Sunset/Everett Traffic Study

8/13/2019 Sunset/Everett Traffic Study

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/sunseteverett-traffic-study 1/73

Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use Development Project

Traffic Study

October 2, 2013

Prepared by

The Mobility Group





Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use Development Project Traffic Study

The Mobility Group i October 2, 2013

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................ 1

1.2 Study Scope ....................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Organization of this Report ............................................................................... 4

2. Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................... 5

2.1 Roadway System ............................................................................................... 5

2.2 Study Intersections ............................................................................................ 6

2.3 Existing Intersection Conditions ....................................................................... 6

2.4 Existing Transit Service .................................................................................... 12

3. Future Conditions Without The Project ................................................................... 14

3.1 Traffic Forecasts ................................................................................................ 14

3.2 Related Projects ................................................................................................. 14

3.3 Future Base Transportation System Improvements .......................................... 22

3.4 Future Intersection Conditions .......................................................................... 25

4. Future With Project Conditions ................................................................................ 27

4.1 Project Transportation Characteristics .............................................................. 27

4.2 Project Impacts .................................................................................................. 37

4.3 Existing With Project Impacts ........................................................................... 42

5. Project Mitigation ........................................................................................................ 49

5.1 Future With Project – Mitigation Measures ...................................................... 49

Appendix A Traffic Counts (LADOT format)

Appendix B Intersection LOS Analysis Sheets

Appendix C Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis

Appendix D Mitigation Concept Plan




The Mobility Group ii October 2, 2013

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 Project Location .............................................................................................. 2

Figure 1.2 Project Site Plan ............................................................................................. 3

Figure 2.1 Analyzed Intersections ................................................................................... 7

Figure 2.2 Configuration of Analyzed Intersections ........................................................ 8

Figure 2.3 Existing Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour ................................................... 9

Figure 2.4 Existing Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour ................................................... 10

Figure 3.1 Location of Related Projects .......................................................................... 15

Figure 3.2 Future Without Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour ........................... 23Figure 3.3 Future Without Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour ............................ 24

Figure 3.4 Future Configuration of Analyzed Intersections ............................................ 26

Figure 4.1 Project Only Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour ............................................ 33

Figure 4.2 Project Only Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour ............................................ 34

Figure 4.3 Future With Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour ................................ 35

Figure 4.4 Future With Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour ................................. 36

Figure 4.5 Existing With Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour ............................. 44

Figure 4.6 Existing With Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour .............................. 45




The Mobility Group iii October 2, 2013

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections .............................. 11

Table 2.2 Existing Conditions – Intersection Level of Service ...................................... 12

Table 3.1 Related Project List and Trip Generation Estimates ...................................... 16

Table 3.2 Future Without Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service .............. 25

Table 4.1 Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use Development Project –

Trip Generation Estimates ............................................................................. 28

Table 4.2 Future With Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

AM Peak Hour ................................................................................................ 38

Table 4.3 Future With Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

PM Peak Hour ................................................................................................ 38

Table 4.4 Site Adjacent Intersections – Signal Warrant Analysis –

Future With Project Conditions ...................................................................... 40

Table 4.5 Transit Trips Generated by the Project ........................................................... 43

Table 4.6 Existing With Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

AM Peak Hour ................................................................................................ 47

Table 4.7 Existing With Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

PM Peak Hour ................................................................................................ 47

Table 4.8 Site Adjacent Intersections – Signal Warrant Analysis –

Existing With Project Conditions ................................................................... 48




__________________________________________________________________________________________The Mobility Group 1 October 2, 2013

1. Introduction

This report documents a traffic impact analysis for the proposed Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use

Development Project (the “Project”) in the City of Los Angeles. The Project is generally bounded by Sunset Boulevard to the west, Everett Street to the southeast and east, and private

property to the north. The Project location is shown in Figure 1.1.

1.1 Project Description

The Project would be located northwest of downtown Los Angeles and be comprised of two

parts. Part 1 would be bounded by Sunset Boulevard to the west and private property to the

north and east. This portion of the Project will consist of up to approximately 214 market-rate

apartments, of which 14 units will be provided as affordable housing units, and approximately8,453 sq ft of retail commercial. For the purposes of the Traffic Study, the commercial space

will be defined as a 1,900 sq ft coffee shop and a 6,553 sq ft retail fronting on Sunset

Boulevard. This portion of the Project is currently developed and includes a 3,000 sq ft

warehouse, a residential duplex, two single-family homes, a 4,800 sq ft building

materials/lumber store and a two-stall car wash. All of the current uses are to be demolished.

Part 2 will consist of a small-lot subdivision containing up to approximately 7 single-family

homes with access provided from Everett Street. This portion of the Project is currently

developed and includes one single-family home which is to be demolished. Access to the two

single-family homes described as part of Part 1 is provided via Everett Street.

Vehicular access for Part 1 of the Project is to be provided by three driveways located along

Sunset Boulevard. The main driveway will be located at the signalized intersection of Sunset

Boulevard & Marion Avenue. The second driveway will be an unsignalized intersection

located approximately 170 feet north of the main driveway. The third driveway will also be

an unsignalized intersection and will be located at the extreme northern edge of the Project.

Vehicular access for Part 2 of the Project will be provided by a driveway on Everett Street. A

ground floor plan is shown in Figure 1.2.

For purposes of the Traffic Study, the Project were analyzed as one project ( i.e., Parts 1 and 2

were analyzed together).

1.2 Study Scope

The scope and methodology of this analysis was determined in conjunction with the City of

Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) and conducted in accordance with the

LADOT Traffic Study Guidelines.









The analysis addresses the following time periods:

- AM peak hour

- PM peak hour

The analysis also addresses the following scenarios:

- Existing Conditions

- Future Without Project Conditions

- Future With Project Conditions

- Existing With Project Conditions

The analysis assumes completion of the Project by the end of 2016. The impact analysis

therefore addresses the year 2016 for the Project.

1.3 Organization of this Report

The remainder of this report is organized as follows. Chapter 2 describes the existing

transportation conditions in the area of the Project. Chapter 3 addresses future conditions

(year 2016) without the Project and sets the future cumulative baseline for analysis of Project

impacts. Chapter 4 provides a description of the proposed Project and its transportation

characteristics, including trip generation, distribution of Project trips, and analyzes potential

transportation impacts of the Project, including traffic, transit, and a Congestion Management

Program evaluation. Chapter 5 identifies any proposed transportation mitigation measures for

the Project.





2. Existing Conditions

2.1 Roadway System

Regional Access

Regional access to the general area of the Project Site is provided by the Hollywood Freeway

(US-101), about ! - mile south of the site, and the Pasadena Freeway (SR-110), about ! -mile east of the site.

North-South Streets

Beaudry Avenue: Beaudry Avenue is a two-way street providing one travel lane in eachdirection. It is classified as a Collector Street north of Sunset Boulevard. On-street parking is

allowed with some restrictions. South of Sunset Boulevard it is classified as a Major

Highway Class II street with two travel lanes in each direction. On-street parking is not

allowed.

Edgeware Road: Edgeware Road is a two-way street providing one travel lane in each

direction. North of Temple Street, it is classified as a Local Street and south of Temple Street

it is classified as a Collector Street. On-street parking is allowed with some restrictions.

Everett Street: Everett Street is a two-way street providing one travel lane in each direction in

the vicinity of the Project Site. It is classified as a Local Street. On-street parking is allowed

with some restrictions.

East-West Streets

Sunset Boulevard: Sunset Boulevard is a two-way street providing three southbound travel

lanes in the AM peak period and three northbound travel lanes in the PM peak period in the

vicinity of the Project Site. It is classified as a Major Highway Class II street. On-street

parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street with peak hour restrictions.

Elysian Park Avenue: Elysian Park Avenue is a two-way street providing three travel lanes in

each direction. It is classified as a Major Highway Class II street. On-street parking is

allowed with some restrictions.

Marion Avenue: Marion Avenue is a two-way street providing one travel lane in each

direction in the vicinity of the Project Site. It is classified as a Collector Street. On-street

parking is allowed with some restrictions.





Bellevue Avenue: Bellevue Avenue is a two-way street providing one travel lane in each

direction west of Marion Avenue and two lanes in each direction east of Marion Avenue.

West of Marion Avenue, it is classified as a Collector Street and east of Marion Avenue it is

classified as a Local Street. On-street parking is allowed with some restrictions.

2.2 Study Intersections

A total of four study intersections were identified, in conjunction with LADOT staff, for

inclusion in the traffic analysis. The analyzed locations are shown in Figure 2.1 and

correspond to locations where potential traffic impacts from the project are most likely to

occur. The intersections identified for analysis are as follows:

1. Sunset Boulevard & Elysian Park Avenue

2. Sunset Boulevard & Marion Avenue3. Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue

4. Edgeware Road & Temple Street

All study intersections are signalized and currently operate under the City’s second generation

ATCS (Adaptive Traffic Control System) which utilizes enhanced surveillance and control

technologies to adapt traffic signal timings to respond to actual traffic conditions on the

ground to further improve the effectiveness of the ATSAC system. The existing lane

configurations for these four analyzed intersections are shown in Figure 2.2.

2.3 Existing Intersection Conditions

Existing Traffic Volumes

New traffic counts were conducted at all of the analyzed intersections to obtain existing

turning movement counts. The traffic counts were conducted in May of 2013, for both the

AM and the PM peak periods (between 7:00 and 10:00 am and between 3:00 and 6:00 pm).

The existing peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 2.3 and 2.4 for the AM and

PM peak hours respectively (highest volume hours within the peak periods)..

Level of Service Methodology

Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure used to describe the condition of traffic flow,

ranging from excellent conditions at LOS A to overloaded conditions at LOS F, with each

level defined by a range of volume/capacity (V/C) ratios. Table 2.1 defines the ranges of V/C

ratios and their corresponding levels of service for signalized intersections. LOS D is







0

2061 0

46

78 55

95

32

141

813

31

82

831

124

0

23

585 452

123

195

104 204

83

1240

770

0

0

0128

978

0

015

0

2031

746

1143

50

530

0 101 0

37

106

689

1

Study Intersection

Intersection Reference Number

XX Intersection Turn Volume

X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site

Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use Development Project - Traffic Study

Existing Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour

Figure 2.3

9/13/13



108

1096

1019

1012

902

852

1360

0 89 0

35

0

0

0

8880

162

0

144

0

41

94

353 61

47

890

77 354

1795

49

665

119

209

1

42

538 689

0

107

24 33

392183 0

11

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Existing Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour

Figure 2.4

9/13/13





Table 2.1 Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections

Level

of

Service

Description

Volume to

Capacity

Ratio

A

B

C

D

E

F

Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear quite

open, turning movements are easily made, and nearly all drivers find

freedom of operation.

Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat

restricted within platoons of vehicles. This represents stable flow.

An approach to an intersection may occasionally be fully utilized

and traffic queues start to form.

Good operation. Occasionally drivers may have to wait for more

than 60 seconds, and backups may develop behind turning vehicles.

Most drivers feel somewhat restricted.

Fair operation. Cars are sometimes required to wait for more than

60 seconds during short peaks. There is no long-standing traffic

queues. This level is typically associated with design practice for

peak periods.

Poor operation. Some long-standing vehicular queues develop oncritical approaches to intersections. Delays may be up to several

minutes.

Forced flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups from

locations downstream or on the cross street may restrict or prevent

movement of vehicles out of the intersections approach lanes;

therefore, volumes carried are not predictable. Potential for stop-

and-go type traffic flow.

<0.600

0.601 – 0.700

0.701 – 0.800

0.801 – 0.900

0.901 – 1.000

Over 1.000

Source: Highway Capacity Manual , Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.,

1985 and Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, MCHRP Circular 212, 1982.





recognized as the standard in downtown areas. Intersection analysis was conducted using the

“Critical Movement Analysis (Planning Method)” as described in “Transportation Research

Circular 212, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C. 1980”, to obtain

volume/capacity (V/C) ratios for each intersection.

Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service

Table 2.2 summarizes the existing AM and PM peak hour V/C ratios and corresponding levels

of service at the analyzed intersections.

AM Peak Hour

All of the studied intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the AM peak hour.

PM Peak Hour

All of the studied intersections currently operate at LOS B or better during the PM peak hour

except for the intersection of Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue, which operates at LOS F.

Table 2.2 Existing Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

Intersection

Existing Conditions

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

V / C LOS V / C LOS


2. Sunset Boulevard & Marion Avenue

3. Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue


0.679

0.467

0.745

0.460

B

A

C

A

0.625

0.355

1.028

0.479

B

A

F

A

2.4 Existing Transit Service

Summary of Transit Service on Major Streets in the Project Vicinity

Sunset Boulevard

Located immediately adjacent to the Project Site, Sunset Boulevard carries one Metro Rapid

line (704) and two Metro Local Bus lines (2/302 and 4).





Metro Rapid 704 runs between Downtown Los Angeles and Santa Monica via Sunset

Boulevard and Santa Monica Boulevard. It operates approximately between 6:00am and

8:30pm near the project site on weekdays, from about 6:30am to 8:30pm on Saturdays, and

7:00am to 8:00pm on Sundays. It runs at about 10 – 15 minute headways during weekday

peak periods, at about 15-30 minutes on evenings and weekends.

Metro Local 2/302 runs between Downtown Los Angeles and Pacific Palisades via Sunset

Boulevard. It operates 24 hours and runs at about 6-10 minute headways during the morning

and evening weekday peak and every 15-20 minutes on weekends.

Metro Local 4 runs between Downtown Los Angeles and West Los Angeles via Sunset

Boulevard and Santa Monica Boulevard. It operates 24 hours and runs at about 8 – 12

minutes during the morning and evening weekday peak and every 15-30 minutes on evenings

and weekends.

Figueroa Street

DASH Lincoln Heights/Chinatown runs is a circulator shuttle that connects Chinatown and

Lincoln Heights mainly via Figueroa Street, Cesar Chavez Boulevard, Broadway, and Main

Street. It operates approximately between 7:00am and 7:00pm and runs at about 30 minute

headways on weekdays. On Saturdays it operates approximately between 9:00am and 7:00pm

and runs at about 30 minute headways.





3. Future Conditions Without The Project

3.1 Traffic Forecasts

In order to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of the Project, it was necessary to first

estimate and then analyze future traffic conditions without the Project. The year selected for

this analysis was 2016 which is the expected year of completion of the Project.

Future traffic forecasts were estimated by forecasting two separate components of traffic

growth in the study area.

The first component represents the ambient growth that is a general growth in traffic volumes

due to minor new developments in the Project Area, and regional growth and developmentoutside the study area. A growth rate of 1% per year was assumed for this ambient traffic

growth in conjunction with LADOT. The existing traffic counts were therefore adjusted

upward by a total of 3% to represent the ambient growth to the Project completion year.

The second component of future growth relates to specific development projects located in the

study area that are either under construction, approved, or under formal planning

consideration and potentially could be in place by the year 2016 when the Project will be

completed. The following section of this chapter describes the process of estimating traffic

from these related projects.

This approach is conservative in that not all of the related projects may be ultimately built,

and not all may be built by 2016 (the buildout year of the Project). Along with the fact that

the analysis includes both a list of specific related projects and a general background growth

factor, the analysis likely overstates the future growth in traffic without the Project.

3.2 Related Projects

Project List

A list of proposed development projects that could affect traffic conditions in the Project Area

was prepared based on information obtained from a variety of sources including the City of

Los Angeles, other studies and reports, and field verification and observations. A total of 68

potential development projects were identified, in conjunction with LADOT, the locations of

which are shown in Figure 3.1 and are listed in Table 3.1.





T a b l e 3 . 1

R

e l a t e d P r o j e c t L i s t a n d T r i p G e n e r a t i o n E s t i m a t e s

8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

1

P l a z a d e C u l t u r a Y A r t e s

5 0 1 N .

M a i n S t r e e t

3 2 , 0

0 0 s . f

C o m m u n i t y B l d g .

1 , 0

8 9

2 0

4

2 4

8 2

4 4

1 2 6

2 5 , 0

0 0 s . f

P e r f o r m i n g A r t s

1 4 , 1

0 0 s . f

P l a z a H o u s e

2 3 , 7

0 0 s . f

E d u c a t i o n a l C e n t e r a n d M u s e u m

2

W a l m a r t

7 0 1 W C

e s a r C h a v e z

3 3 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

1 , 4

1 7

2 0

1 3

3 3

6 0

6 3

1 2 3

3

M i x e d U s e

1 4 3 5 W 3

r d S t r e e t

1 2 2 D U

A p a r t m e n t

7 1 1

1 1

4 2

5 3

4 1

2 5

6 6

2 0 1 2 - C E N - 4 0 0 1 6

3 , 5

0 0 S f

R e t a i l

4

P i e r o I I ( L o r e n z o R e s D e v e l o p m e n t )

1 0 7 6 W .

6 t h

6 0 0 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

4 , 8

9 1

7 4

2 5 3

3 2 7

2 7 8

1 6 9

4 4 7

2 0 0 4 - C E N - 1 3 8 2

2 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

5

L A U S D C L A H S #

1 1 H R D / P D C

1 2 0 0 W C

o l t o n S t .

2 5 , 5

0 0 s . f

O f f i c e

6 5 3

5 3

6 9

9 2

4 7

4 8

9 5

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 6 4 8

3 5 0 s e a t s

C o n f e r e n c e C e n t e r

6

R e s i d e n t i a l & P u b

l i c P a r k i n g P r o j e c t

6 1 9 S W e s t l a k e A v e .

5 2 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

2 5 4

4

1 6

2 0

1 6

8

2 4

7

S m a r t a n d F i n a l

8 4 5 S F i g u e r o a S t .

2 1 , 1

2 2 s f

D i s c o u n t S u p e r m a r k e t

1 , 1

2 2

0

0

0

3 5

3 5

7 0

8

T i t l e I n s u r a n c e B u i l d i n g

4 3 3 S S p r i n g S t .

2 5 0 D U

C o n d o

1 , 4

5 3

1 9

9 1

1 1 0

2 5

1 0 5

1 3 0

9

N e w M e d i c a l O f f i c e B u i l d i n g ( G o o d

S a m a r i t a n H o s p i t a l )

W i l s h i r e B l v d / W i t m e r S t .

1 5 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

I m a g i n g c e n t e r , p h a r m a c y , s u r g i c a l s u i t e s ,

a n d p h y s i c i a n o f f i c e s

5 , 4

2 0

2 9 4

7 8

3 7 2

1 5 0

4 0 8

5 5 8

E N V 2 0 0 9 - 0 8 8 4 E A

1 0

C l a r k H o t e l

4 2 6 S H i l l S t .

3 4 7 R o o m s

H o t e l

2 , 8

3 5

1 1 8

7 6

1 9 4

1 0 9

9 6

2 0 5

1 1

F e d e r a l C o u r t h o u

s e

s o u t h w e s t c o r n e r o f 1 s t S t . a n d

B r o a d w a y

6 0 0 , 0

0 0 s f

C o u r t h o u s e

9 0 3

2 5 7

3 2

2 8 9

1 1 2

2 4 9

3 6 1

1 2

V a l e n c i a P r o j e c t

N o r t h w e s t c o r n e r o f W i l s h i r e

a n d V a l e n c i a

2 0 1 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

7 2 1

- 5 6

9

- 4 7

2 8

- 1 9

9

6 , 0

0 0 s f

R e t a i l

1 , 5

0 0 s f

R e s t a u r a n t

1 3

8 t h & G r a n d M i x e

d - U s e P r o j e c t

W .

8 t h S t ( N o r t h o f 8 t h S t .

b e t w e e n G r a n d a n d O l i v e )

8 7 5 D . U

C o n d o m i n i u m s

4 , 1

6 2

5 2

2 0 5

2 5 7

2 3 0

1 4 2

3 7 2

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 2 5 2 8

3 4 , 0

6 1 s . f

R e t a i l

1 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t s

1 4

S B O M E G A

6 0 1 S M a i n S t .

7 7 7 D U

H i g h - r i s e C o n d o

3 , 6

9 0

5 5

2 2 3

2 7 8

1 9 8

1 2 3

3 2 1

2 0 , 0

0 0 s f

R e t a i l

1 5

A l a m e d a D i s t r i c t P l a n

2 2 D U

R e s i d e n t i a l

2 5 , 3

1 2

1 , 4

3 8

8 7 8

2 , 3

1 6

1 , 0

8 3

1 , 8

0 0

2 , 8

8 3

( E x c l u d i n g d e v e l o

p m e n t t o d a t e )

7 , 4

4 3 , 2

0 0 s . f

O f f i c e

6 4 5 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

7 5 0 R o o m s

H o t e l

2 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

1 6

S p r i n g S t r e e t G a r

a g e & A p a r t m e n t s

S p r i n g S t S o u t h o f 5 t h S t .

1 2 0 D U

A p a r t m e n t

7 9 8

1 2

4 9

6 1

4 8

2 6

7 4

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M

P r o j e c t N a m e - E

A F # / D O T C a s e #

L o c a t i o n / A d d r e s s

P r o j e c t D e s c r i p t i o n

D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#

R e l a t e d P r o j e c t s L i s t

A l a m e d a S t . / L o s A n g e l e s S t .



T a b l e 3 . 1

R


8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M


A F # / D O T C a s e #



D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#


1 7

P r o p Q & F P u b l i c S a f e t y C i v i c C t r

F a c i l i t y P l a n

L o s A n g e l e s S t . / T e m p l e S t .

1 7 9 , 0

0 0 s . f .

J a i l

3 , 6

0 0

3 1 3

6 0

3 7 3

1 2 2

2 7 2

3 9 4

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 1 9 5 9

3 0 , 0

0 0 s . f .

G o v e r n m e n t B u i l d i n g

2 1 0 s p a c e s

P a r k i n g S t r u c t u r e

1 8

B l o s s o m P l a z a

9 0 0 N B r o a d w a y

2 6 2 S t u

M i d d l e S c h o o l

2 , 8

2 3

9 7

6 5

1 6 2

9 5

9 4

1 8 9

2 2 , 0

0 8 s f

R e t a i l

9 , 0

0 0 s f

S i t - d o w n R e s t a u r a n t

6 , 0

0 0 s f

F a s t - f o o d R e s t a u r a n t

7 , 0

0 0 s f

C u l t u r e C e n t e r

1 9

M i x e d - U s e D e v e l o p m e n t ( P a c i f i c

E l e c t r i c B u i l d i n g )

6 1 0 S .

M a i n S t .

1 3 , 9

2 1 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t s

1 , 4

2 9

1 1

1 1

2 2

7 8

3 9

1 1 7

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 7 0 1 9 ; 2

0 0 5 - C E N - 2 7 8 0

7 2 6 s . f

R e t a i l

7 2 6 s . f

P o o l / E v e n t

2 0

L A U S D - C e n R e g E l e m S c h o o l # 1 4

A l v a r a d o S t . N o r t h - W e s t

C o r n e r o f A l v a r a d o S t . / S a n t a

8 7 5 S t u d e n t s

E l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l

9 1 0

1 5 2

1 2 5

2 7 7

0

0

0

2 0 0 7 - C E N - 4 1 7 9

2 1

C h i n a t o w n G a t e w

a y P r o j e c t

C e s a r C h a v e z A v e .

/ B r o a d w a y

2 8 0 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

2 , 6

6 5

4 0

1 1 2

1 5 2

1 4 8

9 9

2 4 7

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 2 3 4 8

2 2 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

2 2

M i x e d - U s e P r o j e c

t

6 6 2 S L u c a s A v e .

1 3 0 D U

C o n d o

1 , 4

0 0

1 8

8 7

1 0 5

8 2

4 0

1 2 2

7 , 0

3 7 s f

R e t a i l

2 3

M i x e d - U s e P r o j e c

t

5 3 4 S M a i n S t .

1 6 0 D U

A p a r t m e n t

2 , 2

1 3

5 2

7 5

1 2 7

8 7

5 8

1 4 5

1 8 , 0

0 0 s f

R e t a i l

3 , 5

0 0 s f

R e s t a u r a n t

3 , 5

0 0 s f

F a s t - f o o d R e s t a u r a n t

2 4

M i x e d - U s e ( R e s t a

u r a n t , r e t a i l , a n d

h e a l t h c l u b )

1 0 1 - 1 3 1 E .

6 t h S t r e e t

1 1 , 0

1 8 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

1 , 5

4 1

1 5

9

2 4

9 2

4 5

1 3 7

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 7 0 1 7 M N ; 2 0 0 5 - C E N - 2 6 5 9

8 , 9

2 7 s . f

R e t a i l

5 , 0

6 6 s . f

H e a l t h C l u b

2 5

H a l l o f J u s t i c e

2 1 1 W T

e m p l e S t r e e t ( T e m p l e

S t r e e t / S p r i n g S t . )

3 0 E m p l s .

N e t i n c r e a s e i n n u m b e r o f e m p l o y e e s f r o m

1 6 3 0 t o 1 6 6 0

1 , 0

5 2

1 2 8

2 4

1 5 2

4 5

1 0 1

1 4 6

2 0 0 4 - C E N - 1 0 1 1

1 , 0

0 0 S p a c e

P a r k i n g S t r u c t u r e

2 6

Q u a l i t y R e s t a u r a n

t & B a r

5 1 5 W .

7 t h S t . ( 7 t h S t . / O l i v e

S t . )

8 , 8

9 1 s . f .

Q u a l i t y R e s t a u r a n t

1 , 3

0 8

- 1

0

- 1

8 7

4 3

1 3 0

E A F 2 0 0 3 - 9 1 9 3

7 , 6

6 8 s . f

B a r

2 7

C h a r t e r H i g h S c h o o l

1 5 5 2 W R

o c k w o o d S t .

6 0 0 S t u d e n t s

H i g h S c h o o l

7 1 5

1 2 2

5 8

1 8 0

2 6

2 9

5 4

2 8

M e t r o p o l i s M i x e d - U s e

8 5 1 S .

F r a n c i s c o S t . ( 8 t h S t . /

F r a n c i s c o S t . )

4 8 0 R o o m s

H o t e l

8 , 0

1 0

3 0 7

3 1 8

6 2 5

3 8 6

5 1 2

8 9 8

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 2 2 6 0

8 3 6 D . U


9 8 8 , 2

2 5 s . f

O f f i c e



T a b l e 3 . 1

R


8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M


A F # / D O T C a s e #



D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#


2 9


4 5 6 S .

W i t m e r ( W i t m e r / 5 t h )

3 9 D . U


1 6 2

2

1 0

1 2

9

5

1 4

E N V 2 0 0 6 - 3 2 9 4 M N

3 0

4 0 0 S B r o a d w a y M i x e d - U s e P r o j e c t

4 0 0 - 4 1 6 B r o a d w a y

4 3 0 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

2 , 6

2 8

3 7

1 4 1

1 7 8

1 6 2

7 9

2 4 1

1 0 , 0

0 0 s f

R e t a i l

5 , 0

0 0 s . f

L o u n g e

3 1

M i x e d - u s e R e s i d e

n t i a l , R e t a i l a n d

R e s t a u r a n t

6 0 9 W .

8 t h ( 8 t h / G r a n d / H o p e

P r o j e c t )

2 2 5 D . U


4 , 9

0 8

8 5

1 0 9

1 9 4

2 4 3

1 5 8

4 0 1

2 0 0 7 - C E N - 3 9 7 0

2 0 0 R o o m s

H o t e l

3 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

3 2 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

3 2

B a r / L o u n g e

7 0 1 E 3 r d S t r e e t

8 , 7

7 0 s . f

B a r / L o u n g e

7 8 9

0

0

0

4 4

2 2

6 6

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 0 3 6 6

3 3

C h i n a t o w n C o n d o

m i n i u m s 7

1 1 0 1 M a i n S t . ( M a i n / R o n d o u t )

3 0 0 D . U


1 , 1

0 2

1 3

5 8

7 1

5 4

3 3

8 7

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 3 3 0 5

3 4

R e s i d e n t i a l P r o j e c t

1 3 1 1 W .

5 t h S t r e e t

8 0 D . U


5 3 8

8

3 3

4 1

3 3

1 7

5 0

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 2 1 5 6 ; 2 0 0 5 - C E N - 1 9 5 8

3 5

S u p e r m a r k e t & R e t a i l

5 0 0 N B u n k e r H i l l A v e .

1 7 , 0

0 0 s . f

S u p e r m a r k e t

1 , 9

2 4

3 7

2 3

6 0

9 8

9 1

1 8 9

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 1 9 4 3

4 , 2

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

3 6

L i t t l e T o k y o B l o c k

8 P r o j e c t

2 0 0 S .

L o s A n g e l e s S t . ( L o s

A n g e l e s / 2 n d S t )

5 7 0 D . U


4 , 6

8 8

6 4

2 1 2

2 7 6

2 2 2

1 4 3

3 6 5

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 1 9 9 3

2 8 0 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

5 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

3 7

M i x e d - U s e R e s i d e n t i a l a n d R e t a i l

1 9 0 1 W .

7 t h S t . ( 7 t h / B o n n i e

B r a e S t . )

9 0 D . U

P h 1 - A p a r t m e n t s

1 , 5

0 4

2 9

6 1

9 0

7 5

5 8

1 3 3

V T T - 6 9 2 1 3 ; 2 0 0 6

- C E N - 3 8 3 9

1 5 , 5

0 0 s . f

P h 1 - R e t a i l

8 2 D . U

P h 2 - A p a r t m e n t s

1 7 , 3

0 0 s . f

P h 2 - R e t a i l

3 8

P a r k / F i f t h P r o j e c t

5 0 1 S .

O l i v e S t . ( O l i v e / 5 t h )

9 0 0 D . U


5 , 1

0 9

9 6

2 0 0

2 9 6

2 6 3

1 7 4

4 3 7

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 3 2 3 4

1 9 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

1 9 , 2

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

3 9

K a w a d a T o w e r

2 4 0 S .

H i l l S t . ( H i l l / 3 r d )

3 3 0 D . U


1 , 5

5 1

2 1

1 0 3

1 2 4

9 2

4 6

1 3 8

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 8 0 3

1 2 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

4 0

B u n k e r H i l l D e s i g n & D e v e l o p m e n t

P r o g r a m E I R - P a

r c e l Y

B l o c k b o u n d e d b y 3 r d S t . ,

O l i v e S t . ,

H i l l S t . ,

& 4 t h S t .

9 6 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

O f f i c e

8 , 0

0 4

4 7 3

7 4

5 4 7

1 8 8

6 6 0

8 4 8

1 0 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l



T a b l e 3 . 1

R


8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M


A F # / D O T C a s e #



D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#


4 1

G r a n d A v e n u e P r

o j e c t

1 , 6

4 8 D . U


2 2 , 6

0 1

9 1 9

6 3 2

1 , 5

5 1

1 , 1

2 0

1 , 3

4 4

2 , 4

6 4

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 3 0 2 2

4 1 2 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

6 8 1 , 0

0 0 s . f

C o u n t y O f f i c e B u i l d i n g

5 3 , 0

0 0 s . f

S u p e r M a r k e t

6 7 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

2 2 5 , 2

5 0 s . f

R e t a i l

2 5 0 S e a t s

E v e n t F a c i l i t y

5 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

H e a l t h C l u b

2 7 5 R o o m s

H o t e l

4 2


2 2 1 S .

L o s A n g e l e s S t .

3 0 0 D . U


1 , 9

1 0

3 8

1 8 6

2 2 4

8 4

4 2

1 2 6

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 8 4 4 6 , 2

0 0 6 - C E N - 3 1 1 0

( L o s A n g e l e s S t . / 2 n d S t . )

3 , 4

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

4 3

C i t y C o r p P l a z a P

h a s e I I I

7 5 5 S F i g u e r o a S t .

( 7 t h / F i g u e r o a S t . )

7 9 2 , 0

0 0 s . f

O f f i c e

4 , 6

7 7

6 1 6

8 3

6 9 9

1 1 7

5 7 1

6 8 8

4 4

M i x e d - U s e D e v e l o p m e n t

1 0 2 7 W .

W i l s h i r e P r o j e c t

( W i l s h i r e / S t . P a u l S t . )

4 0 2 D . U


1 , 4

9 8

1 9

9 4

1 1 3

9 1

4 5

1 3 6

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 2 8 7 0

4 , 7

2 8 s . f

R e t a i l

4 5

M i x e d - U s e

1 1 3 5 W 7

t h S t . ( 7 t h S t r e e t /

L u c a s )

1 3 0 D . U


1 , 0

6 3

1 4

5 0

6 4

5 8

3 6

9 4

E N V 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 8 5 ; 2

0 0 6 - C E N - 3 1 6 9

7 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

4 6

M i x e d - U s e

3 2 7 N F r e m o n t A v e .

( F r e m o n t / T e m p l e )

6 0 0 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

3 , 5

6 8

6 1

1 5 1

2 1 2

1 9 9

1 5 6

3 5 5

2 0 0 4 - C E N - 1 5 0 7

3 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

4 7

M i x e d - U s e

1 1 1 1 W .

W i l s h i r e B l v d .

4 2 0 D . U


2 , 9

0 0

4 1

1 0 5

1 4 6

1 4 5

1 1 8

2 6 3

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 2 8 8 5

( W i l s h i r e / B i x e l )

4 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

4 8

B u n k e r H i l l M i x e d

- U s e

7 2 0 W .

C e s a r C h a v e z

2 7 2 D . U


1 , 6

3 9

2 5

8 7

1 1 2

5 7

9 0

1 4 7

2 0 0 5 - C E N - 1 9 3 0

( C e s a r C h a v e z / B u n k e r H i l l

A v e . )

6 , 4

3 1 s . f

R e t a i l

8 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

4 9

W i t m e r P r o j e c t

1 2 4 7 W .

7 t h S t .

1 8 6 D . U


1 , 4

8 6

3

1 0

1 3

4 0

2 8

6 8

E N V - 2 0 0 6 - 8 5 8 6 ,

2 0 0 6 - C E N - 3 4 8 7

( 7 t h / W i t m e r )

6 , 2

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

5 0

C o n d o s ( T T 6 7 7 3 8 )

8 5 5 N F i g u e r o a T i e r

1 0 2 D . U


5 9 8

8

3 7

4 5

3 6

1 7

5 3

E N V 2 0 0 6 - 7 6 1 5 M N

F i g u e r o a / C o l l e g e

5 1

L A U S D - C e n t r a l

L A H i g h S c h o o l # 1 2

1 2 0 1 W M

i r a m a r S t

5 0 0 S t u

H i g h S c h o o l

5 2 9

8 8

4 2

1 3 0

0

0

0

2 0 0 4 - C E N - 1 8 4 5

5 2

M e d i c a l O f f i c e A d

d i t i o n

2 1 0 0 W 3

r d S t

2 4 , 0

7 5 s . f

8 7 0

4 7

1 3

6 0

2 4

6 6

9 0

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 1 8 6 5

5 3

B u s M a i n t e n a n c e

& I n s p e c t i o n F a c i l i t y 4 5 4 E C o m m e r c i a l S t

2 A c r e

B u s m a i n t e n a n c e & i n s p e c t i o n f a c i l i t y

6 9

1 2

1 8

3 0

5

5

1 0

P a r c e l L / M - 2 - B o u n d e d b y

G T K W a y ,

H o p e S t r e e t , &

U p p e r 2 n d S t r e e t

P a r c e l Q a n d P a r c e l W -

B o u n d e d b y 1 s t S t r e e t , G r a n d

A v e n u e ,

H i l l S t r e e t , & U p p e r

2 n d S t r e e t .



T a b l e 3 . 1

R


8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M


A F # / D O T C a s e #



D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#


5 4

C e n t e r L a n d

4 1 8 S S p r i n g S t

9 6 D U


2 , 2

0 2

2 6

1 2 8

1 5 4

1 2 6

6 1

1 8 7

V T T - 6 9 5 7 2 - C N ; 2

0 0 7 - C E N - 4 3 2 3

1 2 2 D U

H o t e l R o o m s

1 0 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t / R e t a i l

2 , 0

0 0 s . f

S p a

4 , 0

0 0 s . f

D r i n k i n g P l a c e

5 5

A f f o r d a b l e A p a r t m

e n t s

4 3 1 S L u c a s A v

7 5 D U

A p a r t m e n t s ( a f f o r d a b l e )

5 0 4

6

2 5

3 1

3 1

1 6

4 7

E N V 2 0 0 7 - 4 8 3 3 E A ; 2 0 0 7 - C E N - 4 6 4 4

5 6

A p a r t m e n t s

7 1 5 N Y a l e S t

6 5 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

4 3 7

7

2 7

3 4

2 6

1 4

4 0

E N V 2 0 0 7 - 5 7 6 2 E A ; 2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 6 5 3

5 7

G o o d S a m a r i t a n M i x e d - U s e P r o j e c t

1 1 3 6 W 6

t h S t

7 2 5 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

3 , 8

0 0

4 6

1 8 4

2 3 0

2 2 2

1 1 9

3 4 1

E N V 2 0 0 7 - 5 8 8 7 E I ; 2 0 0 7 - C E N - 4 5 2 0

3 9 , 9

9 9 s . f

R e t a i l

5 8

M i x e d - U s e

1 9 2 4 W T

e m p l e S t

1 3 2 D U

H i - r i s e C o n d o m i n i u m s

1 , 3

5 0

1 1

5 3

6 4

6 9

3 4

1 0 3

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 6 5 9

7 3 D U


4 6 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

1 9 , 1

0 3 s . f

R e t a i l

5 9

O f f i c e

1 1 3 0 W W

i l s h i r e B l

8 6 , 8

4 4 s . f

O f f i c e

5 3 0

9 1

1 2

1 0 3

1 4

6 9

8 3

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 6 9 9

6 0

M T A B u s F a c i l i t y

9 2 0 N V i g n e s S t

2 7 1 b u s e s

B u s m a i n t e n a n c e & i n s p e c t i o n f a c i l i t y

1 , 9

2 7

2 9

4 3

7 2

3 5

4 0

7 5

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 4 5 0

6 4 7 e m p l o y e e s

6 1

B e v e r l y + L u c a s P

r o j e c t

1 4 3 0 W B

e v e r l y B l

1 5 7 D U

A p a r t m e n t s

8 6 7

1 3

5 3

6 6

5 2

2 8

8 0

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 7 9 9

6 2

L A D o d g e r S t a d i u

m t h e N e x t 5 0

Y e a r s

1 0 0 0 W E

l y s i a n P a r k A v

2 3 , 7

5 0 s . f

S p e c i a l t y R e s t a u r a n t

4 , 4

5 6

1 7 2

2 7

1 9 9

2 0 0

2 8 0

4 8 0

2 0 0 8 - C E N - 4 8 3 9

3 8 , 4

9 0 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t

3 5 , 5

7 0 s . f

M u s e u m

1 3 8 , 5

6 5 s . f

O f f i c e

6 3

S u n s e t F l a t s M i x e

d - U s e

2 2 2 5 W S

u n s e t B l

6 5 D U


1 , 2

8 3

4 4

5 6

1 0 0

6 5

4 2

1 0 7

2 0 0 9 - C E N - 5 0 7 1

1 5 , 5

5 0 s . f

R e t a i l a n d R e s t a u r a n t

6 4

W i l s h i r e G r a n d R e d e v e l o p m e n t

P r o j e c t

9 3 0 W W

i l s h i r e B l

5 6 0 R o o m s

H o t e l R o o m s

3 , 6

2 4

7 2 5

7 5

8 0 0

9 4

7 6 4

8 5 8

E N V 2 0 0 9 - 1 5 7 7 E A ; 2 0 0 9 - C E N - 5 0 8 0

1 0 0 D U

R e s i d e n t i a l U n i t s

6 5

C o n v e r t V a c a n t T

h e a t e r / R e s t a u r a n t t o

R e s t a u r a n t w / E n t e r t a i n m e n t

2 1 3 9 W S

u n s e t B l

5 , 9

7 9 s . f

R e s t a u r a n t / T h e a t e r

5 3 8

4

1

5

3 0

1 5

4 5

E N V 2 0 0 9 - 4 0 4 3 E A ; 2 0 1 0 - C E N - 5 1 8 5



T a b l e 3 . 1

R


8 / 1 5 / 2 0 1 3

I n

O u t

T o t a l

I n

O u t

T o t a l

A M P e a k H o u r

W e e k d a y

4 : 3 0 - 5 : 3 0 P M


A F # / D O T C a s e #



D a i l y

T r i p s

P r o j e c t

#


6 6

B a r l o w H o s p i t a l R

e p l a c e m e n t a n d

M a s t e r P l a n P r o j e

c t

2 0 0 0 S t a d i u m W a y ,

L o s

A n g e l e s ,

C A 9 0 0 2 6

5 6 B e d

H o s p i t a l

6 , 2

8 4

1 2 6

3 4 0

4 6 6

3 5 0

2 2 8

5 7 8

3 1 , 0

0 0 s . f

A d m i n / S u p p o r t F a c i l i t y

2 4 B e d

N u r s i n g F a c i l i t y

8 8 8 D U

M u l t i - F a m i l y R e s i d e n t a i l

1 5 , 0

0 0 s . f

R e t a i l

6 7

L o s A n g e l e s S t r e e t C i v i c C e n t e r

P r o j e c t

1 5 0 N L o s A n g e l e s S t r e e t

7 1 2 , 5

0 0 s f

G o v e r n m e n t O f f i c e

1 3 , 5

3 4

9 3 0

1 1 8

1 , 0

4 8

4 3 2

9 4 2

1 , 3

7 4

3 5 , 0

0 0 s f

R e t a i l

2 , 5

0 0 s f

C h i l d C a r e F a c i l i t y

6 8

M i x e d - U s e

1 2 3 4 W .

3 r d S t r e e t

3 6 3 D . U

A p a r t m e n t s

1 , 6

9 1

2 3

9 0

1 1 3

9 2

4 9

1 4 1

E N V 2 0 0 5 - 7 2 1 9 M N ; 2 0 0 5 - C E N - 2 5 3 7

( 3 r d / B i x e l S t )

7 , 7

4 0 s . f

R e t a i l

T o t a

l

2 0 2 , 4

4 0

8 , 6

3 4

6 , 7

4 6

1 5 , 3

5 0

9 , 0

8 7

1 1 , 3

5 9

2 0 , 4

4 5

F : \ P r o j e c t s 2 0 1 3 \ S u n s e t a n d E v e r e t t \ R e l a t e d P r o j e c t s \ 0 8 - 1 5 - 1 3 v e r s i o n \ [ T a b l e 3 . 1

R e l a t e d P

r o j e c t L i s t & T G - 8 - 1 5 - 1 3 . x

l s x ] R P ( W P

e a k H o u r T G A d j m t s





It should also be noted that, for purposes of preparing a conservative worst case analysis, no

potential street improvements or transportation mitigation measures that might be associated

with any of the related projects were included in the future conditions traffic analysis.

Project Trip Generation and Distribution

Trip generation estimates for the related projects were prepared, as also shown in Table 3.1.

These were generally taken from the environmental and/or traffic studies prepared for the

individual projects. Where the information was not available from previous reports, the trip

generation was estimated using trip rates developed by the Institute of Transportation

Engineers (ITE). Similarly, trip distribution estimates were also taken from previous studies

where available or were estimated based on an understanding of the type of the project, its

location, and the downtown roadway and circulation system.

As shown in Table 3.1, the related projects would generate a total of about 15,350 vehicletrips in the AM peak hour and about 20,445 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour. It should be

noted that because of the large geographic distribution of these projects, that not all of these

trips would travel through the study area and traverse the study intersections.

Future Traffic Forecasts for 2016 Without Project Condition

The trip estimates shown in Table 3.1 were then added to the roadway network and combined

with existing volumes and ambient traffic growth (described earlier) to provide forecasts of

future traffic conditions in the study area in 2016, for both the AM and PM peak periods,representing the future without Project conditions.

The future without Project peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 3.2 and 3.3 for

the AM and PM peak hours respectively.

3.3 Future Base Transportation System Improvements

Transportation system improvements that will occur prior to the future analysis year of 2016,

and thus could affect the future traffic forecasts, were identified and reviewed for anyimplications for the analysis.

City of Los Angeles 2010 Bicycle Plan – First Year of the First Five-Year Implementation

Strategy – Sunset Boulevard

Since the collection of existing traffic counts and the analysis of existing conditions, the City

of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) has implemented bus/bike lanes on



125

782

2223

842

1278

61

550

0 104 0

1044

0

0

0

0132

0

016

0

127

201

155 272

91

1408

88 145

919

32

84

856

136

0

24

665 548

98

41 48

86 587363

43

0

01

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Future Without Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour

Figure 3.2

9/13/13



140

1279

1209

1171

1053

914

1400

0 92 0

188

0

0

0

9682

0

150

0

42

97

420 178

51

1058

89 365

1990

50

685

123

243

1

43

638 785

110

31 34

46 09586

39

0

11

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Future Without Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour

Figure 3.3

9/13/13





0.9 miles of Sunset Boulevard (from Figueroa Street to Douglas Street) within the existing

right-of-way. This project replaced the current peak-period curb vehicle lane in each

direction along Sunset Boulevard with a peak-period bicycle-transit-only lane from Figueroa

Street to Elysian Park Avenue. The resulting Future Without Project lane configurations at

the study intersections are shown in Figure 3.4. The bike/transit only lane have been

incorporated into the future conditions analysis.

3.4 Future Intersection Conditions

Future Without Project Intersection Level of Service

The future without Project traffic forecasts were evaluated to determine the V/C ratio and

LOS for the analyzed intersections for both the AM and PM peak hours. The results are

shown in Table 3.2, which summarizes the intersection levels of service calculated for the

future without Project conditions, and compares them to existing conditions levels of service.

Table 3.2 Future Without Project Conditions – Intersection Level of Service

Intersection

Future Without Project Conditions

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

V / C LOS V / C LOS


2. Sunset Boulevard & Marion Avenue3. Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue


0.751

0.7530.853

0.515

C

CD

A

0.676

0.6211.322

0.529

B

BF

A

AM Peak Hour

All studied intersections would operate at LOS D or better during the AM peak hour in the

future.

PM Peak Hour

All studied intersections would operate at LOS B or better during the PM peak hour in the

future, except for the following intersection which would operate worse than LOS D:

Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue LOS F







4. Future With Project Conditions

This section of the report describes the transportation characteristics of the Project anddocuments the analysis of potential Project traffic impacts in the study area.

4.1 Project Transportation Characteristics

The Project would be located northwest of downtown Los Angeles and be comprised of two

parts. Part 1 would be bounded by Sunset Boulevard to the west and private property to the

north and east. This portion of the Project will consist of up to approximately 214 market-rate

apartments, of which 14 units will be provided as affordable housing units, and approximately

8,453 sq ft of retail commercial. For the purposes of the Traffic Study, the commercial spacewill be defined as a 1,900 sq ft coffee shop and a 6,553 sq ft retail fronting on Sunset

Boulevard. This portion of the Project is currently developed and includes a 3,000 sq ft

warehouse, a residential duplex, two single-family homes, a 4,800 sq ft building

materials/lumber store and a two-stall car wash. All of the current uses are to be demolished.

Part 2 will consist of a small-lot subdivision containing up to approximately 7 single-family

homes with access provided from Everett Street. This portion of the Project is currently

developed and includes one single-family home which is to be demolished. Access to the two

single-family homes described as part of Part 1 is provided via Everett Street.

Vehicular access for Part 1 of the Project is to be provided by three driveways located alongSunset Boulevard. The main driveway will be located at the signalized intersection of Sunset

Boulevard & Marion Avenue. The second driveway will be an unsignalized intersection

located approximately 170 feet north of the main driveway. The third driveway will also be

an unsignalized intersection and will be located at the extreme northern edge of the Project.

Vehicular access for Part 2 of the Project will be provided by a driveway on Everett Street.

For purposes of the Traffic Study, the Project were analyzed as one project ( i.e., Parts 1 and 2

were analyzed together).

Project Trip Generation

Trip generation from the Project was estimated using trip rates from Trip Generation Manual

– 9th

Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2012). Table 4.1 summarizes the trip

generation estimates for the daily, AM peak & PM peak hour periods respectively.



Table 4.1 Sunset & Everett Mixed-Use Development Project - Trip Generation Estimates

Daily

Daily

Sunset Boulevard Part

Existing Uses

Warehousing ITE 150 3,000 SF 3.56 11

Net Warehousing -11

Apartments,

ITE 220 2 DU 6.65 13

Reduction for transit trips - 5% -1

-12

Building Materials/Lumber Store, ,

ITE 812 4,800 S.F 15.33 74


Reduction for pass-by trips 20% -14

-56

Car Wash,

ITE 947 2 Stalls 108.00 216

Reduction for pass-by trips 20% -44

-172

-251

Proposed Uses

Apartments,

ITE 220 214 DU 6.65 1,423


1,352

Coffee Shop, , 4,

ITE 936 1,900 SF 1,117.00 2,122

(Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -106

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% -101

(Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% -958

Net Coffee Shop 958

Retail, ,

ITE 820 6,553 SF 42.70 280

(Reduction for internal trips) - 10% -28

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% -13

(Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% -120

Net Retail 120

2,429

2,178

Everett Street Part

Existing Uses

Single-Family Residence3,4

ITE 210 3 DU 9.52 29


Net Single-Family Residence -27

-27

Proposed Uses

Single-Family Homes ITE 210 7 DU 9.52 67

Reduction for transit trips - 5% -3Net Single-family Homes 64

64

37

Total Project Trips

Total Existing Uses -278

Total Proposed Uses 2,493

2,216

Land Use Assumptions

Net Apartments

Source1

& Code

Net Building Materials/Lumber Store

Subtotal Everett St Net

Subtotal Existing - Everett St Portion

Subtotal Proposed - Everett St Part

Subtotal Sunset Blvd Net

Total Project Net

Net Apartments

Net Car Wash

Subtotal Existing - Sunset Blvd Portion

Subtotal Proposed - Sunset Blvd Part

Quantity UnitsTrip Rate

Total

Trips




AM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

Trip Rate

In Out Total In Out Total


Existing Uses

Warehousing ITE 150 3,000 SF 0.24 0.06 0.30 1 0 1

Net Warehousing -1 0 -1

Apartments,

ITE 220 2 DU 0.10 0.41 0.51 0 1 1

Reduction for transit trips - 5% 0 0 0

0 -1 -1


ITE 812 4,800 S.F 1.74 0.86 2.60 8 4 12

Reduction for transit trips - 5% -1 0 -1

Reduction for pass-by trips 20% -1 -1 -2

-6 -3 -9

Car Wash,

ITE 947 2 Stalls 4.00 4.00 8.00 8 8 16


-6 -6 -12

-13 -10 -23

Proposed Uses

ITE 220 214 DU 0.1 0.41 0.51 21 88 109

Reduction for transit trips - 5% -1 -4 -5

20 84 104

Coffee Shop, 4,

ITE 936 1,900 SF 55.27 53.11 108.38 105 101 206

(Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -5 -5 -10

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% -5 -5 -10

(Reduction for pass-by trips) - 50% -48 -45 -93

Net Coffee Shop 47 46 93

Retail16,17,18

ITE 820 6,553 SF 0.60 0.36 0.96 4 2 6

(Reduction for internal trips) - 5% 0 0 0

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% 0 0 0


Net Retail 2 1 3

69 131 200

56 121 177

Everett Street Part

Existing Uses

Single-Family Residence,4

ITE 210 3 DU 0.19 0.56 0.75 0 2 2


Net Single-Family Residence 0 -2 -2

0 -2 -2

Proposed Uses


ITE 210 7 DU 0.19 0.56 0.75 1 4 5

Reduction for transit trips - 5% 0 0 0Net Single-Family Residence 1 4 5

1 4 5

1 2 3

Total Project Trips

Total Existing Uses -13 -12 -25

Total Proposed Uses 70 135 206

57 123 180



Total Project Net



Net Apartments



Total TripsQuantity Units


Land Use AssumptionsSource

1

& Code

Net Car Wash

Apartments5,6

Net Apartments




PM Peak Hour

AM Peak Hour

Trip Rate

In Out Total In Out Total


Existing Uses

Warehousing ITE 150 3,000 SF 0.08 0.24 0.32 0 1 1

Net Warehousing 0 -1 -1

Apartments,

ITE 220 2 DU 0.40 0.22 0.62 1 0 1


-1 0 -1


ITE 812 4,800 S.F 2.11 2.38 4.49 10 12 22

Reduction for transit trips - 5% 0 -1 -1


-8 -9 -17

Car Wash,

ITE 947 2 Stalls 4.00 4.00 8.00 8 8 16


-6 -6 -12

-15 -16 -31

Proposed Uses

Apartments,

ITE 220 214 DU 0.40 0.22 0.62 86 47 133

Reduction for transit trips - 5% -5 -2 -7

81 45 126

Coffee Shop, 4,

ITE 936 1,900 SF 20.37 20.38 40.75 39 38 77

(Reduction for internal trips) - 5% -2 -2 -4

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% -2 -2 -4


Net Coffee Shop 17 17 34

Retail16,17,18

ITE 820 6,553 SF 1.78 1.93 3.71 11 13 24

(Reduction for internal trips) - 5% 0 -1 -1

(Reduction for transit trips) - 5% 0 -1 -1


Net Retail 5 6 11

103 68 171

88 52 140

Everett Street Part

Existing Uses


ITE 210 3 DU 0.63 0.37 1.00 2 1 3


Net Single-Family Residence -2 -1 -3

-2 -1 -3

Proposed Uses


ITE 210 7 DU 0.63 0.37 1.00 4 3 7

Reduction for transit trips - 5% 0 0 0Net Single-Family Residence 4 3 7

4 3 7

2 2 4

Total Project Trips

Total Existing Uses -17 -17 -34

Total Proposed Uses 107 71 178

90 54 144



Total Project Net

Net Apartments




Total Trips


Net Apartments

Land Use AssumptionsSource

1

& CodeQuantity Units

Net Car Wash





1. ITE Trip Rates from Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, DC, 2012, except otherwise noted.

2. Source: Trip Rate for ITE 150 - Warehousing.

3. Source: Trip Rate for ITE 210 - Single-Family Residence.

4. Residential trip rates were adjusted to account for transit (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures , Transit Credit,

May 2012.

5. Source: Trip Rate for ITE 220 - Apartment.

6. Apartment trip rates were adjusted to account for transit (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures , Transit Credit,

May 2012.

7. Source: Trip Rate for ITE 812 - Building Materials / Lumber Yard.

8. Commercial trip rates were adjusted to account for transit (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit,

May 2012.

9. Commercial trip rates were adjusted to account for pass-by trips (20%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures,

Attachment H - LADOT Policy on Pass-by Trips, May 2012.

10. Source: Trip Rate for ITE 947 - Automated Car Wash.

11. Car Wash trip rates were adjusted to account for pass-by trips (20%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures,

Attachment H - LADOT Policy on Pass-by Trips, May 2012.

12. Source: Average trip rates for ITE 936 - Coffee Shop With No Drive-Thru.

13. Average daily rate for ITE - 936 Coffee Shop With No Drive-Thru is not available. Daily rate was calculated by taking the proportional

ratio of ITE 933 - Fast Food Restaurant With No Drive-Thru PM Peak Hour rate as compared to ITE 936 - Coffee Shop With

No Drive-Thru and applying that ratio to the Ite 933 Daily rate.

14. Coffee Shop land use was adjusted to account for transit trips (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit,

May 2012.

15. Coffee Shop land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (50%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment H -

LADOT Policy on Pass-By Trips, May 2012.

16. Source: Average trip rates for ITE 820 - General Retail.

17. Retail land use was adjusted to account for transit trips (5%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Transit Credit,

May 2012.

18. Retail land use was adjusted to account for pass-by trips (50%) per LADOT Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, Attachment H -

LADOT Policy on Pass-By Trips, May 2012.

F:\Projects 2013\Sunset and Everett\Traffix\08-28-13 Run Add Bus Lane\H. 1900 Coffee 6553 Retail 9-12-13\[Table 4.1 TG Est T





Because of its downtown location near transit, employment and entertainment destinations, a

number of Project trips would be expected to be walk or transit trips rather than auto vehicle

trips. Similarly, because the commercial components of the Project will be primarily locally

serving to the Project and the surrounding area, some of the trips might be expected to be

walk-ins either from the Project or the surrounding area. Certain adjustments to the trip

generation were therefore made, with LADOT approval, to reflect these conditions. The tripsgenerated by all future land use components of the Project (residential and commercial) were

reduced by 5% to allow for use of transit1 to and from the Project Site. For the coffee shop

uses, a reduction of 5% for internal trips from the Project and walk-in trips from the

surrounding area was applied. Similarly, for the retail uses, a reduction of 10% for internal

trips from the Project and walk-in trips from the surrounding area was applied. Also, for the

coffee shop and the retail uses, a pass-by rate of 50%1 was applied.

For existing uses, 5% transit reduction was also applied for all uses except for the warehouse

and the car wash. A pass-by rate of 20%1 was applied for the building materials/lumber store

and the car wash uses.

As shown in Table 4.1, the analysis estimates that the Project would generate a total of 2,216

daily vehicle trips, 180 AM peak hour vehicle trips and 144 PM peak hour vehicle trips.

Trip Distribution

The likely distribution of project trips was identified based on the type of land uses in the

Project, the likely origins and destinations of Project residents and visitors, and the

characteristics of the street system in the area of the Project. The following distribution was

assumed:

- 20% of the trips towards the north

- 30% of the trips towards the south

- 25% of the trips towards the east

- 25% of the trips towards the west

Traffic generated by the Project was added to the future without Project traffic volumes to

obtain future traffic volumes with the Project for both peak periods at each of the study

intersections.

The Project only peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 4.1 and 4.2 for the AM

and PM peak hours respectively and the total future with Project conditions peak hour traffic

volumes are illustrated in Figures 4.3 and 4.4 for the AM and PM peak hours.

1 Per LADOT Traffic Study Guidelines.



21

0-1 42

0

0 0

0

0

0

2

0

2

4

0

22

0

0 0

0

0

0 0

20

62

10

0

0

00

1

0

210

8

23

25

20

3

00

0 -1 27

10

0

25

1

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Project Only Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour

Figure 4.1

9/13/13



0

44

8

10

26

1

00

0 -1 30

4

0

0

0

110

2

0

114

8

0

0

0 0

8

29

4 0

20

0

2

1

0

20

0

0 0

0

0

0 0

00-1 21

101

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Project Only Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour

Figure 4.2

9/13/13



53

42

21

7362

48

86 58

98

41

145

921

32

86

860

136

22

24

665 548

127

201

155 272

111

1470

890

0

0

0132

0

2116

8

2246

874

1298

64

550

0 103 27

1045

125

807

1

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Future With Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour

Figure 4.3

9/13/13



43

21

11

85 095

110

31 34

365

2010

50

687

124

243

21

43

638 785

42

97

420 178

59

1087

930

0

0

10782

0

1254

8

46

1217

1181

1079

915

1400

0 91 30

190

140

1323

1

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Future With Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour

Figure 4.4

9/13/13





4.2 Project Impacts

Significant Impact Thresholds

LADOT has established criteria to determine if Project impacts are significant at an

intersection. These criteria are shown below.

Definition of Significant Impact at Intersection

With Project Traffic Project-Related Increase

LOS V/C Ratio in V/C Ratio

C 0.701 – 0.800 equal to or greater than 0.040

D 0.801 – 0.900 equal to or greater than 0.020

E, F > 0.900 equal to or greater than 0.010

Using these criteria, for example, a project would not have a significant impact at an

intersection if it is operating at LOS C after the addition of project traffic and the incremental

change in the volume/capacity (V/C) ratio is less than 0.040. However, in another example, if

the intersection is operating at LOS E or LOS F and the incremental change in V/C ratio is

0.010 or greater, then the project would be considered to have a significant impact.

Future With Project - Signalized Intersection Level of Service

The intersection level of service analysis for the future with Project conditions is summarized

in Table 4.2 for the AM peak hour and in Table 4.3 for the PM peak hour. These tables also

compare the level of service for without Project and with Project conditions, show the

increase in V/C ratios at each intersection due to the Project, and identify if the increase

constitutes a significant impact.

The analysis summarized in Table 4.2 indicates that for the AM peak hour, the addition of

Project traffic would not cause the level of service to change at any of the study intersections,

and that any increases in volume/capacity (V/C) ratios would be less than the threshold for a

significant impact to occur.

The analysis summarized in Table 4.3 indicates that for the PM peak hour, the addition of

Project traffic would not cause the level of service to change at any of the study intersections, but the increase in the volume/capacity (V/C) ratio would cause a significant impact at one

intersection (with the resultant LOS in parentheses).

Sunset Boulevard and Beaudry Avenue (LOS F)





Table 4.2 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service

AM Peak Hour

Intersection

AM Peak Hour

Change

in V / C

Significant

Impact

Future Without

Project

Future With

Project

V / C LOS V / C LOS





0.751

0.753

0.853

0.515

C

C

D

A

0.759

0.792

0.857

0.529

C

C

D

A

0.008

0.039

0.004

0.014

No

No

No

No

Table 4.3 Future With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service

PM Peak Hour

Intersection

PM Peak Hour

Change

in V / C

Significant

Impact

Future Without

Project

Future With

Project

V / C LOS V / C LOS





0.676

0.621

1.322

0.529

B

B

F

A

0.678

0.660

1.338

0.536

B

B

F

A

0.002

0.039

0.016

0.007

No

No

Yes

No





Future With Project – Unsignalized Intersection Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis

LADOT Traffic Study guidelines indicate that unsignalized intersections adjacent to the

project or integral to the project’s site access and circulation should be evaluated solely to

determine the need for installation of a traffic signal or other traffic control device. The

intersection of Sunset Boulevard & Everett Street is currently a stop-controlled intersectionand is located adjacent to the Project Site; therefore, a traffic signal warrant analysis was

conducted at that intersection.

The warrant analysis was based on the peak hour traffic volumes. The result of the traffic

signal warrant analysis is shown in Table 4.4 for the future with Project conditions. Based on

an analysis of the peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard & Everett

Street, a signal would not be warranted in either the AM or PM peak hour.

CMP Analysis

The Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires that new

development projects analyze potential project impacts on CMP monitoring stations, if an EIR

is prepared for the Project. As an EIR is not being prepared for the Project, no CMP analysis

is required. Nevertheless, for purposes of preparing a comprehensive study, a check was

conducted against CMP criteria.

When a CMP analysis is needed, the CMP methodology requires that the Traffic Study

analyze traffic conditions at all CMP arterial monitoring stations where the Project will add

50 or more trips during either the AM or PM weekday peak hours of adjacent street traffic.The CMP also requires that traffic studies analyze mainline freeway monitoring stations

where the project will add 150 or more trips in either direction during either AM or PM

weekday peak hours. If, based on these criteria, the Traffic Study identifies no facilities for

study, then no further traffic analysis is required.

CMP Arterial Monitoring Stations

As shown in Table 4.1, the Project would generate 230 AM peak hour trips and 180 PM peak

hour trips. A review of the 2010 CMP indicated the following arterial monitoring stations

that are closest to the Project site:

Sunset Boulevard & Alvarado Street

Wilshire Boulevard & Alvarado Street

Washington Boulevard & Alameda Street



T a b l e 4 . 4

S i t e A d j a c e n t I n t e r s e c t i o n s

- S i g n a l W a r r a n t A n a l y s i s - F

u t u r e W i t h P r o j e c t C o n d i t i o n s

V o l u m e

1

( b o t h

a p p r o a c h e s )

# o f L a n e s

p e r

D i r e c t i o n

V o l u m e

1

( h i g h v o l u m e

a p p r o a c h )

# o f L a n e s

p e r

D i r e c t i o n

A M

3 , 3 7 0

2

8 2

1

1 0 0

N o

P M

3 , 4 5 8

2

4 1

1

1 0 0

N o

N o t e :

1 . F u t u r e W i t h P r o j e

c t v o l u m e s .

2 . C a l t r a n s T r a f f i c M

a n u a l - F i g u r e 9 - 8 P e a k H o u r V o l u m e

W a r r a n t ( U r b a n A r e a s ) . M i n o r s t r e e t w

a r r a n t c a l c u l a t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o m a j o r s t r e e t v o l u m e .

S u n s e t B l v d

S i g n a l

W a r r a n t e d

M i n o r S t r e e t

M

i n o r S t r e e t

W a r r a n t

T

h r e s h o l d

V o l u m e

2

P e a k

H o u r

M a j o r S t r e e t

I n t e r s e c t i o n

S u n s e t & E v e r e t t

M i n o r S

t r e e t

E v e r e t t S t r e e t






As these are some distance from the Project Site, and as the Project trips will disperse onto

numerous roadways away from the site, it is therefore clear that the Project traffic volumes

would not exceed the thresholds for analysis. Further, based on the trip generation and trip

distribution characteristics of the Project as described earlier, it is estimated that the maximum

number of trips that the Project would add to any single CMP monitoring station would be 26

trips at the Sunset Boulevard & Alvarado Street station. There is therefore no need for furtheranalysis and there would be no significant impacts at any CMP arterial monitoring stations.

CMP Freeway Monitoring Stations

A review of the 2010 CMP also indicated the following freeway monitoring stations that are

closest to the Project Site.

I-5 at Stadium Way

US-101 North of Vignes Street

SR-110 South of US-101 SR-110 North of Alpine Street

SR-110 at Pasadena Avenue

Many of these stations are located some considerable distance from the Project Site.

Nevertheless, the number of Project trips expected to pass through these stations was

estimated based on the Project trip distribution and the Project trip generation (shown in Table

4.1). The maximum number of one-way Project trips that would be added to any single

freeway segment at these monitoring stations would be 13 southbound trips along the SR-110

Freeway south of the US-101 Freeway. Besides these CMP monitoring stations, the

maximum number of one-way Project trips that would be added to any single freewaysegment would be 10 westbound trips along the US-101 Freeway north of Alvarado Street.

With this low incremental volume, which is below the CMP threshold of 150 trips, it is

concluded that no further analysis is necessary and that the Project would not cause any

significant impacts to freeway operations.

CMP Transit Impact Analysis

Although not required because an EIR is not being prepared for the Project, an analysis of

potential Project impacts on the transit system was also performed, per the CMP requirements

and guidelines.

Significant Impact Thresholds

Based on factors in the “CEQA Thresholds Guide,” City of Los Angeles (1998), the

following criterion was established to determine if there would be any significant transit

impacts due to the Project:





The capacity of the transit system serving the Project Area would be substantially

exceeded.

Transit Analysis

The number of transit trips that would be generated by the Project was estimated based on thetrip generation methodology described in Chapter 4.

The estimate of base vehicle trips (unadjusted) for each Project land use (from Table 4.1) was

converted to person trips by applying a conversion factor of 1.4, as per CMP guidelines. The

person trip numbers were then multiplied by the estimated percent taking transit for each land

use, as previously determined and discussed earlier in this Chapter. These numbers are higher

in some cases than the default countywide guidelines in the CMP but are more accurate in this

instance as they reflect the higher transit use that would occur for the Project because of its

downtown location. Because of the nature of the Project land uses, there would be a higher

number of transit trips in the AM peak hour.

There would be approximately 27 net additional transit trips (12 inbound trips and 15

outbound trips) in the AM peak hour due to the Project, and approximately 19 additional

transit trips (12 inbound and 7 outbound) in the PM peak hour, as shown in Table 4.5. The

highest number of additional transit trips would therefore occur in the AM peak hour.

The peak hourly capacity of the transit system serving the area of the Project Site is

approximately 954 persons per direction. The highest directional volume of peak hour trips

added by the Project would be 15 trips. As this would be less than 1.6% of total transit

capacity, it is concluded that the Project would not cause the capacity of the transit system to be substantially exceeded and therefore that the Project would not create any significant

impacts on the transit systems serving the Project Area.

4.3 Existing With Project Impacts

This section addresses an analysis of potential Project impacts for the existing conditions with

Project scenario. Project traffic was added to existing conditions traffic and the potential for

impacts evaluated.

Existing With Project - Signalized Intersection Level of Service

The total existing with Project conditions peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures

4.5 and 4.6 for the AM and PM peak hours.



T a b l e 4 . 5

T r a n s i t T r i p s G e n e r a t e d b y T h e P r o j e c t

T o t a l

I n 4

O u t 4

T o t a l

I n 4

O u t 4

S u n s e t B o u l e v a r d P a r t

E x i s t i n g U s e s

W a r e h o u s i n g

- 1

- 1

- 1

- 1

0 %

0 %

0

0

0

0

0

0

A p a r t m e n t s

- 1

- 1

- 1

- 1

5 %

5 %

0

0

0

0

0

0

B u i l d i n g M a t e r i a l s / L u m b e

r S t o r e

- 1 2

- 2 2

- 1 7

- 3 1

5 %

5 %

- 1

- 1

0

- 2

- 1

- 1

C a r W a s h

- 1 6

- 1 6

- 2 2

- 2 2

0 %

0 %

0

0

0

0

0

0

P r o p o s e d U s e s

A p a r t m e n t s

1 0 9

1 3 3

1 5 3

1 8 6

5 %

5 %

8

2

6

9

6

3

R e s t a u r a n t

7 0

6 4

9 8

9 0

5 %

5 %

5

3

2

5

3

2

C o f f e e S h o p

2 1 7

8 2

3 0 4

1 1 5

5 %

5 %

1 5

8

7

6

3

3

E v e r e t t S t r e e t P a r t

E x i s t i n g U s e s

S i n g l e - F a m i l y R e s i d e n c e

- 2

- 3

- 3

- 4

5 %

5 %

0

0

0

0

0

0

P r o p o s e d U s e s

S i n g l e - F a m i l y H o m e s

5

7

7

1 0

5 %

5 %

0

0

0

1

1

0

T o t a l

3 6 9

2 4 3

5 1 8

3 4 2

2 7

1 2

1 5

1 9

1 2

7

1 . F r o m T a b l e 4 . 1 - T r i p G e

n e r a t i o n E s t i m a t e s .

2 . C o n v e r s i o n f a c t o r o f 1 . 4

f r o m v e h i c l e t r i p s t o p e r s o n t r i p s , p e r C M

P g u i d e l i n e s .

3 . T r a n s i t p e r c e n t a g e f r o m

T a b l e 4 . 1 - T r i p G e n e r a t i o n E s t i m a t e s .

4 . I n / o u t d i s t r i b u t i o n f r o m T

a b l e 4 . 1 - T r i p G e n e r a t i o n E s t i m a t e s .

% B y T r a n s i t 3

A M P e a k

H o u r

P M P e a k

H o u r

A M P e a k H o u r

T r a n s i t T r i p s

P M

P e a k H o u r

L a n d U s e

B a s e ( U n a d j u s t e d ) 1

V e h i c l e T r i p s

P e r s o n T r i p s

2

A M P e a k

H o u r

P M P e a k

H o u r

A M

P e a k

H o u r

P M P e a k

H o u r



21

2060 42

46

78 55

95

32

141

815

31

84

835

124

22

23

585 452

123

195

104 204

103

1302

780

0

0

0128

979

0

2115

8

2054

771

1163

53

530

0 100 27

47

106

714

1

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Existing With Project Traffic Volumes – AM Peak Hour

Figure 4.5

9/30/13



108

1140

1027

1022

928

853

1360

0 88 30

39

0

0

0

9980

164

0

1248

8

41

94

353 61

55

919

81 354

1815

49

667

120

209

21

42

538 689

0

107

24 33

392182 21

111

Study Intersection



X

LEGEND

2 3 4

No Scale

Project Site


Existing With Project Traffic Volumes – PM Peak Hour

Figure 4.6

9/30/13





Tables 4.6 and 4.7 summarize the level of service for the existing with Project conditions at

the analyzed intersections for the AM and PM peak hours respectively.

The analysis summarized in Table 4.6 indicates that for the AM peak hour, the addition of


and that any increases in volume/capacity (V/C) ratios would be less than the threshold for asignificant impact to occur.

The analysis summarized in Table 4.7 indicates that for the PM peak hour, the addition of


and that any increases in volume/capacity (V/C) ratios would be less than the threshold for a

significant impact to occur.

It is therefore concluded that no significant traffic impacts would be caused by the Project.

Existing With Project – Unsignalized Intersection Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis

The warrant analysis was based on the peak hour traffic volumes. The result of the traffic

signal warrant analysis is shown in Table 4.8 for the existing with Project conditions. Based

on an analysis of the peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Sunset Boulevard &

Everett Street, a signal would not be warranted in either the AM or PM peak hour.





Table 4.6 Existing With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service

AM Peak Hour

Intersection

AM Peak Hour

Change

in V / C

Significant

Impact

Existing Existing With

Project

V / C LOS V / C LOS





0.679

0.467

0.745

0.460

B

A

C

A

0.686

0.507

0.749

0.473

B

A

C

A

0.007

0.040

0.004

0.013

No

No

No

No

Table 4.7 Existing With Project Conditions - Intersection Level of Service

PM Peak Hour

Intersection

PM Peak Hour

Change

in V / C

Significant

Impact

Existing Existing With

Project

V / C LOS V / C LOS





0.625

0.355

1.028

0.479

B

A

F

A

0.626

0.398

1.036

0.486

B

A

F

A

0.001

0.043

0.008

0.007

No

No

No

No



T a b l e 4 . 8

S i t e A d j a c e n t I n t e r s e c t i o n s

- S i g n a l W a r r a n t A n a l y s i s - E

x i s t i n g W i t h P r o j e c t C o n d i t i o n s

V o l u m e

1

( b o t h

a p p r o a c h e s )

# o f L a n e s

p e r

D i r e c t i o n

V o l u m e

1

( h i g h v o l u m e

a p p r o a c h )

# o f L a n e s

p e r

D i r e c t i o n

A M

3 , 1 2 7

2

7 8

1

1 0 0

N o

P M

3 , 1 3 9

2

3 8

1

1 0 0

N o

N o t e :

1 . E x i s t i n g W i t h P r o j e c t v o l u m e s .

2 . C a l t r a n s T r a f f i c M

a n u a l - F i g u r e 9 - 8 P e a k H o u r V o l u m e

W a r r a n t ( U r b a n A r e a s ) . M i n o r s t r e e t w

a r r a n t c a l c u l a t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o m a j o r s t r e e t v o l u m e .

S u n s e t B l v d

S i g n a l

W a r r a n t e d

M i n o r S t r e e t

M

i n o r S t r e e t

W a r r a n t

T

h r e s h o l d

V o l u m e

2

P e a k

H o u r


I n t e r s e c t i o n

S u n s e t & E v e r e t t

M i n o r S

t r e e t

E v e r e t t S t r e e t






5. Project Mitigation

This Chapter explores and identifies mitigation strategies to reduce or eliminate thesignificant traffic impact caused by the Project.

5.1 Future With Project – Mitigation Measures

It is worth noting that the earlier impact analysis was deemed to be conservative (worst case)

as it assumed a list of other related projects that could occur by 2016, and also assumed a

growth in other background traffic of 1% per year. If these background and related project

trip growth levels do not occur by 2016 and if Project trips are in fact lower than estimated,

then it is possible that some of the significant traffic impacts identified for this Project in factmay not occur – as traffic levels of service conditions could be better than estimated in the

analysis. Nevertheless, mitigation measures were explored for all the significant traffic

impacts identified under future with Project conditions, as described below.

Sunset Boulevard & Beaudry Avenue

The earlier analysis identified that the Project would cause a significant impact at this

intersection in the PM peak hour. The Project would cause the level of service to change

from LOS F with a V/C ratio of 1.322 to LOS F with a V/C ratio of 1.338.

The proposed mitigation measure is to re-stripe the northbound approach to the intersection

(Beaudry Avenue) from one shared left/thru/right lane to one left turn lane and one shared

thru/right lane. This could be done without any roadway widening. A concept plan of this

mitigation measure is provided in Appendix D.

The level of service with this measure would improve to LOS E (V/C ratio of 0.951 and the

V/C ratio would decrease by -0.371). This would fully mitigate the PM peak hour impact.

LADOT will review the existing traffic signal and determine whether any modifications to the

signal are necessary in order to implement this mitigation measure, and if, so, this mitigation

may be revised to include any such necessary modifications

Summary of Intersection Improvements

With the above mitigation measure, there would be no significant impacts due to the Project.







































Documents

Sunset/Everett Traffic Study