, May 2007. [8] Traffic Impact Study for Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel, City of Beverly Hills, RBF Consulting, May 2004. [9] Traffic Impact Analysis for the Beverly/Wilshire Office Project, City of Beverly Hills, RBF Consulting, May 2007. [10] Traffic Impact Analysis for the 9200 Wilshire Boulevard Mixed-Use Project, City of Beverly Hills, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, January 2006. [11] The Beverly Hilton Revitalization Plan Draft EIR, Impact Sciences, Inc., August 2007. [12] Square footage per use not available. Assumed 50/50 split between office and retail uses. [13] Beverly Hills BMW Traffic Study, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, October 13, 2004. [14] Traffic Impact Study for Simon Wiesenthal Center Museum of Tolerance, Crain & Associates, July 2008. [15] Traffic Impact Report for the Proposed Condominium Development at 300 South Wetherly Drive, City of Los Angeles, Crain & Associates, June 2007. [16] Traffic Impact Study Westfield Century City New Century Plan, City of Los Angeles, Linscott, Law &Greenspan, Engineers, October 10, 2007. [17] Although the incremental impacts of the project could be compared to the phase two entitled enrollment of 250 high school students, to be conservative, the project is compared to the phase one entitled enrollment of 200 high school students. The difference between the existing enrollment and the phase one entitled enrollment is included as a related project. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-33

Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Figure II-7 Related Projects Location Map

Legend Source: Crain & Associates, 4/6/2010. Figure II-8 Total Related Projects Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour

Legend Source: Crain & Associates, 4/6/2010. Figure II-9 Total Related Projects Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Analysis of Future (2012) Traffic Conditions, Without and With Project Using the same CMA procedures described previously in the analysis of the Existing (2008) traffic conditions, an analysis was conducted of the Future (2012) Without Project traffic volumes and the Future (2012) With Project traffic volumes. These analyses identified the future levels of service at the study intersections for both the Without Project and With Project scenarios. The analysis results of the With Project condition were then compared to the analysis results of the Without Project condition to determine the incremental traffic impacts directly attributable to the proposed development. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table II-15, Critical Movement Analysis Summary Future (2012) Without and With Project conditions. For the analysis of future project traffic impacts, the current roadway system s characteristics were assumed to prevail. As described previously, future (2012) baseline traffic volumes for the Without Project condition were determined by combining area ambient traffic growth with the total related projects traffic volumes. The Future (2012) Without Project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures II-10, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes Without Project AM Peak Hour, and II-11, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes Without Project PM Peak Hour. Traffic volumes generated by the project, as determined earlier, were then added to these baseline volumes to develop the Future (2012) With Project condition to determine traffic impacts directly attributable to the proposed development. These traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures II-12, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project AM Peak Hour, and II-13, Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project PM Peak Hour. The results of the CMA of future traffic conditions at the study intersections are summarized in Table II- 15. (The CMA calculation worksheets for future conditions are included as Appendix D to the Traffic Study.) As shown in Table II-15, with the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic, three of the five study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS A to D) during both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive is projected to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS F during the PM peak hour. The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive is projected to operate at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour. With the addition of project traffic, only the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue s LOS would change from LOS C to LOS D during the AM and PM peak hours. Additionally, the project would result in a change in CMA that would exceed City of Los Angeles thresholds at three intersections (Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue, Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive and Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive) during one or both peak periods. Therefore, impacts would be significant prior to the implementation of mitigation measures. It should be noted that the foregoing analysis overstates potential peak hour impacts of the modifications proposed by the Applicant because it analyzes the potential impacts of increasing permitted enrollment YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-37

City of Los Angeles May 2010 from 200 high school students to 350 high school students, rather than from 250 high school students (the level permitted by existing 1999 CUP for phase two) to 350 high school students. No. 1 2 3. 4 5 Table II-15 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Future (2012) Traffic Conditions Without and With Project Conditions Intersection Peak Hour Without With Project With Mitigation a Project CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact CMA LOS Impact Pico Boulevard and AM 0.759 C 0.764 C 0.005 No 0.760 C 0.002 No Roxbury Drive PM 0.671 B 0.674 B 0.003 No 0.671 B 0.000 No Pico Boulevard and AM 0.772 C 0.826 D 0.054 Yes 0.784 C 0.017 No Castello Avenue PM 0.803 C 0.863 D 0.060 Yes 0.810 D 0.010 No Pico Boulevard and AM 0.935 E 0.958 E 0.030 Yes 0.942 E 0.008 No Beverwil Drive PM 1.035 F 1.046 F 0.011 Yes 1.036 F 0.002 No Pico Boulevard and AM 0.867 D 0.875 D 0.008 No 0.871 D 0.004 No Beverly Drive PM 0.962 E 0.975 E 0.013 Yes 0.963 E 0.002 No Cashio Street and AM 0.706 C 0.713 C 0.007 No 0.709 C 0.003 No Beverwil Drive PM 0.518 A 0.521 A 0.003 No 0.519 A 0.001 No a With Project impacts following implementation of Mitigation Measures II-10 and II-13. Source: Crain & Associates, July 2009 Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis As noted, the 1999 CUP and the project include the cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, which would be constructed before the proposed project. Therefore, no project trips were assumed along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. Therefore, impacts to the residential street segment would be less than significant. The results of the residential street impact analysis are summarized in Table II-16, Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis Summary. (Note: because members of the public have expressed an interest in understanding the potential effects of eliminating the cul-de-sac, Appendix E of the Traffic Study provided a "without" culde-sac scenario, which has been updated to reflect revised project trip generation rates in the November 2009 Letter. The analysis of this condition can be found immediately following this section.) YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-38

Source: CA Crain & Associates, 12/16/2009. Figure II-10 Future (2010) Traffic Volumes Without Project AM Peak Hour

Source: CA Crain & Associates, 12/16/2009. Figure II-11 Future (2010) Traffic Volumes Without Project PM Peak Hour

Source: Crain & Associates, 12/17/2009. Figure II-12 Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project AM Peak Hour

Source: Crain & Associates, 12/17/2009. Figure II-13 Future (2012) Traffic Volumes With Project PM Peak Hour

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Street Segment Table II-16 Neighborhood Traffic Impact Analysis Summary Existing (2008) Without Project Project Traffic Future (2012) ADT With Project % Project Significant Impact? Castello Ave between Alcott St and Cashio St 636 662 0 662 0.0% No Note: vpd = vehicles per day Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. If the cul-de-sac was not constructed and therefore not included in the future conditions, it is estimated that 398 project trips would travel along Castello Avenue, resulting in a significant impact. However, the cul-de-sac is proposed to be constructed as a part of the project as provided for in the 1999 CUP, and therefore no significant residential intrusion impact would occur. An updated analysis of impacts without construction of the cul-de-sac is included in the Appendix (November 2009 Letter) of this R-EIR. Congestion Management Program (CMP) Impact Analysis The local CMP requires that all CMP intersections be analyzed where a project would likely add 50 or more trips during the peak hours. The nearest arterial CMP monitoring stations are: Santa Monica Boulevard at Wilshire Boulevard approximately one mile northwest of the project site; Wilshire Boulevard at La Cienega Boulevard - less than one and three-quarter miles northeast of the project site; and Santa Monica Boulevard at Westwood Boulevard slightly more than two miles west of the project site. A review of the project trip distribution and net project traffic additions to the study vicinity shows that the proposed project will not add 50 or more trips per hour to any of these CMP intersections and no further CMP intersection analysis is warranted. According to the CMP, any freeway segment where a project is expected to add 150 or more trips in any direction during the peak hours is also to be analyzed. As shown in Table II-12, the maximum number of directional project trips will be 42 inbound trips during the AM peak hour. As the maximum peak hour trips are substantially less than the freeway threshold of 150 directional trips, no additional CMP freeway analysis is necessary and impacts would be less than significant. Project Parking and Access Currently, the school provides 65 parking spaces on site. 85 parking spaces are required upon completion of phase two in accordance with the 1999 CUP. The project proposes a total on site parking supply of 100 spaces following completion of the proposed improvements. Access to the project site will be provided via a full-service driveway along Castello Avenue located between Pico Boulevard and the proposed cul-de-sac to be implemented per the 1999 CUP. The drop off/loading zone would be accommodated within the project site and would not result in traffic congestion along Castello Avenue. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-43

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-17 Parking Demand Estimate Weekday Daytime Parking Allocations Weekday Evening Parking Allocation Uses Parking Spaces Uses Parking Spaces Students Students 350 High School 35 350 High School 9 100 JSI/YOLA University 0 100 JSI/YOLA University 10 Staff Staff 35 Full-time Faculty/Staff 35 35 Full-time Faculty/Staff 9 14 Part-time Faculty/Staff 14 14 Part-time Faculty/Staff 4 1 Maintenance 1 1 Maintenance 1 Subtotal 85 Subtotal 33 Visitor (approximately 10%) 9 Visitor (300 non-student gym seats) 60 Total Demand 94 Total Demand 93 Total Supply 100 Total Supply 100 Surplus 6 Surplus 7 Notes: Parking Assumptions Group Daytime Ratio Assumption Basis Evening Ratio Assumption Basis High School Students 1:10 1999 CUP Analysis Method ¼ Day ULI Shared Parking University Students 0 Not Applicable 1:10 1999 CUP Analysis Method Full-time Faculty/Staff 1:1 1999 CUP Analysis Method ¼ Day ULI Shared Parking Part-time Faculty/Staff 1:1 1999 CUP Analysis Method ¼ Day ULI Shared Parking Maintenance 1:1 1999 CUP Analysis Method ¼ Day ULI Shared Parking Visitor 10% 1999 CUP Analysis Method 1:5 50% bus/walk; 1:2.5 auto Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. In addition to the project requirements from the 1999 CUP, the project will continue to provide on-site parking free of charge to students, faculty and employees and to other visitors to the YULA Facilities. No parking spaces on the subject property shall be allocated or permitted to be used by any third party or by any staff or visitors to the Simon Wiesenthal Center or the Museum of Tolerance. All YULA students, faculty, employees and visitors will be required to park on the project premises except for special events where off-site parking is provided. Consistent with the 1999 CUP, each student, faculty member and employee who parks on the project premises is required to be issued, on an annual basis, an individually numbered parking permit which must be prominently displayed on the dashboard or rear view mirror of the car. Consistent with the 1999 CUP, parking on residential streets by YULA students, parents, faculty and employees will continue to be prohibited. The applicant is required to inform students, parents, faculty and employees of all regulations concerning restriction on parking and loading and unloading of students. The applicant is required to continue to maintain a progressive disciplinary system of enforcement. If any condition is violated, YULA will assess the violator a fine of $50.00 for the first offense, $100.00 for the second offense. A third offense must also result in the temporary suspension of the involved student(s) from YULA. Security guard(s) are required to be responsible for reporting to the YULA Liaison, the license number of YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-44

City of Los Angeles May 2010 any car belonging to a student, family, faculty member or employee seen parking on a residential street or seen loading or unloading students off-site. If any type of event at YULA is expected to attract more vehicles than the available number of parking spaces on-site including the accounting of vehicles parked on-site belonging to students, faculty and employees, the applicant is required to provide free and conveniently accessible parking through the use of one or more of the following measures, as appropriate: (a) a complimentary valet service; (b) a stacking system using tandem parking on-site; (c) the use of parking at another location within 750 feet of the subject premises; and/or (d) an off-site shuttle system. If a shuttle system is used, shuttle vehicles must be of a capacity which will facilitate the transportation of persons to and from YULA so that time waiting for such shuttles is minimized and the use of shuttles is maximized. Signs shall be posted in highly visible locations, and security guard(s) and/or parking attendant(s) must be located at the entrance to the YULA parking lot, to direct vehicles to the designated parking areas(s) and to admonish drivers not to park in the residential areas. YULA is required to institute a program by which parking is assigned to students, parents, visitors, faculty and employees at a specific location on-site or off-site, prior to an event which is expected to exceed on-site parking capacity. Such a program shall be designed to avoid traffic congestion and circulation problems associated with drivers arriving at a parking location and being turned away due to the capacity of such parking area having been reached. In addition, the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) parking requirement was also analyzed for the proposed project. As shown in Table II-18, the LAMC parking requires a total of 265 parking spaces when the gym floor is used as seating (100 spaces for other evenings when the gym floor does not have seating). Compared to the proposed supply of 100 parking spaces, there is a shortage of 165 spaces per the LAMC parking requirement. However, given the nature of the proposed uses, these 100 spaces should be sufficient for typical daily uses. Table II-17 shows the approximate allocation of the proposed 100 spaces. These 100 spaces, combined with the various parking related conditions proposed by the applicant, will adequately protect the neighborhood from potential parking impacts from the educational and religious activities at the project site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Table II-18 Los Angeles Municipal Code Parking Requirement Uses Parking Ratio Parking Required 400 seat Gymnasium 1:5 seats 80 5,760 Gym Floor 1:35 square feet 165 100 JSI/YOLA University Students 1:5 students 20 Total 265 Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. Neighborhood On-Street Parking Analysis As discussed above, on-street parking is prohibited and the project will provide sufficient parking spaces on the school site to meet normal operating needs, and with a combination of on-site and off-site parking for special events. For informational purposes, an on-street parking survey was conducted on Thursday, YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-45

City of Los Angeles May 2010 January 10 and Friday, January 11, 2008 (while local schools were in session) along the school adjacent streets. These street segments include Roxbury Drive and Castello Avenue between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street, Alcott Street and Saturn Street between Castello Avenue and Beverwil Drive, and Cashio Street between Roxbury Drive and Beverwil Drive. As shown in Table II-19, On-Street Parking Occupancy Summary, during the adjacent streets peak parking period (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM), the survey shows a maximum of 66 percent of on-street parking occupancy along Roxbury Drive between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street. Overall on-street parking occupancy along the school adjacent streets is approximately 33 percent during the peak parking period (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM). Therefore, the on-street parking occupancy is relatively low and the parking demand is under the capacity along the school adjacent neighborhood streets. No. Table II-19 On-Street Parking Occupancy Summary Intersection Parking Demand Estimated Parking Spaces Parking Occupancy 1 Roxbury Dr between Pico Blvd & Cashio St 25 38 66% 2 Castello Ave between Pico Blvd & Cashio St 14 40 35% 3 Alcott St between Castello Ave & Beverwil Dr 16 50 32% 4 Saturn St between Castello Ave & Beverwil Dr 10 39 26% 5 Cashio St between Roxbury Dr & Beverwil Dr 8 51 16% Total 73 218 33% Source: Crain & Associates, February 2009. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Construction Traffic As previously discussed and presented in Table II-14, there would be 61 related projects in the vicinity of the project site. Related Project No. 53, the Museum of Tolerance, which would entail the expansion of the existing museum, is the closest of the related projects located west and adjacent to the project site. Construction of Related Project No. 53 has the potential to occur simultaneously with construction of the proposed project. The maximum construction workers at the Related Project No. 53 site would not exceed 50 workers per day. The construction traffic estimations for Related Project No. 53 are shown in Table II-20. These projections are lower than the proposed operational peak hour traffic for Related Project No. 53 shown in Table II-14. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-46

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-20 Related Project No. 53 Construction-Related Trip Generation Type Size Unit Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour I/B O/B Total I/B O/B Total Structural Excavation & Façade Removal 35 workers 106 12 3 15 3 12 15 Basement Foundations 20 workers 60 7 2 9 2 6 8 Structural Frame 30 workers 91 11 2 13 3 10 13 Façade & Finishes 50 workers 151 18 4 22 4 17 21 Delivery Trucks a 8 trucks 16 8 0 8 0 8 8 Total Maximum Daily Construction Trips 167 26 4 30 4 25 29 Notes: I/B = inbound, O/B = outbound. Assumes 2 peak hour passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips per 4 delivery trucks per day. Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008. The project s construction impacts were calculated and are summarized in Table II-21. As shown in the table, none of the study intersections are expected to be significantly impacted by project construction traffic volumes using the significance thresholds established by the LADOT, when compared to the future (2012) Without Project Construction conditions. Therefore, cumulative construction impacts to intersection LOS and capacity would be less than significant. No. Intersection Table II-21 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Existing (2008) and Future (2012) Traffic Conditions Without and With Project Construction Trips Peak Hour Existing Conditions (2008) Future Conditions (2012) With Project Without Without With Project & Museum Project Construction Construction Construction Construction CMA LOS CMA LOS CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact Pico Blvd & AM 0.713 C 0.713 C 0.758 C 0.759 C 0.001 No 1 Roxbury Dr PM 0.622 B 0.624 B 0.671 B 0.671 B 0.000 No Pico Blvd & AM 0.712 C 0.717 C 0.767 C 0.769 C 0.002 No 2 Castello Ave PM 0.773 C 0.793 C 0.800 C 0.807 D 0.007 No Pico Blvd & AM 0.776 C 0.787 C 0.934 E 0.936 E 0.002 No 3. Beverwil Dr PM 0.779 C 0.784 C 1.034 F 1.036 F 0.002 No Pico Blvd & AM 0.814 D 0.818 D 0.867 D 0.868 D 0.001 No 4 Beverly Dr PM 0.902 E 0.908 E 0.961 E 0.964 E 0.003 No Cashio St & AM 0.635 B 0.637 B 0.706 C 0.707 C 0.001 No 5 Beverwil Dr PM 0.440 A 0.442 A 0.518 A 0.519 A 0.001 No Source: Crain & Associates, September 2008. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-47

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Operational Traffic As previously discussed, the analysis of traffic impacts of the proposed project considers the effects of future growth in traffic within the region through consideration of traffic generated by 61 related projects and the application of a one percent ambient annual growth factor to the year 2012 in order to account for increases in traffic due to projects not yet proposed or projects outside the study area. Consequently, impacts of cumulative growth were incorporated into the traffic analysis and therefore reflected in the future (2012) Without and With Project conditions presented above in Table II-15. As shown in the table, three of the study intersections are expected to be significantly impacted by project traffic volumes using the significance thresholds established by the LADOT, when compared to the future (2012) Without Project conditions. However, Mitigation Measure II-13 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, cumulative impacts to intersection LOS and capacity would be less than significant. Without Cul-De-Sac Analysis The 1999 CUP (Condition 75) includes installation of a cul-de-sac along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway as a condition of Phase 2. The applicant proposes no change to Condition 75, and the Traffic Study therefore assumed the cul-de-sac would be constructed before the proposed project, and did not assume any project trips along Castello Avenue south of the project driveway, between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. However, because members of the public have expressed an interest in understanding the potential effects of eliminating the cul-de-sac, Appendix E of the Traffic Study provided a "without" cul-de-sac scenario, which has been updated to reflect revised project trip generation rates in the November 2009 Letter. For the without cul-de-sac scenario, it was assumed that turn restrictions now in place would remain and that, as currently is the case, approximately half of the site trips use the roadway segment to the south of the school site. The existing traffic counts and related projects data, and study methodology from the submitted February 2009 traffic study report and July 2009 technical letter update were also used. Based on these assumptions, impact analysis for the future (Year 2012) was conducted for the 5 study intersections. The Levels of Service (LOS) and Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) values and project traffic impacts for this scenario are shown in Table II-22. As indicated in Table II-22, in the event the cul-de-sac were not constructed as required by Condition 75 of the 199 CUP, significant traffic impacts would occur at three intersections during one or both peak hours. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-48

City of Los Angeles May 2010 Table II-22 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Without Cul-de-Sac Future (2012) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Conditions Without Peak Project With Project No. Intersection Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact 1 2 3. 4 5 Pico Boulevard and AM 0.759 C 0.767 C 0.008 No Roxbury Drive PM 0.671 B 0.685 B 0.014 No Pico Boulevard and AM 0.777 C 0.804 D 0.027 Yes Castello Avenue PM 0.846 D 0.882 D 0.036 Yes Pico Boulevard and AM 0.934 E 0.949 E 0.015 Yes Beverwil Drive PM 1.026 F 1.031 F 0.005 No Pico Boulevard and AM 0.867 D 0.873 D 0.006 No Beverly Drive PM 0.962 E 0.972 E 0.010 Yes Cashio Street and AM 0.706 C 0.721 C 0.015 No Beverwil Drive PM 0.518 A 0.529 A 0.011 No Source: Crain & Associates, November 2009. The potential increase in project-related traffic volumes was also analyzed for the two residential street segments assuming the without cul-de-sac scenario. Neighborhood residential street impacts are evaluated by LADOT based on average daily traffic (ADT). As discussed above, trip distribution reflected the observed existing patterns. As shown in Table II-23 below, based upon the LADOT criteria, if the requirement for the Castello Cul-de-sac were eliminated the project would significantly impact one of the residential streets Castello Avenue between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street. Table II-23 Residential Street Impact Analysis for Without Cul-de-Sac Scenario Street Segment Castello Ave between Pico Blvd and Cashio St Alcott Street between Castello Ave and Beverwil Drive Note: vpd = vehicles per day Source: Crain & Associates, November 2009. Existing (2009) VPD Without Project Project Traffic Future (2012) ADT With Project Project Increase Significant Impact? 678 662 398 1,060 398 Yes 312 321 27 348 27 No The without cul-de-sac analysis indicates that in addition to the intersection impacts described in Table II- 22, in the event the cul-de-sac is not constructed as required by Condition 75 of the 1999 CUP, vehicles would be able to travel to and from the high school along neighborhood streets and a significant traffic impact would be generated at the residential street segment of Castello Avenue between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street. The implementation of mitigation measures II-13 and II-14 would reduce intersection impacts to a less than significant level. However, such measures would not mitigate potential impacts to YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-49

City of Los Angeles May 2010 the residential street segment of Castello Avenue between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street. Therefore, such impact would be significant and unavoidable. The purpose of the 1999 CUP's requirement for the cul-de-sac was to avoid such impacts and trips along residential streets to the south of the project... Therefore, the applicant proposes that Condition 75 be retained. MITIGATION MEASURES Construction As part of the 1999 CUP and MND the following construction conditions relating to traffic and parking were adopted and are proposed to be retained by the Applicant: II-1 II-2 II-3 II-4 Hours of excavation, hauling and open air construction shall be limited to the period of 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday (excluding holidays), except for extended hours on weekdays only, as required during concrete pours. Vans bringing construction workers may arrive at the site no earlier than 7:45 a.m. so that actual construction can begin no earlier than 8 a.m. Construction workers and vehicles shall exit the site by 5 p.m. Interior construction associated with remodeling or with any new building(s) (after such is fully enclosed) may commence at 7 a.m., with construction workers to arrive at the site no earlier than 6:45 a.m., provided that the noise does not disturb neighborhood residents; if the arrival of such workers causes disturbances, then the interior construction shall be limited to the same hours as those permitted for open air construction as set forth herein. This condition does not apply to construction personnel engaged in supervisorial, administrative or inspection activities. All excavation and demolition debris truck traffic shall be limited to Pico Boulevard. Trucks utilized for hauling of exported soil and construction equipment shall be staged on the property and shall be prohibited from staging in residential areas, and trucks and other construction vehicles shall not be permitted on Castello Avenue south of Alcott Street, or on Saturn Street, Alcott Street or Roxbury Drive, at any time. Trucks shall be radio dispatched from a remote location on an as-needed basis. Haul trucks and construction equipment shall be cleaned, watered and/or covered before leaving the property. Any material spilled on any street shall be removed promptly by the contractor. Construction workers shall be prohibited from parking in residential neighborhoods. During the construction and remodeling period, off-street parking shall be provided for construction personnel. Construction workers shall be required to park at designated off-site parking areas and shall walk or be transported to the construction site by vanpools. Construction workers may also park on-site when the parking structure is available to accommodate such parking. The contractor shall implement procedures adequate to enforce the restrictions set forth herein, including but not limited to posting signs with these instructions at the construction site, printed in both English and Spanish, which shall be legible from a distance of 50 feet. Flaggers shall be provided on-site to facilitate truck entry and exit. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-50

City of Los Angeles May 2010 II-5 II-6 A maximum of two visits per day by a catering truck shall be permitted. Such catering trucks shall be accommodated only on-site. Catering truck operators shall be instructed not to use their horn or other loud signal. All construction contracts and subcontracts shall specify that failure of the contractor or subcontractor to comply with any construction condition(s) shall constitute a breach of contract and shall be grounds for termination of the contract or subcontract, as applicable. In this regard, each contract and subcontract shall have an acknowledgment page attached which shall require the contractor or subcontractor to acknowledge that the conditions have been read and understood and shall be fully complied with. The project construction manager shall maintain a file of such acknowledgments for every contractor and subcontractor involved in this project. Additionally, although not required to reduce impacts to less than significant levels, the following mitigation measure is proposed: II-7 II-8 The applicant shall prepare a Construction, Staging, and Management Plan in accordance with City requirements that take into account any simultaneous construction activities associated with Related Project No. 53. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall record and execute a Covenant and agreement (Planning Department General Form CP-6770), binding the project applicant to the following haul route conditions: All construction truck traffic shall be restricted to truck routes approved by the City of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, which shall avoid residential areas and other sensitive receptors to the extent feasible. Hours of operation shall be from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Days of the week shall be Monday through Friday. No hauling activities are permitted on Saturdays, Sundays or Holidays. Trucks shall be restricted to 18-wheel dump trucks or smaller. The Traffic Bureau of the Los Angeles Police Department shall be notified prior to the start of hauling (213.485.3106). Streets shall be cleaned of spilled materials at the termination of each work day. The final approved haul routes and all the conditions of approval shall be available on the job site at all times. The owner or contractor shall keep the construction area sufficiently dampened to control dust caused by grading and hauling, and at all times provide reasonable control of dust caused by wind. Hauling and grading equipment shall be kept in good operating condition and muffled as required by law. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-51

City of Los Angeles May 2010 All loads shall be secured by trimming, watering or other appropriate means to prevent spillage and dust. All trucks are to be watered at the job site to prevent excessive blowing dirt. All trucks are to be cleaned of loose earth at the job site to prevent spilling. Any material spilled on the public street shall be removed by the contractor. The applicant shall be in conformance with the State of California, Department of Transportation policy regarding movements of reducible loads. All regulations set forth in the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles pertaining to the hauling of earth shall be complied with. Truck Crossing warning signs shall be placed 300 feet in advance of the exit in each direction. One flag person(s) shall be required at the job and dump sites to assist the trucks in and out of the project area. Flag person(s) and warning signs shall be in compliance with Part II of the 1985 Edition of Work Area Traffic Control Handbook. The City of Los Angeles, Department of Transportation, telephone 213.485.2298, shall be notified 72 hours prior to beginning operations in order to have temporary "No Parking" signs posted along the route. Any desire to change the prescribed routes must be approved by the concerned governmental agencies by contacting the Street Use Inspection Division at 213.485.3711 before the change takes place. The permittee shall notify the Street Use Inspection Division, 213.485.3711, at least 72 hours prior to the beginning of hauling operations and shall also notify the Division immediately upon completion of hauling operations. A surety bond shall be posted in an amount satisfactory to the City Engineer for maintenance of haul route streets. The forms for the bond will be issued by the Valley District Engineering Office, 6262 Van Nuys Boulevard, Suite 251, Van Nuys, CA 91401. Operation As part of the 1999 CUP and MND the following operational conditions relating to traffic and parking were adopted and are proposed to be retained by the Applicant: II-9 All loading and unloading of students shall be conducted on-site to the maximum extent feasible. To facilitate traffic movement, to prevent double-parking and to ensure the enforcement of these and any other related traffic control provisions, YULA shall provide a traffic control monitor at the entrance of the parking area during regular YULA Boys High School days' morning drop-off hours (7:15 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.) and afternoon pick-up hours (5:15 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.). YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-52

City of Los Angeles May 2010 II-10 II-11 II-12 II-13 Within 90 days of the effective date of the approval of the CUP, a traffic and parking management plan, prepared by a licensed traffic engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Transportation (DOT) for its review and approval. Within 60 days of approval, the project shall implement the traffic monitoring and demand management plan to limit the net project trip generation to 62 AM peak hour trips and 21 PM peak hour trips. Adding the net project trips identified in the Traffic Study to the project site s existing trip generation data, the maximum number of trips the expanded school could generate shall be capped as 281 AM peak hour trips and 153 PM peak hour trips. Traffic demand measures may include without limitation, carpooling strategies, busing, shuttles, and public transit incentives. Submittal of parking and driveway plan to the Bureau of Engineering and the Department of Transportation. Parking on residential streets by YULA students, parents, faculty and employees shall be prohibited. The applicant shall be required to compile a traffic monitoring report (TMR) to survey the actual on-site traffic conditions of the proposed project. The TMR should document that the School is in substantial compliance with the traffic study trip projections for both the morning and afternoon peak hours, which corresponds to a trip cap of 281 trips during the AM peak hour and 153 trips during the PM peak hour for the School at full occupancy. The measurements of actual trips shall cover the morning and afternoon peak hours, Tuesday through Friday (excluding School holidays), over a one week period when the School is in general session. Prior notification of when monitoring will be conducted should not be provided to the School (except for security purposes) but shall be provided to DOT at least one month in advance. The monitoring shall take place at the School driveway off Castello Avenue, at the School s expense. The TMR should be produced annually for a minimum of three (3) years following the School s first year of full enrollment, in which time the review must show compliance for the entire threeyear review period. Should the review show that the School is not within substantial compliance, the School will have one (1) year to correct its deficiency. If the School cannot achieve compliance within the corrective year, then a new three (3) year review period will commence and the School shall submit a traffic management plan (TMP) to DOT that outlines the course of action the School will take in order to achieve compliance. If the School cannot achieve compliance after implementation of the TMP, then a reduction in the School s enrollment should be considered. The TMR, and TMP if necessary, should be prepared by a Certified Traffic Engineer and submitted to DOT for review within thirty (30) days following the completion of each monitoring action. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-53

City of Los Angeles May 2010 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE Impacts associated with the construction of the project would be less than significant; Mitigation Measures II-1 through II-8 are proposed to further reduce impacts. Operation of the project would result in significant impacts at three intersections. As shown in Table II-15, Mitigation Measures II-10 and II- 13 would reduce all of these impacts to less than significant. In addition, Mitigation Measures II-9, II-11 and II-12 are proposed to further reduce impacts to local residents. YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter II. Environmental Impact Analysis Page II-54

City of Los Angeles Appendix A: Traffic Study YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Appendices

DRAFT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR YESHIVA UNIVERSITY OF LOS ANGELES BOYS HIGH SCHOOL PHASE II PROJECT AT 9760 WEST PICO BOULEVARD, CITY OF LOS ANGELES Prepared for: DECRON PROPERTIES CORPORATION Prepared by: Crain & Associates 2007 Sawtelle Boulevard, Suite 4 Los Angeles, California 90025 (310) 473-6508 February 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project Background The project site is located at 9760 West Pico Boulevard at the southwest corner of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue in the City of Los Angeles. The project site is currently occupied by Yeshiva University of Los Angeles Boys High School ("YULA Boys High School") which operates a modern orthodox Judaic high school. The project site is also utilized by the adult-education programs Jewish Studies Institute of Yeshiva University of Los Angeles ("JSI") and Yeshiva University of Los Angeles University ("YOLA University"). The facilities are also used by the Yeshiva University of Los Angeles Girls High School ("YULA Girls High School"), as well as students, families, faculty, neighbors and others for Orthodox Jewish prayer and services. Use of the religious sanctuary by persons not affiliated with the school is permitted only on evenings, holidays, and Saturdays. Only a subset of these elements would be affected by the project. The project site has operated as a modern orthodox Judaic high school, adult education center, and sanctuary under various Conditional Use Permits (CUPs). The most recent, and existing, CUP for the project site was issued in 1999 under Case Number ZA-1999-279-CU-ZV-PA1, and associated site plan consistency determinations issued in 2000 and 2001 (collectively, the "1999 CUP"). The 1999 CUP provided for the continuing operation of a modern orthodox Judaic high school and religious education center and for a campus expansion, to be constructed in two phases, of 47,100 square feet of facilities. The 1999 CUP was approved after the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND-99-0151) (the "MND"). The 1999 CUP authorizes a total of 47,100 square feet upon build-out of the entire facility (phase one and phase two). Phase two of the build-out authorized by the 1999 i

CUP includes a 10,500 square foot expansion to the existing facilities, including a new gymnasium and library, and a Beit Midrash addition. In terms of enrollment, at the phase one level, the 1999 CUP currently permits: YOLA University YOLA High School Jewish Studies Institute Total Enrollment 50 students 200 students 150 students/quarter 400 students The Applicant is currently operating under the foregoing enrollment limitations. However, the 1999 CUP also permits expansion of the total enrollment to 450 students after the completion of phase two as follows: YOLA University YOLA High School Jewish Studies Institute Total Enrollment 30 students 250 students 170 students/quarter 450 students The 1999 CUP also provides other conditions governing the operation of the facilities located at the project site, including the use of the facilities for religious services by individuals not affiliated with the high school in the evenings, after 6:30, and on Saturday and Jewish Orthodox holidays. Project Characteristics As described in more detail below, the Applicant is proposing: (1) to complete build-out of the campus with 45,000 square feet of facilities, including modification of the full build-out plans approved pursuant to the 1999 CUP; (2) modify the enrollment limits by increasing permitted enrollment for the Judaic boys high school while decreasing permitted enrollment for adult education programs; and (3) modify the specific permit conditions of the 1999 CUP, including but not limited to, increased flexibility as to the ii

number and nature of events conducted at the project site, extended evening hours for various activities, extended use of the facilities by YULA Girls High School, and extended use of the facilities for orthodox religious services. The Applicant's project would maintain the maximum permitted enrollment (450 students) authorized by the 1999 CUP, but alter the composition of permitted enrollment to a maximum of 350 high school students (100 more high school students than permitted by the 1999 CUP) and 100 JSI/YOLA University students (100 less adult education students than permitted by the 1999 CUP). As stated above, the Applicant also requests amendments to specific permit conditions of the 1999 CUP, including but not limited to, increased flexibility as to the number and nature of events conducted at the project site. These amendments relate to activities that take place outside of peak travel periods when project potential traffic impacts are assessed (for example, the use of the project facilities during evening hours for sports and other events, and the expanded use of the facilities for orthodox religious services), and therefore do not result in potential traffic and transportation impacts that this study is intended to address. JSI and YOLA University activities and classes shall begin no earlier than 7:00 PM and shall be concluded by 11:00 PM. Weekday religious activities and prayer services at the YOLA Synagogue for persons not affiliated with YULA shall begin no earlier than 7:00 PM. However, the potential parking impacts of all activities at the project site are also addressed by this report. On-site parking upon completion of full project buildout would be increased from that required under the 1999 CUP (85) to 100 subterranean parking spaces. For any event that is expected to attract more vehicles than the number of on-site parking spaces, the Applicant proposes to provide free and conveniently accessible parking through one or more specific measures. The project does not propose to use the adjacent Simon iii

Wiesenthal Center/Museum of Tolerance as a potential parking location. Access to the project site will be provided via a full-service driveway along Castello Avenue located between Pico Boulevard and the planned Cul-de-Sac to be implemented per the 1999 CUP. An appendix is also included assessing the project impacts should that Cul-de- Sac not be constructed as part of the base condition. The drop-off/loading zone will be accommodated within the project site, which would not cause any problem to the street traffic along Castello Avenue. Buildout of the project does not include the approximately 7,153 square feet of building area on the second and third floors of the project site used as exhibit space and known as the "West Wing," which is currently included in the 1999 CUP premises. The applicant and operator of the project site does not have possession of the West Wing and the project therefore proposes to eliminate the West Wing from the area covered by CUP. Alternative uses for the West Wing are the subject of separate applications filed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The proposed project is anticipated to be completed and occupied no later than 2012. Once completed and occupied, it is estimated that the project will generate approximately 257 daily trips, including 62 AM peak hour trips and 21 PM peak hour trips. The traffic study presented herein analyzed existing (2008) and future (2012) AM and PM peak hours traffic conditions at five intersections and one residential street segment in the project site vicinity. The cumulative traffic impacts attributable to ambient growth and 61 potential related projects in the surrounding area were also included in the 2012 analysis. As is demonstrated herein, the completed project is not expected to result in any significant traffic impacts with or without the Cul-de-Sac. Therefore, no project iv

traffic mitigation measures are required. However, to be conservative, a monitoring requirement as listed below is recommended as a measure: For three years after full authorized high school enrollment is achieved, the applicant shall provide LADOT with an annual report prepared by a certified traffic engineer monitoring AM/PM peak hour trips for four consecutive days when the high school is in general session. If the monitoring report indicates that the high school is not in substantial compliance with the AM/PM peak hour traffic projections in the traffic study, a plan to reduce the traffic generation to such levels or require additional mitigation shall be implemented to the satisfaction of LADOT. Project traffic impacts were also analyzed for Congestion Management Program (CMP) locations. No significant regional traffic impacts were identified at the CMP monitoring intersections or freeway locations. v

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction... 1 Project Background... 1 Project Characteristic... 2 Environmental Setting... 9 Existing Freeways... 9 Existing Streets and Highways... 10 Existing Public Transit... 12 Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes... 13 Analysis of Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions... 14 Project Traffic... 21 Trip Generation... 21 Trip Distribution... 23 Trip Assignment... 24 Project Parking and Access... 24 Neighborhood On-Street Parking Analysis... 31 Future Traffic Conditions... 32 Traffic Growth... 32 Related Projects... 33 Highway System Improvements... 39 Analysis of Future (2012) Traffic Conditions... 45 LADOT Significant Impact Criteria... 48 Residential Street Traffic Impact Analysis... 49 Congestion Management Program (CMP) Impact Analysis... 51 Mitigation Measures... 53 Appendix A Traffic Count Data Sheets Appendix B Study Intersections Geometrics and Traffic Controls Appendix C Related Projects Trip Generation Rates and Equations Appendix D CMA Calculation Worksheets Appendix E Without Cul-de-Sac Traffic Study Appendix F Without Cul-de-Sac CMA Calculation Worksheets vi

LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. Page 1 Site Vicinity Map... 6 2 Study Intersection Locations Map... 7 3 Conceptual Project Site Plan... 8 4 Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes... 15 5 Project Trip Distribution Percentages... 26 6 Project Traffic Volumes... 27 7 Related Projects Location Map... 34 8 Total Related Projects Traffic Volumes... 40 9 Future (2012) Without Project Traffic Volumes... 42 10 Future (2012) With Project Traffic Volumes... 46 LIST OF TABLES Table No. Page 1 Critical Movement Volume Ranges For Determining Levels of Service 18 2 Level of Service (LOS) As a Function of CMA Values... 19 3 CMA Summary - Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions... 20 4 Project Trip Generation Rates and Equations... 22 5 Project Trip Generation... 23 6 Directional Trip Distribution... 24 7 Parking Demand Estimate... 25 8 LAMC Parking Requirement... 30 9 On-Street Parking Occupancy Summary... 31 10 Related Projects Location, Description and Trip Generation... 35 11 CMA Summary Future (2012) Traffic Conditions... 48 12 LADOT Criteria for Significant Traffic Impact... 49 13 Residential Street Impact Analysis... 50 14 LADOT Neighborhood Traffic Impact Criteria... 50 vii

INTRODUCTION Project Background The project site is located at 9760 West Pico Boulevard at the southwest corner of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue in the City of Los Angeles. The project site is currently occupied by Yeshiva University of Los Angeles Boys High School ("YULA Boys High School") which operates a modern orthodox Judaic high school. The project site is also utilized by the adult-education programs Jewish Studies Institute of Yeshiva University of Los Angeles ("JSI") and Yeshiva University of Los Angeles University ("YOLA University"). The facilities are also used by the Yeshiva University of Los Angeles Girls High School ("YULA Girls High School"), as well as students, families, faculty, neighbors and others for Orthodox Jewish prayer and services. Use of the religious sanctuary by persons not affiliated with the school is permitted only on evenings, holidays, and Saturdays. Only a subset of these elements would be affected by the project. The project site has operated as a modern orthodox Judaic high school, adult education center, and sanctuary under various Conditional Use Permits (CUPs). The most recent, and existing, CUP for the project site was issued in 1999 under Case Number ZA-1999-279-CU-ZV-PA1, and associated site plan consistency determinations issued in 2000 and 2001 (collectively, the "1999 CUP"). The 1999 CUP provided for the continuing operation of a modern orthodox Judaic high school and religious education center and for a campus expansion, to be constructed in two phases, of 47,100 square feet of facilities. The 1999 CUP was approved after the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND-99-0151) (the "MND"). The 1999 CUP authorizes a total of 47,100 square feet upon build-out of the entire facility (phase one and phase two). Phase two of the build-out authorized by the 1999 1

CUP includes a 10,500 square foot expansion to the existing facilities, including a new gymnasium and library, and a Beit Midrash addition. In terms of enrollment, at the phase one level, the 1999 CUP currently permits: YOLA University YOLA High School Jewish Studies Institute Total Enrollment 50 students 200 students 150 students/quarter 400 students The Applicant is currently operating under the foregoing enrollment limitations. However, the 1999 CUP also permits expansion of the total enrollment to 450 students after the completion of phase two as follows: YOLA University YOLA High School Jewish Studies Institute Total Enrollment 30 students 250 students 170 students/quarter 450 students The 1999 CUP also provides other conditions governing the operation of the facilities located at the project site, including the use of the facilities for religious services by individuals not affiliated with the high school in the evenings, after 6:30, and on Saturday and Jewish Orthodox holidays. Project Characteristics As described in more detail below, the Applicant is proposing: (1) to complete build-out of the campus with 45,000 square feet of facilities, including modification of the full build-out plans approved pursuant to the 1999 CUP; (2) modify the enrollment limits by increasing permitted enrollment for the Judaic boys high school while decreasing permitted enrollment for adult education programs; and (3) modify the specific permit conditions of the 1999 CUP, including but not limited to, increased flexibility as to the 2

number and nature of events conducted at the project site, extended evening hours for various activities, extended use of the facilities by YULA Girls High School, and extended use of the facilities for orthodox religious services. The Applicant's project would maintain the maximum permitted enrollment (450 students) authorized by the 1999 CUP, but alter the composition of permitted enrollment to a maximum of 350 high school students (100 more high school students than permitted by the 1999 CUP) and 100 JSI/YOLA University students (100 less adult education students than permitted by the 1999 CUP). As stated above, the Applicant also requests amendments to specific permit conditions of the 1999 CUP, including but not limited to, increased flexibility as to the number and nature of events conducted at the project site. These amendments relate to activities that take place outside of peak travel periods when project potential traffic impacts are assessed (for example, the use of the project facilities during evening hours for sports and other events, and the expanded use of the facilities for orthodox religious services), and therefore do not result in potential traffic and transportation impacts that this study is intended to address. JSI and YOLA University activities and classes shall begin no earlier than 7:00 PM and shall be concluded by 11:00 PM. Weekday religious activities and prayer services at the YOLA Synagogue for persons not affiliated with YULA shall begin no earlier than 7:00 PM. However, the potential parking impacts of all activities at the project site are also addressed by this report. On-site parking upon completion of full project buildout would be increased from that required under the 1999 CUP (85) to 100 subterranean parking spaces. For any event that is expected to attract more vehicles than the number of on-site parking spaces, the Applicant proposes to provide free and conveniently accessible parking through one or more specific measures. The project does not propose to use the adjacent Simon 3

Wiesenthal Center/Museum of Tolerance as a potential parking location. Access to the project site will be provided via a full-service driveway along Castello Avenue located between Pico Boulevard and the planned Cul-de-Sac to be implemented per the 1999 CUP. An appendix is also included assessing the project impacts should that Cul-de- Sac not be constructed as part of the base condition. The drop-off/loading zone will be accommodated within the project site, which would not cause any problem to the street traffic along Castello Avenue. Buildout of the project does not include the approximately 7,153 square feet of building area on the second and third floors of the project site used as exhibit space and known as the "West Wing," which is currently included in the 1999 CUP premises. The applicant and operator of the project site does not have possession of the West Wing and the project therefore proposes to eliminate the West Wing from the area covered by CUP. Alternative uses for the West Wing are the subject of separate applications filed by the Simon Wiesenthal Center. The institution has retained Crain & Associates to conduct a traffic study to assess the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding street system. This report presents the results of an analysis of existing conditions as well as estimated future traffic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours. This analysis incorporates a detailed evaluation of existing and future traffic conditions at the following 5 intersections and along one residential street segment: Study Intersections 1. Pico Boulevard and Roxbury Drive 2. Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue 3. Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive 4. Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive 5. Cashio Street and Beverwil Drive 4

Study Residential Street Segment 1. Castello Avenue between Alcott Street and Cashio Street As shown in Figure 2, the five intersections and one street segment chosen for study are those in the project site vicinity. LADOT has confirmed that these study intersections and street segment are those most directly impacted by project traffic. The project site plan is shown in Figure 3. 5

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The rectangular-shaped project site is located at 9760 West Pico Boulevard at the southwest corner of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue in the City of Los Angeles. The project site is bounded by West Pico Boulevard to the north, South Castello Avenue to the east, a mix of multi-family and single-family residential homes to the south, and the Simon Wiesenthal Center/Museum of Tolerance and residential homes to the west. In the project vicinity, commercial establishments front Pico Boulevard. North of the project site is the City of Beverly Hills. To the northwest of the project site is the Century City Community, with commercial and film entertainment businesses, including the Westfield shopping center and 20th Century Fox Studio. Regional access to the project site is provided by the San Diego Freeway (I-405) and the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10). An extensive grid of surface streets also serves the project area. The key transportation facilities serving the project area are described in further detail below. Existing Freeways The San Diego Freeway (I-405) is a north-south oriented freeway located approximately two and one-half miles west of the project site. This facility typically provides four mainline travel lanes per direction, although additional auxiliary lanes are present between on- and off-ramps. A southbound high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane also exists in the Sepulveda Pass area, and a northbound HOV lane has been approved for construction. The San Diego Freeway provides a west side alternative route across the Santa Monica Mountains to the Ventura Freeway (US-101) and the Golden State Freeway (I-5). The San Diego Freeway also provides direct access to other area freeways, including an interchange with the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) approximately two and one-half miles southwest of the project site. Access to the project area surface 9

street network is provided by full sets of on- and off-ramps at Santa Monica Boulevard, a northward directed half set of ramps for Olympic/Pico Boulevards and a southward directed half set of ramps from National Boulevard. According to the most current (2007) data available through the Caltrans Website, the traffic volumes on the San Diego Freeway between Santa Monica Boulevard (State Route 2) and Wilshire Boulevard is approximately 291,000 vehicles per day (VPD). The Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) is the primary east-west freeway in Los Angeles County. This facility, located approximately one and three-quarter miles south of the project site, provides a continuous route from the City of Santa Monica through Downtown Los Angeles, continuing eastward as the San Bernardino Freeway through San Bernardino and Riverside counties. The Santa Monica Freeway provides four mainline travel lanes in each direction, with auxiliary lanes between some ramp locations. Surface street access is provided at Overland Avenue, National Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard. As previously mentioned, the Santa Monica Freeway has a full interchange with the San Diego Freeway approximately two and one-half miles southwest of the project site. Between National Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard, the traffic volume is approximately 276,000 VPD on the Santa Monica Freeway. Existing Streets and Highways Pico Boulevard is an east-west Major Highway Class II that forms the northern boundary of the project site. This roadway provides access from the City of Santa Monica to Central Avenue in downtown Los Angeles. In the study vicinity, Pico Boulevard provides three through lanes in each direction and left-turn channelization at most intersections. At some portions on Pico Boulevard, on-street parking during non-peak hours is permitted. However, some portions have parking restriction at all times. At Castello Avenue and Roxbury Drive, Pico Boulevard is restricted from turning right in the eastbound direction during PM peak hour. 10

Roxbury Drive is designated as a Collector Street. This north-south oriented roadway transitions from Hartford Way in the City of Beverly Hills and extends discontinuously to just north of Sawyer Street. In the vicinity of the project site, Roxbury Drive has one through lane in each direction. The on-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2-hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM from Monday to Saturday. Castello Avenue is a designated Local Street that forms the eastern boundary of the project site. This north-south roadway extends from Peck Drive and Newman Street in the north to Horner Street in the south. This roadway provides one travel lane in each direction. The on-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2- hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM from Monday to Saturday. Cashio Street is an east-west oriented Local Street located south of the project site. This roadway transitions from Roxbury Drive in the west to its eastern terminus at Crescent Heights Boulevard. East of Beverwil Drive, Cashio Street is designated a Collector Street. Near the project vicinity, this roadway provides one through lane in each direction. The on-street parking is allowed for vehicles with District No. 25 Permit, and 2-hour parking is allowed for other vehicles between 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM from Monday to Saturday. Beverly Drive is designated as a Major Highway Class II north of Pico Boulevard and a Local Street south of Pico Boulevard. This north-south oriented roadway extends from Franklin Canyon Drive in the north to Harlow Drive in the south. In the project vicinity, one through lane in each direction is provided with left-turn channelization at most intersections. Beverwil Drive is a Collector Street located east of the project site. It is a north-south oriented street which connects with Beverly Drive in the north and eventually becomes 11

Castle Heights Avenue at Kincardine Avenue. Near the project site, Beverwil Drive has two through lanes in each direction and left-turn channelization at key intersections. Existing Public Transit The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) provides an extensive system of bus lines throughout the project area. Current regional transit information available through Metro indicates that two bus routes have stops within reasonable walking distance (approximately one-half mile or less) of the project site. In addition, Santa Monica also provides two Big Blue Bus routes near the project site. Metro Bus Service Line 28/328 provides east-west service between Century City and Downtown Los Angeles via Olympic Boulevard. In the project vicinity, a stop is provided on Olympic Boulevard at Camden Drive. Weekdays, Line 28/328 has headways of approximately 8 to 15 minutes. Saturday service on Line 28 has headways of approximately 7 to 18 minutes. Line 28 has headways of approximately 10 to 20 minutes on Sundays and holidays. Line 328 does not operate on weekends or holidays. Line 14 provides east-west service between Downtown Los Angeles and Beverly Hills via Beverly Boulevard. Near the project site, Line 14 travels on Pico Boulevard, with a stop at Beverly Drive. Weekday headways are approximately 10 to 12 minutes. Weekend and holiday service has headways of approximately 12 to 15 minutes. Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 5 provides service between Santa Monica, Century City and Rimpau Transit Center via Pico Boulevard, Olympic Boulevard and Colorado Avenue. In the project vicinity, Line 5 travels along Pico Boulevard with a stop provided at Beverly Drive. Service is provided Monday through Friday with headways of approximately 20 12

minutes. Saturday, Sunday and holiday services operate on longer headways of approximately 30 minutes. Line 7 operates between Santa Monica and Rimpau Transit Center, with limitedstop service provided by the express, Super 7 Line, during peak hours. Stops for Line 7 near the project site are provided along Pico Boulevard at Roxbury Drive and Beverwil Drive. Near the project site, a stop for the Super 7 Line is provided along Pico Boulevard at Beverly Drive. Line 7 buses operate on weekday headways of approximately 10 to 15 minutes while the Super 7 Line operates on weekday headways of approximately 20 minutes. Weekend and holiday schedules are provided with headways of approximately 15 to 20 minutes. Super 7 Line does not operate on weekends or holidays. In addition to these routes, additional public bus and rail opportunities are available via transfers to other lines and/or transit providers. When transfer opportunities are considered, the greater Los Angeles region is readily accessible from the project site by the transit system. Although public transportation is available, to provide a conservative analysis, no project trip generation reduction due to public transit has been assumed. Existing (2008) Traffic Volumes Peak-hour traffic counts at four of the study intersections were conducted in May 2007 by National Data & Surveying Services and Crain & Associates, during the weekday AM and PM peak periods. The remaining study intersection (Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue) was counted in February 2008 by Traffic Solutions during the weekday AM and PM peak periods. All counts were gathered manually from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM in the morning and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM in the afternoon and were conducted when local schools were in session. The peak-hour and corresponding traffic volumes for both AM and PM peak periods were identified individually for each intersection based on the 13

combined four highest consecutive 15-minute volumes for all vehicular movements at the intersection. An annual ambience growth factor of 1.0 percent was compounded and applied to the 2007 volumes to represent existing volumes for the year 2008. Existing peak-hour volumes at the 5 study intersections are illustrated in Figures 4(a) and 4(b). (The traffic count data sheets are included in Appendix A, and the lane configurations and traffic controls are included in Appendix B.) Analysis of Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions An analysis of current traffic conditions was conducted on the streets serving the project area. Detailed traffic analyses of existing traffic conditions were performed at the following 5 study intersections and along one residential street segment location, all of which were selected in consultation with LADOT: Study Intersections 1. Pico Boulevard and Roxbury Drive (Signalized) 2. Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue (2-Way Stop Control) 3. Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive (Signalized) 4. Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive (Signalized) 5. Cashio Street and Beverwil Drive (Signalized) Study Residential Street Segment 1. Castello Avenue between Alcott Street and Cashio Street All of the four signalized study intersections are currently operated under the City s Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system and ATCS (Adaptive Traffic Control System). The ATSAC and ATCS signal enhancements, which provide computer monitoring of traffic demand and modify traffic signal timing in real time to 14

maximize capacity and decrease delay, have been recognized to increase intersection capacities by approximately seven and ten percent, respectively, at installed locations. The methodology used in this study for the analysis and evaluation of traffic operations at each study intersection is based on procedures outlined in Circular Number 212 of the Transportation Research Board. 1 This is consistent with the LADOT traffic study guidelines. In the discussion of Critical Movement Analysis for signalized intersections, procedures have been developed for determining operating characteristics of an intersection in terms of the "Level of Service" provided for different levels of traffic volume and other variables, such as the number of signal phases. The term "Level of Service" (LOS) describes the quality of traffic flow. LOS A to C operate well. LOS D typically is the level for which a metropolitan area street system is designed. LOS E represents volumes at or near the capacity of the highway, which might result in stoppages of momentary duration and fairly unstable flow. LOS F occurs when a facility is overloaded and is characterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A determination of the LOS at an intersection, where traffic volumes are known or have been projected, can be obtained through a summation of the critical movement volumes at that intersection. Once the sum of critical movement volumes has been obtained, the values indicated in Table 1 can be used to determine the applicable LOS. 1 Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Circular Number 212, Transportation Research Board,Washington, D.C., 1980. 17

Table 1 Critical Movement Volume Ranges* For Determining Levels of Service (LOS) Maximum Sum of Critical Volumes (VPH) 2-Way 4-Way Four STOP STOP Level of Two Three or More Sign Sign Service Phase Phase Phases Controlled Controlled A 900 855 825 720 600 B 1,050 1,000 965 840 700 C 1,200 1,140 1,100 960 800 D 1,350 1,275 1,225 1,080 900 E 1,500 1,425 1,375 1,200 1,000 F ------------------------------Not Applicable------------------------ * For planning applications only, i.e., not appropriate for operations and design applications. Capacity represents the maximum total hourly movement volume of vehicles in the critical lanes, which has a reasonable expectation of passing through an intersection under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. For planning purposes, capacity equates to the maximum value of LOS E, as indicated in Table 1 for the signalized intersection. For unsignalized intersections, a capacity of 1,200 vehicles per hour per lane was assumed for 2-Way Stop controlled intersections, and a capacity of 1,000 vehicles per hour per lane was assumed for 4-Way Stop controlled intersections. The Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) values used in this study were calculated by dividing the sum of critical movement volumes by the appropriate capacity value. As Table 1 shows, this value varies for the type of signal control present or proposed at the study intersections since added signal phases reduce the capacity by adding yellow indication time. 18

Table 2 Level of Service (LOS) As a Function of Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Values Level of Range of Service Description of Operating Characteristics CMA Values A Uncongested operations; all vehicles clear < 0.60 in a single cycle. B Same as above. >0.60 < 0.70 C Light congestion; occasional backups on >0.70 < 0.80 critical approaches. D Congestion on critical approaches, but >0.80 < 0.90 intersection functional. Vehicles required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks. No long-standing lines formed. E Severe congestion with some long-standing >0.90 < 1.00 lines on critical approaches. Blockage of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for protected turning movements. F Forced flow with stoppages of long duration. > 1.00 By applying this analysis procedure to the study intersections, the CMA value and the corresponding LOS for existing traffic conditions were calculated. These basic CMA calculations were adjusted, however, to account for traffic signal enhancements that are not considered in the CMA methodology, such as the City s ATSAC and ATCS System. LADOT has determined that this system results in an approximate seven percent and ten percent, respectively, increase in capacity over locations where the system is not implemented. Therefore, per LADOT policy, the CMA value calculated using the standard methodology was reduced by 0.07 for ATSAC implementation at existing signalized study intersections, and by 0.10 for the signalized intersections operating with ATSAC and ATCS, in order to approximate the improvement in intersection capacity resulting from the ATSAC/ATCS implementation. 19

The CMA value and the corresponding LOS for existing (2008) traffic conditions are shown in Table 3. The CMA calculation worksheets for existing conditions are included in Appendix D. Table 3 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) and Level of Service (LOS) Summary Existing (2008) Traffic Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Intersection CMA LOS CMA LOS 1. Pico Boulevard & Roxbury Drive 0.713 C 0.622 B 2. Pico Boulevard & Castello Avenue 0.712 C 0.773 C 3. Pico Boulevard & Beverwil Drive 0.776 C 0.779 C 4. Pico Boulevard & Beverly Drive 0.814 D 0.902 E 5. Cashio Street & Beverwil Drive 0.635 B 0.440 A As the values in Table 3 indicate, in general, most study intersections in the project vicinity are experiencing relatively good levels of service (LOS A to C). The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive is currently operating at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour. 20

PROJECT TRAFFIC The following section describes the methodology used to determine the trip generation, distribution and assignment of the project. Driveway access and parking for the project are also discussed. Trip Generation Traffic-generating characteristics of various land uses have been surveyed and documented in studies conducted under the auspices of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The most recent information is provided in the 7th Edition of the ITE Trip Generation manual. For calculating daily and PM peak hour trips associated with the project, High School (ITE Land Use Code 530) rates were used. The West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (TIMP) trip generation rates were used for the AM peak hour. For university students, use of one-half of the daily rate for Junior/Community College (ITE Land Use Code 540) was conservative since the classes are only held in the evening and all of the students are commuters rather than campus residents. Since classes are held only in the evening, the peak hour generation rates were set to zero. The daily, and AM and PM peak hours trip rates and equations used for determining the project s trip generation are shown in Table 4. 21

Table 4 Project Trip Generation Rates and Equations High School (per student) LU 530 Daily: [1] T = 1.71 (S) AM Peak Hour: [2] T = 0.41 (S); I/B = 69%, O/B = 31% PM Peak Hour: [1] T = 0.14 (S); I/B = 47%, O/B = 53% Junior/Community College (per student) LU 540 Daily: [3] T = 0.6 (S) AM Peak Hour: [3] T = 0 (S); I/B = 0%, O/B = 0% PM Peak Hour: [3] T = 0 (S); I/B = 0%, O/B = 0% Where: T = trip ends I/B = inbound percentages S = student O/B = outbound percentages LU = ITE land use code Source: [1] Daily and PM peak hour rates based on Trip Generation, 7th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003. [2] AM peak hour rates based on West Los Angeles TIMP Specific Plan. [3] The Junior/Community College rates were further modified to reflect that classes are currently restricted to the evening, and the proposed project would not change the current schedule. This was conservatively assumed to eliminate any reduction in peak hour trips from the decrease in allowed enrollment size and only assumed one-half of the usual decrease in daily trips. The above site trip generation calculation rates and equations were selected in accordance with standard LADOT procedures. These base trip rates present a worst case trip generation condition applicable only to suburban locations, as the trip generation rates and equations of ITE 7th Edition Trip Generation and West Los Angeles TIMP Specific Plan do not account for such trip reducing factors as multi-purpose trips or internal trips, extensive transit use, walk-in trips or pass-by trips. These factors may play a significant role in determining the actual traffic generating characteristics of a particular project. For purposes of a conservative analysis, the project trip generation calculations did not include any adjustments for internal, transit, walk-in or pass-by trips. For the purpose of assessing the project's traffic and transportation impacts, 200 students (the enrollment permitted by the 1999 CUP after phase one) is assumed as the existing baseline. As shown in Table 5, the enrollment amendments proposed by the project (i.e. increased enrollment to 350 high school students) would generate 22

approximately 257 daily trips, including 62 AM peak hour trips and 21 PM peak hour trips. ITE Table 5 Project Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Code Use/Description Daily I/B O/B Total I/B O/B Total Proposed Uses 530 High School 350 st 599 99 45 144 23 26 49 540 Junior/Community College* 100 st 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 Synagogue Expansion** 100 person 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 739 99 45 144 23 26 49 Existing Uses: 530 High School (Entitled) 200 st 342 57 25 82 13 15 28 540 Junior/Community College* 200 st 120 0 0 0 0 0 0 Synagogue Expansion** 25 person 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal 482 57 25 82 13 15 28 Net Project Trips: 257 42 20 62 10 11 21 * Junior/Community College operates in the evening only with no weekday class starting prior to 7:00 PM. Half of the normal generation for the daily value was assumed with no peak hour generation included. ** Synagogue will continue to operate in the evening only during the weekdays with no weekday service starting before 7:00 PM. Proposed-assumed 2.5 person/car, 100 persons/2.5=40 trips for one direction, 80 trips for inbound and outbound daily trips. Existing-assumed 2.5 person/car, 25 persons/2.5=10 trips for one direction, 20 trips for inbound and outbound daily trips. Trip Distribution Estimation of the directional distribution of project trips was the next step in the analytical process. This trip distribution pattern for the project was determined by considering the proposed land use, existing traffic movements, characteristics of the surrounding roadway system, the geographic location of the project site and its proximity to freeways and major travel routes. In addition, student enrollment data based on zip codes was used to estimate the directional distribution from the location of student residences. The 1999 CUP includes a Cul-de-Sac along Castello Avenue south of the school driveway, which will be constructed before the proposed project. As a result, no trips were assigned along Castello Avenue to the south. A neighborhood 23

improvement at the intersection of Pico Boulevard/Beverwil Drive was approved and is currently under construction. This improvement measure is being made as part of the Neighborhood Traffic Program and includes the installation of a landscaped median on Beverwil Drive in order to reduce the number of southbound travel lanes south of Pico Boulevard and thereby to reduce the volume of cut-through traffic. In light of this improvement, Beverwil Drive is not treated as a main access route for the project trips. Based on these factors, the generalized trip distribution shown in Table 6 was estimated for the project. Table 6 Directional Trip Distribution Direction Percentage of Trips North 15% South 15% East 40% West 30% Total: 100% Trip Assignment The assignment of project traffic to the street and highway systems was accomplished in two steps. Using the directional distribution percentages for the project area developed previously, the number of trips in each direction was calculated. The second step was to assign these trips to specific routes within the study area, including surface streets and freeways, using the percentages shown in Figure 5. The assignment is based on traffic directly accessing the project site. Project traffic volumes at the study intersections for the AM and PM peak hours, based on the net volumes shown in Table 5 are shown in Figures 6(a) and 6(b). Project Parking and Access Currently, the school provides 65 parking spaces on site. 85 parking spaces are required upon completion of phase two in accordance with the 1999 CUP. The project proposes a 24

total on site parking supply of 100 spaces. Access to the project site will be provided via a full-service driveway along Castello Avenue located between Pico Boulevard and the planned Cul-de-Sac to be implemented per the 1999 CUP. The drop-off/loading zone will be accommodated within the project site, which would not cause any problem to the street traffic along Castello Avenue. The anticipated parking demand for the project is set forth in Table 7. As shown in the Table 7, the parking supply of 100 spaces will meet the school parking demand for both weekday daytime and evening. Table 7 Parking Demand Estimate Weekday Daytime Parking Demand Weekday Evening Parking Demand Students Students 350 High School Students 35 spaces 350 High School Students 9 spaces 100 JSI/University Students 0 spaces 100 JSI/University Students 10 spaces Staff Staff 35 Full-Time Faculty/Staff 35 spaces 35 Full-Time Faculty/Staff 9 spaces 14 Part-Time Faculty/Staff 14 spaces 14 Part-Time Faculty/Staff 4 spaces 1 Maintenance 1 spaces 1 Maintenance 1 spaces Subtotal 85 spaces Subtotal 33 spaces Visitor Approximately 10% 9 spaces Visitor 300 non-student seats 60 spaces in auditorium. Total 94 spaces Total 93 spaces Parking Assumptions Daytime Evening Group Ratio Assumption Basis Ratio Assumption Basis High School Students 1:10 Current CUP Analysis 1/4 Daytime ULI Shared Parking (6PM employee) University Students 0 Not Applicable 1:10 Current CUP Analysis Full-time Faculty/Staff 1:1 Current CUP Analysis 1:4 Daytime ULI Shared Parking (6PM employee) Part-time Faculty/Sraff 1:1 Current CUP Analysis 1:4 Daytime ULI Shared Parking (6PM employee) Maintenance 1:1 Current CUP Analysis 1:4 Daytime ULI Shared Parking (6PM employee) Visitor 10% Current CUP Analysis 1:5 50% by bus/walk-in and 1:2.5 for portion arriving by auto. 25

In addition to the project requirements from the 1999 CUP, the project will continue to provide on-site parking free of charge to students, faculty and employees and to other visitors to the YULA Facilities. No parking spaces on the subject property shall be allocated or permitted to be used by any third party or by any staff or visitors to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Moriah Films or the Museum of Tolerance. All YULA students, faculty, employees and visitors will be required to park on the subject premises except for special events where off-site parking is provided. Consistent with the 1999 CUP, each student, faculty member and employee who parks on the subject premises shall be issued, on an annual basis, an individually numbered parking permit which shall be prominently displayed on the dashboard or rear view mirror of the car. Consistent with the 1999 CUP, parking on residential streets by YULA students, parents, faculty and employees will continue to be prohibited. The applicant shall inform students, parents, faculty and employees of all regulations concerning restriction on parking and loading and unloading of students. The applicant will continue to maintain a progressive disciplinary system of enforcement. If any condition is violated, YULA will assess the violator a fine of $50.00 for the first offense, $100.00 for the second offense. A third offense shall also result in the temporary suspension of the involved student(s) from YULA.. Security guard(s) shall be responsible for reporting to the YULA Liaison, the license number of any car belongs to a student, family, faculty member or employee seen parking on a residential street or seen loading or unloading students offsite. If any type of event at YULA is expected to attract more vehicles than the available number of parking spaces on-site including the accounting of vehicles parked on-site belonging to students, faculty and employees, the applicant shall provide free and conveniently accessible parking through the use of one or more of the following measures, as appropriate: a) a complimentary valet service: b) a stacking system using tandem parking on-site; c) the use of parking at another location within 750 feet of the 29

subject premises; and/or d) an off-site shuttle system. If a shuttle system is used, shuttle vehicles shall be of a capacity which will facilitate the transportation of persons to and from YULA so that time waiting for such shuttles is minimized and the use of shuttles is maximized. Signs shall be posted in highly visible locations, and security guard(s) and/or parking attendant(s) shall be located at the entrance to the YULA parking lot, to direct vehicles to the designated parking areas(s) and to admonish drivers not to park in the residential areas. YULA shall institute a program by which parking is assigned to students, parents, visitors, faculty and employees at a specific location on-site or off-site, prior to an event which is expected to exceed on-site parking capacity. Such a program shall be designed to avoid traffic congestion and circulation problems associated with drivers arriving at a parking location and being turned away due to the capacity of such parking area having been reached. In addition, the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) parking requirement was also analyzed for the proposed project. As shown in Table 8, the Code parking requires a total of 265 parking spaces. Compared to the proposed supply of 100 parking spaces, there is a shortage of 165 spaces per the Los Angeles Municipal Code parking requirement. However, as discussed above and as shown in Table 7, the actual parking demand on site is a maximum of 94 spaces. The project would provide 100 spaces, which would exceed daily parking demand by six spaces. Table 8 Los Angeles Municipal Code Parking Requirement Uses Parking Ratio Parking Demand 400 seat High School Gym 1/ 5 seats 80 spaces 5,760 sf Gym Floor (Total 6,860sf, 1,100sf for seating) 1/ 35 sf 165 spaces 100 student JSI/University Students 1/ 5 students 20 spaces Total: 265 spaces 30

Neighborhood On-Street Parking Analysis As discussed above, the project will provide sufficient parking spaces on the school site to meet normal operating needs, and with a combination of on-site and off-site parking for special events. For informational purposes, an on-street parking survey was conducted on Thursday, January 10 and Friday, January 11, 2008 (while local schools were in session) along the school adjacent streets. These street segments include Roxbury Drive and Castello Avenue between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street, Alcott Street and Saturn Street between Castello Avenue and Beverwil Drive, and Cashio Street between Roxbury Drive and Beverwil Drive. As shown in Table 9, during the adjacent streets peak parking period (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM), the survey shows a maximum of 66% of on-street parking occupancy along Roxbury Drive between Pico Boulevard and Cashio Street. Overall onstreet parking occupancy along the school adjacent streets is approximately 33% during the peak parking period (12:30 PM - 1:30 PM). Therefore, the on-street parking occupancy is relatively low and the parking demand is under the capacity along the school adjacent neighborhood streets. Table 9 School Adjacent On-Street Parking Occupacy Summary (12:30 PM 1:30 PM) Estimated Parking Parking Parking Street Segment Demand Spaces Occupacy 1. Roxbury Dr. btw. Pico Blvd. & Cashio St. 25 38 66% 2. Castello Ave. btw. Pico Blvd. & Cashio St. 14 40 35% 3. Alcott St. btw. Castello Ave. & Beverwil Dr. 16 50 32% 4. Saturn St. btw. Castello Ave. & Beverwil Dr. 10 39 26% 5. Cashio St. btw. Roxbury Dr. & Beverwil Dr. 8 51 16% Total 73 218 33% 31

FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS To forecast year 2012 pre-project conditions, the Traffic Study utilizes two separate, though overlapping, techniques in accordance with LADOT practices and policy. First, as discussed further below, the Traffic Study assumes that existing (2008) traffic volumes will grow by a factor of 1% each year until 2012 when the Project is completed. While the 1% factor is intended to account for all reasonably foreseeable traffic growth from new development and other sources, in addition to the 1% annual growth factor, the Traffic Study also assumes the build-out of all identified related development projects proposed in the project area, as discussed further below. Finally, in accordance with LADOT practice and policy, the Traffic Study assumes that the related projects will not be accompanied by any traffic mitigation measures. In actuality, however, most major projects are accompanied by traffic mitigation because of the requirements of CEQA. The intention of this methodology is to provide a worst case scenario against which to assess potential traffic impacts and identify mitigation measures. This methodology is likely to significantly overstate future traffic conditions in the vicinity of the project. The above analysis provides the baseline traffic volumes for the analysis of future (2012) conditions, referred to as the Future (2012) Without Project condition. Finally, project traffic was analyzed as an incremental addition to the Future (2012) Without Project condition to establish the Future (2012) With Project condition and to determine project traffic impacts. Traffic Growth Based on an analysis of the trends in traffic growth in the study area over the last several years, an annual traffic growth factor of 1.0 percent for the area street system has been deemed reasonable in consultation with LADOT. This growth factor is used to account for increases in traffic resulting from new development and other sources, including without 32

limitation projects not yet proposed or outside of the study area. This "growth factor" was applied to the existing (2008) traffic volumes to develop the estimated baseline volumes for the future study year 2012. Related Projects In addition to the use of the ambient growth rate, listings of potential projects located in the study area ("related projects") that might be developed within the study time frame were obtained from the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, City of Beverly Hills, Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and recent studies of projects in the area. A review of this information indicated that 61 related projects (including, but not limited to the adjacent Museum of Tolerance expansion project) could contribute significant traffic volumes to the five study intersections. As noted previously, the ambient traffic growth factor is expected to accurately represent all area traffic growth within the study period and, as such, the inclusion of the 61 related projects in addition to the assumed background traffic growth may tend to overstate cumulative traffic volumes. The locations of the related projects are illustrated in Figure 7, with their descriptions and trip generations shown in Table 10. Daily, AM and PM peak hour trips were estimated by applying trip generation rates from the ITE manual, Trip Generation, 7th Edition. These trip generation rates and equations are included in Appendix C. The existing phase one entitlement allows enrollment of 200 high school students, however, during the 2007 school year, enrollment was 186 high school students. Therefore, the difference between the existing condition and the phase one entitlement condition was added as related project number 61. For the analysis of Future (2012) "Without Project" traffic conditions, the related projects trip generation was assigned to the study area circulation system, using methodologies similar to those previously described for project trip assignment, with the assumption of 33

Table 10 Related Projects Location, Description and Trip Generation Map No. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily In Out Total In Out Total 1. 10201 W. Pico Boulevard [1] 360,000 sf Studio (remainder estimate) 4,439 474 30 504 65 219 284 2. 2055 Avenue of the Stars 147 du Condominium (St. Regis) 861 11 54 65 51 25 76 3. 2000 Avenue of the Stars [2] 763,900 sf Office (11,357) 101 (181) (80) (683) (216) (899) 16,012 sf High-turnover Restaurant 16,011 sf Quality Restaurant 19,214 sf Retail 10,675 sf Cultural Center (332,856) sf Office (to be removed) (1,751) st Cinema (to be removed) (2,250) st Shubert Theatre (to be removed) (117,212) sf High-turnover Restaurant (to be removed) (39,071) sf Quality Restaurant (to be removed) (61,970) sf Retail (to be removed) (44,277) sf Health Club (to be removed) 4. 10131 Constellation Avenue [3] 483 du Condominium (1,636) (37) 85 48 (49) (105) (154) (9,150) sf Bank (to be removed) (6,700) sf Office (to be removed) (19,754) sf Restaurant (to be removed) 5. 10000 Santa Monica Boulevard 300 du Condominium 1,758 22 110 132 105 51 156 6. 9900 Wilshire Boulevard [4] 252 du Condominium (321) 52 80 132 (6) (18) (24) 15,600 sf Retail 4,800 sf Quality Restaurant (220,000) sf Department Store (to be removed) 7. 9876 Wilshire Boulevard 50 rm Hotel (net change) 409 17 11 28 16 14 30 120 du Condominium (net change) 703 9 44 53 42 20 62 11,500 sf Restaurant 1,462 69 63 132 77 49 126 2,574 95 118 213 135 83 218 8. 9844 Wilshire Boulevard [5] 95,000 sf Office 1,090 131 (4) 127 21 140 161 (9,633) sf Retail (to be removed) 9. 9748-9766 Wilshire Boulevard [6] 84,000 sf General Office 1,668 91 16 107 60 102 162 9,000 sf Specialty Retail 7,000 sf Restaurant (26,000) sf General Office (To be removed) 10. 129 S. Linden Drive 76 du Senior Congregate Care Facility 154 3 2 5 7 6 13 11. SEC Wilshire Boulevard & Peck Drive [7] 60 du Condominium 884 16 32 48 36 30 66 12,000 sf Specialty Retail 35

Map No. Table 10 (continued) Related Projects Location, Description and Trip Generation Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily In Out Total In Out Total 12. 257 N. Canon Drive 40,000 sf Office 440 55 7 62 10 50 60 15,000 sf Retail 665 11 7 18 18 23 41 5,000 sf Restaurant 636 30 28 58 34 21 55 1,741 96 42 138 62 94 156 13. 202-240 N. Beverly Drive [8] 214 rm Hotel 2,586 79 78 157 133 132 265 203-241 N. Canon Drive 25 du Condominium 27,000 sf Commercial/Retail 33,279 sf Public Garden 14. 231 N. Beverly Drive [9] 177,225 sf Office 4,081 332 79 411 126 330 456 22,875 sf Retail 8,000 sf Restaurant 15. 9200 Wilshire Boulevard [10] 54 du Condominium 950 10 23 33 51 31 82 5,600 sf Quality Restaurant 8,400 sf Retail 16. 140-144 S. Oakhurst Drive 11 du Residential 74 1 5 6 5 2 7 17. 9001-9041 W. Pico Boulevard 360 st Private School 893 173 111 284 26 35 61 9,615 sf Specialty Retail 426 7 5 12 11 15 26 31 du Apartment 208 3 13 16 12 7 19 1,527 183 129 312 49 57 106 18. 1333 S. Beverly Green Drive 5 du Condominium 29 Nominal 2 2 2 1 3 19. 2263 S. Fox Hills Drive 15 du Condominium 88 1 6 7 5 3 8 20. 552-558 N. Hillgreen Drive 9 du Condominium 53 1 3 4 3 2 5 21. 428-430 Smithwood Drive 1 du Apartment 7 0 1 1 1 0 1 22. 432-436 S. Beverly Drive 9,325 sf Church Expansion 85 4 3 7 3 3 6 23. 9090 Olympic Boulevard 9,000 sf Synagogue 96 1 0 1 7 8 15 10,000 sf Private School 111 22 13 35 Nominal Nominal Nominal 207 23 13 36 7 8 15 24. 156-168 N. La Peer Drive 16 du Condominium 94 1 6 7 5 3 8 25. 313-317 Reeves Drive 10 du Condominium 59 1 3 4 3 2 5 26. 261-283 S. Reeves Drive 23 du Condominium 135 2 8 10 8 4 12 (24) du Condominium (to be removed) (141) (2) (9) (11) (8) (4) (12) (6) 0 (1) (1) 0 0 0 27. 125 S. Camden Drive 40 du Condominium 134 3 15 18 14 7 21 28. 150 El Camino 66 st Screening Room 116 1 Nominal 1 4 1 5 29. 144 Reeves Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 36 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Table 10 (continued) Related Projects Location, Description and Trip Generation Map No. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily In Out Total In Out Total 30. 131-191 N. Crescent Drive 88 du Residential 591 9 36 45 36 19 55 9355-9373 Wilshire Boulevard 40,000 sf Office/Retail 440 55 7 62 10 50 60 1,031 64 43 107 46 69 115 31. 201 N. Crescent Drive 80 du Assisted Care Facility 278 6 7 13 8 7 15 32. 265 N. Beverly Drive 45,000 sf Office 1,123 103 30 133 44 119 163 33. 338 N. Canon Drive 11,900 sf Retail 527 8 6 14 14 18 32 34. 9378 Wilshire Boulevard 14,996 sf Shopping Center 644 9 6 15 27 29 56 14,996 sf Office 165 20 3 23 4 18 22 809 29 9 38 31 47 78 35. 456 N. Camden Drive 1,750 sf Retail Expansion 78 1 1 2 2 3 5 36. 9730 Wilshire Boulevard 204 rm Hotel 1,667 70 44 114 64 56 120 37. 150 Lasky Drive 42 rm Hotel 346 15 9 24 13 12 25 38. SWC Wilshire Boulevard/Santa Monica Boulevard 120 du Condominium 649 1 15 16 45 12 57 [11] 522 du Hotel 12,270 rm Restaurant Existing Hotel credit 39. 8800 Burton Way 14,570 sf Retail 1,942 30 19 49 84 92 176 40. 8800 Wilshire Boulevard [12] 7,285 sf Office 80 10 1 11 2 9 11 7,285 sf Retail 1,237 20 13 33 53 58 111 1,317 30 14 44 55 67 122 41. 8767 Wilshire Boulevard 60,856 sf Office 670 83 11 94 15 76 91 11,260 sf Retail 1,642 26 16 42 71 77 148 3,000 sf Restaurant 381 18 17 35 20 13 33 2,693 127 44 171 106 166 272 42. 8600 Wilshire Boulevard 4,800 sf Retail 213 4 2 6 6 7 13 25 du Residential 168 3 10 13 10 6 16 381 7 12 19 16 13 29 43. 8536 Wilshire Boulevard 24,890 sf Medical Office 899 49 13 62 25 68 93 44. 9001 Olympic Boulevard [13] 78 st Vehicle Service Center 1,042 117 19 136 81 141 222 45. 8525 Pico Boulevard 39 du Apartment 262 4 16 20 16 8 24 11,327 sf Retail 1,649 26 16 42 72 77 149 1,911 30 32 62 88 85 173 46. 469 N. Crescent Drive 34,000 sf Cultural Center 778 34 21 55 16 40 56 47. 9601 Wilshire Boulevard 30,000 sf Gym 988 15 21 36 62 60 122 37

Table 10 (continued) Related Projects Location, Description and Trip Generation Map AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Location (Address) Size Unit Description Daily In Out Total In Out Total 48. 326 N. Rodeo Drive 4,550 sf Retail 202 3 2 5 5 7 12 49. 133 Spalding Drive 4 du Condominium 23 0 2 2 1 1 2 50. 115 N. Swall Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 51. 50 N. La Cienega Boulevard 14,000 sf Medical Office 506 28 7 35 14 38 52 (14,000) sf Office (to be removed) (154) (19) (3) (22) (4) (17) (21) 352 9 4 13 10 21 31 52. 317 Elm Drive 25 du Condominium 147 2 9 11 9 4 13 (8) du Condominium (47) (1) (3) (4) (3) (1) (4) 100 1 6 7 6 3 9 53. 9786 Pico Boulevard [14] 100,000 sf Museum 1,713 139 103 242 131 118 249 500/800 st Special Events 54. 300 Wetherly Drive [15] 140 du Condominium 820 11 51 62 49 24 73 55. 9735 Durant Drive 11 du Condominium 64 1 4 5 4 2 6 56. 221 S. Hamilton Drive 3 du Condominium 18 0 1 1 1 1 2 57. 447-451 N. Doheny Drive 23 du Condominium 135 2 8 10 8 4 12 (16) du Apartment (to be removed) (108) (2) (6) (8) (7) (3) (10) 27 0 2 2 1 1 2 58. 505 N. Rodeo Drive 120 st Private School 298 58 37 95 9 11 20 59. 301 N. Beverly Drive 2,500 sf Retail 111 2 1 3 3 4 7 60. 10250 Santa Monica Boulevard [16] 358,881 sf Shopping Center 5,922 (235) 58 (177) 290 74 364 262 du Condominium (289,460) sf Office (to be removed) 61. 9760 W. Pico Boulevard [17] 200 st CUP Entitled Enrollment 342 57 25 82 13 15 28 (186) st Current Enrollment (2007 school year) (318) (52) (24) (76) (12) (14) (26) 24 5 1 6 1 1 2 Construction of Castello Avenue Cul-de-Sac 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sources: [1] Trip generation rates based on Traffic Impact Analysis for the Renovation and Expansion of Fox Studio Facilities, Century City, Crain & Associates, Revised October 1991. [2] Traffic Impact Study for Office, Commercial and Cultural Use Project at 2000 Avenue of the Stars, Century City, Crain & Associates, June 2002. [3] Draft Traffic Study for 10131 Constellation Boulevard Residential Project, Century City, Kaku Associates, Inc., October 2005. [4] Draft EIR for 9900 Wilshire Boulevard, Impact Sciences, Inc., August 2007. [5] Draft Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Beverly Hills Gateway Project at 9844 Wilshire Bouelvard, City of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, December 2002. [6] Traffic Impact Report for the Proposed Mixed Use at Wilshire Blvd & Spalding Dr of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, March 2008. [7] Traffic Impact Study for Proposed Mixed-Use Project at Southeast Corner of Wilshire Boulevard & Peck Drive, City of Beverly Hills, Crain & Associates, May 2007. [8] Traffic Impact Study for Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel, City of Beverly Hills, RBF Consulting, May 2004. [9] Traffic Impact Analysis for the Beverly/Wilshire Office Project, City of Beverly Hills, RBF Consulting, May 2007. [10] Traffic Impact Analysis for the 9200 Wilshire Boulevard Mixed-Use Project, City of Beverly Hills, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, January 2006. [11] The Beverly Hilton Revitalization Plan Draft EIR, Impact Sciences, Inc., August 2007. [12] Square footage per use not available. Assumed 50/50 split between office and retail uses. [13] Beverly Hills BMW Traffic Study, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, October 13, 2004. [14] Traffic Impact Study for Simon Wisenthal Center Museum of Tolerance, Crain & Associates, July 2008. [15] Traffic Imapct Report for the Proposed Condominium Development at 300 South Wetherly Drive, City of Los Angeles, Crain & Associates, June 2007. [16] Traffic Imapct Study Westfield Century City New Century Plan, City of Los Angeles, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers, October 10 2007. [17] 2007 school year enrollment is 186, the 1999 CUP entitlement enrollment is 200. To be conservative, the difference is assumed as a related project. 38

the 1999 CUP Cul-de-Sac constructed. The traffic shift due to the planned Cul-de-Sac was calculated and incorporated into the total related projects traffic volumes. The total related projects traffic volumes assigned to the study intersections are illustrated in Figures 8(a) and 8(b) for the AM and PM peak hours. As discussed above, the related projects traffic volumes were then combined with the growth-factored background traffic volumes described in the previous section, resulting in the Year 2012 Without Project AM and PM peak hours traffic estimates, which is shown in Figures 9(a) and 9(b). Highway System Improvements Many traffic improvements have already been implemented at key locations in the study area in order to utilize the existing street system more effectively and efficiently. For purposes of this study, no changes to the existing striping and traffic signal conditions were assumed for the future year analyses. The 1999 CUP includes the construction of a Cul-de-Sac along Castello Avenue near the south end of the school site. This Cul-de-Sac will be constructed before the proposed project. The implementation of the Cul-de-Sac is therefore assumed for the future conditions. The existing eastbound No-Right Turn 3:00 PM to 7:00 PM sign at the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue would no longer be necessary after construction of the Cul-de-Sac and will be removed to facilitate access to the project site from Pico Boulevard during the PM peak hour. This improvement is assumed in the analysis of the future conditions. However, Appendix E analyzes the change in impact results which would occur if the Cul-de-Sac were removed from the base conditions. The construction of a major transportation improvement to Santa Monica Boulevard within the City of Los Angeles was completed in January 2007. The dual roadway configuration of Santa Monica Boulevard and Little Santa Monica Boulevard was replaced by a single roadway as part of the Santa Monica Boulevard Transit Parkway Project. The 39

reconstructed roadway configuration extends from the San Diego Freeway to Moreno Drive in the City of Beverly Hills. The Office of the Mayor of the City of Los Angeles released the Olympic-West Pico- East plan in November 2007. The plan proposes to ensure consistent rush hour parking restrictions along both Olympic and Pico Boulevards, to create preferential signal timing to allow commuters to move quickly along Olympic Boulevard heading west and Pico Boulevard heading east, and to add more westbound lanes on Olympic Boulevard and more eastbound lanes on Pico Boulevard. The three-phase project is intended to speed up the flow of traffic and reduce congestion on Olympic and Pico Boulevards along the seven-mile stretch between La Brea Boulevard and Centinela Avenue. The implementation of the plan is anticipated to increase the capacity of the street system in the project area, especially for eastbound and westbound traffic. The details of the plan, including lane configurations and the signal improvements have not been determined at the present time. In addition, the City's preliminary approval of the plan was set aside by the Los Angeles Superior Court on May 5, 2008 for failure to comply with CEQA. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Olympic-West Pico-East will be the subject of a separate traffic study and CEQA review that will assess cumulative conditions before such project is further considered or approved. Because none of the relevant details of the plan are known at this time, the plan is not assumed in the analysis of the future conditions. A neighborhood improvement at the intersection of Pico Boulevard/Beverwil Drive was approved and is currently under construction. This improvement measure is being made as part of the Neighborhood Traffic Program and includes the installation of a landscaped median on Beverwil Drive in order to reduce the number of southbound travel lanes south of Pico Boulevard and thereby to reduce the volume of cut-through traffic. These improvements were assumed in the future traffic conditions for both the Without Project and With Project scenarios. 44

Analysis of Future (2012) Traffic Conditions, Without and With Project The analysis of future traffic conditions at the five study intersections was performed using the same CMA analysis procedures used for existing conditions described previously in this report. As discussed earlier, for the analysis of future project traffic impacts, the current roadway system s characteristics were assumed to prevail. As described earlier, future (2012) baseline traffic volumes for the Without Project condition were determined by combining area ambient traffic growth with the total related projects traffic volumes. The Future (2012) Without Project AM and PM traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 9(a) and 9(b). Traffic volumes generated by the project, as determined earlier, were then added to these baseline volumes to develop the Future (2012) With Project condition and determine traffic impacts directly attributable to the proposed development. These traffic volumes are shown in Figures 10(a) and 10(b) for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The results of the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) of future traffic conditions at the study intersections are summarized in Table 11. (The CMA calculation worksheets for future conditions are included in Appendix D.) As shown in Table 11, with the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic, three of the five study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS A to D) during both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverwil Drive is projected to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour and LOS F during the PM peak hour. The intersection of Pico Boulevard and Beverly Drive is projected to operate at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS E during the PM peak hour. With the addition of project traffic, only the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue s LOS will change from LOS C to LOS D during the PM peak hour. 45

Table 11 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Future (2012) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Without Peak Project With Project Significant No. Intersection Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact Impact 1. Pico Blvd. & Roxbury Dr. AM 0.758 C 0.760 C 0.002 No PM 0.671 B 0.671 B 0.000 No 2. Pico Blvd. & Castello Ave. AM 0.767 C 0.784 C 0.017 No PM 0.800 C 0.810 D 0.010 No 3. Pico Blvd. & Beverwil Dr. AM 0.934 E 0.942 E 0.008 No PM 1.034 F 1.036 F 0.002 No 4. Pico Blvd. & Beverly Dr. AM 0.867 D 0.871 D 0.004 No PM 0.961 E 0.963 E 0.002 No 5. Cashio St. & Beverwil Dr. AM 0.706 C 0.709 C 0.003 No PM 0.518 A 0.519 A 0.001 No LADOT Significant Impact Criteria The City of Los Angeles defines a significant intersection traffic impact based on a stepped scale, with intersections at high volume-to-capacity ratios being more sensitive to additional traffic than intersections operating with more available capacity. According to LADOT policy, a significant impact is identified as an increase in the CMA value (i.e., V/C ratio), due to project-related traffic, of 0.010 or more when the final ( With project ) Level of Service is E or F, a CMA increase of 0.020 or more when the final Level of Service is LOS D, or an increase of 0.040 or more at LOS C. No significant impacts are deemed to occur with a final LOS of A or B, as these operating conditions exhibit sufficient surplus capacities to accommodate large traffic increases with little effect on traffic delays. These criteria are summarized in Table 12 below. 48

Table 12 LADOT Criteria for Significant Traffic Impact LOS Final CMA Value Project-Related Increase in CMA Value C 0.700-0.800 equal to or greater than 0.040 D > 0.800-0.900 equal to or greater than 0.020 E, F > 0.900 equal to or greater than 0.010 Based on these criteria and as shown in Table 11, the project traffic is not anticipated to significantly impact any of the five study intersections. Residential Street Traffic Impact Analysis A residential street traffic analysis was also conducted to determine the potential impact of project traffic on the residential street segment listed below. This selected location is considered the most appropriate indicator of traffic impacts the project could have on the surrounding residential street system. 1. Castello Avenue between Alcott Street and Cashio Street Per LADOT policy, the determination of a residential street traffic impact is based on daily traffic volumes traversing the study street segment. Daily traffic counts for the residential street segment were conducted on May 30, 2007 (while local schools were in session). An annual ambience growth factor of 1.0 percent was compounded and applied to the 2007 volume to represent an existing volume for the year 2008. The traffic count data is provided in Appendix A. These daily traffic volumes were used as the basis for the residential street impact analysis. For the analysis of the future traffic volumes on the residential street, future traffic volumes were estimated using the same procedures and assumptions described previously in the development of future intersection volumes. The Future Without Project Daily Traffic Volume (VPD) was based on the 1% annual ambient traffic growth 49

and related projects volumes. The Future With Project VPD included the addition of project traffic. The 1999 CUP includes the Cul-de-Sac along Castello Avenue south of the school driveway, which will be constructed before the proposed project. Therefore, no project trips were assumed along Castello Avenue south of the school driveway, including Castello Avenue between Alcott Street and Cashio Street. The results of the residential street impact analysis are summarized in Table 13. Table 13 Residential Street Impact Analysis Street Segment Existing Future (2012) ADT (2008) Without Project With Project Significant VPD Project Traffic Project Increase Impact 1. Castello Ave. 636 662 0 662 0 No btw. Alcott St. & Cashio St. LADOT defines a significant traffic impact on local streets, attributable to a project, based on a variable scale according to the criteria shown in Table 14. Table 14 LADOT Neighborhood Traffic Impact Criteria Projected Future ADT (With Project) Project-Related Increase in Final ADT 0 to 999 120 trips or more 1,000 to 1,999 12 percent or more 2,000 to 2,999 10 percent or more 3,000 or more 8 percent or more Source: West Los Angeles Transportation Improvement and Mitigation Specific Plan (TIMP), adopted March 8, 1997. According to the above significance criteria and as summarized in Table 13, the project is not expected to significantly impact the analyzed residential street segment. 50

If the Cul-de-Sac were not constructed and therefore not included in the future conditions, it is estimated that only less than one-tenth of the project trips would travel along Castello Avenue from the south. Approximately 47% of the total project trips of 257 per day would need to travel to and from the south using this segment in order for this impact to be considered significant. Therefore, while the Cul-de-Sac will be constructed as a part of the 1999 CUP, it is not necessary to avoid a significant residential intrusion impact. A traffic study for Without Cul-de-Sac is included in Appendix E. Congestion Management Program (CMP) Impact Analysis To address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion was impacting the quality of life and economic vitality of the State of California, the Congestion Management Program (CMP) was enacted by Proposition 111. The intent of the CMP is to provide the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) process. A countywide approach has been established by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), the local CMP agency, designating a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County. The Level of Service at each CMP monitoring station is supervised by local jurisdictions in order to implement the statutory requirements of the CMP. If Level of Service standards deteriorate, then local jurisdictions must prepare a deficiency plan to meet conformance standards outlined by the countywide plan. The local CMP requires that all CMP intersections be analyzed where a project would likely add 50 or more trips during the peak hours. The nearest arterial CMP monitoring stations are: Santa Monica Boulevard at Wilshire Boulevard approximately one mile northwest of the project site; Wilshire Boulevard at La Cienega Boulevard - less than one and three-quarter miles northeast of the project site; and Santa Monica Boulevard at Westwood Boulevard slightly more than two miles west of the project site. A review 51

of the project trip distribution and net project traffic additions to the study vicinity shows that the proposed project will not add 50 or more trips per hour to any of these CMP intersections and no further CMP intersection analysis is warranted. According to the CMP, any freeway segment where a project is expected to add 150 or more trips in any direction during the peak hours is also to be analyzed. As shown in Table 5, the maximum number of directional project trips will be 42 inbound trips during the AM peak hour. As the maximum peak hour trips are substantially less than the freeway threshold of 150 directional trips, no additional CMP freeway analysis is necessary. 52

MITIGATION MEASURES As indicated in the preceding analyses, it is anticipated that neither any of the five study intersections nor the one study residential street segment would be significantly impacted; therefore, no project traffic mitigation measures are required. However, to be conservative, a monitoring requirement as listed below is recommended as a measure: For three years after full authorized high school enrollment is achieved, the applicant shall provide LADOT with an annual report prepared by a certified traffic engineer monitoring AM/PM peak hour trips for four consecutive days when the high school is in general session. If the monitoring report indicates that the high school is not in substantial compliance with the AM/PM peak hour traffic projections in the traffic study, a plan to reduce the traffic generation to such levels or require additional mitigation shall be implemented to the satisfaction of LADOT. 53

APPENDIX A TRAFFIC COUNT DATA SHEETS

VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY N/S STREET: Roxbury Dr E/W STREET: Pico Blvd Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project # 07-2273-001 PERIOD: AM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 N 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-7:15 0 343 7 6 97 0 8 4 4 10 4 16 499 114 44 65 7:15-7:30 0 477 7 7 132 4 12 3 2 15 6 5 670 7:30-7:45 2 554 13 10 176 6 41 19 2 10 6 19 858 7:45-8:00 2 597 25 23 192 2 45 24 6 18 14 25 973 8:00-8:15 2 559 14 13 205 10 58 20 6 14 10 29 940 8:15-8:30 2 582 16 18 244 5 84 34 5 16 10 28 1,044 8:30-8:45 1 623 12 17 241 6 59 44 4 16 14 28 1,065 73 62 8:45-9:00 9 513 20 25 225 5 75 49 6 19 10 29 985 915 AM PEAK HOUR: 2,277 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 800 AM 26 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-8:00 4 1,971 52 46 597 12 106 50 14 53 30 65 3,000 7:15-8:15 6 2,187 59 53 705 22 156 66 16 57 36 78 3,441 7:30-8:30 8 2,292 68 64 817 23 228 97 19 58 40 101 3,815 7:45-8:45 7 2,361 67 71 882 23 246 122 21 64 48 110 4,022 8:00-9:00 14 2,277 62 73 915 26 276 147 21 65 44 114 4,034 * 276 147 21 14 PERIOD: PM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 4:00-4:15 4 313 14 20 368 2 14 12 8 33 42 29 859 112 252 150 4:15-4:30 10 308 17 21 422 3 16 12 12 32 37 30 920 4:30-4:45 13 286 17 9 452 9 20 15 11 36 49 33 950 4:45-5:00 8 317 20 20 436 1 11 16 12 36 43 25 945 5:00-5:15 8 244 17 15 552 8 10 12 12 42 72 32 1,024 5:15-5:30 3 316 21 16 542 8 16 13 4 41 77 27 1,084 5:30-5:45 16 311 15 13 520 9 16 6 14 37 60 26 1,043 64 74 5:45-6:00 6 315 21 20 548 9 13 9 10 30 43 27 1,051 2,162 PM PEAK HOUR: 1,186 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 500 PM 34 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 33 4:00-5:00 35 1,224 68 70 1,678 15 61 55 43 137 171 117 3,674 4:15-5:15 39 1,155 71 65 1,862 21 57 55 47 146 201 120 3,839 4:30-5:30 32 1,163 75 60 1,982 26 57 56 39 155 241 117 4,003 4:45-5:45 35 1,188 73 64 2,050 26 53 47 42 156 252 110 4,096 5:00-6:00 33 1,186 74 64 2,162 34 55 40 40 150 252 112 4,202 * 55 40 40

INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CRAIN & ASSOCIATES PROJECT: YESHIVA OF LOS ANGELES II DATE: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2008 PERIOD: 07:00 AM TO 09:00 AM INTERSECTION: N/S CASTELLO AVENUE E/W PICO BOULEVARD FILE NUMBER: 1-AM 15 MINUTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTALS SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT 700-715 2 0 2 4 387 6 6 0 5 4 114 2 715-730 5 1 2 5 501 8 11 1 7 8 147 3 730-745 3 2 1 4 580 27 21 0 3 11 166 1 745-800 2 0 1 3 634 10 8 0 4 3 206 1 800-815 2 0 0 3 617 5 5 0 2 3 260 2 815-830 3 0 0 5 592 9 7 1 3 4 274 4 830-845 1 1 1 2 623 5 4 0 2 2 281 3 845-900 0 0 2 5 576 6 4 2 2 2 277 2 1 HOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTALS SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTALS 700-800 12 3 6 16 2102 51 46 1 19 26 633 7 2922 715-815 12 3 4 15 2332 50 45 1 16 25 779 7 3289 730-830 10 2 2 15 2423 51 41 1 12 21 906 8 3492 745-845 8 1 2 13 2466 29 24 1 11 12 1021 10 3598 800-900 6 1 3 15 2408 25 20 3 9 11 1092 11 3604 A.M. PEAK HOUR 6 1 3 0800-0900 11 15 PICO BOULEVARD 1092 2408 11 25 9 3 20 CASTELLO AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978

INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CRAIN & ASSOCIATES PROJECT: YESHIVA OF LOS ANGELES II DATE: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2008 PERIOD: 04:00 PM TO 06:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S CASTELLO AVENUE E/W PICO BOULEVARD FILE NUMBER: 1-PM 15 MINUTE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTALS SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT 400-415 2 0 2 4 277 6 7 0 0 1 494 4 415-430 5 0 1 4 292 9 16 0 2 3 554 3 430-445 4 0 2 6 312 10 19 0 2 5 500 5 445-500 3 0 2 5 307 12 13 0 2 5 541 5 500-515 6 0 1 6 300 10 13 0 2 5 588 5 515-530 9 0 2 7 321 9 11 0 3 3 609 4 530-545 7 0 3 6 333 12 10 0 2 4 631 3 545-600 7 0 4 4 335 7 15 0 1 5 624 6 1 HOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTALS SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTALS 400-500 14 0 7 19 1188 37 55 0 6 14 2089 17 3446 415-515 18 0 6 21 1211 41 61 0 8 18 2183 18 3585 430-530 22 0 7 24 1240 41 56 0 9 18 2238 19 3674 445-545 25 0 8 24 1261 43 47 0 9 17 2369 17 3820 500-600 29 0 10 23 1289 38 49 0 8 17 2452 18 3933 P.M. PEAK HOUR 29 0 10 0500-0600 18 23 PICO BOULEVARD 2452 1289 17 38 8 0 49 CASTELLO AVENUE THE TRAFFIC SOLUTION 329 DIAMOND STREET ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA 91006 626.446.7978

VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY N/S STREET: Beverwil Dr/Camden Dr E/W STREET: Pico Blvd Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project # 07-2273-002 PERIOD: AM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 N 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-7:15 7 361 4 21 97 7 48 44 10 7 19 11 636 140 166 32 7:15-7:30 6 439 5 21 133 7 69 63 11 6 28 26 814 7:30-7:45 15 488 8 28 155 9 84 92 11 11 29 21 951 7:45-8:00 18 503 5 31 183 12 82 106 18 8 36 25 1,027 8:00-8:15 14 486 6 17 178 19 85 132 24 9 39 25 1,034 8:15-8:30 6 487 10 34 199 8 74 154 27 9 40 30 1,078 8:30-8:45 12 529 11 21 201 11 74 189 24 6 51 33 1,162 103 68 8:45-9:00 7 335 9 28 204 13 83 179 25 9 31 36 959 761 AM PEAK HOUR: 2,005 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 50 745 AM TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-8:00 46 1,791 22 101 568 35 283 305 50 32 112 83 3,428 7:15-8:15 53 1,916 24 97 649 47 320 393 64 34 132 97 3,826 7:30-8:30 53 1,964 29 110 715 48 325 484 80 37 144 101 4,090 7:45-8:45 50 2,005 32 103 761 50 315 581 93 32 166 113 4,301 * 8:00-9:00 39 1,837 36 100 782 51 316 654 100 33 161 124 4,233 319 581 93 50 PERIOD: PM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 4:00-4:15 10 252 16 27 346 80 28 40 16 19 83 37 954 132 494 78 4:15-4:30 11 287 8 24 354 76 33 58 17 19 89 40 1,016 4:30-4:45 21 252 5 30 370 112 29 63 22 23 99 31 1,057 4:45-5:00 19 234 9 14 328 82 35 43 19 17 101 22 923 5:00-5:15 25 268 8 26 386 126 29 37 19 26 119 28 1,097 5:15-5:30 16 276 7 30 414 150 29 53 26 17 135 31 1,184 5:30-5:45 20 302 6 24 401 153 32 71 12 17 117 38 1,193 112 69 5:45-6:00 23 289 10 32 403 146 33 62 16 18 123 24 1,179 1,604 PM PEAK HOUR: 1,135 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 500 PM 575 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 84 4:00-5:00 61 1,025 38 95 1,398 350 125 204 74 78 372 130 3,950 4:15-5:15 76 1,041 30 94 1,438 396 126 201 77 85 408 121 4,093 4:30-5:30 81 1,030 29 100 1,498 470 122 196 86 83 454 112 4,261 4:45-5:45 80 1,080 30 94 1,529 511 125 204 76 77 472 119 4,397 5:00-6:00 84 1,135 31 112 1,604 575 123 223 73 78 494 121 4,653 * 131 223 73

VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY N/S STREET: Beverly Dr E/W STREET: Pico Blvd Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project # 07-2273-003 PERIOD: AM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 N 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-7:15 7 321 30 10 92 7 25 48 13 18 26 8 605 122 174 84 7:15-7:30 11 421 37 11 105 7 30 64 11 19 24 7 747 7:30-7:45 9 460 37 9 188 15 46 66 25 25 28 19 927 7:45-8:00 6 507 32 16 181 11 48 117 18 19 31 28 1,014 8:00-8:15 12 423 37 21 166 8 62 108 24 21 48 30 960 8:15-8:30 14 428 27 17 191 7 58 132 15 25 40 27 981 8:30-8:45 10 435 37 15 183 11 55 138 9 19 55 37 1,004 69 133 8:45-9:00 12 369 32 17 190 20 64 148 18 17 49 50 986 721 AM PEAK HOUR: 1,793 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 745 AM 37 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-8:00 33 1,709 136 46 566 40 149 295 67 81 109 62 3,293 7:15-8:15 38 1,811 143 57 640 41 186 355 78 84 131 84 3,648 7:30-8:30 41 1,818 133 63 726 41 214 423 82 90 147 104 3,882 7:45-8:45 42 1,793 133 69 721 37 223 495 66 84 174 122 3,959 * 8:00-9:00 48 1,655 133 70 730 46 239 526 66 82 192 144 3,931 223 495 66 42 PERIOD: PM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 4:00-4:15 14 265 48 18 353 24 25 78 15 35 101 29 1,005 127 432 157 4:15-4:30 11 254 42 20 362 24 26 67 21 41 102 27 997 4:30-4:45 20 258 29 17 364 30 28 73 17 46 97 24 1,003 4:45-5:00 12 312 36 16 371 29 30 53 13 34 106 22 1,034 5:00-5:15 16 299 35 21 375 29 33 72 26 38 118 46 1,108 5:15-5:30 15 273 35 18 370 28 30 69 19 39 111 35 1,042 5:30-5:45 19 252 31 27 332 28 25 68 19 35 109 27 972 72 135 5:45-6:00 17 275 45 18 326 24 24 70 20 29 119 42 1,009 1,480 PM PEAK HOUR: 1,142 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 430 PM 116 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 63 4:00-5:00 57 1,089 155 71 1,450 107 109 271 66 156 406 102 4,039 4:15-5:15 59 1,123 142 74 1,472 112 117 265 77 159 423 119 4,142 4:30-5:30 63 1,142 135 72 1,480 116 121 267 75 157 432 127 4,187 * 4:45-5:45 62 1,136 137 82 1,448 114 118 262 77 146 444 130 4,156 5:00-6:00 67 1,099 146 84 1,403 109 112 279 84 141 457 150 4,131 121 267 75

VEHICLE TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY N/S STREET: Beverwil Dr E/W STREET: Cashio St Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project # 07-2273-004 PERIOD: AM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 N 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-7:15 2 13 16 0 0 5 0 96 1 1 26 0 160 8 243 14 7:15-7:30 2 32 15 1 4 2 1 127 3 4 37 1 229 7:30-7:45 6 72 16 1 9 5 1 158 6 9 39 1 323 7:45-8:00 9 77 36 0 1 9 0 147 5 2 52 3 341 8:00-8:15 7 89 25 1 7 4 0 170 5 4 60 1 373 8:15-8:30 7 111 36 0 4 3 1 230 7 3 76 3 481 8:30-8:45 7 127 24 1 7 4 0 259 5 3 55 1 493 2 115 8:45-9:00 7 140 30 0 5 11 0 250 3 4 52 3 505 23 AM PEAK HOUR: 467 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 800 AM 22 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 7:00-8:00 19 194 83 2 14 21 2 528 15 16 154 5 1,053 7:15-8:15 24 270 92 3 21 20 2 602 19 19 188 6 1,266 7:30-8:30 29 349 113 2 21 21 2 705 23 18 227 8 1,518 7:45-8:45 30 404 121 2 19 20 1 806 22 12 243 8 1,688 8:00-9:00 28 467 115 2 23 22 1 909 20 14 243 8 1,852 * 1 909 20 28 PERIOD: PM Peak Hour DATE: WEDNESDAY 5/30/2007 15-MINUTE WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 4:00-4:15 12 9 15 3 12 18 7 82 4 27 179 0 368 7 912 251 4:15-4:30 9 9 20 0 16 17 3 74 3 25 171 1 348 4:30-4:45 8 15 14 1 22 19 3 84 7 37 182 1 393 4:45-5:00 10 13 13 1 24 21 3 75 3 48 172 2 385 5:00-5:15 14 12 21 0 33 20 7 87 6 47 219 2 468 5:15-5:30 9 10 20 0 49 25 7 97 5 73 242 1 538 5:30-5:45 12 15 20 1 38 17 4 89 1 66 211 2 476 1 72 5:45-6:00 11 9 11 0 48 27 8 79 9 65 240 2 509 168 PM PEAK HOUR: 46 1-HOUR WESTBOUND EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND 500 PM 89 TOTALS L T R L T R L T R L T R TOTAL 46 4:00-5:00 39 46 62 5 74 75 16 315 17 137 704 4 1,494 4:15-5:15 41 49 68 2 95 77 16 320 19 157 744 6 1,594 4:30-5:30 41 50 68 2 128 85 20 343 21 205 815 6 1,784 4:45-5:45 45 50 74 2 144 83 21 348 15 234 844 7 1,867 5:00-6:00 46 46 72 1 168 89 26 352 21 251 912 7 1,991 * 26 352 21

Average Daily Traffic Volumes Volumes for: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 City: Los Angeles Project #: 07-2274-001 Location: Castello Ave btwn Pico Blvd & Cashio Prepared St by: Southland Car Counters AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB 00:00 0 0 12:00 8 3 00:15 0 0 12:15 5 1 00:30 0 0 12:30 6 3 00:45 1 1 0 0 1 12:45 6 25 7 14 39 01:00 0 1 13:00 5 2 01:15 1 0 13:15 7 5 01:30 0 1 13:30 7 7 01:45 1 2 0 2 4 13:45 2 21 7 21 42 02:00 0 0 14:00 2 3 02:15 0 0 14:15 4 9 02:30 0 0 14:30 6 7 02:45 0 0 0 0 14:45 2 14 8 27 41 03:00 0 0 15:00 3 10 03:15 0 0 15:15 0 7 03:30 0 0 15:30 3 5 03:45 0 0 0 0 15:45 0 6 4 26 32 04:00 0 0 16:00 2 7 04:15 0 0 16:15 5 6 04:30 1 0 16:30 5 14 04:45 1 2 1 1 3 16:45 1 13 4 31 44 05:00 5 1 17:00 5 10 05:15 0 1 17:15 11 14 05:30 4 0 17:30 6 7 05:45 2 11 0 2 13 17:45 1 23 3 34 57 06:00 3 0 18:00 1 8 06:15 9 1 18:15 8 9 06:30 1 0 18:30 9 10 06:45 4 17 0 1 18 18:45 3 21 1 28 49 07:00 0 5 19:00 1 3 07:15 14 8 19:15 1 3 07:30 20 14 19:30 3 3 07:45 4 38 3 30 68 19:45 8 13 1 10 23 08:00 12 8 20:00 4 3 08:15 3 3 20:15 1 6 08:30 2 3 20:30 4 4 08:45 0 17 4 18 35 20:45 2 11 1 14 25 09:00 5 5 21:00 6 1 09:15 6 3 21:15 2 1 09:30 5 6 21:30 4 1 09:45 3 19 0 14 33 21:45 8 20 0 3 23 10:00 6 4 22:00 2 3 10:15 3 1 22:15 0 5 10:30 4 4 22:30 2 2 10:45 5 18 1 10 28 22:45 0 4 4 14 18 11:00 3 4 23:00 0 1 11:15 2 4 23:15 1 2 11:30 7 1 23:30 1 0 11:45 5 17 3 12 29 23:45 0 2 0 3 5 Total Vol. 142 90 232 173 225 398 Daily Totals NB SB EB WB Combined 315 315 630 AM PM Split % 61.2% 38.8% 36.8% 43.5% 56.5% 63.2% Peak Hour 07:15 07:15 07:15 12:00 16:30 16:30 Volume 50 33 83 25 42 64 P.H.F. 0.63 0.59 0.61 0.78 0.75 0.64

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY City of Los Angeles STREET: Department of Transportation North/South ROXBURY DRIVE East/West PICO BOULEVARD Day: AM WEDNESDAY Date: MAY 30, 2007 Weather: CLEAR PM WEDNESDAY MAY 30, 2007 Hours: 7-9 AM 4-6 PM School Day: YES District: LOS ANGELES N/B S/B E/B W/B DUAL- WHEELED N/A N/A N/A N/A BIKES N/A N/A N/A N/A BUSES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/B TIME S/B TIME E/B TIME W/B TIME AM PK 15 MIN 130 8:45 58 8:30 267 8:15 636 8:30 PM PK 15 MIN 46 4:30 146 5:00 577 5:45 345 4:45 AM PK HOUR 444 8:00 223 8:00 1,014 8:00 2,435 7:45 PM PK HOUR 159 4:00 518 4:45 2,260 5:00 1,327 4:00 NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N-S Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 106 50 14 170 7-8 53 30 65 148 318 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 276 147 21 444 8-9 65 44 114 223 667 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 61 55 43 159 4-5 137 171 117 425 584 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 55 40 40 135 5-6 150 252 112 514 649 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 498 292 118 908 TOTAL 405 497 408 1,310 2,218 N/A N/A N/A N/A EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E-W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 46 597 12 655 7-8 4 1,971 52 2,027 2,682 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 73 915 26 1,014 8-9 14 2,277 62 2,353 3,367 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 70 1,678 15 1,763 4-5 35 1,224 68 1,327 3,090 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 64 2,162 34 2,260 5-6 33 1,186 74 1,293 3,553 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 253 5,352 87 5,692 TOTAL 86 6,658 256 7,000 12,692 N/A N/A N/A N/A

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY City of Los Angeles STREET: Department of Transportation North/South CASTELLO AVENUE East/West PICO BOULEVARD Day: AM THURSDAY Date: FEBRUARY 28, 2008 Weather: CLEAR PM THURSDAY FEBRUARY 28, 2008 Hours: 7-9 AM 4-6 PM School Day: YES District: LOS ANGELES N/B S/B E/B W/B DUAL- WHEELED N/A N/A N/A N/A BIKES N/A N/A N/A N/A BUSES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/B TIME S/B TIME E/B TIME W/B TIME AM PK 15 MIN 24 7:30 8 7:15 286 8:30 647 7:45 PM PK 15 MIN 21 4:30 11 5:15 638 5:30 351 5:30 AM PK HOUR 66 7:00 21 7:00 1,114 8:00 2,508 7:45 PM PK HOUR 69 4:15 39 5:00 2,487 5:00 1,350 5:00 NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N-S Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 19 1 46 66 7-8 6 3 12 21 87 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 9 3 20 32 8-9 3 1 6 10 42 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 6 0 55 61 4-5 7 0 14 21 82 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 8 0 49 57 5-6 10 0 29 39 96 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 42 4 170 216 TOTAL 26 4 61 91 307 N/A N/A N/A N/A EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E-W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 7 633 26 666 7-8 51 2,102 16 2,169 2,835 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 11 1,092 11 1,114 8-9 25 2,408 15 2,448 3,562 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 17 2,089 14 2,120 4-5 37 1,188 19 1,244 3,364 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 18 2,452 17 2,487 5-6 38 1,289 23 1,350 3,837 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 53 6,266 68 6,387 TOTAL 151 6,987 73 7,211 13,598 N/A N/A N/A N/A

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY City of Los Angeles STREET: Department of Transportation North/South BEVERWIL DRIVE East/West PICO BOULEVARD Day: AM WEDNESDAY Date: MAY 30, 2007 Weather: CLEAR PM WEDNESDAY MAY 30, 2007 Hours: 7-9 AM 4-6 PM School Day: YES District: LOS ANGELES N/B S/B E/B W/B DUAL- WHEELED N/A N/A N/A N/A BIKES N/A N/A N/A N/A BUSES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/B TIME S/B TIME E/B TIME W/B TIME AM PK 15 MIN 287 8:30 90 8:30 245 8:45 552 8:30 PM PK 15 MIN 115 5:30 183 5:15 594 5:15 328 5:30 AM PK HOUR 1,070 8:00 318 8:00 933 8:00 2,087 7:45 PM PK HOUR 419 5:00 693 5:00 2,291 5:00 1,250 5:00 NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N-S Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 283 305 50 638 7-8 32 112 83 227 865 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 316 654 100 1,070 8-9 33 161 124 318 1,388 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 125 204 74 403 4-5 78 372 130 580 983 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 123 223 73 419 5-6 78 494 121 693 1,112 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 847 1,386 297 2,530 TOTAL 221 1,139 458 1,818 4,348 N/A N/A N/A N/A EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E-W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 101 568 35 704 7-8 46 1,791 22 1,859 2,563 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 100 782 51 933 8-9 39 1,837 36 1,912 2,845 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 95 1,398 350 1,843 4-5 61 1,025 38 1,124 2,967 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 112 1,604 575 2,291 5-6 84 1,135 31 1,250 3,541 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 408 4,352 1,011 5,771 TOTAL 230 5,788 127 6,145 11,916 N/A N/A N/A N/A

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY City of Los Angeles STREET: Department of Transportation North/South BEVERLY DRIVE East/West PICO BOULEVARD Day: AM WEDNESDAY Date: MAY 30, 2007 Weather: CLEAR PM WEDNESDAY MAY 30, 2007 Hours: 7-9 AM 4-6 PM School Day: YES District: LOS ANGELES N/B S/B E/B W/B DUAL- WHEELED N/A N/A N/A N/A BIKES N/A N/A N/A N/A BUSES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/B TIME S/B TIME E/B TIME W/B TIME AM PK 15 MIN 230 8:45 116 8:45 227 8:45 545 7:45 PM PK 15 MIN 131 5:00 202 5:00 425 5:00 360 4:45 AM PK HOUR 831 8:00 418 8:00 846 8:00 1,992 7:15 PM PK HOUR 475 5:00 748 5:00 1,668 4:30 1,340 4:30 NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N-S Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 149 295 67 511 7-8 81 109 62 252 763 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 239 526 66 831 8-9 82 192 144 418 1,249 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 109 271 66 446 4-5 156 406 102 664 1,110 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 112 279 84 475 5-6 141 457 150 748 1,223 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 609 1,371 283 2,263 TOTAL 460 1,164 458 2,082 4,345 N/A N/A N/A N/A EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E-W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 46 566 40 652 7-8 33 1,709 136 1,878 2,530 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 70 730 46 846 8-9 48 1,655 133 1,836 2,682 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 71 1,450 107 1,628 4-5 57 1,089 155 1,301 2,929 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 84 1,403 109 1,596 5-6 67 1,099 146 1,312 2,908 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 271 4,149 302 4,722 TOTAL 205 5,552 570 6,327 11,049 N/A N/A N/A N/A

TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY City of Los Angeles STREET: Department of Transportation North/South BEVERWIL DRIVE East/West CASHIO STREET Day: AM WEDNESDAY Date: MAY 30, 2007 Weather: CLEAR PM WEDNESDAY MAY 30, 2007 Hours: 7-9 AM 4-6 PM School Day: YES District: LOS ANGELES N/B S/B E/B W/B DUAL- WHEELED N/A N/A N/A N/A BIKES N/A N/A N/A N/A BUSES N/A N/A N/A N/A N/B TIME S/B TIME E/B TIME W/B TIME AM PK 15 MIN 264 8:30 82 8:15 16 8:45 177 8:45 PM PK 15 MIN 109 5:15 316 5:15 75 5:45 47 5:00 AM PK HOUR 930 8:00 265 8:00 47 8:00 610 8:00 PM PK HOUR 399 5:00 1,170 5:00 258 5:00 169 4:45 NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N-S Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 2 528 15 545 7-8 16 154 5 175 720 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 1 909 20 930 8-9 14 243 8 265 1,195 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 16 315 17 348 4-5 137 704 4 845 1,193 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 26 352 21 399 5-6 251 912 7 1,170 1,569 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 45 2,104 73 2,222 TOTAL 418 2,013 24 2,455 4,677 N/A N/A N/A N/A EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E-W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 2 14 21 37 7-8 19 194 83 296 333 N/A N/A N/A N/A 8-9 2 23 22 47 8-9 28 467 115 610 657 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4-5 5 74 75 154 4-5 39 46 62 147 301 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5-6 1 168 89 258 5-6 46 46 72 164 422 N/A N/A N/A N/A TOTAL 10 279 207 496 TOTAL 132 753 332 1,217 1,713 N/A N/A N/A N/A

APPENDIX B STUDY INTERSECTIONS GEOMETRICS AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

APPENDIX C RELATED PROJECTS TRIP GENERATION RATES

Appendix C Related Projects Trip Generation Rates and Equations Apartment (per dwelling unit) LU 220 Daily: T = 6.72 (D) AM Peak Hour: T = 0.51 (D); I/B = 20%; O/B = 80% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.62 (D); I/B = 65%; O/B = 35% Residential Condominium/Townhouse (per dwelling unit) LU 230 Daily: T = 5.86 (D) AM Peak Hour: T = 0.44 (D); I/B = 17%; O/B = 83% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.52 (D); I/B = 67%; O/B = 33% Congregate Care Facility (per dwelling unit) LU 253 Daily: T = 2.02 (D) AM Peak Hour: T = 0.06 (D); I/B = 59%; O/B = 41% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.17 (D); I/B = 55%; O/B = 45% Hotel (per room) LU 310 Daily: T = 8.17 (R) AM Peak Hour: T = 0.56 (R); I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.59 (R); I/B = 53%, O/B = 47% Health/Fitness Club (per 1,000 sf) LU 492 Daily: T = 32.93 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 1.21 (A); I/B = 42%, O/B = 58% PM Peak Hour: T = 4.05 (A); I/B = 51%, O/B = 49% Recreational Community Center (per 1,000 sf) LU 495 Daily: T = 22.88 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 1.62 (A); I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% PM Peak Hour: T = 1.64 (A); I/B = 29%, O/B = 71% High School (per student) LU 530 Daily: T = 1.71 (St); AM Peak Hour: T = 0.41 (St); I/B = 69%, O/B = 31% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.14 (St); I/B = 47%, O/B = 53% Special School (K-12) (per student) LU 536 Daily: T = 2.48 (St); AM Peak Hour: T = 0.79 (St); I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.17 (St); I/B = 43%, O/B = 57% C-1

Appendix C (continued) Related Projects Trip Generation Rates and Equations University (per student) LU 550 Daily: T = 2.38 (St); AM Peak Hour: T = 0.19 (St); I/B = 80%, O/B = 20% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.21 (St); I/B = 30%, O/B = 70% Church (per 1,000 sf) LU 560 Daily: T = 9.11 AM Peak Hour: T = 0.72 (A); I/B = 54%, O/B = 46% PM Peak Hour: T = 0.66 (A); I/B = 52%, O/B = 48% Synagogue (per 1,000 sf) LU 561 Daily: T = 10.64 AM Peak Hour: T = 0.14 (A); I/B = 100%, O/B = 0% PM Peak Hour: T = 1.69 (A); I/B = 47%, O/B = 53% General Office Building (per 1,000 sf) LU 710 Daily: T = 11.01 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 1.55 (A); I/B = 88%, O/B = 12% PM Peak Hour: T = 1.49 (A); I/B = 17%, O/B = 83% Medical-Dental Office Building (per 1,000 sf) LU 720 Daily: T = 36.13 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 2.48 (A); I/B = 79%, O/B = 21% PM Peak Hour: T = 3.72 (A); I/B = 27%, O/B = 73% Specialty Retail (per 1,000 sf) LU 814 Daily: T = 44.32 (A) AM Peak Hour:* T = 1.2 (A); I/B = 60%, O/B = 40% PM Peak Hour: T = 2.71 (A); I/B = 44%, O/B = 56% Shopping Center (per 1,000 sf) LU 820 Daily: Ln(T) = 0.65 Ln(A) + 5.83 AM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.60 Ln(A) + 2.29; I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% PM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.66 Ln(A) + 3.40; I/B = 48%, O/B = 52% High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (per 1,000 sf) LU 932 Daily: T = 127.15 (A) AM Peak Hour: T = 11.52 (A); I/B = 52%, O/B = 48% PM Peak Hour: T = 10.92 (A); I/B = 61%, O/B = 39% C-2

Appendix C (continued) Related Projects Trip Generation Rates and Equations Automobile Care Center (per 1,000 sf) LU 942 Daily: T = N/A AM Peak Hour: T = 2.94 (A); I/B = 65%, O/B = 35% PM Peak Hour: T = 3.38 (A); I/B = 50%, O/B = 50% Where: T = trip ends A = area I/B = inbound D = dwelling unit O/B = outbound R = room S = seat St = student Sources: Trip Generation, 7th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington D.C., 2003. * San Diego Traffic Generators, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), April 2002. C-3

APPENDIX D CMA CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 14 2300 63 0 EASTBOUND 74 924 26 0 NORTHBOUND 279 148 0 21 SOUTHBOUND 66 44 78 37 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 14 N/A 788 788 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 74 N/A 317 317 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 279 N/A 148 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 66 N/A 44 N/A 78 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 862 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 357 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1219 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.713 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 2 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 21 2444 71 0 EASTBOUND 77 1041 29 0 NORTHBOUND 290 154 0 25 SOUTHBOUND 93 46 82 38 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 21 N/A 838 838 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 77 N/A 357 357 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 290 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 93 N/A 46 N/A 82 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 915 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 372 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1287 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.758 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 3 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 21 2450 72 0 EASTBOUND 77 1054 29 0 NORTHBOUND 290 154 0 25 SOUTHBOUND 95 46 82 38 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 21 N/A 841 841 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 77 N/A 361 361 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 290 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 95 N/A 46 N/A 82 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 918 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 372 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1290 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.760 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 4 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 33 1198 0 75 EASTBOUND 65 2218 0 0 NORTHBOUND 56 40 24 16 SOUTHBOUND 152 255 27 86 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 33 N/A 599 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 65 N/A 739 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 56 N/A 40 N/A 24 N/A SOUTHBOUND 152 N/A 255 N/A 27 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 772 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 311 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1083 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.622 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 5 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 42 1274 0 84 EASTBOUND 67 2369 0 0 NORTHBOUND 60 42 37 21 SOUTHBOUND 182 265 20 98 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 42 N/A 637 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 67 N/A 790 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 60 N/A 42 N/A 37 N/A SOUTHBOUND 182 N/A 265 N/A 20 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 832 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 325 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1157 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.671 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 6 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 42 1277 0 85 EASTBOUND 67 2371 0 0 NORTHBOUND 60 42 37 21 SOUTHBOUND 183 265 21 97 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 42 N/A 638 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 67 N/A 790 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 60 N/A 42 N/A 37 N/A SOUTHBOUND 183 N/A 265 N/A 21 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 832 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 325 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1157 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.671 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 7 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 25 2408 15 0 EASTBOUND 11 1092 11 0 NORTHBOUND 9 3 20 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 1 6 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 25 N/A 808 808 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 11 N/A 368 368 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 32 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 819 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 35 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 854 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.712 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 8 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 2627 16 0 EASTBOUND 11 1261 13 0 NORTHBOUND 9 3 14 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 1 6 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 29 N/A 881 881 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 11 N/A 425 425 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 892 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 29 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 921 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.767 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 9 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 56 2627 16 0 EASTBOUND 11 1261 28 0 NORTHBOUND 16 3 27 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 1 6 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 56 N/A 881 881 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 11 N/A 430 430 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 46 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 892 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 49 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 941 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.784 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 10 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 38 1289 18 5 EASTBOUND 18 2469 0 0 NORTHBOUND 8 0 49 0 SOUTHBOUND 10 0 29 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 38 N/A 644 N/A 18 N/A EASTBOUND 18 N/A 823 823 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 57 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 39 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 861 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 67 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 928 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.773 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 11 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 14 1421 8 16 EASTBOUND 19 2695 0 0 NORTHBOUND 8 0 8 0 SOUTHBOUND 10 0 30 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 14 N/A 710 N/A 8 N/A EASTBOUND 19 N/A 898 898 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 16 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 40 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 912 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 48 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 960 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.800 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 12 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 21 1421 12 12 EASTBOUND 19 2695 3 0 NORTHBOUND 12 0 15 0 SOUTHBOUND 10 0 30 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 21 N/A 710 N/A 12 N/A EASTBOUND 19 N/A 899 899 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 27 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 40 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 920 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 52 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 972 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.810 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 13 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 51 2025 32 0 EASTBOUND 104 769 51 0 NORTHBOUND 318 587 94 0 SOUTHBOUND 32 168 114 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 51 N/A 686 686 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 104 N/A 273 273 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 318 N/A 340 340 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 32 N/A 141 141 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 790 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 459 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1249 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.776 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 14 9/18/2008 11:14:24 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 56 2162 37 0 EASTBOUND 156 853 60 0 NORTHBOUND 366 692 110 0 SOUTHBOUND 38 218 63 78 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 56 N/A 733 733 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 156 N/A 304 304 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 366 N/A 401 401 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 38 N/A 218 N/A 63 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 889 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 584 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1473 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.934 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 15 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 56 2181 37 0 EASTBOUND 158 862 62 0 NORTHBOUND 370 692 110 0 SOUTHBOUND 38 218 66 79 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 56 N/A 739 739 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 158 N/A 308 308 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 370 N/A 401 401 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 38 N/A 218 N/A 66 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 897 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 588 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1485 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.942 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 16 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 85 1146 0 31 EASTBOUND 113 1620 581 0 NORTHBOUND 124 225 74 0 SOUTHBOUND 79 499 122 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 85 N/A 573 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 113 N/A 734 734 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 124 N/A 150 150 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 79 N/A 310 310 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 819 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 434 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1253 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.779 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 17 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 116 1227 0 34 EASTBOUND 174 1687 616 0 NORTHBOUND 118 299 122 0 SOUTHBOUND 83 614 11 135 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 116 N/A 614 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 174 N/A 768 768 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 118 N/A 210 210 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 83 N/A 614 N/A 11 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 884 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 732 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1616 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 1.034 LEVEL OF SERVICE... F ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 18 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 116 1232 0 34 EASTBOUND 175 1692 617 0 NORTHBOUND 119 299 122 0 SOUTHBOUND 83 614 12 135 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 116 N/A 616 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 175 N/A 770 770 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 119 N/A 210 210 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 83 N/A 614 N/A 12 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 886 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 733 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1619 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 1.036 LEVEL OF SERVICE... F ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 19 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 42 1811 134 0 EASTBOUND 70 728 37 0 NORTHBOUND 225 500 0 67 SOUTHBOUND 85 176 0 123 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 42 N/A 648 648 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 70 N/A 382 382 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 225 N/A 500 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 85 N/A 176 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 718 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 585 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1303 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.814 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 20 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 44 1935 140 0 EASTBOUND 73 826 40 0 NORTHBOUND 244 525 0 69 SOUTHBOUND 88 193 0 128 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 44 N/A 692 692 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 73 N/A 433 433 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 244 N/A 525 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 88 N/A 193 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 765 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 613 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1378 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.867 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 21 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 44 1950 140 0 EASTBOUND 73 833 42 0 NORTHBOUND 248 525 0 69 SOUTHBOUND 88 193 0 128 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 44 N/A 697 697 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 73 N/A 438 438 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 248 N/A 525 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 88 N/A 193 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 770 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 613 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1383 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.871 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 22 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 64 1153 0 136 EASTBOUND 73 1495 117 0 NORTHBOUND 122 270 44 32 SOUTHBOUND 159 436 0 128 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 64 N/A 576 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 73 N/A 806 806 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 122 N/A 270 N/A 44 N/A SOUTHBOUND 159 N/A 436 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 870 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 558 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1428 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.902 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 23 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 66 1263 0 142 EASTBOUND 76 1598 126 0 NORTHBOUND 128 286 46 33 SOUTHBOUND 165 456 0 133 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 66 N/A 632 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 76 N/A 862 862 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 128 N/A 286 N/A 46 N/A SOUTHBOUND 165 N/A 456 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 928 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 584 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1512 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.961 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 24 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 66 1267 0 142 EASTBOUND 76 1602 127 0 NORTHBOUND 129 286 46 33 SOUTHBOUND 165 456 0 133 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 66 N/A 634 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 76 N/A 864 864 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 129 N/A 286 N/A 46 N/A SOUTHBOUND 165 N/A 456 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 930 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 585 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1515 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.963 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 25 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 28 472 116 0 EASTBOUND 2 23 22 0 NORTHBOUND 0 919 20 0 SOUTHBOUND 14 245 8 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 616 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 47 NORTHBOUND N/A N/A 470 470 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 14 N/A 126 126 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 618 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 484 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1102 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.635 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 26 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 494 121 0 EASTBOUND 2 26 29 0 NORTHBOUND 0 1075 21 0 SOUTHBOUND 15 308 8 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 644 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 57 NORTHBOUND N/A N/A 548 548 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 15 N/A 158 158 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 646 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 563 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1209 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.706 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 27 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 494 123 0 EASTBOUND 2 26 29 0 NORTHBOUND 0 1077 21 0 SOUTHBOUND 16 309 8 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 646 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 57 NORTHBOUND N/A N/A 549 549 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 16 N/A 158 158 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 648 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 565 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1213 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.709 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 28 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: EXISTING (2008) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 46 46 73 0 EASTBOUND 1 170 90 0 NORTHBOUND 26 356 21 0 SOUTHBOUND 254 921 7 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 165 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 261 NORTHBOUND N/A 154 N/A 249 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 254 N/A 464 464 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 307 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 503 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 810 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.440 LEVEL OF SERVICE... A ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 29 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 48 51 76 0 EASTBOUND 1 179 99 0 NORTHBOUND 42 425 22 0 SOUTHBOUND 264 1068 7 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 175 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 279 NORTHBOUND N/A 153 N/A 336 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 264 N/A 538 538 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 327 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 600 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 927 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.518 LEVEL OF SERVICE... A ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 30 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 48 51 76 0 EASTBOUND 1 179 99 0 NORTHBOUND 42 426 22 0 SOUTHBOUND 264 1069 7 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 175 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 279 NORTHBOUND N/A 153 N/A 337 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 264 N/A 538 538 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 327 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 601 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 928 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.519 LEVEL OF SERVICE... A ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total Cul-de-Sac, Row: 31 9/18/2008 11:14:25 AM

APPENDIX E WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC TRAFFIC STUDY

WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC The 1999 CUP includes the construction of a Cul-de-Sac along Castello Avenue south of the school driveway, which will be constructed before the proposed project. The existing eastbound No-Right Turn 3PM to 7PM sign at the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue would no longer be necessary after construction of the Cul-de-Sac and will be removed to facilitate access to the project site from Pico Boulevard during the PM peak hour. To be conservative, the project is also analyzed for the Without Cul-de-Sac scenario. Trip Distribution Without Cul-de-Sac, the project traffic would cut through the neighborhood community south of the project site. The current eastbound No-Right Turn 3PM to 7PM sign at the intersection of Pico Boulevard and Castello Avenue is prohibiting the eastbound right turn traffic into the neighborhood. Without Cul-de-Sac, the sign will be in effect, therefore, the PM peak hour project distribution would be different from the AM peak hour. The project traffic distributions of the AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figures E-1(a) and E-1(b). The project traffic volumes of the AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figures E-2(a) and E-2(b).

Future Traffic Conditions As shown in Table E-1 for the study intersections analysis, and Table E-2 for the study residential street segment analysis, the completed project is not expected to result in any significant traffic impacts. Table E-1 Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) Summary Future (2012) Traffic Conditions - Without and With Project Without Cul-de-Sac Scenario Without Peak Project With Project Significant No. Intersection Hour CMA LOS CMA LOS Impact Impact 1. Pico Blvd. & Roxbury Dr. AM 0.758 C 0.760 C 0.002 No PM 0.671 B 0.672 B 0.001 No 2. Pico Blvd. & Castello Ave. AM 0.774 C 0.789 C 0.015 No PM 0.841 D 0.856 D 0.015 No 3. Pico Blvd. & Beverwil Dr. AM 0.933 E 0.939 E 0.006 No PM 1.025 F 1.027 F 0.002 No 4. Pico Blvd. & Beverly Dr. AM 0.867 D 0.871 D 0.004 No PM 0.961 E 0.963 E 0.002 No 5. Cashio St. & Beverwil Dr. AM 0.706 C 0.708 C 0.002 No PM 0.518 A 0.519 A 0.001 No Table E-2 Residential Street Impact Analysis for Without Cul-de-Sac Scenario Street Segment Existing Future (2012) ADT (2008) Without Project With Project Significant VPD Project Traffic Project Increase Impact 1. Castello Avenue 636 662 21 683 21 No btw. Pico Boulevard & Cashio Street

APPENDIX F WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC CMA CALCULATION WORKSHEETS

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 21 2444 71 0 EASTBOUND 77 1041 29 0 NORTHBOUND 290 154 0 25 SOUTHBOUND 93 46 82 38 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 21 N/A 838 838 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 77 N/A 357 357 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 290 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 93 N/A 46 N/A 82 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 915 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 372 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1287 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.758 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 2 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 21 2450 72 0 EASTBOUND 77 1054 29 0 NORTHBOUND 290 154 0 25 SOUTHBOUND 95 46 82 38 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 21 N/A 841 841 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 77 N/A 361 361 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 290 N/A 154 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 95 N/A 46 N/A 82 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 918 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 372 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1290 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.760 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 3 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 42 1274 0 84 EASTBOUND 67 2369 0 0 NORTHBOUND 60 42 37 21 SOUTHBOUND 182 265 20 98 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 42 N/A 637 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 67 N/A 790 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 60 N/A 42 N/A 37 N/A SOUTHBOUND 182 N/A 265 N/A 20 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 832 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 325 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1157 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.671 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 4 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:1, PICO BOULEVARD & ROXBURY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 42 1277 0 85 EASTBOUND 67 2372 0 0 NORTHBOUND 60 42 37 21 SOUTHBOUND 183 265 20 98 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 42 N/A 638 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 67 N/A 791 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 60 N/A 42 N/A 37 N/A SOUTHBOUND 183 N/A 265 N/A 20 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 833 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 325 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1158 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.672 LEVEL OF SERVICE... B ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 5 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 2627 16 0 EASTBOUND 11 1261 13 0 NORTHBOUND 9 3 22 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 1 6 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 29 N/A 881 881 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 11 N/A 425 425 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 34 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 892 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 37 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 929 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.774 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 6 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 52 2627 16 0 EASTBOUND 11 1261 28 0 NORTHBOUND 16 3 33 0 SOUTHBOUND 3 1 6 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 52 N/A 881 881 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 11 N/A 430 430 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 52 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 892 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 55 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 947 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.789 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 7 9/18/2008 2:22:05 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 41 1421 19 5 EASTBOUND 19 2695 0 0 NORTHBOUND 8 0 52 0 SOUTHBOUND 10 0 30 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 41 N/A 710 N/A 19 N/A EASTBOUND 19 N/A 898 898 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 60 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 40 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 939 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 70 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1009 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.841 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 8 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:2, PICO BOULEVARD & CASTELLO AVENUE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 47 1421 19 5 EASTBOUND 19 2699 0 0 NORTHBOUND 12 0 58 0 SOUTHBOUND 10 0 30 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 47 N/A 710 N/A 19 N/A EASTBOUND 19 N/A 900 N/A N/A N/A NORTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 70 SOUTHBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 40 EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 947 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 80 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1027 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 0 CMA VALUE... 0.856 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- Capacity used = 1200. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 9 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 56 2162 37 0 EASTBOUND 156 861 60 0 NORTHBOUND 365 692 102 0 SOUTHBOUND 38 218 63 78 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 56 N/A 733 733 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 156 N/A 307 307 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 365 N/A 397 397 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 38 N/A 218 N/A 63 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 889 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 583 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1472 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.933 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 10 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 56 2181 37 0 EASTBOUND 158 870 60 0 NORTHBOUND 365 692 102 0 SOUTHBOUND 38 218 66 79 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 56 N/A 739 739 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 158 N/A 310 310 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 365 N/A 397 397 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 38 N/A 218 N/A 66 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 897 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 583 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1480 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.939 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 11 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 89 1254 0 34 EASTBOUND 174 1731 616 0 NORTHBOUND 118 299 78 0 SOUTHBOUND 83 614 24 122 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 89 N/A 627 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 174 N/A 782 782 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 118 N/A 188 188 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 83 N/A 614 N/A 24 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 871 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 732 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1603 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 1.025 LEVEL OF SERVICE... F ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 12 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:3, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 89 1259 0 34 EASTBOUND 175 1736 620 0 NORTHBOUND 118 299 78 0 SOUTHBOUND 83 614 25 122 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 89 N/A 630 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 175 N/A 785 785 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 118 N/A 188 188 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 83 N/A 614 N/A 25 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 874 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 732 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1606 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 1.027 LEVEL OF SERVICE... F ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 13 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 44 1935 140 0 EASTBOUND 73 826 40 0 NORTHBOUND 244 525 0 69 SOUTHBOUND 88 193 0 128 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 44 N/A 692 692 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 73 N/A 433 433 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 244 N/A 525 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 88 N/A 193 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 765 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 613 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1378 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.867 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 14 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 44 1950 140 0 EASTBOUND 73 833 42 0 NORTHBOUND 248 525 0 69 SOUTHBOUND 88 193 0 128 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 1 0 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 44 N/A 697 697 N/A N/A EASTBOUND 73 N/A 438 438 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 248 N/A 525 N/A 0 N/A SOUTHBOUND 88 N/A 193 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 770 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 613 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1383 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.871 LEVEL OF SERVICE... D ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 15 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 66 1263 0 142 EASTBOUND 76 1598 126 0 NORTHBOUND 128 286 46 33 SOUTHBOUND 165 456 0 133 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 66 N/A 632 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 76 N/A 862 862 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 128 N/A 286 N/A 46 N/A SOUTHBOUND 165 N/A 456 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 928 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 584 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1512 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.961 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 16 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:4, PICO BOULEVARD & BEVERLY DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 66 1267 0 142 EASTBOUND 76 1602 127 0 NORTHBOUND 129 286 46 33 SOUTHBOUND 165 456 0 133 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 1 0 2 0 1 0 4 EASTBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 NORTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND 66 N/A 634 N/A 0 N/A EASTBOUND 76 N/A 864 864 N/A N/A NORTHBOUND 129 N/A 286 N/A 46 N/A SOUTHBOUND 165 N/A 456 N/A 0 N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 930 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 585 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1515 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 3* CMA VALUE... 0.963 LEVEL OF SERVICE... E ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 17 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 494 121 0 EASTBOUND 2 26 29 0 NORTHBOUND 0 1075 21 0 SOUTHBOUND 15 308 8 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 644 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 57 NORTHBOUND N/A N/A 548 548 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 15 N/A 158 158 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 646 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 563 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1209 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.706 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 18 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: AM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 29 496 121 0 EASTBOUND 2 27 29 0 NORTHBOUND 0 1077 21 0 SOUTHBOUND 15 309 8 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 646 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 58 NORTHBOUND N/A N/A 549 549 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 15 N/A 158 158 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 648 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 564 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 1212 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.708 LEVEL OF SERVICE... C ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 19 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITHOUT PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 48 51 76 0 EASTBOUND 1 179 99 0 NORTHBOUND 42 425 22 0 SOUTHBOUND 264 1068 7 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 175 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 279 NORTHBOUND N/A 153 N/A 336 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 264 N/A 538 538 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 327 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 600 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 927 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.518 LEVEL OF SERVICE... A ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 20 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

CRAIN & ASSOCIATES CMA CALCULATIONS INTERSECTION:5, CASHIO STREET & BEVERWIL DRIVE DATE: 9/18/2008 INITIALS: TF PERIOD: PM PEAK HOUR CASE: FUTURE (2012) WITH PROJECT (WITHOUT CUL-DE-SAC SCENARIO) ** INPUT VOLUMES ** APPROACH ** RIGHT TURNS ** LEFT THROUGH MIN ON GREEN MAX ON RED WESTBOUND 48 51 76 0 EASTBOUND 1 180 99 0 NORTHBOUND 42 425 22 0 SOUTHBOUND 264 1068 7 0 ** NUMBER OF LANES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R TOTAL ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED LANES WESTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 EASTBOUND 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 NORTHBOUND 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 SOUTHBOUND 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 ** ASSIGNED LANE VOLUMES ** APPROACH LEFT LEFT THROUGH RIGHT RIGHT L/T/R ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED ONLY SHARED WESTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 175 EASTBOUND N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 280 NORTHBOUND N/A 153 N/A 336 N/A N/A SOUTHBOUND 264 N/A 538 538 N/A N/A EAST-WEST CRITICAL VOLUMES... 328 NORTH-SOUTH CRITICAL VOLUMES... 600 ----- THE SUM OF CRITICAL VOLUMES... 928 NUMBER OF CRITICAL CLEARANCE INTERVALS... 2* CMA VALUE... 0.519 LEVEL OF SERVICE... A ---------- * Includes CMA value decreased due to ATCS Implementation. File: I:\Crain Projects\Active Projects\Yeshiva of Los Angeles II\Data\Icap7\YOLA Total 9-18-08.xls, Worksheet: Total WO Cul-de-Sac, Row: 21 9/18/2008 2:22:06 PM

City of Los Angeles Appendix B: Letter regarding the Yeshiva High School Traffic Monitoring Report to the LADOT dated July 1, 2009 YULA Boys High School Expansion Recirculated Traffic/Transportation/Parking Chapter Appendices

EMAIL TRANSMITTED July 1, 2009 Mr. Eddie Guerrero Transportation Engineer West LA/Coastal Development Review Los Angeles Department of Transportation 7166 W. Manchester Avenue Los Angeles, California 90045 RE: Yeshiva High School Traffic Monitoring Report Dear Eddie, Based on comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR), we have conducted additional traffic analyses. In particular, we conducted a count to determine the actual current site generation for the school. This letter documents the results of that vehicle trip count of the actual current site, and corrects the analysis in the Draft EIR, as well as one traffic mitigation measure recommended by you for the project. Count surveys were conducted by Crain & Associates on Thursday, April 23 rd, 2009 which represented a typical general school day at Yeshiva High School. The 15-minute interval counts were collected from 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM in order to cover the periods for the ITE manual trip generation rates which were used in the DEIR Traffic Study. Traffic related to Yeshiva High School was based on the number of vehicles counted entering or exiting the school driveway; or vehicles that dropped-off students outside of the school gate. Based on the vehicle trip counts conducted on April 23rd, the morning peak hour occurred between 7:00 AM to 8:00 AM. During this period, a total of 204 vehicles (123 inbound, 81 outbound) were identified as school-related traffic. The afternoon peak hour occurred 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. During this period, a total of 123 vehicles (43 inbound, 80 outbound) were observed. Copies of the count and survey data are included as Attachment 1. These counts were then divided by the current enrollment level of 186 students in order to establish the current site per student generation rates.