Attachment K - Amendments to the GP - Part IIC I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -1
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
3
Chapter 3
CIRCULATION
he Circulation Element addresses anticipated
mobility needs, and the ability of the roadway network and the various transportation modes to
meet future travel demands through the buildout year of the
Land Use Element (2025). Incremental increases in development intensity increase the use of local and regional
roadways by passenger vehicles and trucks. The plan and
policies presented in this Element identify strategies that the City will pursue to maintain good service levels wherever
possible.
As local roadway facilities are linked to regional roadways, the
policies within this Element highlight Rosemead’s continued
need to work within the region and with neighboring
jurisdictions to alleviate traffic congestion. Reduced
dependency on the automobile for typical trips supports these
objectives and improves overall environmental quality in terms
of noise and air quality. As there are alternatives to the passenger vehicle, this Element examines the transportation
options available to Rosemead residents and establishes
appropriate policies to promote diverse trip modes.
California State law requires that each city undertake a periodic
review of its General Plan. The law also requires an update of the Circulation Element as part of the overall process. The
T
R O S E M E A D G E N E R A L P L A N
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -2
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
specific code sections and the related requirements are as
follows:
▪ Government Code Section 65302 (b): (The general plan
shall include) a circulation element consisting of the
general location and extent of existing and proposed
major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals,
and other local public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the land use element of the plan.
▪ Government Code Section 95303: The general plan may address any other subjects, which, in the judgment of
the legislative body, relate to the physical development
of the county or city.
Relationship to Other
Elements
According to California planning law, the Circulation Element must be independent but consistent with other elements. The
Circulation Element is most closely related to the Land Use
Element, as changes in trip patterns and increases in local trip generation are caused by increases in land use intensity over
time.
The planned development areas identified in the Land Use
Element served as the basis for the analysis of future traffic
levels, and then needed roadway improvements were identified.
Implementation of the Circulation Element ensures that existing transportation facilities will be improved to adequately
serve traffic generated by future development, where the
improvements are both warranted and feasible. Additionally, projected noise contours from transportation sources are
included in the Noise Element.
Other Plans
Regional Transportation Plan
The Regional Transportation Plan is a component of the
Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide prepared by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to address regional issues, goals, objectives, and policies into the
middle of the 21st century. The Plan, which SCAG periodically
updates to address changing conditions, has been developed
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -3
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
with active participation from local agencies throughout the
region, elected officials, the business community, community
groups, private institutions, and private citizens. The Plan sets
broad goals for the region and provides strategies to reduce
problems related to congestion and mobility.
Congestion Management Plan
The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA or officially known as “Metro”) is responsible for
planning and operating regional transit facilities and services in
Los Angeles County. As required by State law, Metro prepares a Congestion Management Plan (CMP) for Los Angeles County.
The CMP identifies the future regional transportation network,
establishes acceptable service levels for network routes, and identifies strategies to reduce congestion. Local jurisdictions
within the County are responsible for implementing the CMP.
The CMP roadway network includes the following roadways
that serve Rosemead:
▪ San Bernardino Freeway (Interstate 10)
▪ Pomona Freeway (State Route 60)
▪ Rosemead Boulevard (State Route 19)
In addition, the intersection of Rosemead Boulevard at Valley Boulevard is classified as a CMP arterial monitoring station.
The performance of this intersection is regularly tracked for
CMP report updates.
Air Quality Management Plan
The federal Clean Air Act requires preparation of plans to
improve air quality in any region designated as a non-
attainment area (A non-attainment area is a geographic area
identified by the Environmental Protection Agency and/or
California Air Resources Board as not meeting State or federal standards for a given pollutant). The plan must outline specific
programs, strategies, and timelines for bringing the area into
compliance with air quality standards. The Air Quality Management Plan prepared by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District, first adopted in 1994 and updated on a
three-year cycle, contains policies and measures designed to
achieve federal and State standards for healthier air quality in
the South Coast Air Basin. Many of the programs address
circulation improvements, since fossil-fuel-powered vehicles
account for more than 60 percent of the nitrogen oxide
emissions and 70 percent of the carbon monoxide emissions
within the Basin.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -4
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Roadway Classifications
Roadways within Rosemead, as in any typical urbanized area, are defined using a hierarchical classification system. Each
type of roadway is generally described by purpose and capacity.
Rosemead’s circulation system is defined by five types of roadway facilities, for which the general standards are
described below.
Freeways
Freeways are controlled access, high-speed roadways with
grade-separated interchanges. They are intended to carry high
volumes of traffic from region to region. The planning, design, construction, and maintenance of freeways in California are the
responsibility of the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans).
Interstate 10 – The San Bernardino Freeway is a six-lane
freeway with high-occupancy vehicle lanes in both directions. The facility bisects the commercial/retail areas of the city.
Interstate 10 provides a full-access interchange with Interstate
710 (Long Beach Freeway) approximately four miles to the
west, and also with Interstate 605 (San Gabriel River Freeway)
approximately four miles to the east. Via Interstate 10, direct
access is provided to Los Angeles on the west and San
Bernardino County on the east.
State Route 60 – The Pomona Freeway traverses the southern
end of Rosemead, with an interchange at San Gabriel Boulevard. The facility generally parallels the San Bernardino
Freeway and has nearby interchanges with the Interstate 710
and Interstate 605 freeways.
Major Arterials
The function of a Major Arterial is to connect traffic from minor
arterials and collectors to other parts of the city, freeway
interchanges, and adjacent major land uses. They are the
principal urban thoroughfares and provide a linkage between
activity centers in the City and to adjacent communities. Major
Arterials are designed to move large volumes of traffic, typically
in the range of 40,000 to 60,000 vehicles per day. They are
generally served by regional transit routes and are the primary truck routes in the community. The adoption of the Garvey
Avenue Specific Plan in 2017 introduced multimodal
transportation and infrastructure for bicycles, pedestrians, and transit into the portion of Garvey Avenue within the Specific
Plan area.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -5
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
There are currently four Major Arterials within the City of
Rosemead: Valley Boulevard, Garvey Avenue, San Gabriel
Boulevard, and Rosemead Boulevard.
Minor Arterials
The primary purpose of Minor Arterials is to serve as an
intermediate route carrying traffic between local streets and
major arterials. They are designed to carry moderate levels of traffic, generally in the range of 15,000 to 25,000 vehicles per
day. Within Rosemead, these roadway facilities were
previously referred to as Secondary Arterials. The roadway
plan within this Element introduces the Minor Arterial
designation, as it is a more descriptive name for the function of
these facilities.
Minor Arterials within the City include Del Mar Avenue, Graves
Avenue, New Avenue, Rush Street, Temple City Boulevard,
Lower Azusa Road, Mission Drive, and Walnut Grove Avenue. These well-placed streets complete the well-balanced arterial
circulation system, which the City has constructed to provide
an efficient flow of traffic to places of importance while protecting residential neighborhoods.
Collector Roads
The primary function of a collector street is to connect a
neighborhood area with nearby arterials. Collector roads are
intended to move traffic between local streets and arterials and
commonly carry less than 15,000 vehicles per day.
Roadways classified as collector streets include Encinita
Avenue, Grand Avenue, Hellman Avenue, Ivar Avenue, Loftus Drive, Marshall Street, Muscatel Avenue, Ramona Boulevard,
Rio Hondo Avenue, and Rosemead Place.
Local Streets
Local streets are designed to principally provide vehicular,
pedestrian, and bicycle access to individual parcels throughout
the City. They are intended to carry low volumes of traffic, and
are typically two-lane roadways.
The established hierarchy of roadway facilities within
Rosemead is illustrated within Figure 3-1.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -6
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-1: Existing Roadway Classifications
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -7
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Measurement of Traffic Flow
The traffic study for this element was primarily based on two
traffic engineering concepts – Intersection Capacity Utilization
(ICU) values and Level of Service (LOS) values. Both of these are used to measure the adequacy of roadway facilities, but the
ICU methodology was specifically developed to gauge the
operations at signalized roadway intersections. The ICU methodology is based on specific calculations that include the
number of approach lanes and approach volumes by turning
movement.
The ICU output value correlates directly with a more common
term in traffic engineering, the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio.
Traffic volumes for existing conditions at the analyzed locations
are defined by traffic counts, conducted manually at roadway
intersections or by automatic tube counters at mid-block roadway segments. Traffic volumes for future or forecast
conditions are defined by annual increases in ambient/area
traffic and specific traffic increases calculated for planned land use intensity/use changes under the Land Use Element.
Capacity refers to the maximum vehicle carrying ability of a roadway, and is a critical component of roadway design. A
roadway that carries 16,000 vehicles per day, with the capacity
to accommodate 20,000 vehicles within the same timeframe, has a V/C value of 0.80 for the analyzed time period.
The V/C value is used in turn to establish Level of Service
(LOS) categories describing the performance of roadways and
intersections throughout the community. Six categories of LOS
– the letter designations A to F – are used to identify traffic
conditions, with LOS A representing excellent conditions and
LOS F representing extreme congestion. For roadways, the
LOS designations are based on V/C ratios calculated based on
the roadway’s capacity at the LOS E/LOS F threshold of 1.00. Table 3-1 provides V/C ranges, the corresponding LOS, and a
description of expected traffic conditions for roadway
segments.
For intersections, LOS is based on Intersection Capacity
Utilization (ICU) ratios, which take into account the volume-to-capacity ratios of all of the critical turning movements that take
place at an intersection. Table 3-2 provides ranges of ICU
values (equivalent to V/C values), the corresponding LOS, and
a description of expected traffic conditions for intersections.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -8
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-1
Level of Service Descriptions for Roadways
Level of
Service Flow Conditions
Volume to
Capacity
Ratio
A LOS A describes primarily free-flow operations at average travel speeds,
usually about 90 percent of the free-flow speed for the arterial
classification. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to
maneuver within the traffic stream. Stopped delays at signalized
intersections are minimal.
0-0.60
B LOS B represents reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel
speeds, usually about 70 percent of the free-flow speed for the arterial
classification. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are
not generally subjected to appreciable tension.
0.61-0.70
C LOS C represents stable operations; however, ability to maneuver and
change lanes in midblock locations may be more restricted than at LOS B, and longer queues, adverse signal coordination, or both may contribute
to lower average speeds of about 50 percent of the average free-flow speed for the arterial classification. Motorists will experience appreciable
tension while driving.
0.71-0.80
D LOS D borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause a
substantial increase in delay and hence decreases in arterial speed. LOS
D may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing,
high volumes, or some combination of these factors. Average travel
speeds are about 40 percent of free-flow speed.
0.81-0.90
E LOS E is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of
one-third the free-flow speed or less. Such operations are caused by some combination of adverse progression, high signal density, high
volumes, extensive delays at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing.
0.91-1.00
F LOS F characterizes arterial flow at extremely low speeds below one-third to one-fourth of the free-flow speed. Intersection congestion is likely at
critical signalized locations, with high delays and extensive queuing. Adverse progression is frequently a contributor to this condition.
Over 1.00
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -9
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-2
Level of Service Descriptions for Signalized Intersections
Level of Service Description
Intersection
Capacity
Utilization (ICU) Ratio
A Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear
quite open, turning movements are easily made, and nearly all
drivers find freedom of operation.
0-0.60
B 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.
0.61-0.70
C Good operation. Occasionally drivers may have to wait more
than 60 seconds, and back-ups may develop behind turning
vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted.
0.71-0.80
D Fair operation. Cars are sometimes required to wait more than
60 seconds during short peaks. There are no long-standing
traffic queues. This level is typically associated with design
practice for peak periods.
0.81-0.90
E Poor operation. Some long-standing vehicular queues develop
on critical approaches to intersections. Delays may be up to
several minutes.
0.91-1.00
F Forced flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups form
locations downstream or on the cross street may restrict or
prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approach
lanes; therefore, volumes carried are not predictable. Potential
for stop and go type traffic flow.
Over 1.00
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1985
and Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, NCHRP Circular 212, 1982.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -10
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Future Circulation
Issues
The local circulation system within Rosemead has evolved over
time to provide travel routes for both local and regional trips.
Major roadways provide access to the I-10 freeway and the State Route (SR) 60 freeway. The I-10 and SR-60 freeways are
both east-west trending facilities within the city that have
access ramps at major north-south roadways. These freeways
link Rosemead residents and businesses to destinations
throughout the Los Angeles area and the Southern California
region.
Rosemead Boulevard, Walnut Grove Avenue, San Gabriel
Boulevard, and Del Mar Avenue are the major north-south
roadways within the City. All four major north-south roads provide connections to Interstate 10. In addition, San Gabriel
Boulevard connects to SR-60 within the southern area of the
city. Valley Boulevard, Garvey Avenue, Graves Avenue, and Rush Street are the major east-west roadways within the City.
Although these arterials often act as relief valves to the
freeways during peak commute periods, they also provide good alternative travel routes to destinations throughout the San
Gabriel Valley.
A safe and convenient circulation system is needed to support
the variety of land uses in Rosemead and to manage through
traffic that originates in and is destined for locations outside
the City.
Four major issues are addressed by the goals, policies, and
implementation actions of the Circulation Element:
(1) Efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians
throughout the city;
(2) Promoting alternative modes of travel;
(3) Separating traffic associated with commercial and
industrial uses from residential neighborhoods; and
(4) Ensuring that adequate parking exists for all
commercial and industrial development.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -11
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Future Land Use Intensification
Development outside of the City limits will generate additional increases in area traffic volumes. Such development has been
incorporated into the ambient annual growth rate within the
Circulation Element traffic analysis, added to existing volumes and compounded over the period between existing (year 2009)
and future buildout (year 2025) conditions. Traffic generated
from developments envisioned under the updated Land Use Element was added to the analysis after the creation of future
ambient growth volumes.
Relationship of Trip Generation to
Land Use Makeup
All development creates vehicle trips of some measurable total per unit of intensity (floor area increment or residential unit).
The trip generation methodology used within the traffic study,
and the assumptions utilized for trip reductions, are discussed below. The potential for increased use of transit, bicycles, or
other trip modes was not included in the analysis in order to
provide a conservative estimate of impacts.
Conservative Nature of Development Analysis
The trip generation totals used within the traffic analysis
prepared for the Circulation Element update were conservative,
both by design and by necessity. The traffic analysis
methodology was designed to plan for a conservative level of
trip generation from each area of intensified development that would be allowed under the updated Land Use Element. It is
also necessary to provide this conservative analysis, as
additional trip generation reductions, beyond those taken for 7mixed-use developments (discussed below) cannot be
substantiated without intense transit service levels or
established and active trip reduction programs.
With increasing land use densities that commonly occur during
the maturation of an urban-area city, there is an increasing
potential for higher transit use or an increasing potential for
higher percentage shares of walking trips and bicycle trips.
Infrastructure and programs must support these changes in
trip patterns, however.
As Rosemead is entering a new phase of urbanization through
establishment of major mixed-use centers within the updated Land Use Element and the current predominant makeup of the
City is lower density, single-use developments, credits were
only taken for internal trip capture between uses within mixed-
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -12
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
use projects and for pass-by or linked trips. These deductions,
typical to traffic studies, are based on national standards for
related trip reductions and characteristics.
Pass-by reductions were taken for commercial retail trips
during the p.m. peak hour only. These reductions were based
on typical percentages of these occurrences (unplanned side
trips that take place between a planned or regular daily origin and destination). These primary trips already exist on the area
roadways, and the pass-by trips would become an additional
linked trip along the route of the overall primary trip, so these are not included in the impact calculations.
Additional reductions were taken for internal trip capture within mixed-use developments. There are multiple mixed-use
project zones envisioned within the updated Land Use Element.
These mixed-use developments – most typically consisting of
retail and residential uses in one building – capture some
residential-to-commercial trip demand internally and such
trips are therefore not generated on area roadways.
Further trip reductions were not taken. A methodology that
established trip reduction estimates for developments along
transit corridors are provided within the CMP document. However, existing transit levels within Rosemead, and transit
levels envisioned for the near future, would not support the use
of these additional trip reductions in the analysis.
Potential Trip Generation Intensity Reductions
The synergy that is possible between multiple mixed-use and
higher-density development projects has not been factored into
the trip generation calculations. When this synergy occurs,
more walking trips occur between different nearby
developments and more non-auto trips can be generated.
These aspects, however, are difficult to estimate at the level of
analysis undertaken for the city-wide traffic study conducted
for this Element. In addition, estimates for such reductions can only be defined through surveys at similar uses which were not
conducted for this macro-level analysis. As trip reductions for
these types of trips were not taken, the analysis provides a conservative (or worst-case) estimate of potential traffic
impacts.
Traffic Circulation Analysis
According to the Circulation Element Update traffic impact
study report, completed by KOA Corporation on February 19,
2010, multiple roadway segments and major intersections would operate at LOS values of E or F in the year 2025 with
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -13
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
implementation of land use intensification that would be
allowed by the updated Land Use Element of the General Plan.
Table 3-34 provides a summary of future conditions with the
projected General Plan land use development, without the
proposed circulation roadway network improvements, as
analyzed within the traffic study. Within the table headings,
the term “V/C” refers to the calculated volume-to-capacity ratio provided by the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis
methodology. Values of 1.000 or greater define at-capacity
operations. The term “LOS” refers to the related level of service values, ranging from A to F. The Garvey Avenue Specific Plan
Traffic Impact Analysis included in the certified Final
Environmental Impact Report (SCH: 2015041067) updated the Levels of Service for the intersections identified in Table 3-3
Table 3-3
Garvey Avenue Specific Plan – Traffic Impact Study
Intersections
Intersection
Del Mar Avenue/Hellman Avenue
San Gabriel Blvd/Hellman Ave
New Avenue/Garvey Avenue
Jackson Avenue/Garvey Avenue
Del Mar Avenue/Garvey Avenue
Kelburn Avenue/Garvey Avenue
San Gabriel Blvd/Garvey Avenue
Delta Avenue/Garvey Avenue
Walnut Grove Avenue/Garvey Avenue
Formatted: Table Title, Right: 1.08"
Formatted Table
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -14
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-34
Future (year 2025) Area Intersection Levels of Service *
V/C LOS V/C LOS
1 Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.0.858 D 0.871 D
2 Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.0.889 D 0.942 E
3 Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.1.220 F 1.155 F
4 Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.1.132 F 1.171 F
5 Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.1.155 F 1.123 F
6 Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.0.615 B 0.614 B
7 Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave.0.631 B 0.929 E
8 Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.1.079 F 0.942 E
9 Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St.1.432 F 1.586 F
10 Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.1.051 F 1.107 F
11 Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way 1.005 F 0.898 D
12 Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.0.799 C 0.952 E
13 Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.0.958 E 0.898 D
14 San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.1.014 F 0.906 E
15 Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona 0.989 E 1.207 F
16 Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.0.931 E 1.056 F
17 Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St.0.742 C 0.831 D
18 New Ave. at Garvey Ave.0.916 E 1.013 F
19 Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave.0.948 E 1.084 F
20 San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.1.078 F 1.123 F
21 Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.1.009 F 1.143 F
22 San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush St./Potrero Grande 0.587 A 0.776 C
23 Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St.0.641 B 0.741 C
24 Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.0.490 A 0.507 A
25 Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.0.923 E 1.069 F
26 San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps 0.945 E 0.921 E
27 Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps 0.628 B 0.649 B
28 San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.0.750 C 0.778 C
AM Peak Hour PM Peak HourIntersection
* Projected General Plan land use development without General Plan circulation roadway network
improvements.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -15
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
The following degradations in intersection peak-hour LOS
values would occur with full implementation of the updated
Land Use Element:
▪ Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave. – Operations would
worsen from LOS D to E within the p.m. peak hour.
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St. – Operations would
worsen from LOS E to F within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St. – Operations would
worsen from LOS E to F within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Wy. – Operations would worsen from LOS E to F within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave. – Operations would
worsen from LOS E to F within the a.m. peak hour and from LOS D to E in the p.m. peak hour.
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman Ave./Ramona Ave. –
Operations would worsen from LOS D to E within the
a.m. peak hour.
▪ Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave. – Operations would
worsen from LOS D to E within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ New Ave. at Garvey Ave. – Operations would worsen
from LOS D to E within the a.m. peak hour and from
LOS E to F within the pm. peak hour.
▪ Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave. – Operations would worsen from LOS D to E within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave. - Operations would
worsen from LOS E to F within the a.m. peak hour.
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd. – Operations
would worsen from LOS D to E within the a.m. peak
hour.
▪ San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 westbound ramps –
Operations would worsen from LOS D to E within the
p.m. peak hour.
Figure 3-2 illustrates the level of service values at the study
intersections during the a.m. and p.m. peak hour for the future
with General Plan development scenario without roadway
improvements.
Table 3-45 provides the results of the level of service calculations for each of the study roadway segments, based on
this analysis scenario. LOS values of E or F are displayed in
bold text on the right side of the table.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -16
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-54
Future (year 2025) Area Roadway Segment Levels of Service *
Volume V/C LOS
1 Walnut Grove Av Grand Ave Mission Drive Secondary 4 30,000 15,608 0.520 A
2 Walnut Grove Av Wells/Edmond Valley Blvd Secondary 4 30,000 21,710 0.724 C
3 Walnut Grove Av Valley Blvd Marshall St Secondary 4 30,000 30,614 1.020 F
4 Walnut Grove Av Hellman Ave Garvey Ave Secondary 4 30,000 29,107 0.970 E
5 Walnut Grove Av Fern Ave Klingerman St Secondary 4 30,000 22,982 0.766 C
6 Walnut Grove Av Rush St Landis View Lane Secondary 4 30,000 20,322 0.677 B
7 San Gabriel Blvd Hellman Ave Emerson Place Major 4 40,000 36,520 0.913 E
8 San Gabriel Blvd Garvey Ave Klingerman St Major 4 40,000 26,000 0.650 B
9 San Gabriel Blvd Delta Ave Walnut Grove Ave Major 4 40,000 20,525 0.513 A
10 Del Mar Ave Hellman Ave Emerson Place Secondary 4 30,000 27,137 0.905 E
11 Del Mar Ave Garvey Ave Newmark Ave Collector 2 15,000 19,273 1.285 F
12 New Ave Newmark Ave Graves Ave Collector 2 15,000 9,467 0.631 B
13 Valley Blvd Muscatel Ave Ivar Ave Major 4 40,000 33,212 0.830 D
14 Valley Blvd Hart Ave Mission Drive Major 4 40,000 21,519 0.538 A
15 Valley Blvd Rio Hondo Ave Temple City Blvd Major 4 40,000 31,573 0.789 C
16 Temple City Blvd Valley Blvd Marshall St Secondary 4 30,000 25,000 0.833 D
17 Garvey Ave New Ave Del Mar Ave Major 4 40,000 36,095 0.902 E
18 Garvey Ave Del Mar Ave San Gabriel Blvd Major 4 40,000 35,744 0.894 D
19 Garvey Ave San Gabriel Blvd Walnut Grove Ave Major 4 40,000 37,381 0.935 E
20 Garvey Ave Walnut Grove Ave Rosemead Blvd Major 4 40,000 32,728 0.818 D
21 Rosemead Blvd Lower Azusa Road Mission Drive Major 5 50,000 56,505 1.130 F
22 Rosemead Blvd Valley Blvd Marshall St Major 4 40,000 60,035 1.501 F
23 Rosemead Blvd Telstar Ave Whitmore St Major 6 60,000 71,215 1.187 F
Future (2025) w/
DevelopmentRoadway
Capacity
No. of
LanesPrimary Street N/E End of
Segment
S/W End of
Segment
Roadway
Class
* Projected General Plan land use development without General Plan circulation roadway network improvements.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -17
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-2
Level of Service Values at Study Intersections
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -18
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
This page intentionally left blank.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -19
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
The following degradations in roadway segment daily LOS
values would occur with full implementation of the updated
Land Use Element:
▪ Walnut Grove Ave., between Valley Blvd. and Marshall
St. – LOS would worsen from E to F
▪ Walnut Grove Ave., between Hellman Ave. and Garvey
Ave. – LOS would worsen from D to E
▪ Garvey Ave., between New Ave. and Del Mar Ave. -LOS
would worsen from C to E.
▪ Garvey Ave., between San Gabriel Blvd. and Walnut Grove Ave. -LOS would worsen from D to E.
Figure 3-3 illustrates the levels of service based on the analyzed daily volumes at the study roadway segments, for the
future with General Plan development scenario.
Traffic Incursion onto Residential
Roadways
In residential neighborhoods, there is a growing trend to design
and implement traffic control measures to enhance the
livability for residents that live along local streets. Some of the
control measures include speed humps, speed cushions, curb extensions, traffic diverters, chokers, and traffic circles. The
intent of such measures is to slow traffic or prevent through
traffic, which should remain on collector or arterial streets and not infiltrate residential neighborhoods.
This Element acknowledges the potential for significant traffic increases on residential roadways due to nearby intensification
of corridor commercial or industrial development.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -20
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-3
Level of Service Values – Study Roadway Segments,
Future with General Plan Development
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -21
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Circulation Plan
The goals and policies in this Element emphasize the need for a
circulation system capable of serving the travel traffic needs
within Rosemead. These needs are discussed within this
section.
General Plan Roadway System
The updated roadway plan for the city is illustrated on Figure
3-4. The updates to the roadway plan are based on needs for
increased roadway corridor capacity in the future analysis
period with General Plan development, as identified by the Circulation Element update traffic study.
Roadway improvements, outside of those required as mitigation for individual development projects, are prioritized,
funded, and completed using the City’s Capital Improvement
Plan process. Many of the recommended mitigations for significant impacts of the Circulation Element update would
need to be provided by individual developments as they trigger
impacts, or otherwise would need to be funded through the
Capital Improvement Plan or another source.
The Circulation Policy Plan for Rosemead is illustrated in
Figure 3-4. This Plan includes the following roadway classification updates, for certain segments of these roadways,
based on the recommended addition of lanes within this
section:
▪ Walnut Grove Avenue, from the I-10 freeway north to
Valley Boulevard – Reclassified from Minor Arterial to Major Arterial.
For some roadways, an increase in the number of lanes does not translate to a change in classification (for example, a four-
lane major arterial upgraded to a six-lane major arterial stays at
the same classification). The Garvey Avenue Specific Plan for
the LA Auto Auction and Landwin Property Sites Mixed Use
Destination “Restore the Street Grid” diagram envisions
extending Denton Avenue, Kelburn Avenue, Falling Leaf
Avenue, and Pine Street across Garvey Avenue and into the
development opportunity site. It also envisions extending
Virginia Street east to San Gabriel Blvd. Implementation of
this envisioned roadway system is through the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -22
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -23
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-4 -
Circulation Plan for Major
Rosemead Roadways
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -24
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Addressing Traffic Congestion
Although many of the policies within this Element concentrate
on reducing trips and promoting alternate modes of travel
within Rosemead, the base of any urban circulation system is a roadway network that provides enough capacity to avoid peak-
period gridlock and allow for economic functions,
resident/visitor and commercial customer access, and emergency access to continue in as efficient a manner as
possible.
The land area within Rosemead has not been developed within
a vacuum. The city has grown up and urbanized along with the
surrounding communities and the Southern California region as a whole. Traffic volumes will continue to increase on
Rosemead roadways whether local development is intensified
or not. Capacity enhancements will be necessary to
accommodate both regional trips that traverse Rosemead and for trips generated by new development within the city.
Traffic congestion continues to be a key issue affecting the quality of life in Rosemead. Although Rosemead will
experience limited growth outside of planned mixed-use project
areas, regional influences will continue to contribute to traffic congestion. Over time, the City will pursue two primary
courses of action to improve congestion:
(1) Focused physical improvements that enhance the
capacity of roadways and intersections; and
(2) Creative programmatic solutions to manage trip
generation and congestion.
These two sets of actions are discussed further within the
remainder of this section.
Physical Capacity Improvements
The first set of physical capacity improvements that were evaluated for the Circulation Element update were aimed at
reducing traffic congestion at major intersection approaches.
Identified capacity improvements at major intersections, for
implementation through the buildout analysis year of 2025, are
listed within Table 3-5 below.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -25
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-56
Identified Intersection Approach Improvements
Recommended Intersection Improvement
3 Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.NB & SB thru lane; EB additional left turn lane
4 Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.EB & WB thru lane
5 Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.NB & SB thru lane
9 Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St.EB & WB left turn lane; NB right turn lane
10 Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.NB & SB thru lane
11 Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way SB shared thru-right lane (near I-10 on & off ramps)
14 San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.Restripe SB shared thru-right lane to new thru lane and right turn lane
15 Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona Restripe right turn lane to EB shared left-thru-right, and exclusive left turn
16 Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.NB thru lane
18 New Ave. at Garvey Ave.WB thru lane
19 Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave.Restrict parking providing an additional EB & WB thru lane
20 San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.EB & WB thru lane
21 Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.WB thru lane
25 Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.SB all-way into thru-right turn lane; new second left turn
Intersection
Also included in the analysis was the configuration of mid-
block segments of major roadways. These also represent
capacity increases for the reduction of congestion. The identified physical improvements to major roadway corridors,
for implementation through the buildout analysis year of 2025,
are listed within Table 3-67 below.
Table 3-67
Identified Roadway Segment Improvements
No. of
Description Lanes
3 Walnut Grove Av Valley Blvd Marshall St Secondary 4 On-street parking removal would likely be required.6
21 Rosemead Blvd Lower Azusa Road Mission Drive Major 5 On-street parking removal on west curb would likely be
required. 6
22 Rosemead Blvd Valley Blvd Marshall St Major 4 Widening and on-street parking removal would likely be
required. 8
23 Rosemead Blvd Telstar Ave Whitmore St Major 6 Widening would likely be required. 8
No. of
LanesPrimary Street N/E End of
Segment
S/W End of
Segment
Roadway
Class
IMPROVEMENT
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -26
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Additional Potential Capacity Improvements
Other general operational improvements were identified for the
study intersections that focus on turn lane configurations.
Improvements can be made at these locations as operational
improvements, but they are not required to mitigate study intersection impacts. The improvements are based on general
traffic engineering standards. It is general traffic engineering
practice to consider a separate right-turn lane when movement traffic volumes exceed 200 vehicles in the peak hour, and a
single left-turn lane is considered when traffic volumes exceed
100 vehicles during the peak hour. For dual turn lanes, the
standard is to consider additional turn lanes when the
movement traffic volumes exceed 300 vehicles in either peak
hour.
Based on these additional potential improvements, widening
would likely occur at most intersections. Land dedications
should be considered to implement these measures as new adjacent development occurs.
Table 3-78 provides a summary of additional potential capacity improvements based on the turn volumes at the study
intersections.
Alternative Capacity Enhancements
An alternate strategy for traffic improvement is the
implementation of corridor traffic signal synchronization with
adaptive control technology. Adaptive signal control
technologies have the goals of reducing travel times, vehicle
delay, and overall congestion. According to studies conducted
by the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT), increases in roadway capacity by as much as ten
percent can be achieved through the implementation of these
signal system technologies. This gain appears in the form of less congestion, delays, and stops at the included roadway
intersections.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -27
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-78
Additional Potential Capacity Improvements
Right-turn
lane
Additional
right-turn
lane
Left-turn
lane
Additional
left-turn
lane
1 Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.NB
2 Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.WB NB *WB *
3 Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.EB/SB
4 Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.NB/SB
5 Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.SB WB
6 Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.WB
7 Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave.NB NB
8 Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.SB/WB
9 Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St.NB NB WB WB
10 Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.EB
11 Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way NB/SB *
12 Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.NB/WB
13 Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.
14 San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave. *SB
15 Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona SB WB
16 Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.SB/WB
17 Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St.
18 New Ave. at Garvey Ave.WB SB
19 Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave.SB/WB SB
20 San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.SB
21 Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.SB/WB
22 San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush St./Potrero Grande SB/WB
23 Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St.NB/SB SB EB
24 Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.
25 Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd. *SB
26 San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps NB WB
27 Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps WB
28 San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.EB/SB
* - Overlaps with recommended mitigation measures for identified impacts
Notes:
EB - Eastbound
NB - Northbound
SB - Southbound
WB - Westbound
Intersection
Potential Mitigation Measure
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -28
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Corridor synchronization improvements, however, can only be
effective in implementation where there are multiple traffic
signals along a corridor that can facilitate movements of
platoons of vehicles while minimizing delay on the major street.
Figure 3-5 provides an illustration of the corridors
recommended for traffic signal coordination and centralized
control within the traffic study for this Element.
The post-improvement operations at the study intersection are
provided within Table 3-89 (a.m. peak) and Table 3-109 (p.m. peak). The analyzed improvements include operational
benefits for those intersections within the recommended
synchronization corridors, and approach capacity improvements for locations outside of those corridors.
With the implementation of signal synchronization and
adaptive control within the recommended corridors, the
following intersections within the corridors would continue to
have significant impacts and would require traditional
widening improvements:
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St. – a.m. peak and p.m.
peak hours
▪ Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd. – p.m. peak
hour
Implementation of a centralized and adaptive traffic signal
control system, while not eliminating the need for physical
capacity increases at all major area intersections, will provide
alternative remedy for traffic impacts of the Land Use Element
update at many local intersections.
Local implementation of such a system in Rosemead can be
implemented as an extension of the Intelligent Transportation
System (ITS) projects currently being planned and
implemented by the County of Los Angeles Department of
Public Works. Rosemead will become part of the San Gabriel
Valley ITS system, and would potentially have the ability (with
additional funding sources) to build upon the initial sub-regional system set up by the County.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -29
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
This page intentionally left blank.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -30
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-5 -
Corridors Recommended for Signal
Synchronization and Adaptive Control (color)
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -31
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
This page intentionally left blank.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -32
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-89
Post-Synchronization and Roadway Improvement
Operations at Study Intersections – AM Peak
V/C
Recommended Mitigation Measure V/C LOS Diff.Impact?
1 Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.758 C -0.074 No
2 Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.789 C -0.087 No
3 Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.120 F -0.059 No
4 Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.032 F -0.040 No
5 Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.055 F -0.055 No
6 Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.515 A *No
7 Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.531 A *No
8 Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.979 E -0.082 No
9 Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.332 F 0.348 Yes
10 Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.951 E -0.048 No
11 Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.905 E -0.047 No
12 Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.N/A 0.799 C **No
13 Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.858 D -0.074 No
14 San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.914 E -0.071 No
15 Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.889 D -0.006 No
16 Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.831 D -0.046 No
17 Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.642 C *No
18 New Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.816 D -0.063 No
19 Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.848 D -0.045 No
20 San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.978 E -0.071 No
21 Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.909 E -0.002 No
22 San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush St./Potrero Grande N/A 0.587 A **No
23 Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St.N/A 0.641 B **No
24 Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.N/A 0.490 A **No
25 Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.No feasible mitigation 0.923 E 0.091 No
26 San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps N/A 0.945 E **No
27 Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps N/A 0.628 B **No
28 San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.N/A 0.750 D **No
* These intersections would not have significant traffic impacts. These locations would be included in the synchronized corridors, for necessity of corridor completeness. There would continue to be an absnece of
impacts at these locations after implementation
** These intersections would not require mitigation measures, and they would not be included within the recommended sychronization corridors.
Future With
Mitigation
Conditions
Year (2025)
Intersection
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -33
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Table 3-910
Post-Synchronization and Roadway Improvement
Operations at Study Intersections – PM Peak
V/C
Recommended Mitigation Measure V/C LOS Diff.Impact?
1 Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.771 C -0.051 No
2 Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.842 D -0.078 No
3 Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.055 F -0.017 No
4 Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.071 F -0.007 No
5 Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.023 F -0.017 No
6 Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.514 B *No
7 Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.829 D *No
8 Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.842 D -0.065 No
9 Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.486 F 0.452 Yes
10 Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.007 F -0.012 No
11 Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.798 C -0.055 No
12 Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.SB left turn lane 0.952 E **No
13 Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.798 C -0.072 No
14 San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.806 D -0.086 No
15 Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.107 F -0.001 No
16 Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.956 E -0.069 No
17 Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.731 D *No
18 New Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.913 E -0.009 No
19 Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 0.984 E -0.022 No
20 San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.023 F -0.087 No
21 Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.Corridor Signal Synchronization and Adaptive Control 1.043 F 0.008 No
22 San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush St./Potrero Grande N/A 0.776 C **No
23 Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St.N/A 0.741 C **No
24 Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.N/A 0.507 A **No
25 Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.No feasible mitigation 1.069 F 0.066 Yes
26 San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps N/A 0.921 E **No
27 Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps N/A 0.649 B **No
28 San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.N/A 0.778 C **No
* These intersections would not have significant traffic impacts. These locations would be included in the synchronized corridors, for necessity of corridor completeness. There would continue to be an
absnece of impacts at these locations after implementation
** These intersections would not require mitigation measures, and they would not be included within the recommended sychronization corridors.
Future With
Mitigation
Conditions
Year (2025)
Intersection
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -34
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Demand and Alternative Mode Enhancements
As an alternative to physical roadway improvements,
Rosemead must begin actively promoting a diversity of trip
modes to and from local developments, the use of transit for a
higher proportion of local and commuter trips, and encouragement of trip management programs at the individual
development level. Such actions have been included in the list
of implementation goals and policies within this Element.
The potential for the reduction of vehicle trip generation from
commercial developments is described below for each of these
categories:
▪ Promoting a diversity of trip modes: All potential trip
modes including passenger vehicles, walking, bicycling,
and transit must be considered in the evaluation of
major development projects within Rosemead. As
major roadway projects are considered in the future, the provision of bicycle lanes should be considered where
additional lanes or on-street parking would normally be
provided. Provision of these facilities must be balanced, however, with the management of congestion and the
parking needs of adjacent land uses.
▪ Promoting higher use of transit: Rosemead is served by
a basic network of regional transit lines and the local
shuttle lines operated by the City. A movement of transit’s role within Rosemead into a viable mode of
local and commuter travel must occur. The City should
develop a centralized transit center that includes a bus
transfer center that links local routes with commuter
routes to downtown Los Angeles and other major job
centers. A park-and-ride facility could also be a part of
the larger transit center development. In-lieu
mitigation measures should be considered for major
developments, where contributions would be made
toward the establishment or frequency increase of transit service to and from those developments,
providing support to transit development as new
development occurs.
▪ Promoting the use of trip management programs: Trip
generation can often only be effectively managed at the source. Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
programs have been used for many years in local
jurisdictions as an avenue to provide in-lieu mitigation measures for commercial developments. Resources are
allocated by the developer to subsidization of transit
passes, the promotion of carpooling and alternate trip
modes, and the infusion of transit awareness into the workplace. The City should begin requiring TDM
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -35
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
programs where physical traffic mitigation measures are
infeasible or where roadway widening at the associated
loss of parking or sidewalk areas would be undesirable.
Post-implementation monitoring of trip reduction
targets must be tied to development approvals when
TDM plans are involved.
Trips by bicycle can be encouraged by both on-street and off-street facilities. On-street facilities would include striped and
signed (Class II) bicycles lanes on cross-town routes that
overlap with major roadways and bicycle loops/sensors at traffic lights. Off-street facilities can include bicycle racks and
kiosks with bicycle route maps at small public facilities or
private developments, up to bicycle enclosures, showers/lockers, and bicycle rentals at large facilities.
The existing bicycle route network within Rosemead, and the
potential future bicycle network, is illustrated within Figure 3-
6. This potential bicycle lane network is for illustrative
purposes only, but provides an example of how a bicycle
network can be spaced across the city while providing access to
most residential neighborhoods and commercial districts.
Ideally, bicycle lanes would be placed on low-volume roadways
that traverse the City.
The potential routes would need further study, to determine if
parking or travel lanes can be removed or adjusted to provide for the bicycle facilities, or if future roadway widening and
improvements can include such facilities in the approved cross-
sections. The study would examine whether arterials or
continuous but lower-volume collector roadways would be
appropriate for the provision of bicycle facilities.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -36
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Figure 3-6 -
Existing Bicycle Routes and Potential Future Routes
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -37
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
This page intentionally left blank.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -38
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Controlling Truck Traffic Through Routes
The existing truck route network within Rosemead provides for
truck access to local businesses, and to some extent, provides
routes for trucks to travel through the City to other
destinations.
Where truck traffic is intruding on areas where walking trips
and other modes are being promoted, it should be prohibited. Where truck traffic is impeding resident access to
neighborhoods, other roadway facilities, or the freeways, access
routes should be reconsidered.
Truck route locations and the potential adverse traffic impacts
that would result from a consolidation of routes on specific
corridors should be examined in more detail in a special study,
which on completion would serve as an update to the
Circulation Element. Truck route signage should also be
studied and updated as necessary as part of the special study.
Goals and Policies
Based on the issues and potential solutions presented within
this Circulation Element update document, the following goals
and policies were developed to guide implementation of the
identified solutions.
Goal 1: Maintain efficient vehicular and
pedestrian movements throughout the
City.
Policy 1.1: Annually monitor and review the function of
Rosemead’s primary roadway system to identify
any major capacity bottlenecks.
Policy 1.2: Annually review and update, via special study,
truck route designations within the City.
Policy 1.3: Assure that traffic studies for individual
developments, and traffic studies conducted for
sectors of the community and specific plans by
the City, make every effort to provide LOS D
operations or better on arterial roadways and
collector roadways if a nexus to the project
exists.
Policy 1.4: Preparation of a traffic impact report shall be
required for major development projects located
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -39
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
in designated mixed-use areas, which generate
trips that would meet a predetermined trip
threshold.
Policy 1.5: Encourage the development of Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) programs for all
major office and commercial developments.
Policy 1.6: Cooperate with neighboring jurisdictions to craft
resolutions to regional traffic problems. Special
emphasis should be devoted to Rosemead
Boulevard, Valley Boulevard, Garvey Avenue,
and San Gabriel Boulevard.
Policy 1.7: Identify appropriate improvements to the Del
Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue intersection for the relief of congestion, while supporting transit
use and walking, as individual area mixed-use
developments are reviewed.
Goal 2: Development of infrastructure and
service to support alternatives modes of
travel.
Policy 2.1: To identify areas of traffic spillover as new
developments occur, monitor traffic patterns in
residential neighborhoods that are adjacent to
commercial or industrial corridors.
Policy 2.2: The provision of Class II (striped and signed)
bicycle lanes along minor arterial or collector
roadway corridors during roadway re-construction projects should be evaluated and
implemented if feasible.
Policy 2.3: Formal transit improvements should be
considered when bus stops are adjacent to
development projects and within roadway re-
construction corridors. Amenities such as
shelters, lighting, bus schedule kiosks, and
similar amenities should be considered and
implemented as feasible.
Policy 2.4: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs should be actively promoted for major
projects as in-lieu mitigation measures, where
physical traffic mitigations are either infeasible
or undesirable to the City.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -40
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Policy 2.5: All site plans for new commercial or industrial
development shall be reviewed for the provision
of pedestrian connectivity to sidewalks and nearby bus stops, and the provision of bicycle
and racks and transit information for larger
projects.
Policy 2.6: Walkable areas of the city, such as in the
downtown area or the proposed mixed-use
districts, should be reviewed for ways to improve
pedestrian access (driveway access point
reductions, buffers between roadways and
sidewalks, crosswalks, etc.).
Policy 2.7: Promote the linking of local public transit routes with that of adjacent jurisdictions and other
transit agencies.
Policy 2.8 Include safe and convenient bicycle and
pedestrian access in all transportation
improvement projects. Ensure that non-
motorized transportation systems are connected
and not interrupted by impassable barriers, such
as freeways and include amenities such as secure
bicycle parking.
Goal 3: Vehicular traffic associated with
commercial and industrial uses should
not intrude upon adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
Policy 3.1: Develop neighborhood traffic control plans for
those neighborhoods experiencing spillover
traffic impacts that may result from
intensification of commercial or industrial areas.
Policy 3.2: Annually review on-street parking in
neighborhoods adjacent to the downtown area
and mixed-use districts, and develop parking
and control plans for those areas adversely
affected by spillover traffic and parking.
Policy 3.3: Require that traffic studies for individual developments along commercial corridors
examine the potential impacts on nearby
residential roadway segments. Consider
residential parking permit programs if necessary
to mitigate potential area parking impacts.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -41
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Policy 3.4: Develop standards for significant impacts to
residential roadways, and include these
standards within the adopted traffic study guidelines for the City.
Policy 3.5: Discourage the use of local residential roadways as through routes. This type of traffic movement
shall be discouraged through traffic calming
planning that involves the local residents.
Goal 4: Provide quality commercial and
industrial development with adequate
parking for employees and visitors.
Policy 4.1: Private and public parking shall be provided in
sufficient amount to adequately meet local needs and to minimize congestion on arterial streets.
Policy 4.2: Conduct periodic reviews of parking code standards and evaluate the standards for
adequacy and applicability to changing
development trends within the city.
Policy 4.3: Require projects in revitalization/redevelopment
areas to provide adequate off-street parking, even in re-use projects.
Policy 4.4: Establish in-lieu parking fees for downtown areas. The City could utilize these fees to build
parking lots or structures as needed, or to create
a designated parking district.
Implementation
Actions
The following implementation actions put the Circulation Element policies and plans into practice for City elected
officials, staff and the public. Each action relates directly to one
or more policies established within the Circulation Element update.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -42
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Goal 1: Maintain efficient vehicular and
pedestrian movements throughout the
city.
Action 1.1 Adopt an ordinance establishing the street
classification changes as described within the
Circulation Element.
Action 1.2 Identify feasible near-term roadway
improvements that fulfill identified Circulation
Element measures, and incorporate those improvements into the next update to the five-
year Capital Improvements Program (CIP).
Action 1.3 Make every feasible effort to provide LOS D
operations or better on arterial roadways and
collector roadways.
Action 1.4 Require TDM plans as a mitigation strategy
component within the City traffic impact study
guidelines.
Action 1.5 Prohibit truck traffic on local and collector
streets unless such streets provide the only access to a site.
Action 1.6 Conduct a citywide study of truck routes to determine if truck routes can be consolidated
without creating adverse impacts due to
concentrations of truck traffic.
Action 1.7 Evaluate the appropriateness of identification
signage on truck routes, including truck route turn signs at major intersections.
Action 1.8 Study alternatives for improving circulation in
the vicinity of Rosemead Square including the
addition of travel lanes on Rosemead Boulevard
through prohibition of parking and a possible
redesign of the adjacent ramp approaches at the
I-10/Rosemead Boulevard interchange.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -43
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Goal 2: Development of infrastructure and
services to support alternative modes of
travel.
Action 2.1 Develop neighborhood traffic control plans for
those neighborhoods experiencing spillover
traffic impacts that may result from
intensification of commercial or industrial areas.
Action 2.2 Conduct a study of the potential for the inclusion
of bicycle lanes along major roadway corridors. If such facilities cannot be included along
commercial thoroughfares, bicycle lanes on
adjacent parallel but minor roadways should be considered.
Action 2.3 Develop a Long-Range Transportation Plan for transit service within Rosemead, which
evaluates potential locations for a centralized
transit center and park-and-ride facility. The
center should tie in regional local and commuter
transit lines and the City transit shuttle.
Action 2.4 Require Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs for major projects as in-lieu
mitigation measures, where physical traffic
mitigations are either infeasible or undesirable to the City.
Action 2.5 Design guidelines and roadway improvement policies within the downtown area and the
planned mixed-use district should promote the
reduction of driveway access points, the provision of buffer space or objects between
roadways and sidewalks, and provide for safe
mid-point crosswalks, as needed and as feasible
within available right-of-way and within existing
roadway/control configurations.
Action 2.6 Collaborate with local transit agencies to:
▪ Develop programs and educate employers
about employee rideshare (carpooling) and
transit.
▪ Establish mass transit mechanisms for the
reduction of worker-related and nonwork
related vehicle trips.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -44
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Action 2.7 Work with AQMD and other agencies to receive
grants for alternative modes of transportation
and improved traffic flow.
Action 2.8 In conjunction with measures that encourage
public transit, ride sharing, bicycling and
walking, implement circulation improvements
that reduce vehicle idling. For example, coordinate controlled intersections so that traffic
passes more efficiently through congested areas.
Action 2.9 Create an interconnected transportation system
that allows a shift in travel from private
passenger vehicles to alternative modes, including public transit, ride sharing, car
sharing, bicycling and walking. Before funding
transportation improvements that increase
vehicle miles traveled, consider alternatives such
as increasing public transit or improving bicycle
or pedestrian travel routes.
Action 2.10 Consider giving funding preference to
investment in public transit over investment in
infrastructure for private automobile traffic.
Action 2.11 Consider providing public transit incentives,
including free and reduced fare areas.
Action 2.12 Consider adopting a comprehensive parking
policy that discourages private vehicle use and
encourages the use of alternative transportation.
For example, reduce parking for private vehicles
while increasing options for alternative
transportation; eliminate minimum parking
requirements for new buildings; “unbundle”
parking (require that parking is paid for
separately and is not included in rent for
residential or commercial space); and set
appropriate pricing for parking.
Goal 3: Vehicular traffic associated with
commercial and industrial uses should
not intrude upon adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
Action 3.1 Require evaluation of potential parking overflow
onto adjacent residential roadways for traffic and parking studies for new commercial and
industrial developments.
C I R C U L A T I O N
P A G E 3 -45
X 2 0 1 7 G P A 1 7 -
0 0 1 A P R I L 1 3 , 2 0 1 0
Action 3.2 Consider programs to prohibit on-street parking
for demand generated by commercial and
industrial activities, using permit programs and
related signage for affected local streets.
Action 3.3 Periodically review on-street parking in
neighborhoods adjacent to
revitalization/redevelopment districts and develop parking and control plans for those
areas adversely affected by spillover traffic and
parking.
Goal 4: Provide quality commercial and
industrial development with adequate
parking for employees and visitors.
Action 4.1 Require that any re-use of commercial or
industrial redevelopment or reuse project must demonstrate that adequate on-site parking and
loading will be provided for the proposed use.
Action 4.2 Examine potential on-street parking demand
within the immediate vicinity of proposed
projects as part of the parking analyses
conducted for projects in the mixed-use and downtown districts.