CC - Item 2C - Tentative Tract Map 061336•
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: OLIVER CHI, CITY MANAGER &t--Gt-~
DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 2007
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01, ZONE CHANGE 05-221,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 05-960, ZONE VARIANCE 04-325,
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05-02, AND TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 061336 LOCATED AT 3212-3232 DEL MAR AVENUE
SUMMARY
Mr. Patrick Yang has submitted applications to develop a new four-story mixed use
development consisting of 36 residential condominium units above 11,505 square feet
of commercial/retail/restaurant space on four vacant parcels totaling 1.28 acres. The
subject site is located on the east side of Del Mar Avenue between Dorothy Street and
Emerson Place. The General Plan designation is Mixed Use Commercial/Residential.
Three of the four parcels are zoned C-3D (Medium Commercial with a Design Overlay),
while the most southerly parcel is zoned C-3 (Medium Commercial).
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council ADOPT Ordinance No. 858, thereby
APPROVING General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Conditional Use
Permit 05-960, Zone Variance 04-325, Planned Development Review 05-02, and
Tentative Tract Map 061336, subject to the attached conditions.
ANALYSIS
A General Plan Amendment is required to allow for an increase in project density
greater than 14 units per acre for mixed use projects. The General Plan Update will
allow for up to 30 units per acre. The project's proposed density is 28.12 dwelling units
per acre.
The Zone Change request is to change the current zoning designation from C-3D and
C-3 (Medium Commercial with Design overlay and General Commercial) to a PD
(Planned Development) zone to allow a mixed use project on the site. In addition, the
General Plan also requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit to develop a
mixed-use development.
A Zoning Variance has been requested to allow deviation from the variable height
requirement in the PD zone when adjacent to existing residentially zoned property.
APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: 0
City Council Meeting • •
November 20, 2007
Page 2 of 2
Both Building A (south building) and Building B (north building) encroach into the 20-
degree plane restriction along the rear (east) building elevations that lie adjacent to the
R-2 (Light Multiple Residential) zoned properties to the east.
Government Code Section 65915 mandates that a City must grant up to 35% density
bonus and up to three incentives in order to minimize stringent development
requirements that restrict projects with affordable housing units. This project qualifies
for the incentive because the applicant will be providing at least 10 percent, or four (4)
units for sale to persons and/or families of moderate income. In addition, the applicant
proposes to reduce the parking stall width dimensions for the residential condominium
parking stalls. The Zoning Code requires a minimum parking stall dimension of 10 feet
by 20 feet for condominium projects. The proposed parking plan shows 9 feet by 20
feet for all parking stalls. Section 65915 of the Government Code allows the City to
consider granting this concession in order to make the affordable component more
feasible for the developer.
On October 15, 2007, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing.
After hearing all testimonies from the applicant and the public, the Commission
unanimously voted to recommend approval of the project to the City Council.
Prepared by:
* M* UM.4n3
Matt Everling
City Planner
City Manager
Attachment A: Ordinance 858
Attachment B: Planning Commission Application Package (Planning Commission Staff Report of October 15,
2007, Amended Conditions of Approval, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Traffic Study, and
Planning Commission Minutes of October 15, 2007)
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-211
Planned Development Review 05-01
Tentative Truct Map 061336
Conditional live Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO. 858
•
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 05-221, AMENDING A PORTION OF THE
ROSEMEAD ZONING MAP FROM C-31) AND C-3 (MEDIUM COMERCIAL
WITH DESIGN OVERLAY AND MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) TO P-D
(PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01
AMENDING A PORTION OF THE GENERAL PLAN ALLOWING THE
DEVELOPER TO EXCEED THE CURRENTLY ALLOWABLE
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY OF 14 UNITS PER ACRE IN A MIXED USE
DESIGNATION. ORDINANCE 858 IS ALSO FOR CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 061336 FOR A
CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION, ZONE VARIANCE 04-325 TO ALLOW A
DEVIATION FROM THE VARIABLE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT,
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05-02 AND CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 04-960 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED-USE PROJECT
CONSISTING OF 36 ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 11,505
SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL, OFFICE AND RESTAURANT SPACE ON A
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3212-3232 DEL MAR AVENUE COMMONLY
KNOWN AS (APNs: 5287-020-033,034,036 & 038)
WHEREAS, Jenny Yam of 421 N. Pine Street San Gabriel, CA, 91775 filed an application
to the City of Rosemead requesting a Zone Change from C-31) and C-3 "Medium Commercial with
Design Overly and Medium Commercial" to PD "Planned Development zone" together with a
General Plan Amendment application requesting to exceed the currently allowable residential
density of 14 units per acre in the General Plan Mixed-Use designation, a Variance application
requesting to deviate from the variable height requirement, Planned Development Review and
Conditional Use Permit application to develop a mixed-use project on a property located at 3212-
3232 Del Mar Avenue (APN: 5287-020-033-034-036 & 038); and
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead has an adopted General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and
associated maps, including specific development standards to control development; and
WHEREAS, approval of Zone Change 05-221 would designate the subject property as
P-D "Planned Development" allowing mixed-use types of development on the subject property such
as commercial and residential uses; and
WHEREAS, State Planning and Zoning Law and Title 17, Chapter 17.116 of the Rosemead
ATTACHMENT A
•
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Planned Development Review 05-02
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 0.1-325
Page 2 of 6
•
Municipal Code authorize and set standards for approval of zone change applications and governs
development of private properties, and
WHEREAS, Section 17.116.010 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code authorizes the
City Council to approve zone change applications whenever the public necessity, convenience,
general welfare or good zoning practices justify such action; and
WHEREAS, Section 65350 of the California Government Code authorizes the City Council
to approve General Plan Amendment applications through public hearing and any other means the
City deems appropriate, and
WHEREAS, City of Rosemead policy encourages consistency of its Zoning Code with the
General Plan and promotes separation of conflicting land uses through good planning practices; and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2007, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission considered
General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Planned Development Review 05-02,
Tentative Tract Map 061336, Zone Variance 04-325 and Conditional Use Permit 04-960 for the
proposed mixed-use development and recommended approval to the City Council after the
Commission made findings that the proposed applications with incorporated mitigation measures
will not have a significant impact on the environment, and
WHEREAS, public notices were posted in several public locations and mailed to property
owners within a 300-foot radius from the subject property specifying the public comment period and
the time and place for a public hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section
65091(a)(3); and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive
testimony, and after hearing all testimonies from the public and the applicant, the Commission
unanimously recommended approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone
Change 05-221, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336, Zone Variance
04-325 and Conditional Use Permit 04-960; and
WHEREAS, on November 5. 2007 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 07-49.
thereby recommending approval to the City Council of General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone
Change 05-221, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336, Zone Variance
04-325 and Conditional Use Permit 04-960 , and
•
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Planned Development Review 05-02
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
Page 3 of 6
0
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2007 the City Council held a public hearing to receive public
testimony relative to General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Planned Development
Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336, Zone Variance 04-325 and Conditional Use Permit 04-
960; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has sufficiently considered all testimony presented to them
and hereby make the following determination:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemead as
follows:
Section 1. Pursuant to the City of Rosemead's CEQA Procedures and CEQA Guidelines, it
has been determined that the adoption of this ordinance will not have a potential significant
environmental impact. This conclusion is based upon the Lead Agency's determination through the
project's Mitigated Negative Declaration containing proposed mitigation measures that the project
will not have a significant impact on the environment per the California Environmental Quality Act
guidelines. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared according to CEQA guidelines.
The City Council, having final approval authority over this project, has reviewed and considered all
comments received during the public review prior to the approval of this project. Furthermore, the
City Council has exercised its own discretionary and independent judgment in reaching the above
conclusion. The City Council, therefore, hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program for the proposed mixed use project located at 3212-3232 Del Mar
Avenue.
Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations, Section 753.5(v)(1), the City Council has
determined that, after considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence that the proposed
project will have potential adverse effects on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which the
wildlife depends. Furthermore, on the basis of substantial evidence, the City Council hereby finds
that any presumption of adverse impacts has been adequately rebutted. Therefore, pursuant to Fish
and Game Code Section 711.2 and Title XIV, California Code of Regulations, Section 735.5(a)(3),
the City Council finds that the project has a de minimis impact on Fish and Game resources.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Rosemead HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES
AND DECLARES that placing the subject property in the PD "Planned Development- zone will
provide an improved level of planning and protection to the quality and character of the
neighborhood where the development is proposed.
•
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Planned Development Review 05-02
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
Page 4 of 6
Section 3. The City Council FURTHER FINDS that General Plan Amendment 05-01 and
Zone Change 05-221 meet the City's goals and objectives as follows:
A. Land Use: The proposed mixed use project consists of a Zone Change from C-31) and C-3
"Medium Commercial with Design Overly and Medium Commercial" to PD "Planned
Development zone". Additional requests include a General Plan Amendment requesting
approval to exceed the currently allowable residential density of 14 units per acre in a mixed-
use designation, a Variance application requesting approval to deviate from the variable
height requirement, a Tentative Tract Map for a condominium subdivision, a Planned
Development Review and a Conditional Use Permit application to develop a mixed-use
project. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are consistent with
General Plan Policy 3.3 that encourages revitalization of major corridors through mixed use
developments to promote the infill of strip commercial districts with higher density multi-
family uses. Therefore, this zone change and General Plan Amendment will allow for
commercial/residential development on the subject site that is compatible with existing
commercial and multi-family land uses along Del Mar Avenue.
B. Circulation: This development is located on Del Mar Avenue. Primary access to the
proposed mixed use project site will be via Del Mar Avenue and will revitalize the site. The
proposed project is consistent with Circulation Element Policy 3.4, which encourages new
developments with adequate parking to locate in revitalization areas. The circulation plan of
the proposed mixed use project does not impede free flow of vehicular traffic on site or on
adjacent roadways.
C. Housing: In addition to increasing homeownership opportunities for City of Rosemead
residents, the applicant will be providing at least 4 units for sale to persons and families of
moderate income. Providing a variety of housing opportunities including affordable housing
is in compliance with Housing Element policy that encourages a range of housing
opportunities for existing and future City residents by ensuring that housing is available to all
socio-economic segments of the community.
D. Resource Management: The proposed mixed use development will provide high quality
landscaping with a variety of drought tolerant shrubs and plants, thereby minimizing water
consumption. The proposed mixed use project is designed with natural resources
conservation in mind. and therefore will not affect any natural resources in the area.
E. Noise: This development will not generate any significant noise levels for the surrounding
area beyond City's permitted noise levels. Additionally, the site will be provided with a new
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Planned Development Review 05-02
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
Page 5of6
•
6-foot tall decorative perimeter CMU block wall that should mitigate residual commercial
noise impacts.
Public Safety: The Fire and Sheriff Departments have reviewed the proposed plans for the
mixed use project. The proposed project will not impede or interfere with the City's
emergency or evacuation plans. The site is not located in any special study zones. The entire
City of Rosemead is free from any flood hazard designations.
G. CEQA Compliance: The City as a "Lead Agency" has determined that the proposed project
may have a significant impact, but implementation of the proposed mitigation measures will
minimize identified significant impacts to a level of less than significant. Hence, the City
Council hereby adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program
for this project.
Section 4. The City Council HEREBY APPROVES Zone Change 05-221, General Plan
Amendment 07-01, Zone Variance 04-325, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract
Map 061336, and Conditional Use Permit 04-960 for development of a mixed-use project located at
3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue.
Section 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or word of this ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rosemead
HEREBY DECLARES that it would have passed and adopted Ordinance No. 858 and each and all
provisions thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more of said provisions may be declared to
be invalid.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance.
PASSED AND APPROVED, this 20th day of November, 2007.
ATTEST:
JOHN TRAN, Mayor
Kamal Bhate, Acting City Clerk
0 0
Ordinance No. 858
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Planned Development Review 05-02
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
Page 6 of 6
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF ROSEMEAD )
I Kamal Bhate, Acting City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. 858 being:
AN ORDINACE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMAD APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 05-221, AMENDING A
PORTION OF THE ROSEMEAD ZONING MAP FROM C-3D AND
C-3 "MEDIUM COMERCIAL WITH DESIGN OVERLAY AND
MEDIUM COMMERCIAL" TO P-D "PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT" AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01
ALLOWING THE DEVELOPER TO EXCEED THE CURRENTLY
ALLOWABLE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY OF 14 UNITS PER ACRE
IN A MIXED-USE DESIGNATION, ZONE VARIANCE 04-325 TO
DEVIATE FROM VARIABLE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT,
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 061336 FOR CONDOMINIUM
SUBDIVISION PURPOSES, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 05-02 AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-960 FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A
MIXED USE PROJECT ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3212-3232
DEL MAR AVENUE.
Ordinance 858 was duly introduced and placed upon first reading at a regular meeting of the City
Council on the 20th day of November, 2007, and that thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted
and passed, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: JOHN TRAN, JOHN NUNEZ, MARGARET CLARK, POLLY LOW, GARY
TAYLOR.
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
Kamal Bhate, Acting City Clerk
•
•
ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2007
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01, ZONE CHANGE 05-221,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 04-960, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW 05-02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 061336, AND ZONE
VARIANCE 04-325 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3212, 3220, 3224 &
3232 DEL MAR AVENUE.
Summary
Mr. Patrick Yang has submitted entitlement applications requesting for approval to
develop a new mixed use development consisting of 36 attached residential units
(totaling 42,288 square feet) above 11,505 square feet of commercial/retail/restaurant
space on four existing parcels totaling 1.28 acres, currently designated Mixed
Use/Commercial/residential by the City's General Plan. The property is located on the
east side of Del Mar Avenue, between Dorothy Street and Emerson Place. Three of the
four parcels currently known as APN 5287-0200-33, 36 & 38 are zoned C-3D (Medium
Commercial with a Design Overlay), while the most southerly parcel known as APN
5287-0200-34 is zoned C-3 (Medium Commercial).
All four parcels are within the Residential / Commercial Mixed -Use Overlay designation
of the City's General Plan. A General Plan Amendment is requested in order to exceed
the currently allowable residential density of 14 units per acre for mixed use
developments. Based on the size of the subject property (1.28 acres), the applicant
would be allowed up to 28 units. For the proposed project to be economically feasible,
the project proponent is requesting to amend the General Plan in order to allow
construction of 36 residential units above retail/restaurant space.
Zone Change 05-221 application is requesting to change the current zoning designation
from C-3D and C-3 (Medium Commercial with Design overlay and General Commercial)
to PD (Planned Development) zone to allow residential and commercial uses on the
subject property.
Conditional Use Permit 04-960 is submitted requesting approval to develop a mixed-use
development in the Commercial/Residential Mixed Use Overlay designation of the City's
General Plan.
ATTACHMENT B
•
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 2 of 29
A Zoning Variance has been requested to allow deviation from the variable height
requirement in the PD zone, when adjacent to existing residentially-zoned property.
Both Building A (south building) and Building B (north building) encroach into the 20-
degree plane restriction along the rear (east) building elevations overlooking R-2 (Light
Multiple Residential) zoned properties to the east. Additionally, the applicant has
requested a development incentive to reduce the required parking stall and dimensions.
The applicant's request is consistent with Section 65915d (2) A of the California
Government Code, which requires Cities and counties to grant development incentives,
and parking space reductions, to affordable housing developments.
Government Code Section 65915 mandates that whenever an applicant is proposing a
development with affordable housing component, the City or County must grant up to
35% density bonus and up to three incentives in order to minimize stringent
development requirements that restrict housing projects with affordable housing units.
Therefore, this project qualifies for the incentive because the applicant will be providing
at least 10 percent or four (4) units for sale to persons and families of moderate income.
The applicant has also submitted Tentative Tract Map (TTM 61336) application for
condominium purposes as part of the entitlement request which would allow
development of 36-residential units on the upper floors to be sold for individual
ownership.
Environmental Analysis
The City of Rosemead acting as a Lead Agency, has completed an Initial Study/Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed mixed use project pursuant to Section
15070 (b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Initial study has
found that there are potential significant environmental impacts that could occur if the
proposed mixed use is implemented. The environmental factors that could be potentially
affected by the project include Aesthetics, Air Quality, and Noise. However, with the
implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, which the applicant has
agreed upon; the identified significant environmental effects will be reduced to a level
that is less than significant as determined by the Lead Agency.
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project was
distributed for a 20-day public review and comment period on September 13, 2007. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration along with Agency comments, and a Mitigation
Monitoring Program as required by CEQA guidelines, is contained in this staff report for
your convenience. If the Commission is inclined to recommending this project to the City
Council for approval, the Commission must first make a finding of adequacy with the
environmental assessment by recommending to the City Council to adopt the attached
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program.
General Plan Amendment
The subject site is currently located within the Commercial/Residential Mixed-Use
Overlay designation of the General Plan, which allows mixed-use projects at a
maximum density of 14 dwelling units per acre and a maximum "commercial" Floor Area
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 3 of 29
Ratio (FAR) of 1:1 (total floor area in relation to total land area). The proposed project
has 11,505 square feet of commercial which equals a FAR of 0.26:1 in compliance with
the General Plan (basement is exempt from FAR). However, the project exceeds the
maximum allowable residential density of 14 dwelling units per acre. Thus, the applicant
is requesting a General Plan Amendment to construct up to 36 residential units on the
subject site.
It is recognized that contemporary mixed use developments is the current trend in San
Gabriel Valley and throughout the State of California. Mixed use developments are
typically characterized by high-density residential uses (30 dwelling units per acre or
higher) in order to be financially feasible, and to facilitate density bonus incentives
encouraged by the State and local regulations. As such, the City is in the process of
updating the General Plan Land Use and Housing Elements to allow high-density
residential uses (up to 30 units per acre) within the Mixed Use Overlay-General Plan
designations. This City initiated General Plan/Zoning Code update and corresponding
environmental review will separate conflicting land uses, provide the mechanism to
allow for high density-mixed use orderly developments that meet the current housing
market trends, and provide for attainment of targeted growth throughout the City.
However, until such time that the General Plan update is completed and adopted,
applicants for mixed use projects must process individual General Plan amendment
applications for developments that exceed 14 dwelling units per acre in the Mixed Use
Overlay designations.
Municipal Code Requirements
Zone Change - Chapter 17.116 of the Rosemead Municipal Code sets forth the
procedures and requirements for zone changes and amendments. A zone change may
be permitted whenever the public necessity, safety, convenience, general welfare and
good zoning practices is justified. Additionally, a zone change must be found consistent
with the General Plan.
Conditional Use Permit - The Land Use Element of the General Plan requires a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the development of a mixed use project. The premise
of the mixed use district is that the basic underlying zoning designation controls
permitted land use and development requirements. Rosemead Municipal Code Section
17.112.010 sets the following criteria that must be met:
• That the Conditional Use Permit applied for is authorized by the provisions
of the Zoning Code; and
• That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect
the established character of the surrounding neighborhood or be injurious
to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the
property is located; and
That the establishment, maintenance or conduct of the use for which the
Conditional Use Permit is sought will not, under the particular case, be
•
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 4 of 29
detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort, convenience or welfare
of persons residing or working in the neighborhood; and
That the granting of such Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect
the General Plan.
Planned Developments -Section 17.76.020 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC)
allows commercial, residential and industrial land uses to be permitted in P-D zone
subject to approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council, subject to the
following findings:
That the granting of such zone change will not adversely affect the established
character of the surrounding neighborhood or be injurious to the property or
improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located,
2. That the project's architecture shall be consistent with and/or complimentary to
the surrounding neighborhood's integrity and the character of the community;
3. That the proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan.
Tentative Tract Map - Section 66474 et seq. of the Subdivision Map Act describes the
grounds under which a City may approve or deny a Tentative Tract Map. In addition,
Chapter 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code provides subdivision regulations,
which adopts Los Angeles County subdivision regulations by reference. The following
are findings that must be made in order to approve a Tentative Tract Map:
• The proposed subdivision will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare, nor injurious to the property or improvements in the immediate
vicinity;
• The proposed division will not be contrary to any official adopted plans or
policies;
• Each proposed parcel conforms in area and dimension to the City codes;
• All streets, alleys and driveways proposed to serve the property have
been dedicated and that such streets, alleys and driveways are of
sufficient width, design and construction to preserve public safety and to
provide adequate access and circulation for vehicular and pedestrian
traffic;
• All easements and covenants required for the approval of Tentative Tract
Map or plot plan have been duly executed and recorded.
Zone Variance -Section 17.108.020 of the Rosemead Municipal Code describes the
required findings to justify approval of a variance.
The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with
the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject
property is situated.
0 •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 5 of 29
That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity in which the property is located.
That because of special circumstances applicable to such property, including,
size, shape, topography, or location or surroundings, the strict application of the
Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive subject property of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and under identical zoning classifications,
That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive
General Plan.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the findings and recommend to
the City Council to ADOPT the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission RECOMMEND for
APPROVAL to the City Council, General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221,
Conditional Use Permit 04-960, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract
Map 61336, and Zone Variance 04-325 subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit "A".
PROJECT ANALYSIS
Existing environmental setting:
Currently, the entire site is vacant and unimproved without any structures. The frontage
has existing curb and gutter along Del Mar Avenue, which will be removed and
replaced, as needed, to accommodate the new development and sidewalk which will
comply with ADA requirements. Existing power poles along the right-of-way will remain,
as the cost to underground the existing 66 KV power lines is prohibitive. The applicant
has the option of under-grounding the existing distribution lines for a cost of $200,000-
$400,000 according to Southern California Edison estimates.
Project Site Description:
The subject site is vacant and is located on the east side of Del Mar Avenue between
Dorothy Street and Emerson Place. The site has previously been used for single family
residential, multiple family residential, and daycare facility. A prior approval to construct
a mini-mall was granted in 1989 on this property, however, the development was never
pursued, and this approval has since lapsed.
The subject site has varying lot depth and abuts a variety of residential uses, office use,
and a public school use. There is a 10-foot storm drain easement along the northern
property boundary, and 80-foot high power poles with overhead (66KV) power lines that
abut the front property line along Del Mar Avenue. The storm drain easement and the
power poles create a development constraint on the property. Southern California
Edison has stated that the front yard setback may have to be adjusted to comply with
separation requirements for the existing power poles and the proposed buildings. As
such, staff is including a condition of approval requiring the applicant to meet with
Southern California Edison prior to submittal of construction drawings, in order to adjust
building footprint and the site plan as needed.
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 6 of 29
The site is generally flat and can be utilized to its full development potential. The
proposed site plan shows two freestanding buildings with storefront facades oriented
towards the sidewalk along Del Mar Avenue, and all parking spaces are located in the
rear and below grade. Access to the proposed residences is through an elevator and
two staircases for each building.
The main driveway into the parking area will serve the site from Del Mar Avenue, and
alley access will be used for secondary (emergency) gated access. Free standing light
poles are provided at-grade parking areas, and all parking lot lighting will be fully
shielded to mitigate glare on adjacent properties to the south and east.
The first floor of the proposed buildings will have commercial tenant spaces ranging in
size from 1,285 square feet to 2,230 square feet in size. The street frontage dimensions
of proposed commercial tenant suites range in width from 24'-3" to 48'-11" along Del
Mar Avenue. One trash enclosure to serve the commercial uses will be provided on the
south side of the parking area. Additionally, two trash enclosures with a "trash chute",
accessible at every floor level, will be provided for the condominium residents. The
residential trash enclosures would be located within the basement parking areas. All
trash enclosures will be designed to comply with City requirements.
Site & Surrounding Land Uses
The project site consists of four contiguous parcels. The site is surrounded by the
following General Plan designations, Zoning districts, and land uses:
North:
General Plan: Residential/Commercial - Mixed Use Overlay
Zoning: C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use: Residential Duplex on Del Mar Ave, Public School on Dorothy St.
South
General Plan:
Residential/Commercial - Mixed Use Overlay
Zoning:
C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use:
Office/Retail on Del Mar Ave, Single Family Residence at 7815 Emerson
Place (east of Del Mar Ave.)
East:
General Plan:
Public Facilities and Medium Density Residential
Zoning:
R-2 (Light Multiple Residential)
Land Use:
Duff Elementary School and Multiple Family Residential
West:
General Plan: Residential/Commercial - Mixed Use Overlay
Zoning: C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use: Commercial/Office, Single Family and Multiple Family Residential
The applicant proposes to combine four (4) lots for the development of a mixed-use
residential and commercial project, consisting of two (2) separate multi-tenant buildings.
The applicant has agreed to allocate ten percent (10%) or four of the residential units for
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 7 of 29
sale to moderate income families. Moderate-income families have incomes ranging from
80 to 120 percent of the County median income. The Cou my qualifies "moderate
income" households based on the total household income and the total family size of
the household.
Tentative Tract Map Review
Tentative Tract Map 61336 has been distributed to various reviewing agencies such
Fire Department, Southern California Edison and Water Companies for their review. No
special condition has been received from the reviewing agencies.
The City Engineer has checked the parcel for its accuracy, and appropriate conditions
of approval have been incorporated into Exhibit A.
Development Standards
The developer has incorporated all Planned Development standards for the proposed
mixed-use project. The Planned Development designation allows the Planning
Commission and the City Council to grant approval of a specific planned development
with diversification in the development standards of conventional zones such as
residential or commercial zones while insuring compliance with the General Plan and
compatibility with existing neighborhoods.
Proposed Setbacks - The project proposes a front yard setback of five-feet (5'-0")
along Del Mar Avenue street frontage. The project proposes a side setback of 10 feet
along the south property line and 11'-11" on the north property line to provide buffer with
adjoining properties. A rear yard setback of 24 feet (Building A) and 83'-6" (Building B)
is provided due to the lot configuration and placement of off-street parking areas in the
rear. Figure 1 shows a summary of the proposed setbacks for the two buildings.
FIGURE 1
BUILDING FRONT REAR I SIDE SIDE
NORTH SOUTH
A 5-0" 241-01) N/A 111-01,
B 5'-0" 55'-7" to 83'-6" 11'-11" N/A
The PD zoning district does not impose any minimum setbacks for new projects.
However, the Planning Commission and City Council must find that the proposed
Planned Development is compatible with existing and future development in
surrounding areas, per Section 17.76.010 of the Zoning Code. Additionally, the City's
adopted Mixed Use Design Guidelines encourage zero setbacks along the street
property lines, provided that a seven-foot wide unobstructed sidewalk passageway is
provided in the public realm, in order to create a pedestrian friendly environment.
0 0
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 8 of 29
Staff finds that the proposed setbacks are compatible with the surrounding properties in
that there are existing structures on the same side of the street (between Dorothy Street
and Emerson Place) that have a zero front yard setback. There is a minimum "building
separation" requirement for condominium development consisting of 20 feet between
structures 17.88.090-D).The project provides a 35 foot separation between Buildings
A and B, in compliance with the Zoning regulations. The proposed project will comply
with the seven-foot clear sidewalk passageway requirement in the City's recently
adopted Mixed Use Development Guidelines.
Building Hei_ghf - The project is governed by the City's variable height requirement
pursuant to Section 17.12.290 of the Zoning Code, which requires a structure to be
stepped back when adjacent to R-1 and R-2 districts. This requirement exists to protect
adjacent residential land uses from the massing of development that may impact light,
air, ventilation and views. The applicant is requesting a Zone Variance from the
variable height requirement for the east elevations of the proposed buildings which abut
an R-2 zone. As currently proposed, the rear 70 feet of the third story, and the rear 45
feet of the second story of Building "A" encroach into the variable height. Similarly, but
to a lesser degree, the rear 42 feet of the fourth story, and the rear 20 feet of the third
story of Building "B" encroach into the variable height.
In response to this request, a comprehensive viewshed analysis was required of the
applicant, and the study concludes that views from the adjacent residences along the
project's east property line will not be significantly impacted by the proposed 3-story
massing of Building "A", because it is set back 24 feet from the rear and will be
screened with an 8-foot high masonry wall and evergreen trees. Additionally, Building
"B" has a substantial setback from the rear property line abutting Duff Elementary
School, and while the current zoning of the school is R-2, there are no residential uses
affected by the proposed development. However, as State law requires, the
Commission must make all four findings to justify the variance request.
Proposed Floor Plans
Commercial - Building A has two tenant suites totaling approximately 3,410 square
feet which will be utilized for sit-down restaurant uses. Building B proposes five tenant
spaces totaling approximately 8,000 square feet, including one 2,230 square foot sit-
down restaurant and four retail spaces for the remainder tenant spaces.
Residential - A total of thirty-six (36) condominium units are proposed within this
development. All units will be located on the second, third and fourth floors of the
proposed Buildings A and B. The unit floor plans range in size from 760 - 1,330 square
feet of living area. The applicant is proposing two, 2-bedroom, 760 square-foot units at
the southeast corner of Building A (Plan D). The condominium regulations of the
Zoning Ordinance require a minimum of 1,100 square feet for a 2-bedroom unit. While
the PD zone allows flexibility in setting the standards for individual projects, the
applicant has agreed to re-design these units to be a one-bedroom unit with 900 square
feet, and staff has included a condition of approval requiring these units to be 900 Sq ft.
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 9 of 29
Each unit will be provided two (2) covered parking spaces located in a subterranean
parking garage, which is to be accessed from the rear of Building A. There are four
different residential floor plans detailed by the following:
Plan A: A total of 26 units have this two-bedroom plan which range in size from 1,114
to 1,435 square feet of living area. These are interior and end units within Buildings A
and B, and they include a living room, dining are, kitchen, laundry area, master
bedroom/bath, and bedroom #2 with common bathroom. Bedroom #2 has access to the
common bathroom, and both bedrooms have access to a balcony that varies in size
from 50 to 138 square feet in size.
Plan B: A total of four (4) units have this two-bedroom plan, which has 1,218 square
feet of living area. These are all end units within Building A, and they include a living
room, dining area, kitchen, laundry area, master bedroom/bath, and bedroom #2 with
common bathroom. Bedroom #2 has access to the common bathroom, and both
bedrooms have access to a balcony measuring approximately 80 square feet.
Plan C. A total of four (4) units have this three-bedroom plan, which has 1,330 square
feet of living area. These are all end units within Building B, and they include a living
room, dining area, kitchen, laundry area, master bedroom/bath, Bedroom #2, Bedroom
#3 and common bathroom. Bedroom #2 has access to the common bathroom, and
each bedroom has access to a private balcony measuring 52 square feet or 57 square
feet, respectively.
Plan D: A total of two (2) units have this two-bedroom plan, which shows two bedrooms
and 760 square feet of living area. These are end units within Building A, and they
include a living room, dining room, kitchen, laundry area, two bedrooms, and common
bathroom. A 42 square foot balcony is accessible via one of the bedrooms. These units
do not comply with the unit size requirements of the Zoning Code, and the applicant has
agreed to modify these to a one-bedroom unit and a minimum size of 900 square feet.
Staff has conditioned the project accordingly, and does not anticipate any major
problem in making this adjustment to the floor plans once the project is approved.
Proposed open space:
Pursuant to Rosemead Municipal Code Section 17.88.130, a minimum of four hundred
(400) square feet of private and/or common open space per unit, or any combination
thereof exclusive of front yard setback, side yard setback, vehicular access ways and
off-street parking areas is required. The required amount of open space is 14,400
square feet for the 36 units. The plans submitted show a total of 14,716 square feet of
common open space area in the form of roof garden areas on the deck above the third
story dwelling of both buildings. Additionally 5,552 square feet of open space (roof
garden) is shown on the deck above the fourth story of Building B.
The third-floor open space amenities include a combination of open trellises,
grass/garden areas, walking/jogging trail, benches as well as barbeque pits for outdoor
entertainment for the home owners' use. Building A would have an elevator and one
staircase accessing the rooftop garden. Building B shows two separate garden areas
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 10 of 29
on the north and south side of the fourth floor. The south garden would have a
staircase access, and the north garden would have an elevator and staircase access.
Additionally there is one staircase from the north garden shown for access to the garden
deck above the fourth story.
The City's Building Department and Fire Department have conceptually reviewed the
proposed rooftop garden plans, and there are concerns with the project's compliance
with exiting requirements of the Building and Fire Codes. As such, there may be a need
for additional stairways or a re-design of the fourth-story dwellings prior to approval by
the Building and Fire Departments. Accordingly, staff has included a condition of
approval requiring the applicant to obtain approval from the Building and Fire
Departments for exiting prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. Minor
modifications to the project's exterior appearance resulting from the exiting compliance
will be handled administratively by the Planning Services Administrator or his designee.
Proposed Landscaping:
The commercial parking lot will have 3,847 square feet of landscaped area (21.2% of
parking area), which exceeds the City's policy requiring a minimum of 3% overall
landscaping for commercial developments. The plans submitted show conceptual
landscaping for the perimeter planting areas, parking lot plantings, and rooftop deck
plantings. The plantings callout 48-inch box evergreen mature trees to be planted along
the rear property boundary abutting residential property. The entries into the residential
lobby areas are accessible from the street through a walkway with trellis cover. All
entries into the storefronts and lobby area will have decorative stone paving.
Additionally, there is "stamped concrete" decorative paving proposed at the driveway
entrance and at two parking aisle locations within the parking lot.
The front planter along Del Mar Avenue shows five feet of plantings to include trees and
small shrubs in front of the commercial tenant spaces. As such, the storefronts
discourage "window shopping" and do not allow for outdoor seating, as envisioned in
the City's draft guidelines for mixed use developments. In an effort to address this
concern, staff recommends that the front planters be minimized and paved as an
extension of the sidewalk area. Ornamental 48"-box street trees with appropriate tree
wells and decorative grates are recommended, subject to the review and approval of
the Planning Director and Parks and Recreation Department.
As part of the agency comments received from the Garvey School District, it was
recommended that a lattice railing with espalier vines be installed along the rear portion
of the roof decks to discourage persons from throwing objects from the roof decks into
the school play areas. The conceptual plans show a wood railing with vines growing on
a raised planter bed. Staff recommends that tubular steel railing be used in lieu of the
wood trellis, to provide a more durable material that can withstand the elements, and
provide a more decorative appearance.
The applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscape and irrigation plan to the
Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of any Building Permits.
For purposes of the Planned Development review, staff is recommending that the
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 11 of 29
Commission approve the conceptual landscape plans as presented, with the conditions
of approval which require that street trees be planted along Del Mar Avenue, and that
storefront planting areas be removed in order to enhance the pedestrian and storefront
interaction.
Proposed Fencing
A 6-foot high decorative masonry wall will be constructed along the north and south
property lines, and an 8-foot high block wall will be installed along the east property line
to prevent students from adjacent school jumping over to the project site. The proposed
block wall will be split face throughout on the east, north and south property lines. A
standard block wall cap will be used to add visual quality character to the wall.
Parking and Circulation:
Chapter 17.84 of the Municipal Code (Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements)
requires one (1) parking space per 250 square feet of commercial space use and one
(1) parking space per 100 square feet of restaurant space. Section 17.84.020 of the
Zoning Code establishes minimum parking spaces for residential projects. Residential
Dwelling units that contain three bedrooms or less must provide two (2) parking spaces
and one (1) guest parking space per two dwelling units. As such, a minimum of 169
parking spaces is required by Code, as shown on the following matrix (Figure 2).
FIGURE 2 (Required Parking Spaces)
Land Use
Area /
No. of
units
Parkin Ratio
TOTAL
Retail
5865 sf
1 space/250 sf
23.46
Restaurant
5640 sf
1 space/100 sf
i 56.4
Residential
36 units
2 covered
72
spaces per unit
Guest Parking
36 units
1 space per two
18
units
TOTAL
169
There are 152 total parking spaces proposed, which results in a deficit of 17 parking
spaces. However, the applicant has requested a development incentive pursuant to
Section 65915d(2)A of the California Government Code, which requires Cities and
Counties to grant up to three incentives including reductions in development standards
and design requirements that restrict housing projects with an affordable component.
This project qualifies for the incentive because the applicant will be providing at least 10
percent of the dwelling units for sale to persons and families of moderate income. The
applicant proposes to have reduced parking stall width dimensions for the residential
condominium parking stalls. Section 17.88.110 of the Zoning Code requires a minimum
parking stall dimension of 10 feet by 20 feet for condominium projects. The proposed
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 12 of 29
parking plan shows 9 feet by 20 feet for all parking stalls. The development incentive of
Section 65915 of the Government Code allows the City to consider granting this
relaxation of the Code-requirement for required parking spaces and dimension, in order
to make the affordable component more feasible for the developer.
With respect to the required number of parking spaces, Section 65915(p) of the
Government Code states as follows.
(p) (1) Upon the request of the developer, no city or county
shall require a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of
handicapped and guest parking, of a development meeting the criteria
of subdivision (b), that exceeds the following ratios:
(A) Zero to one bedrooms: one onsite parking space.
(B) Two to three bedrooms: two onsite parking spaces.
(C) Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.
Based on the above, the developer has requested to apply the above parking ratios for
the proposed development, in order to facilitate the housing affordability component.
The applicant will be selling 10% of the condominiums to moderate income households.
The proposed project meets the parking ratios established by Government Code
Section 65915(p). The 80 parking spaces for the commercial component will be
provided at grade (71 spaces) and in the southern portion of the subterranean parking
structure (9 spaces), outside of the gated parking. Parking for employees will be
encouraged in the non-gated portion of the subterranean parking garage. The gated
subterranean parking will only be used exclusively by residents and their guests. Two
guest parking spaces are provided in the non-gated portion of the subterranean
structure.
Access to the parking areas of the project will be provided via one 29'-9" driveway on
Del Mar Avenue, with secondary (emergency) gated access from an alley that accesses
Dorothy Street at the northeast corner of the property. A red-curb "no parking" area will
be required for the first 40 feet of driveway entrance at Del Mar Avenue to provide
enhanced line-of-sight visibility for vehicles entering and exiting the development.
The proposed parking structure entails significant excavation for constructing below-
grade basement concrete retaining walls with steel reinforcement. A construction
staging plan, restrictions on hours of construction, and dust mitigation/erosion control
best management practices will be used as part of the construction phase. All off-street
parking for the commercial uses will be located to the rear of the proposed buildings at
grade. The on-grade parking will be paved and landscaped with shade trees, shrubs,
permanent irrigation system and a decorative masonry block wall around all interior
property boundaries
Traffic:
A traffic impact study was prepared on August 1, 2007 by Meyer, Mohaddes
Associates. The study details the current levels of service and the projected levels of
service for the main intersections in the vicinity of the project site. It studied four (4)
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 13 of 29
intersections: Del Mar Avenue/Hellman Avenue, Del Mar Avenue/Dorothy Street, Del
Mar Avenue/Emerson Place, and Del Mar Avenue/Garvey Avenue. The Level of Service
(LOS) concept indicates a measure of average operating conditions at an intersection.
The Levels of Service vary from LOS A (free flowing) to LOS F (jammed condition).
When comparing the existing conditions and future base plus related project conditions,
a LOS change from "B" to "C" is noted for the PM peak hour traffic at the Del Mar
Avenue/Hellman Avenue. Similarly, the intersection at Del Mar Avenue/Garvey Avenue
will change from LOS "C" to LOS "D" for the PM peak hour traffic. Since a LOS "C" to
LOS "D" indicates a change from "light congestion" to "significant congestion on critical
approaches, but intersection functional", this change does not warrant traffic mitigation
measures and is considered to be acceptable. The change from LOS "B" to "C" is also
considered acceptable as it represents a condition of "very light congestion" going to
"light congestion". These changes take anticipated projects in the area into
consideration. The Los Angeles County CMP criteria describe a significant impact at an
intersection when the volume to capacity ratio (V/C) is increasing more than 2% and
changing from E to F. These thresholds are not met with the proposed development, as
outlined in the traffic study.
According to Table S-3 of the traffic study, the cumulative project conditions of future
development "with or without the project" indicate that the study intersections are
expected to operate at an acceptable level of service in both the AM and PM peak
hours. Based on the City's LOS threshold criteria, no significant impacts are created
for future impacts at any of the study intersections, as a result of the construction of the
proposed project. The LOS for the intersections at Del Mar Avenue/Hellman Avenue
will remain at LOS "D" and "C" for AM and PM peak hour, respectively. The intersection
at Del Mar Avenue/Dorothy Street will remain at LOS "C" and "D" for AM and PM peak
hour, respectively. Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place will remain at LOS "B" for both
AM and PM peak hour traffic. And the intersection at Del Mar Avenue/Garvey Avenue
will remain at LOS "D" for both AM and PM peak hour traffic.
Based on the traffic study, staff finds that the proposed development will not create any
significant environmental effects upon the traffic and circulation systems. Additionally,
the reduced parking request will not create any hardship on the commercial tenants
because residential uses and the variety of commercial uses designed into the project
have different hours of parking demand, and create a destination attraction whereby
customers will visit more than one business upon arrival to the shopping center. This
shared parking scenario allows for maximizing the use of parking space that otherwise
would be underutilized during hours when the peak demands occur for each of the
different land uses.
Architecture:
Both buildings have a post-modern Italianate style of architecture, characterized by
multi-story street-facing facades, tall, narrow and arched windows with painted foam-
stucco trims, plaster balustrades, corner towers with cupolas, predominately flat roofs
Planning Commission Meetin• •
9
October 15, 2007
Page 14 of 29
with parapets at the rooflines, and smooth stucco plaster. There is substantial variation
in the front wall plane facing Del Mar Avenue due to the private balconies that provide
fenestration along the expanse of multi-story structure especially along street frontage.
Additionally the roof line has a varying height due to detailed architectural elements
such as towers, fourth-story "penthouse" unit cluster, and the landscaping features of
the roof decks including trees and trellis covers. Both Building A and B will have the
same color schemes and use the same exterior materials.
The exterior facades consist of smooth stucco plaster in a combination of Sherwin-
Williams colors, including "Emjoy Yellow", "Chaste White" and "Mocha". The accent/trim
colors include Sherman-Williams "Twinkle", and "Renwick Rose Beige" to be used on
window trim, cornice trim, and horizontal banding above the storefront windows. Black
metal railings will be used.
The colors complement the "terra cota" tile roof and reddish blend granite tiles on the
sides of the buildings. The roof top trellises will be painted in "Twinkle" to match other
trim colors. The scored plaster walls are accented with painted metal railings in "Black
Magic", which are on the second and third story windows and balconies of Building "B".
The mitigation measures require replacing the white foam trim with precast concrete
window trims. Staff is further recommending that all cornice trims be precast concrete in
lieu of textured foam. The proposed roofing material for the domed-roof tower is a
sprayed urethane foam material. Staff is recommending that a pre-fabricated copper or
aluminum ribbed roofing material with factory high-gloss paint be used, in a color to
complement the proposed color schemes of the buildings.
Both Building "A" and "B" are designed with three floors and a fourth-story penthouse
structure that occupies a small portion of the building footprint. The maximum height of
the structures is 48'-6" to the top of the fourth story parapet. The cupola structure and
elevator shaft project five (5) feet, and .13 feet above the fourth story parapet,
respectively.
Furthermore, the proposed architecture consists of a contemporary vernacular with
elements such as smooth stucco, vertical reveals, granite stone veneers, wainscot
trims, metal balcony railings, and decorative pop-outs, along with a stepped cornice trim
that ties the buildings architecturally. The street-facing elevations provide both vertical
and horizontal articulation by employing various parapet wall heights and by pushing the
taller portions of the facade back from the street. The focal point of the buildings is the
two cupola structures on either side of the primary entrance. These towering
architectural features provide unique character, and balance the massing of the fourth
story penthouse areas when viewed from the street.
The protruding vertical columns along the front elevation provide a recess to the
storefront windows and entry doors for street-level retail suites. The columns also create
shadow lines and add interest to the elevations. Additionally, the Mitigated Negative
Declaration includes mitigation measures that require a 2-foot to 4-foot recess for all
storefront entries, and a four-inch recess for all windows, to mitigate the aesthetic
is
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 15 of 29
impacts of the proposed project. Window surrounds will be required to be pre-cast
concrete, in lieu of the stucco trim that is shown on the plans.
The colored renderings of the elevations are available with the Planning Division upon
request and will be available for public view at the Planning Commission Meeting on
October 15, 2007.
Neighborhood Character.
In comparison to the residential uses within the project vicinity and office buildings along
Del Mar Avenue adjacent to the site, development of the proposed project would be
greater in scale and massing, but compatible in relation to the street orientation.
Although there are single-family homes currently adjacent to the site, the entire area
has a General Plan designation Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial which will result in
higher density residential and commercial mixed use developments in the future. There
are existing multiple family developments in the immediate vicinity of the site on Del Mar
Avenue, including a new 15-unit condominium complex under construction to the north.
The proposed development is complementary to the surrounding uses and has a
modern application of a traditional "new urbanism" concept. The rooftop gardens will
provide an added recreational and open space amenity for future residents, including
young families.
Overall, staff finds that the addition of this development will increase property values
and improve the general aesthetics of the neighborhood, while providing much needed
multi-family housing, including four (4) affordable dwelling units, as well as commercial
uses to serve the daily needs of the existing and future residents of Rosemead.
Sign Program
The elevation drawings show proposed wall sign locations on the front, side and rear
elevations of the commercial tenant spaces. The proposed "sign area" consists of a
recessed rectangular area measuring 18 inches in height and extending the full width of
the storefront windows. As such, the tenants could place channel lettered signs that are
6 inches to 18 inches in height. Additionally, the architectural columns between the
tenant spaces could be used for "projecting signs" to animate the streetscape, and
provide better business identification for the vehicular traffic along Del Mar Avenue.
Staff is recommending that a comprehensive sign program, requiring this type of
signage, be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to the
issuance of any sign permits. The sign program would restrict wall signs to illuminated
channel lettering with a maximum lettering height of 12 inches, and maximum logo size
of 18 inches.
Mixed Use Design Guidelines
On September 25, 2007 the Rosemead City Council adopted the Mixed Use Design
Guidelines for the City, prepared by design firm known as Downtown Solutions. The
Guidelines establish a new set of design criteria that architects and developers can use
in the conceptual planning, and in the design detailing portion of the entitlement
process. The adopted Guidelines, in conjunction with the anticipated General Plan
• i
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 16 of 29
updates and the City's Zoning Code regulations, will establish the City's new policies for
mixed use development throughout the City.
The proposed development was submitted, and had substantial progress through the
City's review process, prior to the adoption of the Guidelines. However, the project has
incorporated many of the concepts stipulated in the Guidelines in an attempt to conform
to City policies. While the proposed project is exempt from strict adherence to the
Guidelines, the following is a brief discussion of the project's compliance with the
Guidelines.
The project shows a five-foot wide planter area along Del Mar Avenue. The resulting
sidewalk width will be less than seven feet, once street trees are installed. In order to
provide the seven-foot clear pedestrian passageway, staff is recommending that the
storefronts not have a front landscaped planter. Ornamental street trees (Australian
Willow) with metal grates will be required in the public right-of-way, per the City
Engineer's conditions. The expanded sidewalk areas will provide an enhanced
pedestrian environment, and will accommodate outdoor dining areas as encouraged by
the Guidelines.
§2.2 Site Design
The project's site layout is substantially in conformance with the intent of the Guidelines
to place buildings up against the street frontage with pedestrian-oriented storefronts.
The buildings will be placed on the front property line, with a 5-foot setback on Del Mar
Avenue which will provide opportunities for outdoor dining, as encouraged by the
Guidelines.
62.3A-B Building Design
The project provides active commercial use for the entire commercial building frontage,
in the form of retail and restaurant uses. Additionally, all residential uses are located on
the upper floors. The facade treatments are continuous on all elevations and the two
tower elements at the driveway entrance provide a strong focal point, as encouraged by
the Guidelines.
52.3C Building Elements
While there is not a formal "modular bay" transition every 25 feet, the proposed building
provides substantial architectural variation and wall plane relief due to the use of
balconies, and architectural projections. The upper floor windows correlate
proportionally to the storefront windows. There is strong accentuation of a base, middle
and top element to the facades with the use of sign bands, cornice trims, and decorative
metal railing.
All building entries are oriented towards the street frontage to provide human scale for
the streetscape. Additionally, building signage is proposed along a horizontal band
above the storefronts. The project proposes a variety of quality building materials
including smooth stucco plaster, stone veneer, concrete tile roofing and copper dome
structure, pre-cast concrete balustrade, wrought iron railing, and wood trellis structures.
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15, 2007
Page 17 of 29
52.4 Buildin_g Height
The proposed buildings are three and four stories in height, consistent with the
Guidelines. Variations in building height and massing variation has been incorporated
into the design of the structures.
52.5 Storefront
The proposed storefronts provide large windows and a bulkhead with stone veneer.
The corner storefront provides substantial architectural interest that contracts the more
linear storefronts along the street frontage. Staff recommends that commercial public
entrances at ground level be recessed two to four feet in depth to provide modulation.
Additionally, all doors, including service entries, along Rosemead Boulevard Avenue
and Guess Street will be conditioned to be recessed a minimum of two feet.
52.6 Lightin_g
The plans submitted with this application do not show detailed lighting, although wall-
mounted lighting and freestanding light standards for the parking areas in the rear are
called out on the site plan. Staff has conditioned the project to provide a detailed
lighting plan, and will require all parking lot lighting to be fully shielded to prevent glare
onto adjoining properties.
52.7 Common Areas/Open Space
The plans submitted show substantial usable open space for the residents in the form of
rooftop gardens. Additionally, there is a small usable plaza in the rear portion of the
buildings near the southern residential lobby area that can function as usable open
space and/or outdoor seating for the restaurant tenants.
52.8 Compatibility with Adloinin_g Properties
The project is compatible with the established zero setback and two story office
buildings in the vicinity of the site. The project will have limited encroachment into the
variable height restrictions of the City's General Provisions, and as such will negligibly
impact lateral views of the adjoining residential properties to the east.
52.9 Parking and 52.10 Access
All parking for the project has been designed in the rear of the buildings or in a
subterranean structure, and will be screened from view to the street. Pedestrian
storefronts will line the street frontage, as encouraged by the Guidelines. The project
has a single driveway in the central portion of the site, in order to maximize the
continuity of storefront facades.
Conclusion:
Staff believes that the proposed mixed use project will complement the existing uses
and contribute greatly to the aesthetic value of the existing neighborhood. Approval of
the proposed project will result in no significant environmental impacts to the subject
site and the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed residential land use is consistent
with the surrounding mix of commercial and residential land uses.
• •
Planning Commission Meeting
October 15. 2007
Page 18 of 29
site and the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed residential land use is consistent
with the surrounding mix of commercial and residential land uses.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
On October 5, 2007 written notices of this public hearing were mailed to property
owners within 300 feet of the subject site and eight (8) notices were posted in
designated public places and filed with the Los Angeles County Clerk.
Prepare by:
I 1
r gaba
Senior Planner
Submitted by:
Matt Everli
Planning Services Administrator
Attachments: A.
Conditions of Approval
B.
Site/Floor/Elevation Plans
C.
Mitigated Negative Declaration/Mitigation Monitoring Program
D.
Traffic Study
E.
Assessor's Parcel Map 5287-020-033, 034, 036. & 038)
F.
Zoning Map
G.
General Plan Map
H.
Applications
G:1Planning\PC Reports\ZC1ZC 05-221, GPA 05-01, CUP 04-960. DR 07-146. Commercial office bidg.doc
•
E
EXHIBIT "A"
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01, ZONE CHANGE 05-221, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 04-960, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05-02, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 61336, AND ZONE VARIANCE 04-325
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
October 15, 2007
General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Conditional Use Permit 04-
960, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 61336 and Zone
Variance 04-325 are approved for the construction of 11,505 square feet of
commercial retail and restaurant space, and 36 attached dwelling units totaling
42,288 square feet of floor area to be located at 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue. The
project shall be developed in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "B," dated
September 25, 2007 along with the submitted colored elevations and color material.
Any revision to the approved plans must be resubmitted for review and approval by
the Planning Division.
2. Approval of General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Conditional
Use Permit 04-960, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map
61336 and Zone Variance 04-325 shall not take effect for any purpose until the
applicant has filed with the City of Rosemead an affidavit stating that they are aware
of and accept all of the conditions (including mitigation measures) as set forth in the
letter of approval and this list of conditions.
3. General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Conditional Use Permit 04-
960, Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 61336 and Zone
Variance 04-325 is approved to develop a mixed use project within two-years from
the City Council's approval date. The Applicant shall make progress towards
initiation of the proposed use or request an extension within 30-calender days prior
to expiration of the initial two year approval period. Otherwise General Plan
Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-221, Conditional Use Permit 04-960, Tentative
Tract Map 61336 and Zone Variance 04-325 shall become null and void.
4. The applicant shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws relative to the
approved project including the requirements of the Planning, Building, Fire, Sheriff
and Health Departments.
5. The City Staff shall have access to the subject property at any time during
construction to monitor progress and after construction to monitor compliance.
6. The Planning Commission and/or City Council hereby authorize the Planning
Division to make or approve necessary minor modification to the approved plans
related to this project.
7. Prior to issuance of Building Permits, all school fees and other applicable fees shall
be paid. The applicant shall provide the City with written verification of payment of
such fees.
8. This project is granted or approved with the City of Rosemead and its Planning
Commission and City Council retaining and reserving the right and jurisdiction to
review and to modify the permit--including the conditions of approval--based on
changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the
modification of the use, a change in scope, emphasis, size, or nature of the use, or
the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration, or change of use. This reservation of right
to review is in addition to, and not in lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning
Commission, and City Council to review and revoke or modify any permit granted or
approved under the Rosemead Municipal Code for any violations of the conditions
imposed on this project
9. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Rosemead or
its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the
City of Rosemead or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set side, void, or
annul, an approval of the planning commission and/or city council concerning the
project, which action is brought within the time period provided by law.
10. The conditions listed on this Exhibit "A" shall be copied directly onto development
plans submitted to the Planning and Building Divisions for review.
11. Occupancy will not be granted until all improvements required by this approval have
been completed, inspected, and approved by the appropriate department(s). Store
front commercial tenant spaces shall ONLY be occupied by retail, restaurant, and
personal service uses in order to maintain a lively storefront environment as
recommended by the City's mixed use design guidelines goal 2.0 (4). Office uses,
second-hand sales, and other non-retail businesses shall be prohibited on the store
front spaces.
12. Prior to issuance of any building permit related to this project, the
developer/applicant shall prepare Covenant Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's)
or other similar recorded instrument indicating how and who will maintain proposed
common areas. The CC&Rs shall be prepared by the developer/applicant and
approved by the City Attorney and shall include the following statements: "This
statement is intended to notify all prospective property owners of certain limitations
on construction to residential dwellings contained in this planned development
project. All buildings within this project were designed and approved under a
precise plan, planned development (PD) concept. As a result, some of the project
lots and yard areas are smaller than would ordinarily be allowed under the
development standards contained in the Rosemead Zoning Code. Purchasers of
project dwelling units are hereby notified that they will not gain City approval for any
expansion such as room additions, patio enclosures, etc. Any necessary
modifications or additions must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and approved
or denied by the Community Development Director or his/her designee at his/her
0 0
discretion". The CC&Rs will cover all aspects of property maintenance of the
common areas, including but no limited to driveways, fencing, landscaping, lighting,
parking stalls, open space and recreational areas.
13. There shall be no outside storage of vehicles, vehicle parts, equipments, debris or
travel trailers. All trash and debris shall be contained within City approved trash
enclosures. All trash, rubbish and garbage receptacles shall be regularly cleaned,
inspected and maintained in a clean, safe and sanitary condition. The proposed
trash enclosure structure shall be built with solid roof and provided with the same
architectural elements as the main building including decorative cornices, decorative
trims and contrasting fagade color.
14. The project site shall be maintained in a clean, weed/litter free state in accordance
with Sections 8.32.010, .020, 030, and .040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code,
which pertains to the storage, accumulation, collection, and disposal of garbage,
rubbish, trash and debris. It shall be the responsibility of the subject property owner
to remove any new litter and graffiti within twenty-four (24) hours. A 24-hour Graffiti
Hotline can be called at (626) 569-2345 for assistance.
15. The numbers of the address signs shall be at least six (6) inches tall with a
minimum character width of '/4 inches, contrasting in color and easily visible at
driver's level from the street. The location, color and size of such sign shall be
subject to the approval of the Planning Division.
16. The parking space markers, including handicapped spaces, shall be paved and re-
striped including periodical re-double-striping to meet ADA and City standards as
determined by the Planning and Building and Safety Divisions. Such striping shall
be maintained in a clear, visible, and orderly manner.
17. The applicant shall keep the electrical and mechanical equipment and/or emergency
exits free of any debris, storage, furniture, etc., and maintain a minimum clearance
of five (5) feet.
18. All open areas not covered by concrete, asphalt, or structures shall be landscaped
and maintained on a regular basis. Maintenance procedures of such landscaped
and common areas shall be specifically stated in the CC&Rs prior to issuance of
any building permit.
19.All roof top appurtenances and mechanical equipments shall adequately be
screened from public view such that they are not visible from adjacent properties.
There shall be no mechanical equipment attached to the sides of the buildings.
20. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the developer/applicant shall comply with the
City's storm water ordinance and storm water mitigation plan requirements with
respect to the proposed project.
21. During site grading, the sites shall be watered at least twice a day to eliminate
fugitive dust.
0 0
22. Construction vehicle speeds shall be limited to a maximum of 15 miles per hour in
construction zones.
23. Prior to the issuance of any sign permit, the applicant shall submit a Master Sign
Program to the Planning Division for review and approval. The sign program shall
address sign materials, colors, height, width and location. It shall also address the
use of temporary signage such as banners as well as appropriate window signage.
Wall signs shall be restricted to illuminated channel lettering with a maximum height
of 12 inches, with logos up to 18 inches in height. All wall signs shall be placed flat
against the wall, within the 18-inch horizontal band on the upper portion of the
storefront.
24. Driveways and parking areas shall be surfaced and improved with Portland concrete
cement as shown on Exhibit "B"; and thereafter maintained in good serviceable
condition.
25. All areas shown as stamped concrete on the project plans dated September 25,
2007 shall be replaced with decorative inter-locking pavers to enhance pedestrian
walkways and to add esthetic value to the subject site.
26. The developer/applicant shall extend decorative interlocked pavers along the
primary entrance between buildings A and B, 75 feet from the street property line
towards the ramp to complement the proposed building fagade articulations. Prior to
issuance of building permit the applicant/developer shall submit cut
sheets/brochures to the Planning Division showing colors and materials for
approval. The planning Division shall make a final decision on what colors and
materials to be used before installation of such pavers.
27.All ground level mechanical/utility equipment (including meters, back flow
preservation devices, fire valves, A/C condensers, furnaces and other equipment)
shall be located away from public view or adequately screened by landscaping or
screening walls so as not to be visible from the public right-of-way.
28. The applicant shall submit a final landscape and irrigation plan to the Planning
Division prior to the issuance of building permits. The landscape and irrigation plan
shall include a sprinkler system with automatic timers and moisture sensors. The
new planting materials shall include a combination of colorful and drought tolerant
trees, large potted plants, shrubs, and low growing flowers. Ornamental 48"-Box
Street trees shall be planted along Del Mar Avenue with tree wells and decorative
tree grates. The species of street trees shall be determined by the Planning Division
and the Parks and Recreation Department. Landscaped planter areas in front of the
storefront windows shall be minimized and paved as an extension of the sidewalk
area in order to encourage a pedestrian friendly environment along the storefronts.
29. The developer/applicant shall install a six foot high split face block wall on the north
and south property lines. The developer/applicant shall install an eight foot high split
face block wall along the east property line.
• •
30. The property shall be graded to drain to the street, but in no case shall such
drainage be allowed to sheet flow across public sidewalk. A grading and/or
drainage plan shall be prepared, submitted to and approved by the Building Official
and such grading and drainage shall take place in accordance with such approved
plan.
31. Developer/applicant shall obtain a public works permit for any work done within or
adjacent to the public right-of-way.
32. Applicant shall install and complete all necessary public improvements, including
but not limited to street, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, handicap ramps, and storm
drains, along the entire street frontage of the development site as required by the
City Engineer.
33. All on-site utilities, and distribution facilities and wires for the supply and distribution
of electrical energy, telephone, and cable television shall be placed underground or
at a safe distance from the proposed buildings as determined by the City or
Rosemead and the applicable service provider.
34. Violation of any/or all conditions of approval may result in citation and/or initiation of
revocation proceedings.
35. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall meet with the City's Building
Official and the Fire Department, and submit detailed plans as deemed necessary,
to achieve compliance with the exiting requirements for the rooftop garden decks
above the third floor and fourth floor. Proof of compliance with the Building and Fire
Code regulations for exiting shall be provided to the Planning Division prior to final
plan check approval.
36. The applicant shall re-design the two "Plan D" floor plans as one-bedroom units, in
compliance with the minimum 900 square foot floor requirements of Section
17.88.070 of the Zoning Code. Detailed plans showing compliance with this
condition shall be submitted for review and approval of the Planning Division priorto
issuance of building permits.
37. Prior to issuance of building permits, Deed Restrictions, in a form approved by the
City Attorney, will be recorded against the four (4) affordable condominium units that
meet all of the requirements for affordability for moderate income families and meet
all other criteria outlined in Government Code Section 65915.
38.All cornice trims along the top of the first story of the buildings shall be precast
concrete, painted to match the window trims.
39. The roofing material for the domed roof structures with cupola shall be a fabricated
copper or aluminum material with "high gloss" factory paint in a color to complement
the proposed building color schemes. Vertical reveals to match the elevation
0 Ol
drawings on Exhibit B shall be used.
40. The applicant or successor in interest shall meet with the County Sanitation Districts
of Los Angeles County to obtain a permit or permits to connect to a public sewer
system prior to issuance of a building permit. Payment of applicable connection fees
will be required before a permit to connect to the sewer is issued as determined by
the Los Angles County Sanitation District.
Fire Department Conditions
41.Access shall comply with Section 902 of the Fire Code, which requires all-weather
access. All-weather access may require paving.
42. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior
portion of all structures.
43. Where driveways extend further than 300 feet and are of single access design,
turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown
on the final map. Turnarounds shall be designed, constructed and maintained to
insure their integrity for Fire Department use. Where topography dictates,
turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over 150 feet in length.
44. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as "Private Driveway and Fire
lane" with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with
the Fire Code. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted prior
to construction.
45. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout
construction to all required fire hydrants. All required fire hydrants shall be installed,
tested and accepted prior to construction.
46. The applicant shall provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and
building access numbers prior to occupancy.
47. The applicant shall provide water mains, fire hydrants and fire flows as required by
the County of Los Angeles Fire Department, for all land shown on Tentative Tract
Map 61336, which shall be recorded.
48. The required fire flow for public fire hydrants at this location is 4000 gallons per
minute at 20 psi for a duration of four (4) hours, over and above maximum daily
domestic demand. Three (3) hydrants flowing simultaneously may be used to
achieve the require fire flow.
49. Fire hydrant requirements shall include the installation of one (1) public fire hydrant.
50.All hydrants shall measure 6" X 4" X 2-1/2" brass or bronze, conforming to current
AWWA standard C503 or approved equal. All on-site hydrants shall be installed a
minimum of 25 feet from a structure or protected by a two (2) hour rated firewall.
The applicant shall install the fire hydrant in the location that is shown on the map
on file with the Los Angeles County Fire Department office, described to be "east of
Del Mar Avenue by the proposed driveway".
51. All required fire hydrants shall be installed, tested and accepted or bonded for prior
to Final Map approval. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained
serviceable throughout construction.
52.Additional water system requirements will be required when this land is further
subdivided and/or during the building permit process.
53. This project is subject to Section 904.2.9 of the Building Code, which will require
fire sprinklers to be installed. The applicant shall submit four (4) sets of water plans
to the Fire Department for review and approval. Evidence shall be provided on Los
Angeles County Fire Department fire flow form, Form 195, that the hydrant and
available flow rate meets Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements.
Mitigation Measure Conditions:
54. Applicant shall install dense landscaping, which includes 48" box evergreen trees
and shrubs, and a decorative perimeter block wall to reduce view impacts of the site
from the residential area, making the impact less than significant.
55. Only non-specular building materials shall be used on exterior of structures to
significantly reduce potential light reflection and glare to a less than significant
impact. Windows shall have an anti-glare coating.
56.A photometric survey shall be prepared that limits, to the maximum extent possible
the impact of glare against off-site locations.
57.All windows shall be recessed a minimum of four (4) inches. Window surrounds
shall be dimensional pre-cast concrete sections with defined grout lines.
58. All commercial public entrances at ground level shall be recessed two to four feet in
depth to provide modulation. All doors, including service entries, along Del Mar
Avenue shall be recessed a minimum of two feet.
59. To reduce the appearance of mass of the building, the upper floors and roof forms
shall be designed to vary in setback and height.
60.The site shall be watered at least twice a day to minimize fugitive dust during
grading. Grading shall cease when wind speed exceeds 15 miles per hour.
61. On-site construction vehicle speeds shall be limited to a maximum of 15 miles per
hour.
62. To the maximum extent feasible, architectural coatings shall be applied using paint
materials with zero-VOC content. A list of manufacturers supplying zero-VOC
emission paint materials can be provided by the SCAQMD upon request.
63. Prior to approval of final plans, the applicant shall add dedicated, secured bicycle
parking racks to the surface parking lot. Bicycle parking may consist of pre-
manufactured or custom racks, cemented or bolted in ground, lockers, or similar
bicycle storage device to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.
64. During project phasing, any proposed vegetation and ground cover to be utilized on
site shall be planted in phase one to reduce disturbed areas susceptible to wind
erosion from contributing to dust emission from the project site. Related irrigation
system shall also be installed in phase one to minimize soil erosion and ensure
reliable water provision needed for maturity of such vegetation.
65.The project proponent shall comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and
regulations including rule 403 insuring the clean up of construction-related dirt on
site. Rule 403 prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active
operation, open storage pile, or disturbed surface area beyond the property line of
the emission source. The project will also be required to comply with BMP's per the
City's Storm Water Quality Management Plan.
66. The applicant shall provide decorative pedestrian walkways, thereby encouraging
walking and bicycle use as a mode of transportation between the project site and
related facilities on site and adjacent uses.
67. The hours of construction shall be limited from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through
Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sundays or on any legal holidays
without prior approval by the City.
68. The developer shall require by contract specifications that the following constructing
best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce
construction noise levels.
• Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry
standards. All power construction equipment shall utilize noise shielding and
muffling devices.
• Locate construction staging areas and noise-generating equipment away
from the school and residential uses, where feasible.
• Schedule high noise-producing activities between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6
p.m. to minimize disruption to sensitive uses. Where feasible, high noise-
producing activities should be scheduled between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. to
minimize noise impacts to the adjacent school.
• Construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several
pieces of equipment simultaneously, which generates high noise levels.
69. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits, the applicant shall submit
and, when acceptable, the City shall approve a site-specific and design-specific
geotechnical investigation, prepared in accordance with the "Manual for Preparation
• •
of Geotechnical Reports" (County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works,
February 2000, Revised May 8, 2001) or such other standards as may be
established by the City Engineer and City Building Official. That investigation, as
prepared by a geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist, will determine the
precise nature of excavation, footing and associated details that, when implemented
will ensure that the project is constructed in accordance with and in recognition of
existing site-specific conditions. Each of the recommendations contained in that
investigation will become project-specific conditions and construction activities will
be monitored to ensure the implementation of those measures.
City Engineer's Conditions:
General
70. Details shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Any details which
are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or
City Engineer's policies must be specifically approved in the final map or
improvement plan approvals.
71.A final tract map prepared by, or under the direction of a Registered Civil Engineer
authorized to practice land surveying, or a Licensed Land Surveyor, must be
processed through the City Engineer's office prior to being filed with the County
Recorder.
72.A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and
encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final tract map
is released for filing with the County Recorder.
73. Monumentation of tract map boundaries, street centerline and lot boundaries is
required for a map based on a field survey.
74. Final tract map shall be filed with the County Recorder and one (1) mylar copy of
filed map shall be submitted to the City Engineer's office. Prior to the release of the
final map by the City, a refundable deposit in the amount of $1,000 shall be
submitted by the developer to the City, which will be refunded upon receipt of the
mylar copy of the filed map.
75. The subdivider shall comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and
Rosemead Municipal Code.
76. Approval for filing of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and
specifications mentioned below. If the improvements are not installed prior to the
filing of this division, the developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement and a
Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond in the amount estimated by the
City Engineer guaranteeing the installation of the improvements.
77. The City reserves the right to impose any new plan check and/or permit fees
• •
approved by City Council subsequent to tentative approval of this map.
78. The developer shall submit the condominium final map plans to the City for review
and approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
79. Conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted to the City for
review and approval prior to recordation of the final map. The CC&Rs shall provide
for maintenance of private driveway, parking areas, and maintenance of sewer
laterals and mainline.
Drainaqe and Grading
80. Prior to the recordation of the final map, grading and drainage plans must be
approved to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties as approved
by the City Engineer, including dedication of the necessary easements.
81.A grading and drainage plan must provide for each lot having an independent
drainage system to the public street, to a public drainage facility, or by means of an
approved drainage easement.
82. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and
directed by gravity to the street, a public drainage facility, or an approved drainage
easement.
83. Surface water generated from the site shall not drain over the sidewalk or driveway
into the gutter on Del Mar Avenue. A parkway drain is required.
84. Developer must comply with the City's storm water ordinance and SUSMP
requirements.
Road
85. New drive approach shall be constructed at least 5' from any above-ground
obstructions in the public right-of-way to the top of 'Y' or the obstruction shall be
relocated.
86.Three (3) existing drive approaches on Del Mar Avenue shall be closed with full
curb, gutter and sidewalk.
87. Developer shall construct 4'-square tree wells with metal grates on Del Mar Avenue.
The tree wells shall be spaced 30' on center, planted with 24-inch box Australian
Willow trees, and furnished with an irrigation system that is consistent with the City's
Landscape & Irrigation Plans for Valley Boulevard. The proposed metal tree well
grates shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to installation.
88. Developer shall relocate existing storm drain catch basin on Del Mar Avenue.
Developer shall obtain plan approval and the necessary permits from the Los
0 9
Angeles County Department of Public Works for the catch basin relocation.
Sewer
89. Sewer mainline and laterals shall be privately maintained.
90. Sewers shall be sized in accordance with the California Plumbing Code.
Utilities
91. Power, telephone and cable television service shall be undergrounded where
feasible, as approved by the City Engineer and Planning Division.
92. Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the
developer's expense.
Water
93. Prior to the filing of the final map, there shall also be filed with the City Engineer, a
statement from the water purveyor indicating subdivider compliance with the Fire
Chiefs fire flow requirements.
Planninq Commission Added Conditions on October 15, 2007:
94. A minimum 8-foot high decorative masonry wall shall be constructed along the
eastern and southern property lines as part of the first phase of construction. The
applicant or successor in interest shall avoid damage to the existing improvements
on the neighboring properties, resulting from construction of the subterranean
parking structure.
95. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit plans
showing a workstation and handicapped-accessible half-bathroom within the main
residential lobby area for use by a parking monitor/security guard. Said workstation
and half-bathroom shall be constructed as part of the proposed mixed use project.
96. Prior to recordation of the final map, the subdivider shall submit a comprehensive
Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Planning Director or
designee. The Parking Management Plan shall be incorporated into the CC & R's
and shall be enforced by the property owners association. Said Parking
Management Plan shall include, but not be limited to, the following provisions:
a. Assigned parking for each residence.
b. Designated parking for customers and employees.
c. Parking permit procedures for overnight guest parking.
d. Funding mechanism for a 24-hour parking monitor/security guard.
e. Funding mechanism for maintenance of a workstation with half-bath for the
parking monitor/security guard.
• •
Every homeowner shall be allowed to park a maximum of two (2) vehicles on site.
The parking monitor/security guard shall be responsible for issuing overnight guest
parking permits when there are excess parking spaces available. Employee parking
shall be restricted to the subterranean parking structure.
•
MAYOR
JOHN TRAM
MAYOR PRO TEM:
JOHiv NUNEZ
COUNCILMEMBERS.
MARGARET CLARK
POL:`_OW
GAP'A TAYLO;
•
t~ os - mead
8838 E VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 399
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770
TELEPHONE (626) 569.210C
FAX (626) 307-9218
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ORIGINAL FILED AND
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SEP 13 2007 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
LOS ANGELES, COUNTY CLERK ON OCTOBER 15, 2007
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Rosemead Planning Commission has issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration and will
conduct a public hearing on October 15. 2007 at 7:00 PM. at Rosemead City Hall, 8838 East Valley Boulevard, Rosemead:
CASE NO.: GPA 05-01. ZC 05-221 PDR 05-02 TTM 061336 ZV 04-325, & CUP 04-960 - The City of Rosemead (hereafter
referred to as "Lead Agency" has completed an Initial Study (IS) of the Proposed Mixed Use Project located at 3212, 3220,
3224, & 3232 Del Mar Avenue. The applicant has submitted an application requesting approval to develop a Mixed Use Project
consisting of 36 attached condominium units, 5,865 square feet of retail and 5,640 square feet of restaurant space, along with
subterranean parking.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Initial Study is undertaken to determine if the proposed project may have a
significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study was prepared and completed in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and local guidelines for Implementation of CEQA. On the basis of the Initial Study, the City of
Rosemead has concluded that the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment with the incorporation of
the proposed mitigation measures aimed at addressing the project's potential significant effects and has therefore, prepared a
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The MND reflects the independent judgment of the City as a lead agency per CEQA
guidelines. The project site is not on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. The proposed project is not
considered a project of statewide, regional or area wide significance and would not affect highways or other facilities under the
jurisdiction of the State of California Department of Transportation.
Copies of the ISIMND are on file at the City of Rosemead Planning Department located at 8838 E. Valley Blvd, Rosemead, CA
91770, for public review. Any person wishing to comment on the adequacy of the ISIMND must submit such comments, in writing,
to the City of Rosemead Planning Department, Attn: Matt Everling. Senior Planner. Comments must be received within 20-
calender days from September 13, 2007 to October 3, 2007.
The City of Rosemead Planning Commission will consider the project and the ISIMND at its regular meeting on October 15, 2007
at 7:00pm. The Planning Commission meeting is open to the public and the public is encouraged to attend. If the Planning
Commission finds that with the incorporated mitigation measures, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the
environment: it may recommend the MND to be adopted and the proposed mixed use project to be approved by the City Council.
This means that the City Council may proceed to consider the proposed mixed use project at 3212. 3220, 3224, & 3232 Del Mar
Avenue without the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65009 (b), if this matter is subsequently challenged in court, the challenge may be limited
to only those issues raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of
Rosemead at, or prior to, the public hearing date.
Matt Everling
Senior Planner
•
•
Initial Study I Mitigated Negative Declaration
ROSEMEAD MIXED-USE
3212, 3220, 3224 and 3232 Del Mar Avenue
Rosemead, Los Angeles, CA
Assessor Parcel Numbers: 5287-020-036, 033, 038. 034
Lead Agency:
Cite of Rosemead
8838 E. `'alley Boulevard. Rosemead. CA 91770
626-569-2144
Contact: Matt Everling, Senior Planner
Project Proponent
Jenny Yam, Property Owner
421 North Pine Street
San Gabriel, CA 91775
Project Architect
JWDA
529 E. Valley Boulevard, Suite 228-A
San Gabriel, California 91776
General Plan Amendment 05-01
Zone Change 05-221
Tentative Tract Map 061336
Planned Development Review 05-02
Conditional Use Permit 04-960
Zone Variance 04-325
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2007
0 0
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Der Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
Initial
SECTION 1
1.1 PURPOSE
The Cit< of Rosemead has prepared this Initial Study for the purpose of identifying and evaluating the
potential environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed General Plan
Amendment. Zone Change. Tentative Tract Map, Planned Dedevelopment lopmentReview, a mixed-use se project
Permit and Zone Variance for the subdivision of land and the residential condominiums.
The proposed mixed-use development is comprised of thirty-six (36) totaling 42,28E square feet of living area, located above 11,505 e sfeet of quare refeet of leasable staurant space commercial
space, which includes 5,865 square feet of retail and 5,640 square
1.2 LOCATION
The proposed project is located in the City of Rosemead. Los Angeles Count\,. California, at 3212 -
3232 Del Mar Avenue. The parcels, located at 3270-3237 Del Mar Avenue, are situated in the C3-D,
Medium Commercial zone in a Design Overlay. The parcel located at 3212 Del Mar is located in the
C-3; Medium Commercial zone. The entire project area is located on the east side o
Avenue. south of the I-10 Freeway, between Dorothy Street and Emerson Place. (See Location Map)
Initial
•
•
Rosemead Mixed Use- 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
General Plan Amendment 05-01, Zone Change 05-=31, Tentati\ e Tract Map 0613-36, Planned
Development Review 05-02, Conditional Use Permit 04-960 and Zone Variance 04-335 are requests
to change the existing C-3; Medium Commercial zone and C-3D; Medium Commercial zone with a
Design Overlay to a P-D: Planned Development zone. for the construction of a mixed-use
development on approximately 1.28 acres. This project consists of thirty-six (36) residential
condominiums located above 11,505 square feet of commercial/retail space (5,865 square feet of
retail space and 5,640 square feet of restaurant space). The project area is designated
Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use in the General Plan. which requires a Conditional Use Permit for
a mixed-use project". This request is also to amend the General Plan for an increase in the number
of residential units allowed per acre in the Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use District from fourteen
(14) units per acre to thirty (30) units per acre. The proposed density is 28du/ac. The four (4) parcels
totaling approximately 55,838 square feet are currently vacant.
13.1 Proposed Building Layout and Architecture
Lavout: The sites shape is not square or rectangular, but rather shaped like a "T." The site's length,
measuring from north to south, ranges from approximately 114'4" to 299'-3." The depth of the site,
measuring from east to west, ranges from 135'-0" to 246'-8." Two buildings are proposed, both of
which will be located along the street frontage of Del Mar Avenue. Both a surface and a subterranean
parking area will be located behind the buildings which will be accessible via a 29'-9" wide driveway
on Del Mar Avenue. (See Figure 1.3) As shown in Figure 1.3, the fagade of building "A" spans
approximately 74'-6" along Del Mar Avenue. and extends approximately 148'-0" towards
The the east
property line. The total building footprint occupies approximately 11,139 square
building "B" spans approximately 166--0" along Del Mar Avenue, and extends approximately 751-6"
towards the east property line. The total building footprint of building "B" occupies approximately
12,616 square feet.
Setbacks: Both building "A" and building "B" are setback approximately 5'-0" from the west
property line, which lies along Del Mar Avenue. In addition. building "A" is setback 24 -0" from the
f omline.
east property line, 11'-0" from the south property line and 210'-0'' from the north 0property
Building "B" is setback between 56'-0'' and 157'-0'' from the east property line, the
south propem, line, and approximately 121-0" from the north property line. The total distance
between building "A" and building "B" is 34%0".
2
•
•
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Del Mar Hvenue, Rosemead. California
BL%--C A
Dei Mar Avenue
afr
B,R-Dfl E
~I';I
t
ri .
J
r•
4-t T
N --.f
N
S
-
G
h
L
L
,
-
_ - ~;7
L5
•_c::~nwow
-
f •
SITE P:A':
-OIL s•:. ta:.; et ~.ei crux ,;,;am
,.r. m cr ••~cNr. sTaekan
k~
Figure 1.3
Height: Rectangular and domed towers proposed on each of the buildings. add building height
variation. Along the Del Mar Avenue frontage, the proposed four-store facades have an approximate
averae height of 50'-0." Building "B" is slightly taller than building "A." as the fourth floor of
building "A° only consists of a covered stairway access to a rooftop garden. A 61'-07• tall domed
Na
3
0 0
Rosemead Mixed Use- 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
Initial Study
tower located at the northwest corner of building "A" and a 61'-07' tall domed tower located the
southwest corner of buildinc "B" will create a distinct focal point between the two buildings. The
average height of the north, south and east elevations of building "A" is 41'-0." The average height
of the north, south and east elevations of building "B" is approximately -4 l'-0."
Architecture: The proposed architectural style is post-modern Italianate. characterized by the multi-
story street-facing fagades, tall, narrow and arched windows with form trims, plaster balustrades,
corner towers with cupolas, predominately flat roofs with parapets at the rooflines, and smooth stucco deep plaster surface treatment (See Figure 1.4). Colors proposed range e fveneerrom sDel Mar
brownish-red tones. At street level; Glass storefronts an
fagade. Both building "A" and "B" incorporate rooftop gardens on the upper floors, which will be
improved with landscaping. trellis covered patios, barbeque areas and children playgrounds.
Decorative, 8'-0" block walls are proposed to surround the site along alft , linesapadjacent ed area is
residential areas. In addition to the rooftop gardens, a total of 2,308 square feet
also proposed at around level. throu-hout the site. Decorative 6'-0" walls are proposed along the
remaining north and south property lines of the site, which abut commercial zones.
1. 3.2 Access, Circulation and Parking,
Vehicular access and parking: A two-lane. 29'-9" wide driveway is proposed to provide
access into the site. The driveway will be located in the approximate center of the building
frontage along Del Mar Avenue. Both a surface parking lot and a subterranean parking area
will be located directly behind the buildings. The project proposes 154 parking spaces for
the combined residential and commercial uses, including seventeen compact spaces and
eleven handicap spaces. A secondary access will be added along the north property
boundary linking the site to the existing 20-foot alley the lies adjacent to the elementary
school and cormects to Dorothy Street.
4
• •
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, California
Pedestrian Access: Individual storefront doors located along both the street and parking lot facades
will provide sidewalk-level pedestrian access to the retail, office and restaurant uses. Stairs and
elevators are proposed on each of the buildings both at ground level and in the subterranean parking
area to provide access to the upper levels.
1.4 INTENDED USES OF THIS DOCUMENT
In addition to identifying and evaluating the potential environmental impacts that could occur as a
result of the proposed project, this evaluation will serve to determine the level of environmental
analysis required to adequately prepare and adopt the required environmental documents. and will
provide the basis for input from members of the public and public agencies. Pursuant to Sections
15050. 1505 1, and 1536; of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Rosemead is the Lead Agency in
the preparation of this Initial Study, and any additional environmental documentation required for the
project.
The remainder of this section provides a description of the project's environmental setting. Section
Two of this Initial Study includes an environmental checklist that Gives an overview of the potential
impacts to the environment that may result from project implementation. Section Three elaborates on
the information contained in the environmental checklist. providing justification for the responses
provided in the environmental checklist.
1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed project area for General Plan Amendment 05-01. Zone Change 05-221, Tentative Tract
Map 06L336, Planned Development Review 05-02. Conditional Use Permit 04-960 and Zone
Variance 04-3,25 is located at 3212 -3232 Del Mar Avenue in the C-3; Medium Commercial zone and
C3-D; Medium Commercial zone with a Design Overlay. The subject site consists of four (4) vacant
parcels of land, located on the east side of Del Mar Avenue, south of the I-10 Freeway, between
Dorothy Street and Emerson Place. Del Mar Avenue is a secondary arterial roadway that runs north
and south. in the City of Rosemead.
The site is relatively flat. There are six (6) trees on-site; two (2) Black Walnut trees. two (2) Chinese
Elm trees. a Palm tree and a tall cactus. No oak trees are present.
According to Building Department records. the vacant parcel located at 3212 Del Mar Avenue was
previously developed as a residence and was demolished in 1989. The vacant parcel located at 3=20
Del Mar Avenue was developed as a single-family residence that was later converted to a child
davcare facility in 1983. All structures on this property were demolished in 198'. The vacant parcel
located at 3224 Del Mar was previously developed as an apartment house, and the parcel located at
3232 Del Mar was a single-family residence. These structures were also demolished in 1991 and in
1983, respecil e!\ . In 1989, the Rosemead Planning Commission approved plans for the
5
• •
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 32'2-3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, California
consolidation of the parcels located at 3220-3232 and the construction of a commercial mini-mall.
However. all permits expired before an construction \vas initiated. (Therefore, all four (4) of these
subject parcels have been vacant since the demolition of all structures.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
?v orth
General Plan: Residential/ Commercial Mixed-Use
Zoning: C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use: Single-Family Residences
South
General Plan: Res idential/Commercial Mixed-Use
Zoning: C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use: Commercial/Office
East
General Plan: Medium Density Residential and Public Facilities
Zoning: R-2 (Light Multiple Residential Zone)
Land Use: Duff Elementary, School and Multi-Family Residential
West
General Plan: Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use
Zoning C-3 (Medium Commercial)
Land Use: Commercial/Office, Multi-Family Residences. Dupiexes, and Single-Family
Residences
6
0 0
Rosemead Mixed Use - 32"2.3232 Del Mar,vvznue. Rosemead, California
Initial
SECTION 2
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
N
Significant
Impact
With
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
o
Impact
Environmental issues
1. Aesthetics
Would the project:
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
❑
❑
❑
vista?
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources,
k
❑
including. but not limited to. trees, roc
❑
❑
outcroppings. and historic building within a
state scenic highway?
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual
❑
®
❑
❑
character or quality of the site and its
surroundin_s^
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare
i
❑
®
❑
❑
me
which would adversely affect day or nightt
viawc in the a, ea'~
2. Agriculture Resources
In determining whether impact<~ to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
icultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
refer to the California Agr
agencies may re
prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland.
m_..IJ .L........nrr•
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the ❑
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑
use, or a Williamson Act contract? -
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or ❑
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland.
to non-agricultural use?
❑
o
~
3. Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 71 ❑ El applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quali- standard or contribute ❑ ❑ ❑
substantially to an existins or projected air
quality violation'
Rosemead Mixed U
se - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue.. Rosemead. California
Initial Study
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
No
Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Environmental Issues
C) Resul: in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
protect region is non-attainment under an
C
❑ F7
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions. which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
❑ ® ❑ ❑
substantial number of people?
Biological Resources
4.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
li
i
❑ ❑ ❑
es,
c
status species in local or regional plans, po
or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
ie
li
El
s.
c
identified in local or regional plans, po
❑
t
and regulations or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
- - - - - .
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited
❑
~ ❑
to. marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption. or other means?
d) Interfe-e substantially with the movement of any
native resident or minatory fish or wildlife
❑ ❑ ❑
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
tree
❑ ❑
protecting biological resources, such as a
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community
J
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional. or state habitat conservation plan?
5. Cultural Resources
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
d
d
f
❑
❑
ine
e
sisnificance of a historical resource as
in §15064.59
s
Rosemead Mixed Use - 321, 2.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Initial Study
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
t No
Significant With Significan
impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Environmental issues
dverse chance in the
a su
❑ ❑ ❑
icanhaeological resource
Tea
ant t?
7
th or indirectly destroy a unique
c)
ue
i
❑ ❑ ❑
q
paleontological resource or site or un
-
geologic feature?
-
- d) Disturb an% human remains, , g those
❑ ❑ ❑
interred outside of formal cemeteries".
6. Geology and Soils
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injure or death involving:
- -
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
❑ ❑ El
issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
® ❑
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
❑ ❑ ❑
liquefaction? -
❑
El El
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
❑ ❑ ❑ J
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
-
l
i
❑ ❑ ❑
n on
t
result of the project and potentially resu
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
d
C
❑
e
o
Table I8-1-B of the Uniform Building
❑
❑
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
-
property?
- - - - - - - -
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
ewater
❑
the use of septic tanks or alternative wast
❑
❑
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
zards and Hazardous Materials
ould the project:
P
Creat e a significant hazard to the public or the
aa)
use
F7 17 El Z
,
environment through the routine transport,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
- -
9
•
Initial
Rosemead
Environmental issues
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials into the
vnvirnnment?
•
Use - 3212-3.232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
F7 F7 D
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located within one-quarter mile of a facility
that might reasonably be anticipated to emit ❑ ❑
hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances or
waste?
e) Be located on a site of a current or former
hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste
disposal site unless wastes have been removed
from the former disposal site: or 2) that could ❑ ❑
release a hazardous substance as identified by
the State Department of Health Services in a
current list adopted pursuant to Section 25356
for removal or remedial action pursuant to
Chapter 6.8 of Division 20 of the Health and
Safetv Code?
f) Be located on land that is, or can be made, ❑
sufficiently free of hazardous materials so as to
be suitable for development and use as a school? _
g) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, ❑
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
h) For a project within the vicinity of a private ❑
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
nroiect area?
7, ~7'
a
E
o
~
o
~
i) impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergencv evacuation plan?
j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss. injury or death involving wildland fires.
including where wildlands are adjacent to ❑
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
10
Rosemead Mixed U
se - 3242-3232 Del Mar Nvenue. Rosemead ~afifornia
Initial Study
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Environmental issues
Impact Mitigation Impact impact
k) Be located within 1500 feet of: (i) an above-
ground water or fuel storage tank.. or (ii) an
❑
❑ 17
easement of an above ground or underground
,
pipeline that can pose a safety hazard to the
proposed school?
8. Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the protect:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
❑ ❑ ❑
discharge requirements"
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
i
❑ ❑ ❑
on
groundwater table level (e.g., the product
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have
been granted?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of area, including throu:_h the alteration of the
h
hi
❑
❑ ❑
c
course of a stream or river, in a manner w
would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
-
_ - -
_
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
❑ ❑ ❑
substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner, which would result
in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
id
❑ ❑
El Z
e
stormwater drainage systems or prov
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑ -
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
❑ ❑ ❑ Z
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
t
di
❑ ❑ ❑
rec
structures, which would impede or re
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
❑ ❑
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
?
❑ ❑ -
j) Inundation b\ seiche. tsunami. or mudflow
44
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead California
Initial Study
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Environmental Issues
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
I
l 9. Land Use and Planning
lf'oula the project-
i
J
❑
'
ty
a) Physically divide an established commun
_
b) Conflict with an\ applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
l
l
❑
❑
oca
limited to the general plan, specific plan,
coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
i
i
❑ ❑ ❑
es
t
consen-ation plan or natural commun
conservation plan?
10. Mineral Resources
would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
h
❑ ❑ ❑
e
mineral resource that would be of value to t
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
❑
important mineral resource recovery site
[I
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
11. Noise
mould the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
h
d i
[1 1:1
e
n t
levels in excess of standards establishe
®
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? _
_ -
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
db
❑ ® ❑ ❑
e
om
excessive groundbome vibration or groun
noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
l
l
❑ ❑ ® ❑
s
eve
noise levels in the project vicinity above
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporarn• or periodic increase to ❑ ® ❑ ❑
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
Fe) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public ❑ ❑ ❑ z
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
12
• 0
Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 32'2-3232 Def Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Significant
No
Environmental Issues
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip. would the project expose people
residin_ or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
❑
❑
❑
Population and Housing
Would the project.
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area.
either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes
❑
❑
❑
z
and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
f
❑
❑
❑
housing. necessitating the construction o
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people
r1
rl
necessitating the construcuon vi icpja"wutiut L--J
V -
housing elsewhere?
Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
table service ratios
acce
,
p
❑
❑ ® ❑
a) Fire Protection?
J ❑
❑ ® ❑
b) Police Protection?
❑
❑ ® ❑
C) Schools?
_
El
_
❑ ® ❑
d) Parks?
❑ ® ❑
e) Other public facilities?
Recreation
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neishborhood and regional parks or other
l ❑
❑
❑
recreational facilities such that substantia
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of ❑
❑ ❑
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse rtivslcal CJJeGl Vu uu c11V11v11111-11-
13
•
•
Rosemead Mixed Use - 32 2.3232 Del Mar A, enue. Rosemead. California
Initial Study
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Significant No
Environmental Issues
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
15. Transportation/Traffic
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
capacity of the street system (i.e.. result in a
❑ ❑ ® ❑
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips. the volume to capacity ratio on
roads: or congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulativelyr a
level of service standard established by the
❑ ❑ ~j ❑
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
-
c) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
ti
❑ ❑ ❑
on
programs supporting alternative transporta
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
- - -
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
❑
❑ ❑
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? _
?
_ - C -
0
❑
e) Result in inadequate emergency access
- _ _
_
❑ ® ❑
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑
16. Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
l
❑
❑ ❑
the applicable Regional Water Quality Contro
Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
tion
❑ ❑ ❑
expansion of existing facilities, the construc
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
f
i
on o
storm water drainage facilities or expans
❑ ❑ ❑
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
d
the project from existing entitlements an
❑ ❑ ❑
resources. or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider. which serves or may serve
serve
it
t
_ ❑
❑ lJ
y
o
the project that it has adequate capac
the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
t] Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
❑
❑
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
❑
waste disposal needs?
14
Init+a'
• •
Rosemead Mixed Jse - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With
Significant No
Environmental issues
Impact
Mitigation
Impact Impact
c,i Compi% with federal. state. and local statutes
❑
and rezuiatiom related to solid waste?
17. Mandatory Findings of Significance
al Does the prC~jec: have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habits; of a fish or wildlife species.
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustainine levels. threaten to eliminate a
plant o- animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal. or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
histon or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project E E D
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, ❑ O ❑
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings. either directly or indirectly?
15
0 0
initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212-'232 De. Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Environmental Factors That Could Result in a Potentially Significant Impact
The environmental factors listed beioA are not checked because the proposed mixed-use project would not
result in a "potenualh significant impact'" as indicated by the preceding checklist and supported b\
suhstantiai evidence provided in this document.
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Public Services
❑ Utilities!Services Systems
Agriculture Resources
❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Hydrology/\Vater Quality
❑ Noise
❑ Air Quahr`
❑ Geolo-gy.'Soils
❑ Land Use./Planning
❑ Population'Housinr
❑ Recreation ❑ TransportationrTraffic
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ 1 find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment. and a
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
Z I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be
prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
Environmental Impact Report is required.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project NLAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measure based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Date 4f ' / 3 '07
16
• •
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. Califomia
SECTION 3
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1. AESTHETICS (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION)
a) No impact Areas surrounding the project site are zoned for residential and commercial uses,
Therefore, no significant scenic vistas or views open to the public exist through this site.
b) 'Vo impact The subject site consists of four (4) vacant parcels of land. There are no scenic
resources such as historic buildings. a state scenic highway. or rock outcropping within the
subject site or adjacent area that would be affected or damaged.
C) Less than significant with mitigation. The proposed project would involve the construction
of thirty-six (36) residential condominiums above approximately 11,505 square feet of
leasable space, comprised of 5.865 square feet of retail and 5.640 square feet of restaurant
space. The proposed architectural style is post-modern Italianate. The design consists of a
multi-story street-facing fagade, tall, narrow and arched windo\vs, plaster balustrades,
cupolas, flat roofs with parapets at the rooflines, and stucco plaster surface treatment. Light
earth tone colors have been chosen for the development. which will soften the "looming"
presence that a larger development has the potential to create. These colors include shades
ran-ing from light peach to brownish-red tones. The project would be developed upon land
that has been vacant and neglected for over ten (10) years. The project would result in
structures that would be visible from the surrounding parcels. The new construction would
improve vistas along Del Mar Avenue. However, the views from the residentially zoned
areas to the south and east of this project site would be most impacted, as the proposed height
of the structures do not meet the Rosemead Municipal Code Variable Height requirement.
A Line of Sight Study" ) was completed on January 7, 2006; to address the possible sight
impacts of the proposed buildings from the adjacent residential properties and school
buildings to the east of the subject site. Results of this study indicate that with mitigation
measures, the proposed building height would not cause a significant impact. The study
documents that the existing view from the residential properties is of vacant. blighted land
and commercial buildings on Del Mar Avenue. Photo simulations were produced from the
potentially impacted existing residences, looking onto the proposed project. These images
were then compared to images with a perspective that conforms to the Cit~,'s Variable Height
requirement. The comparison suggests that the viewshed between the conforming and
proposed design is not significantly different. Further analysis was required from the
adjacent schoo! buildings. even though the proposed height of the project relative to this point
is within the height requirements. Results indicate that there will be a large spatial difference
17
• •
initia; Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212-3232 Der Mar Avenue. Rosemead. Califomia
between the proposed project and the school buildings. This study also documents that the
use of the school buildings along the adiacent propem line is mainly service access.. and that
there are few windows and doors on the school building elevation. that .vould have am
significance.
If a zone variance is approved for the proiect to exceed the variable height requirement.,
mitigation measures have been included so that any impact is less than significant.
d) Less than significant ivith mitigation. The neighboring residential area to the south and east
of the development could most likely be impacted by exterior Iighting from within the
development area. Exterior lighting will be designed and installed, with appropriate
shielding, to ensure that light does not spill beyond the limits of the development area.
Additional mitigation measures will be required to assure that any light and glare impact be
less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
1_ Applicant shall install dense landscaping, which includes 48" box evergreen trees and shrubs. and a
decorative perimeter block wall to reduce view impacts of the site from the residential area. making
the impact less than significant.
II. Only non-spe.cular building materials shall be used on exterior of structures to significantly reduce
potential light reflection and glare to a less than significant impact. Windows shall have an anti-
Glare coating.
Ill. A photometric survey shall be prepared that limits, to the maximum extent possible; glare on to off-
site locations.
N. All windows shall be recessed a minimum of four (4) inches. W7indow surrounds shall be
dimensional pre-cast concrete sections with defined rout lines.
V. All commercial public entrances at ground level shall be recessed two to four feet in depth to
provide modulation. All doors, including service entries, along Del Mar Avenue shall be recessed a
minimum of two feet.
V1. To reduce the appearance of mass of the building, the upper floors and roof forms shall be designed
to vary in setback and height.
MONITORING:
Planning Department Staff will ver,fy that all mitigation measures have been incorporated,
and documented on project plans. Building inspectors \vill verify compliance before issuing
building permits. The Planning Department and the Building Department will perform a final
is
• •
Initial Stud}, Rosemead Mixed Use - 32; 2.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead.
verification for compliance of all mitigation measures upon completion of project, prior to
issuance of certificate of occupanc\.
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT)
a- c) IVo Impact. There are no agricultural resources present on this project site or on the
surrounding areas. The Cin is highly urbanized and all properties zoned for agriculture are
not currently utilized for farmland purposes. Agriculturally zoned properties in the City
consist of vacant lots, parkland, plant nurseries., and an elementary school. The project site is
vacant. and has no agricultural resources present. Therefore, this project would not impact
agricultural resources
3. AIR QUALITY (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION)
a) No Impact. The City of Rosemead is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is
bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and
east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is
managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
The South Coast Air Basin has a history of recorded air quality violations and is an area
Where both state and federal ambient air quality standards are exceeded. Because of the
violations of the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). the California Clean
Air Act requires triennia] preparation of an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) to achieve
the standards. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) prepares the
basin's air quality management plans with technical and policy inputs from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Aaency (EPA), the California Air Resource Board (CARE), and
the. Southern California Association of Governments (SLAG), updating the plans even three
years. The most recently adopted plan is the 2003 .AQMP, adopted on August 1, 2003,
available at http://N-\N'~N'•agmd.ao\,/agnip/AQNID03AQM9.1itm. This plan is the South Coast
Air Basin's portion of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Tile SIP outlines steps required to
achieve the standards while allowing for gromth projected by the Southern California
Association of Governments. This plan is designed to achieve the 5 percent annual reduction
goal of the California Clean Air Act.
The AQMP accommodates growth based on SCAG's predictions. Future regional
levels of vehicular air pollution identified in the AQMP are based on SCAG's groWth
forecasts in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) coupled with the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP Thus, projects that are consistent with employment and
population forecasts are consistent with the AQMP. These forecasts are predicted
using local land use plans, particularly zoning and general plan land use designations.
i9
Initial
Rosemead Mixed Use - 32112.3232 De' Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
The proposed project's residential density. approximately 28 unit per acre, is twice the Cin-
of Rosernead's General Plan Land Use designation for the site at 14 units per acre for the
Residential/Commercial - Mixed Use Overlay designation (Ciro of Rosemead General Plan,
Land Use Element pa LU-4). The protect proposes a mixture of residential and commercial
land uses, and is located along a transit corridor that contains a mixture of retail, services. and
residential uses in close proximity. Both the project's area setting and the proposed
development itself reduces dependency on automobiles - an important air quality
management-planning goal. Developing the project at this location will not significantly
affect regional air quality plans: because transit is more convenient and local services will be
reachable on foot or on bicycle thus reducing some vehicle trips and their associated
emissions. During the project design it was intended that residential and commercial units be
located at this site because the proposed structure will be self-sustaining providing goods and
services hence requiring less dependency on use of auto mobiles. Mitigation measures, such
as providing bicycle racks in the parking area can reduce this project's impacts further.
b) A'o Impact Air quality standards in southern California are set by both the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and the California Air Resources Board (GARB) in the California Ambient Air
Qualiny Standards (CAAQS). These standards have been established for five pollutants -
ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO''), fine
particulate matter (PM 10), and lead. The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is managed by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD has developed
significance thresholds that correspond to these criteria pollutants. These thresholds are
described in Chapter 6 of the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (1993) and shown in Table 3.1
below.
The proposed project will generate short-term air pollutants from construction activities and
long-term air pollutants from vehicle emissions and other operations associated ~xith typical
restaurant and commercial uses as well as residential vehicle trips. The project's potential air
pollutant emissions were calculated using the "URBEMIS 2002 Air Emissions from Land
of
Development" model (URBEMIS), and applying the follo~~~ing. factors: 5,640 square feet
restaurant area, 5,865 square feet of retail and office area, and 36 residential units on a 1.28-
acre site. Table 3.1 compares the estimated air quality emissions of the proposed project to
the SCAQMD thresholds. None of the project's anticipated emissions exceed these
thresholds. Consequently, as long as job-site practices comply with existing controls, the
project will not create a significant impact to air quality.
20
0 0
initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3215.3232 Der Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
Table 3.1:
Project Air Emissionsl5CAQMD Threshold Comparison Matrix
Area Plus Operational
Project's Area and
Dail} Construction
Emission Threshold
Project's Maximum
Daily Construction
Emission Threshold
Operational Emissions
Ibsidav)
(max
Emissions (max. Ibsidayl
(max. Ibs/day)
(max. Ibsiday)
.
55
18.50
100
63.50
NOx
c1
19Z
550
5-l3
CO
=~0
.
10
150
0.0
S02
150
f
29
150
115.58
PM10
I 150
.
28
ZZ
75
Zq c
.
Sc
ROG
-.te r., (l -ir rna ) thmllEh a series of chemical reactions with NOx forms ground level ozone.
Although this project does not have the potential to cause a CO botspot_ it map nonetheless
expose future residents to high amounts of CO during peak traffic periods. A traffic study,
which was prepared by Meyer. Mohaddes Associates on May 22. 2006, indicates that Hotspot
conditions already exist during peak traffic periods at the'intersections a of Del
Mar Mar Avenue
and Garvey Avenue. Del Mar Avenue and Hellman Avenue Avenue and
Dorothy Street. The study indicates that these intersections are operating at a level-of-service
criterl&
desi_nation of "D.- However, based on the City's level of service threshold
study
traffic study indicates that no significant impacts would be created
intersections with the construction of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project
would not significantly elevate the amount of CO released into the environment,
c) fro inipact. Construction and operation of the proposed project will not result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants (CO. PM] 0; and precursors of
ozone VOC and NOX) for which the proposed project region is in nonattaimnent under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. SCAQMD neither recommends
quantified analyses of cumulative construction or operational emissions, nor provides
separate methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess cumulative
construction or operational impacts. Instead, the SCAQMD recommends that a projects
potential contribution to cumulative impacts should be assessed using, the same significance
criteria as those for the project's specific impacts. Since none of the project's anticipated
daily emissions exceed the thresholds recommended by SCAQMD, ii is not anticipated that
the project will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant.
d) Less than significant with ntitiaation. There are three sensitive receptors located within
the project's vicinity ; Garvey Park; Duff Elementary School and residences. However, as
indicated above. the project does not exceed the basin wide. regional thresholds. The project
proponent will be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations,
including rule 403 which insures the clean up of construction-related dirt on site. Rule 403
prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation. open storage pile,
or disturbed surface area beyond the property line of the emission source. The project will
also be required to comply with BMPs per Los Angles Storm VVater Quality Management
21
•
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 32122.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Plan. Due to the size and scale of this project., air quality emissions would be less than
significant with the incorporation of the detailed mitigation measures.
el Less than signiTcant with mitigation. During project construction, objectionable odors,
such as those created by diesel emissions, may affect the immediate neighborhood of multi-
and single-family residences. However, these impacts are short-term and will not extend
beyond project completion and occupancy. Mitigation measures, such as limiting the hours
of construction. will reduce these impacts to less than a significant level.
MITIGATION MEASURES:
VII. The site shall be watered at least twice a day to reduce fugitive dust during grading. Grading shall
cease when wind speed exceeds 15 miles per hour.
VIII. On-site construction vehicle speeds shall be limited to a maximum of 15 miles per hour.
IX. To the maximum extent feasible. architectural coatings shall be applied using paint materials with
zero-%10C content. A list of manufacturers supplying zero-VOC emission paint materials can be
provided by the SCAQMD upon request.
X. Prior to approval of final plans. the applicant shall add dedicated, secured bicycle parking racks to
the surface parking lot. Bicycle parking may consist of pre-manufactured or custom racks,
cemented or bolted in ground, lockers, or similar bicycle storage device to the satisfaction of the
Planning Department.
XI. During project phasing, any proposed vegetation and ground cover to be utilized on site shall be
planted in phase one to reduce disturbed areas susceptible to wind erosion from contributing to dust
emission from the project site. Related irrigation system shall also be installed in phase one to
minimize soil erosion and ensure reliable water provision needed for maturity of such vegetation.
The project proponent shall comply Nk'ith all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations
including rule 403 insuring the clean up of construction-related dirt on site. Rule 403
prohibits the release of fugitive dust emissions from any active operation, open storage pile,
or disturbed surface area beyond the property line of the emission source. The project will
also be required to comply with BMPs per Los Angles Storm Water Quality Management
Plan.
X11. Consistent with the construction plans, the applicant shall provide pedestrian walkways, thereby
encouraging walking and bicycle use as a mode of transportation between the project site and
related facilities on site and adjacent uses.
22
i i
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 32'2.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
MONITORING:
Planning Department Staff will verify that all mitigation measures have been incorporated.
and documented on protect plans. Building inspectors will verify compliance before issuing
building permits and throughout project inspection. Planning staff shall have access to the
subject property at any time during construction to monitor progress.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT)
a-b) No impact. Since the project area is urbanized. there is no existing habitat or wetland with
endangered and rare species nor is there any significant vegetation in this project area that
may be affected. This development is occurring in an area where biological resources have
already been highly impacted by urban development. The natural communities that existed in
the area prior to the existing development were destroyed mane years ago. The
implementation of Zone Change 05-221. General Plan Amendment 05-01, Planned
Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336, Conditional Use Permit 04-960,
and Zone Variance 04-325 will not create adverse impacts to the biological resources because
such resources do not exist at this site.
C) Xo impact. The project site is not a site of federally protected wetlands.
d) 1Vo impact Tile subject property consists of four (4) parcels. which are currently vacant.
There are no native wildlife species found to occupy the site. In addition, there are no nearby
bodies of water or hydrological features. which may disrupt migratory fish patterns.
e) Yo impact. The City of Rosemead Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance recognizes oak trees as
significant historical, aesthetic and ecological resources and establishes. conditions for the
preservation and propagation of these trees. No oak trees are present within the proposed
development area.
f) 1Vo impact Project plans have been sent to all reviewing agencies for comment and review to
determine if the project will conflict with any local, regional, or state conservation plans.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES (NO IMPACT)
a-b) 1Vo impact. Based on a staff review of the project site, it is determined that there is no
recorded archaeological or historic resources existing that may be affected by the
implementation of this proposed project. The Cite of Rosemead is a highly urbanized city
with few properties in the cite with significant historical and archaeological resources.
Measures in Section 13064.5 of the CEQA guidelines will be included in the proposed project
to provide for satisfactory miti(_,ation of anv archaeological impact that may result.
23
• •
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3211-3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
Initial Study
c) No impact Before 19911. the subject site was developed with single-family residences. an
apartment house. and a child daycare facility. All structures on these parcels were
demolished. All four (4) of the parcels that make up the subject development area. have been
vacant since 1991. No paleontological resources or geographic features are known or
expected to be present within this impact area.
d) ,?'o impact The subject development area is not expected to disturb an\ human remains.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
a) I .N'o impact The entire Cite of Rosemead lies in a seismically active region. Though
there are various properties in the Cite that are situated in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zone, this prciect area is not one of those properties. There are no known active surface
faults within the project area, which may impact future development. However, severe
;round shaking from a regional earthquake would impact not only the project area, but also
the entire site and surrounding area.
According to the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones, most of the City of Rosemead is
located vvithin an identified liquefaction zone. This subject site and surrounding parcels are
not located within the liquefaction zone.
The project area is not prone to slope instability hazards such as landslides because the area is
relatively flat in nature.
ii) Less than significant impact The major cause of structural damage from earthquakes is
wound shaking. The intensity of ground motion expected at a particular site depends upon the
magnitude of the earthquake, the distance to the epicentert and the geology of the area
ma
he property. Greater movement can be expected at sites on poorly
between the epicenter and t
consolidated material, such as loose alluvium, in close proximity to the causative fault, or in
response to an event of great magnitude. The project site could experience earthquake-
induced activirv because of its location in a seismically active region.
b) 1Vo impact. Appropriate erosion control measures will bconstruction period l All areasdof the
the preparation of final grading plans and throughout the
project site that will be impacted during construction will either be developed or
appropriately landscaped in accordance with approved project plans. Therefore, this project
will not create am significant increase in soil erosion.
c- e) No impact As new construction occurs in the city, new structures will replace older buildings
and will comply with current building codes. Because this project involves new construction,
soil reports will be submitted at Plan Check for review and approval by the City's Building
24
initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 De' Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
and Safer` Department. The soils report will determine if any methods of mitigation will be
required.
7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
a) No impact The implementation of Zone Change 05-221, General Plan Amendment 0--01,
Planned Development Revie\ 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336, Conditional Use Permit
04-960, and Zone Variance 04-325 does not include the creation and transportation of
hazardous materials.
b-c) No intpact The proposed project will not involve the release of hazardous materials into the
environment. The existence of any hazardous materials will be limited to household
quantities of items such as cleaning and maintenance products related to the operation of the
facility. If applicable, a business plan that identifies the type and location of any hazardous
materials used and./or stored on-site would need to be approved by the Los Angeles County
Fire Department.
d) No impact. The existence of am hazardous materials will be limited to household quantities
of items such as cleaning and maintenance products related to the operation of the facility.
e) No intpact Before 1991, the subject site was developed with single family residences, an
apartment house, and a child daycare facility. All structures on these parcels were
demolished. All four (4) of the parcels, that make tip the subject development area, have been
vacant since 1991.
f) Less than significant intpact This site could be made sufficiently free of hazardous
materials. However, the proposed project does not include the development of a school.
g-11) No intpact The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of a public or private airport.
The nearest airports to the site are the Los Angeles International Airport, located at l World
NVav. Los Angeles, Ca 90045, and El Monte Airport, which is located at 4233 Santa Anita
Ave # 1, El Monte, Ca 91731. Neither the Los Angeles International Airport nor El Monte
airport is located within 2 miles of the project site. El Monte Airport is approximately 3.5
miles east of the project site. El Monte Airport, which is owned by Los Angeles County and
operated by American Airports Corporation, is not a large airport. The airport has three
17130/flight schools, aircraft maintenance facilities, flying clubs and several local law
enforcement helicopter operations. The proposed project would not impact the operations at
El Monte Airport. nor would the airport result in a safety hazard for people living or working
on or near the project sites. Therefore, there are no related impacts due to the proximity of
these airports.
25
0 0
Initial
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3292.3232 Del Ma~
i) ?'o impact. The proposed project would not impact the implementation of any emergencv
response or evacuation plan. The Los .Angeles County Fire Department will review this
Project for adequate access.
j) No impact. There are no wild lands within the project area or surrounding area so as not to
expose people of structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires.
ks. easements or pipelines within 1500 feet.
k) '~'o impact There are no tan
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY (NO IMPACT)
a_f) N,o impact. The implementation of Zone Change 05-221, General Plan Amendment 05-01.
Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336. Conditional Use Permit
04-960. and Zone Variance 04-325 will not create significant impacts to the hydrology and
water quality of the area. The vacant site would result in changes in absorption rates.
drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface runoff. A drainage study will be
prepared, along with the appropriate final Trading plans. If applicable, adequate drainage
facilities will be installed. Surface runoff will be discharged. The proposed project will not
create potential impacts to the volume, drainage pattern, rate of flow and overall quality of
any body of water.
The quality of storm water runoff is regulated under the National Pollution Discharge
Th
Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES storm water permits provide a mechanism for
monitoring the discharge of pollutants and for establishing appropriate controls to minimize
the entrance of such pollutants into siorni water runoff. As co-permitee (NPDES No.
CAS614001), the County requires all development projects in its jurisdiction to comply with
the NPDES requirements for construction and operations as appropriate.
The project will be served by the Golden State Water Company, which is expected to have
adequate capacity to serve a mixed-use project, of thirty'-six (36) residential condominiums,
5,865 square feet of retail space; and 5.640 square feet of restaurant space. This project was
distributed to the Golden State Water Company for review and comments. At this stage, no
significant requirements have been issued.
g j) ko impact. Water-quality impacts depend on the conditions of the community where a
project will be located and what it v,ill involve. The subject development area is not located
near any water basin that ma\ be affected. Since the City of Rosemead has been declared by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be in Zone "C", flood insurance is
not niandatory and there is no community panel flood map for the cite.
26
0 0
Initial
Rosemead Mrxed Use - 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead
g. LAND USE AND PLANNING (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
a1 No impact Although the project involve: the subdivision of four (4) parcels into thirtrn--six
(36) residential condominiums located above 5.865 square feet of retail space and .4.640
square feet of restaurant space; the proposed project will not physically divide the existing
communit. The project site has been vacant for over ten (10) gears.
b) Less than significant impact The parcels making up the development site are zoned C-3.
Medium Commercial zone. and C3-D. Medium Commercial with a Design Overla, . The site
is designated Residential!Cominercial Mixed-Use in the General Plan. Under the
Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use designation in the General Plan, mixed-use
developments are permitted when a developer obtains a Conditional Use Permit through the
standard procedures.
This project is also a request to amend the General Plan, for an increase in the number of
residential units allowed per acre in the Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use District.
Currently this land use designation limits the residential density to fourteen (14) units per
acre. The land use designation, Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use, was last amended in
1987. Due to the underutilization of land and the existence of marginal commercial activities
along this portion of Del Mar Avenue, it would be appropriate to increase the residential
density in this overlay district. By increasing the residential density, consumer traffic would
increase, and be beneficial to the existing commercial and retail establishments in this area.
In addition, this development would make 10% of the residential units available at reduced
rates for moderate income families. Finally, the overall development would be recognized as
friendly
"smart groNrth", as the development would provide a pedestrian
of family Thouseholds
of the mixed-use development along with increased concentration
would minimize dependency on the automobile and would not contribute to residential
spravd. Upon adoption of the General Plan Amendment for a higher density in the
Residential /Commercial Mixed-Use District, the project N'ill be compatible with Mixed-Use
developments in the San Gabriel Valley region.
c) No inzpact Tile proposed project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural communities conservation plan.
10. MINERAL RESOURCES (NO IMAPCT)
a) No impact. There are no mineral resources located within the project area so as to result in
loss of availability of such resources.
b) No impact. The Rosemead General Plan and Municipal Code do not include an approved
land use plan that indicates a locally important mineral resource. Therefore, the proposed
project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource
discovery site.
27
0 0
initial
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
11. NOISE (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION)
a) Less than significant with mitigation. The City of Rosemead has established noise/land use
compatibility guidelines consistent with Sate of California criteria. According to Chapter
836 of the Rosemead Municipal Code, the Allowable Exterior Noise level for a residential
land use is 60 dBA (decibels) between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 45 dBA between 10:00
p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The Allowable Exterior Noise level for commercial land use is 65 dBA
between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 60 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
The proposed project will generate construction noise. traffic-related noise. and general
activity noise. The proposed project is expected to comply with these acceptable levels of
noise.
b) Less than significant Kith mitigation. Because the proposed project is a subdivision for the
development of thirh-six (36) residential units, located above 5,865 square feet of retail
space and 5.640 square feet of restaurant space, there will be exposure to ground borne
vibration and around borne noise levels. However, this is temporary and is primarily
associated with initial aradina and foundation work, which is done in the construction
process. Mitigation measures will be required due to the project's close proximity to
sensitive receptors.
C) Less than signifcanf impact. Since the proposed project will result in the construction of
two (2) new structures, it is expected that the noise level may increase from the previous use.
The noise may be derived from the increase in the number of families that will be living at
the subject site. The proposed project will result in additional pedestrian and vehicular traffic
noises. The increase in noise levels is not considered to be substantial.
d) Less than significant Kith mitigation. Since this project involves the construction of new
buildings, there will be a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels above
existing levels that may be created due to construction activities. Mitigation measures have
been included. due to the project's close proximity to a school.
e-f) No impact. The project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or located within two
miles of an airport. The closest airport to the project site is El Monte Airport, located at
4233 North Santa Anita Avenue in the City of El Monte. This airport is approximately 3.5
miles east of the project site. The proposed project would not have an impact on the
operations or the noise levels at El Monte Airport, nor would the airport impact noise
exposure resulting from activities at the airport. Therefore, no impacts would result.
26
• •
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3242.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, California
Initial
MITIGATION MEASURES:
XII1. The hours of construction shall be limited from - a.m. to S pxr.- Monday - Saturd2N. No
construction shall take place on Sundaes or on any legal holidays without prior approval b- the
City.
XN. The developer shall require by contract specifications ts ato reduce t the following construction etlnrebest
management practices (BMPs) be implemented by tractor ls:
• Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry
standards. All power construction equipment shall utilize noise shielding and
muffling devices.
Locate construction staging areas and noise-generating equipment away from the
school and residential uses, where feasible.
• Schedule high noise-producing activities between the hours of 8 A.M. and 6 P.M. to
minimize disruption to sensitive uses. Where feasible, high noise-producing-
activities should be scheduled between 3 P.M. and 6 P.M. to minimize noise impacts
to the adjacent school.
• Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all developed land uses
immediately bordering the subject project area providing a schedule for major
construction activities that will occur though the duration of the construction period.
The notification shall include the identification and contact number for a community
liaison and designated construction manager that will be available on site to monitor
construction activity. Contract information for the community liaison and
construction manager shall be located at the construction office, the Los Angeles
County Sheriffs Department (Temple City Station) and at City Hall in the Building
Department.
XV. Construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of
equipment simultaneously, which generates high noise levels.
XV1. A minimum 8'-0" high decorative concrete block wall shall be installed aloe; all property
lines adjacent to residential areas and Duff Elementary School. A minimum 6--4" decorative
concrete block wall shall be installed along the remaining north and south prope~~ lines of
site, which abut commercial zones.
MONITORING:
Planning Department Staff will verif• that all mitigation measures have been incorporated,
and documented on project plans. Building inspectors will verify compliance before issuing
building permits and throuallout proiect inspection. Planning staff shall have access to the
subject property at any 'Lime during construction to monitor prod=ress.
29
• •
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING (NO IMPACT)
a) 'Vn impact This proposed project will not result in substantial growth in the City's
population. However. since the project involves the construction of thirt\-six (36) nev\
condominium units, there will be an increase in the City's current population. Thin (30) of
the units will provide one (1) master bedroom and one (1) bedroom, four (4) of the units will
provide one (1) master bedroom and two (2) bedrooms, and two (2) of the units will provide
two (2) bedrooms. .According to the California Department of Finance. 2005 Cin- % Counrn
Population and Housing Estimates, the City of Rosemead has a population of 57,189, with an
estimated 4.001 persons per household!"" The applicant is proposing to change the zones of
the subject site from C-3; Medium Commercial and C3-D. Medium Commercial with a
Design Overlay to P-D; Planned Development. which is designed to support high densit\,
condominium units. This project is proposed to meet the needs of current homeom.ners and
potential buyers.
b--c) ,No impact. All four (4) parcels that make up the subject site have been vacant for over ten
(10) years. Therefore, there .will be no displacement of people or housing.
13. PUBLIC SERVICES (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
The conceptual development plan for this project has been sent to all public service agencies
that will serve this development for review and comments. These agencies include the
Counter of Los Angeles Fire Department, the County of Los Angeles Sheriffs Department, the
Garvev School District, the County of Los Angeles Public Works Department, the County of
Los Angeles Sanitation District. and the County of Los Angeles Health Department.
a-b) Less than significant impact. Because the rate of use is not expected to change significantly
due to this development. it is anticipated that the implementation of this project will create a
minimal increase in the demand for public services, such as fire and police protection. The
Cite is not currently planning the construction of new or altered government facilities needed
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, etc. However. the impact will not
impair services to the Cite and its residents.
c--e) Less than significant impact. Impacts to parks and schools are community-specific and are
not expected to be significant with the implementation of this project. Impacts to schools
depend on the site and magnitude of the project, by the student population generated per
household and the capacity of facilities in a given school district. The construction of this
proposed project will increase the area population and thus may increase student populations
at schools. To offset any potential impacts to public services, the developer will be required
to pay public services impact fees required by all reviewing agencies.
30
0 0
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3242.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead. California
Initial Studv
14. RECREATION (NOIMAPCT)
a N'o impact. The implementation of Zone Change 05-221. General Plan Amendment 05
Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336. Conditional Use Permit
04-960, and Zone Variance 04-325 will not significantly impact the usage of existing
recreational facilities in the area. Garvey Park is the nearest park. located approximately 300
feet from the project site. Garvey Park would serve this mixed-use development.
b) No impact The proposed development will include recreation amenities for residents
residing in the condominium units. The project includes four (4) roof gardens and two (2)
playgrounds. This project meets the open space requirement for planned developments,
pursuant to Rosemead Municipal Code. Therefore, this project will not impact recreation
facilities.
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC DISCUSSION (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
a--c) Less than significant impact. A comprehensive traffic analysis prepared by e}er,
Mohaddes Associates, was completed on May 22, 2006, for the proposed mixed-use
development located at 3212-3^_32 Del Mar Avenue. Four intersections were selected for the
level of service (LOS) analysis. Analysis vvas also conducted laen Duff Elementary
26, 2005 to ensure that no significant impacts would occur w
was in session. Meyer. Mohaddes Associates used the significant impact definitions provided
in the 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, as these standards
have been adopted by the City of Rosemead.
The traffic study results indicate that under existing conditions, all four intersections operate
at acceptable levels of service during AM and PM peak hours. Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
calculated a total daily trip generation rate of 888 trips for the proposed project. These rates
were based on rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation,
Mohaddes Associates, the
7" Edition. Based on the traffic study prepared by Meyer,
cumulative project traffic analysis reveals that the proposed project will not significantly
impact any of the study intersections.
d-e) No impact. A site access and circulation analysis -,vas also completed by Meyer, Mohaddes
Associates. The evaluation showed that traffic operations along Del Mar Avenue would not
be impacted by the project. For precaution, Planning Department Staff will require, as a
condition of approval, that 40 feet of red curb be installed an either side of the driveway
entrance to increase visibility for vehicles both accessing the site and traveling along Del Mar
Avenue.
• •
initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212.3232 Del Mar Avenue, Rosemead, California
f) Less than sig,,Otcant impact. According to Rosemead Municipal Code. the entire project is
required to provide 2'4 parking spaces, including seven (7) handicap accessible spaces. The
project will provide a total of 158 spaces, as the applicant will provide 10% moderate income
housing for concession of a reduced parking space amount. The reduction is a total of sixty-
six (66) spaces, and it is expected to have a less than significant impact.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS (NO IMPACT)
a_g) No impact. The implementation of the proposed project is not expected to significantly affect
the consumption of natural gas and electricity, the demand for the communication system, the
regional wastewater treatment system. the storm water drainage. the solid waste generation
and the demand for water, beyond the providers' supply infrastructure. The proposed project
will not be substantial enough to exceed established level-of-service standards of the utilities
and service systems.
The conceptual development plan for this project has been sent to all pertinent utility
companies that will serve this development for review and comments. These companies
include the SBC (Phone Utility), Charter Communications (Cable Utility), Southern
California Edison (Electric Utility), and Southern California Gas (Gas Utility) and the City
Engineer.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT)
a) No impact. The implementation of Zone Change 05-221, General Plan Amendment 05-01,
Conditional Use Permit
Planned Development Review 05-02, Tentative Tract Map 061336,
04-960, and Zone Variance 04-325 \vill not degrade the environmental quality of any fish and
wildlife habitat or threaten to eliminate any plant or animal in the community. The Zoning
District and Land Use designation of this site allow for this proposed project to be
constructed.
b) Less than significant impact. Based on the analysis of this initial study, the proposed project
has few impacts that are less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation measures.
The cumulative impacts created by construction of this mixed-use development, which
proposes thirty-six (36) residential units, located above 5.865 square feet of retail space and
5;640 square feet of restaurant space, is less than significant. The proposed project is
expected to revitalize the existing site, and the surrounding areas on this portion of Del Mar
Avenue.
c) No impact. Based on the findings provided in this environmental analysis and on the review
of plans for this development; the implementation of Zone Change 05-221. General Plan
Amcn6me.nt 05-01, Planned Development Review 05-02. Tentative Tract Map 061336,
32
Initial
Rosemead Mixed Use - 3212-3231 Del Mar Avenue.
Conditional 'Use permit 04-960. and Zone Variance 04-3325 will not be a detriment to the City
nor will it have adverse impacts on the surrounding properties. V.-th respect to the
architectural design. proper consideration has been given to the goals and objectives of the
General Plan and Zoning District for this area. It is the opinion of this department that this
proposed project will enhance the existing use and surrounding environment. The project
will not cause adverse effects on human beings.
33
Initial Study Rosemead Mixed Use - 3211.3231 Del Mar Avenue. Rosemead. California
SECTION 4
REFERENCES
i. Cin of Rosemead General Plan. November 24, 198'
ii. Cit- of Rosemead Municipal Code
iii. Cit- of Rosemead Building Department Records
iV. Traffic Impact Study, prepared by Meyer. Mohaddes Associates. May 22, 2006
v. VieNShed Analysis, prepared by Media Portfolio, January "i, 2006
vi. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. prepared by South Coast Air Qualit. Management
District
vii. Department of Finance - E-5 City / County Population and Housing Estimates, 2005
34
0 0
•
•
FINAL REPORT
Ni I 1;,
t
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
City of Rosemead
Prepared for
C. B. Homes, Inc.
Prepared by
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 4810
Los Angeles, CA 90017
August 1, 2007
R-5-1664
`
is
e: 1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cite, of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
................................1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
...................................I
PROJECT ANALYSIS
...................................I
EXISTING CONDITIONS
...................................I
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING INTERSECTIONS
...................................3
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING ROAD NETWORK
....................................3
EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES
....................................5
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
....................................5
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
....................................5
LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLD CRITERIA
....................................7
EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
....................................7
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
....................................7
FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECTS CONDITIONS
.....................................9
CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS
...................................14
.........14
TRIP GENERATION
TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
.....................................................19
PARKING ANALYSIS
.....................................................20
SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
.....................................................20
EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
.....................................................20
FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECTS CONDITIONS
.....................................................22
CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS
.....................................................24
SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
......................................................24
CONCLUSIONS
......................................................26
APPENDIX A THROUGH D
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
i
• •
I . FII,
L:
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cin• of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1 - PROJECT SITE
................2
FIGURE 2 - EXISTING LANE CONFIGURATIONS
................4
FIGURE 3 - EXISTING AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
................8
FIGURE 4 - RELATED PROJECT LOCATION
..............10
FIGURE 5 - RELATED PROJECT TRAFFIC TRIP DISTRIBUTION
..............1 I
FIGURE 6 - RELATED PROJECT AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
..............12
FIGURE 7 - FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECT AM/PM PEAK HOUR
-
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
...............13
FIGURE 8 - PROJECT TRAFFIC TRIP DISTRIBUTION
...............16
FIGURE 9 - PROJECT-RELATED AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
...............17
FIGURE 10 - CUMULATIVE PROJECT AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
...............18
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
FIGURE S-1 - EXISTING AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES .....................................................21
FIGURE S-2 - FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECT AM/PM PEAK HOUR
TRAFFIC VOLUMES 23
FIGURE S-3 - CUMULATIVE PROJECT AM/PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 25
Alever, Mohaddes Associates
ii
• •
I:
i
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cirv of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE I - LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ..............................................................6
TABLE 2 - LEVEL OF SERVICE UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ........................................................6
TABLE 3 - EXISTING CONDITIONS ...............................................................................................................7
TABLE 4 - RELATED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ..................................................................................9
TABLE S - FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECT CONDITIONS .......................................................9
TABLE 6 - PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ...................................................................................................12
TABLE 7 - CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS ...................................................................................15
TABLE 8 - PROJECT DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS .....................................................................19
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
TABLES-] -EXISTING CONDITIONS .........................................................................................................22
TABLE S-2 FUTURE BASE PLUS RELATED PROJECT CONDITIONS ...................................................22
TABLE S-3 - CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS 24
TABLE S-4 - PROJECT DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS 24
r, h1ohaddes Associates
iii
3210 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Ciro of Rosemead C B. Homes, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
This traffic impact study is for a proposed mixed-use project consisting of 36 condominium apartment units
located immediately above approximately 11.300 square feet of leasable space to be utilized for commercial,
retail and restaurant uses. The project site is located along Del Mar Avenue. south of the I-10 Freeway, in the
City of Rosemead.
This analysis evaluates the operation of four selected intersections, agreed to by City of Rosemead staff, as
potentially being significantly impacted by the proposed project. The following report provides key traffic
information regarding existing traffic volumes, an analysis of impacts at study intersections and a
determination of Levels of Service (LOS) using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method.
Mitigation measures are recommended where appropriate.
Proiect Description
The proposed project would be constructed on a 1.28-acre vacant parcel located on the eastern side of Del
Mar Avenue, between Dorothy Street to the north and Emerson Place to the south. The project would consist
of 36 residential condominium units (4 three bedroom units and 32 two bedroom units), approximately 11,300
square feet of retail and restaurant space and a single-level subterranean parking structure with a capacity of
113 spaces. The new parking structure will be connected to the rear of the proposed structure.
This evaluation was conducted as if each use was a free-standing separate facility, and there were no non-auto
trips between adjacent uses. This provides a conservative analysis, since a mixed-use project like this would
incorporate trips between the residential, retail and restaurant uses made as pedestrians and not by autos (i.e.
internal trips).
Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed project site in relation to the surrounding street network.
Proiect Anah•sis
In conjunction with City of Rosemead staff, a total of four intersections, three signalized and one
unsignalized, were selected for level of service (LOS) analysis. The four intersections represent locations that
may potentially be impacted by traffic due to the proposed project. The study intersections are:
1. Del Mar Avenue and Hellman Avenue;
2. Del Mar Avenue and Dorothy Street;
3. Del Mar Avenue and Emerson Place; and
4. Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue.
As requested by City of Rosemead staff, asecond analysis is to be conducted utilizing traffic counts taken
after the week of September 26, 200to ensure that no significant impacts occur when Duff Elementary
School is in full session. Once these counts have been taken, the second analysis will be conducted utilizing
the same methodology and impact criteria.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
MMA conducted a site visit in order to assess existing conditions at the project site and within the study area.
► The field inventory included review of intersection geometric layout, traffic control, lane configurations,
~y posted speed limits. transit service, land use. and parking.
t Alever, Alohaddes Associates
s
I
I Es
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic impact Study
City of Rosemead
•
C. B. Homes. Inc.
W Glendon Way
W Saxon Ave
-
E Saxon Ave -
-
i
W Ramona Blvd
Fl
r
-
~t
Hellman Ave
z
Dorothy St
o
Cr
c
a
n
`
g
^
0
a
o
Project <
Sr
Site
Emerson PI
i
a
N
Whitmore-St
6
rD
i
Whitmore St
n
m
Garvey Ave
M
I c<p
7
Egley Ave
D
o
Fern Ave
M
c
m i
Garvalia Ave
io
N_a t 0 5 td E
Ar Associates
A Meyer, Mohaddes
a business unit of IlMs, Inc.
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project FIGURE 1
Cite of Rosemead Project Site
Metier, Mohaddes Associates
2
0 0
3 20 Del Mar Avenue Mtxed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Stuclt
Cin, of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
Description of Eaistin2 Intersections
Figure 2 illustrates the existing intersection lane configurations for the four analyzed intersections. A brief
description of each study intersection follows.
` Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue is controlled by a four-phase traffic signal with permitted phasing for all
r left-turn movements. The northbound and southbound approaches are striped as a one left-turn lane, one
through lane and one shared through-right lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches are striped as one
left-turn lane and one shared through-right lane. Immediately north of this intersection are the eastbound and
westbound on and off-ramps for the 1-10 Freeway.
Del Mar Avenue at Dorotlrv Street is an unsignalized T-intersection that is stop-controlled in the westbound
approach. The northbound approach is striped as one through lane and one shared through-right lane. The
southbound approach is striped as one shared left-through lane and one through lane. The westbound
approach is striped as one left-turn/right-turn lane.
Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place is controlled by a four-phase traffic signal with permitted phasing for all
left-turn movements. The northbound and eastbound approaches are stripped as one left-turn lane, one
through lane and one shared through-right lane. The eastbound approach is striped as one left-turn lane and
one shared through-right lane. The westbound approach is striped as one all-movement lane.
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue is controlled by an eight-phase traffic signal that includes a protected left-
turn phase for all the approaches. All four approaches are striped as one left-turn lane, one through lane and
one shared through-right lane.
Description of Existing Road Network
F?
i The following describes existing conditions at the major roadways within the study area.
Del Mar Avenue is a north-south major arterial that provides a linkage between the Interstate 10 (1-10)
Freeway and the State Route 60 (SR-60) Freeway. This facility is located immediately adjacent to the
western edge of the project and provides access to the parking area associated with the project. The existing
lane configuration of this facility consists of two travel lanes in each direction with exclusive left-turn pockets
at all study intersections with the exception of Dorothy Street. Curbside parking is allowed along either side
1 of the street in mid-block segments but is restricted near study intersections.
Hellman Avenue is an east-west secondary arterial, located north of the project, that parallels the 1-10
J Freeway from New Avenue to Walnut Grove Avenue through the City of Rosemead. This roadway consists
of one travel lane in each direction with exclusive left-turn pockets at study intersections. Curbside parking is
allowed along either side of the street.
Dorothy Street is an east-west local street begins as a T-intersection at Del Mar Avenue and extends eastward
to Kelburn Avenue. This facility consists of one travel lane in each direction. Curbside parking is allowed
along either side of the street.
i
Emerson Place is a secondary arterial, located south of the project. which extends eastward from New
Avenue to San Gabriel Boulevard. This roadway consists of one travel lane in each direction with exclusive
left-turn pockets at study intersections. Curbside parking is allowed along either side of the street.
Meter, Mohaddes Associates
3
• •
220 Del Mar Avenue fixed-Lse Prn_ject
Traffic Impact Study
City or Rosemead
C. B. Homes. Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
WIL
p Hellman Ave
t1-*
® Dorothy St
Project
Site
9 Emerson Ave
Garvey Ave
e4
m
O
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates TOSCUE
a business unit of fferfs. fnc.
3220 Del MarANenue Mixed Use Project I'll GURE2
Cite of Itusentead Existim, Lane Configurations
Aleyer, Afohaddes,4ssociates
4
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Citv of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
Garvey Avenue is an east-west major divided arterial located south of the project site. This facility consists
of two travel lanes in each direction with a landscaped median containing exclusive left-turn pockets at study
intersections. Curbside parking is allowed along either side of the street in mid-block segments but is
restricted near study intersections.
Existing Public Transit Services
r~
Existing transit service operating in close proximity to the project site includes two express routes and one
local bus route operated b) Metro, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (METRO).
METRO operates the following two local and one limited bus routes through the study area:
Route 70 is an east-west line that travels between Downtown Los Angeles and the El Monte Busway Station.
This line utilizes Garvey Avenue when traveling through the study area. This route operates with 10 - 12
minute headways 24-hours daily, seven days a week and holidays.
Route 370 is a peak period limited route that operates along the same corridor as Local Route 70. This route
operates with 12 minute headways from 6:00 to 9:30AM and 3:00 to 6:30PM weekdays only.
r Route 170 travels from the California State University - Los Angeles campus to the Montebello Towne
{ Center utilizing Del Mar Avenue as it passes through the study area. This line operates weekdays and minor
I. holidays only from 5:OOAM to 9:30PM with 60-65 minute headways.
TR-AFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Traffic operations in the project vicinity were analyzed, as discussed with the City of Rosemead staff, using
the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology, as defined in the Congestion Management Program
(CMP) for Los Angeles County Guidelines for CMP Transportation Impact Analysis. The ICU methodology
was used to determine volume to capacity (V/C) ratios and service level characteristics for each of the three
signalized study intersections. The one unsignalized intersection level of service was calculated based on the
average delays-based methodology contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).
L;
r... Level of Service Definitions
i~.
` Table 1 describes the level of service (LOS) concept and the operating conditions expected under each level
of service for signalized intersections. Table 2 describes the level of service concept and operating conditions
} expected under each level of service for unsignalized intersections.
l A7eyer, Afohaddes
5
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
City o1 Rosemead
TABLE 1: LEVEL OF SERVICE
nT!"ri a T T7117T% TV'rI DCI'('TIWl L
is
I'
C. B. Homes, Inc.
Level
of
Description
Ratio
Serice
A
Uncongested operations: all queues clear in a single signal cycle.
< 0.600
Ven- light congestion: an occasional approach phase is fully
>0
600 to 0.699
B
utilized.
.
C
Light congestion; occasional backups on critical approaches.
>0.700 to 0.799
Significant congestion on critical approaches, but intersection
D
functional. Cars required to wait through more than one cycle
>0.800 to 0.899
during short peaks. No long-standing queues formed.
Severe congestion with some long-standing queues on critical
approaches. Blockage if intersection may occur if traffic signal
900 to 0.999
>0
E
does not provide for protected turning movements. Traffic queue
.
may block nearby intersections upstream of critical approaches.
F Total breakdown, stop-and-go operation. > 1.000
Source Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Circular 212. Interim Materials on Niglnvay
Capaarr, 1980
TABLE 2: LEVEL OF SERVICE
t wiCT'(' 7 1 1[7u'rI 1NTFT?CFrT1f)NC
I f
Stop-Controlled
Level
Intersection
of
Description
Delay (seconds
Service
er vehicle
Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear quite
A
open, taming movements are easily made, and nearly all drivers find
< 10
freedom of operation.
Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted
within platoons of vehicles. This represents stable flow. An approach
>10 and < 15
B
to an intersection may occasionally be fully utilized and traffic queues
start to form.
Good operation. Occasionally drivers may have to wait more than 60
C
seconds, and back-ups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most
>15 and < 25
drivers feel somewhat restricted.
Fair operation. Cars are sometimes required to wait more than 60
>25 and < 35
D
seconds during short peaks. There are no long-standing traffic queues.
Poor operation. Some long-standing vehicular queues develop on
E
critical approaches to intersections. Delays may be up to several
>35 and < 50
minutes.
Forced flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups form locations
downstream or on the cross street may restrict or prevent movement of > 50
F
vehicles out of the intersection approach lanes; therefore. volumes
carried are not predictable. Potential for stop and go type traffic flow.
Source /Itghis,a Capacu} Manua/. Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D C , 2000
Mever, Mohaddes Associates
6
• •
I r~
t;
I r~
~a
I (
i
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studv
City of Rosemead C B. Homes. Inc.
Level of Service Threshold Criteria
The significant impact definitions provided in the 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles
County were utilized in this study. These definitions are generally applied to all CMP facilities within the
County, but the City of Rosemead has adopted these standards and they are to be applied to all study
intersections. The definitions state that a significant impact is deemed to have occurred if the proposed
project causes the following conditions:
■ An increase in traffic demand on a facility of two percent of capacity (V/C > 0.02) or greater, causing
the facility to operate at LOS F (V/C > 1.00); or
■ The facility is already at LOS F and the proposed project increases traffic demand on a facility by two
percent of capacity.
EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
The morning and evening peak hour level of service analyses were conducted at the four existing study
intersections based on the existing traffic volume counts and the methodologies described previously. The
level of service analysis was performed using TRAFFIX software, version 7.7.
Traffic Volumes
New traffic counts were conducted on Tuesday August 16, 2005 at the four study intersections. The traffic
impact analysis is based on the highest single hour of traffic during each time period at each location. Figure
3 illustrates the existing AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes at the existing study intersections.
Traffic count sheets are provided in Appendix A_
Table 3 summarizes the level of service calculations for the study intersections under existing conditions
during the AM and PM peak hours. The results indicate all four intersections operate at acceptable levels of
service during the AM and PM peak hours. Level of service analysis worksheets for this scenario are
provided in Appendix B.
TeRI F I- VNISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Conditions
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
PNt Peak Hour
LOS
V/C
LOS Vic
1
Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
A
0.509
B
0.674
2
Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street (U)
C
21.4
C
20.8
3
Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
A
0.548
B
0.605
4
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
B
0.611
D
0.845
(U) This intersection is unsignahzed and the LOS result is shown to seconds or deia)- ramcr arau %r-
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
7
•
C. B. Homes, Inc.
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cirv of Rosemead
1-10 EB
Ramps
N m
e
m
1-34184
m
w 1014
~6' Hellman Ave
146212
t r
101105-
60:113
nti~
O
r:
N
M
N N
~ r
-29116
r 16te Dorothy St
tr
N N
n
fry N
N
m
C
1-47;30
c m ~o r- 94196
j -24M
Emerson Ave
61191 t r
941202 W Zn o
33153 t
rv
n
1-
t: 3
1261195
5391569
Ir32139
Garvey Ave
35,729-4 t r
380911--► a M
32?B~ -was
v N
d
Q
cc
R
2
m
0
-Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
TQi 1`'sV°"
I business unlf of fleas. Inc.
3220 Del \larA%cnuc 1llixed Use Project FIGURE 3
Cite of Rosemead Existing AMIPM Peak Ilour Traffic Volumes
I Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
8
•
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed- Use Project
Traffic Impact Studr
City of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
N [O ~
m ^
°
1<- 34164
m
-
.~-10114
L
1x-626
Hellman Ave
1461212
t r
101105-+
60,117
^ 3
0
M
Cb
N °4
m
A
N
29116
L
16ra
Dorothy St
tr
N N
m
M N
N
0
'6-47/30
Q *-94196
J r-24!`3
Emerson Ave
61/91! -,tr
941202
33153 ti n o
N
A
A
C n 3 1261195
io = f 5391569
x32/39
Garvey Ave
351229 t r
360!911- ► o
321761 c N
Q~
m
a
L
M
m
0
er, Mohaddes Associates
IOS`,,L `
3220 Del MarAAcnue Mixed Use Project
Cite of koscnrcad
FIGURE 3
Existino A11/P.M Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
,dries .associates
8
0
0
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
On, of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
5%0
° 5%
0
0
I~
Hellman Ave
Dorothy St
0
I0
0
a
2%
f~l► Emerson Ave
2%
rn
0
IW
8%
♦-No- Garvey Ave
8%
I N
0
0
m
a
2
o ~
i~ Meyer, Mohaddes Associates .t.
business unit of Iteris, Inc.
32201)el N1aj-A enue Mixed Use Project FIGURE 5
Cite of Rosemead Related Project Traffic Trip [distribution
Aleyer Mohaddes Associates
II
• •
3220 Del lbiar Avenue Afixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cin- (?f Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.-
i-10 ES
Ramps
01
1 r<a'1
t
01 -,k
u.
c
3319 Del Mar Ave
t
ti
a
l Emerson Ave
~m1
011-4 1
d
a
R
d
0
Mohaddes Associates
Hellman Ave
Dorothy St
Garvey Ave
G
_!40110 SCALE
mommommoomm~
e business unit 0 Iferls. Inc. FIGURE 6
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project Related Project A I/PN1
Cite of Rosemead Peak Flour Traffic Volumes
Mever, Mohaddes Associates
12
0 0
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Ciri, of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
IA O EB
Ramps
I r.
I
%I- 35186
4-10114
1 j ~r6z6 Hellman Ave
14gr216 t r
10f107-► N p ~
61t116~ aia
vm-
N
~n
N
N 30118
►r 18B Dorothy St
t t
m -
me
N
X48,31
r-M98
1+ r24r23
Emerson Ave
83,93 J t r
96r206-► Q
34154 is C a
n n
n
A
o
^m
v
t: o m k 1291200
° 5501580
1 f-33140
Garvey Ave
361235 --`f t r
388,1929 ► io u~
33180-r N
v;
d
Q.
t9
Z
0
G
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
iC SCALE
a Dusmess unit of (tens. Inc.
FIGURE
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Future Base Plus Related Project
Cit% of, Rownlend
:\.NFPNI Peak Hour TrilTic Volumes
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
13
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Proiect
Traffic Impact Study
Cin° of Rosemead
As can be seen in
both the AM and
Appendix B.
C. B. Homes. Inc.
Table 5, all four intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service in
PM peak hours. Level of service analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in
CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Cumulative Project scenario analyzes the effects of project-related traffic growth when added to the
Future Base plus Related Project conditions. The number of new trips generated by the proposed project was
calculated and added to the Future Base plus Related Projects traffic volumes. Levels of service for each of
the study intersections were then calculated for these new volumes and compared against those calculated
under the Future Base plus Related Project conditions to determine if the proposed project would create any
significant traffic impacts.
Trip Generation
The future conditions with the proposed project were analyzed based on an estimate of the number of new
trips generated by the project. Trip generation rates for the proposed project were calculated based on those
published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, 7't' Edition. The land uses were
identified as 11,300 square feet of retail space (Land Use Code 814 and 820) and 36 residential dwelling units
(Land Use Code 220). Due to the small size of the retail component, the Specialty Retail Center (Land Use
Code 814) trips rates were selected to be used in calculating project-related trips. Unfortunately, ITE has not
developed AM peak hour trip rates for this land use. Based on discussions with City of Rosemead staff, it
was determined that the trips rates for a Shopping Center (Land Use Code 220) were to be utilized in the AM
peak hour to ensure that any potential impacts that may occur as the result of project-related traffic were
identified. The results of these calculations are shown in Table 6.
T A U7 1r nnn 114 !'T TP1P (:FKFRAT101N
1
1
Trips Ends Generated
Land Use
Size
Units
Weekday AM
Weekday PM
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Shopping Center
(AM on] y)
11.3
KSF
26
16
42
Specialty Retail Center
PM only
11.3
KSF
-
-
22
27
49
521
Apartments
36
DU
I 4
17
21
24
13
37
367
Total
30
33
63 46 40 86 I 888
Note. KSF = 1,000 square feet
DU = Dwelling unit
Source institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 7' Edition
Alever, Alohaddes Assoc
•
14
0 0
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cit}, of Rosemead C. B. Homes. Inc.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution assumptions are used to determine the origin and destination of new vehicle trips associated
with the project. The geographic distribution of project trips is based on the locations of local activity centers,
E street system that serves the site, and recent traffic data collected in the project study area. The trip
1 distribution utilized for the Cumulative Project conditions analysis was developed in conjunction with City of
Rosemead staff and is shown in Figure 8.
i Trips generated by the project, as shown in Table 6, were then assigned to the surrounding roadway system
based on the distribution patterns, shown in Figure 8, to estimate the project related peak-hour traffic at each
of the study intersections. Figure 9 illustrates the project trip assignment onto the future roadway network for
the AM and PM peak hours.
The project trip assignment was then added to the Future Base plus Related Projects traffic volumes. The
resulting Cumulative Project traffic volumes for the AM and PM peak hours are illustrated in Figure 10.
These traffic volumes were then utilized to calculate levels of service for the study intersections for
Cumulative Project conditions. Table 7 summarizes the results of the Cumulative Project traffic analysis.
!F'
TABLE 7: CUMULATIVE PROJECT CONDITIONS
Future Without Project
Future With Project
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Significant
Intersection
LOS V/C
LOS V/C
LOS V/C A V/C*
LOS V/C A V/C*
Impact?
1
Del Mar Avenue at Hellman
A
0.517
B
0.686
A
0.524
0.006
B
0.695
0.007
N
N
Avenue
Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy
C
21
9
C
21.6
C
22.7
0.8
C
22.5
0.9
N
N
2
Street (U)
.
3
Del Mar Avenue at
A
0.557
B
0.617
A
0.562
0.005
B
0.623
0.006
N
N
Emerson Place
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey
B
622
0
D
0
862
B
0.628
0,006 D
0.869
0.007
N
N
4
Avenue
.
.
A V/C represents the difference in the volume to capacity ratio oetween the rumre Da.-,c with rivi-, • 4v
i..
S[
Mohaddes
15
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
City of Rosemead
C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
5%
Hellman Ave
5%
0
°
I~
Dorothy St
o0
0
Project
Site
A
O
° 2%
Emerson Ave
2%
rn
°
~W
8%
Garvey Ave
8%
H ~N
O
0
d
Q
IC
d
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates 70SC.AiE
. business unit of Iferis. Inc.
3220 Del Nlar Avenue !Mixed Use Project FIGURE 8
Cite of Rosemead Project Traffic Trip Distribution
Alohaddes
16
0 0
3220 Del ATar Avenue Alixed-L'se Project
Traffic Impact Study
Ciro of Rosemead
C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10
EB
Ramps
►r t'2
Hellman Ave
112 ~
QQ
NL`!N
m
m
ti
tC
i
Dorothy St
• t
r
0
m
X20
Project
r ,3176
site
m
n
e
~t!t
A
E
ve
merson
t; t } t
0
mm~
CV f~N
X213
Garvey Ave
213-4
o_
~c
m
Q
R
d
Mohaddes Associates
~~Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
r 5..lE
r 5..
a business unit of Bens, !nc-
FIGURE 9
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Project-Relaled A11'P\l
Cite of Rosemead
Peek llour Traffic Volumes
,...r!1,:.. _.......iw k. +.iiw..i.. ..i. iii .:J,.
addes Associates
17
• •
3,120 Del Mar Avenue Alixed-L"se Proiect
Traffic Impact Studv
Cin' of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
m
N
pZ- %-35!86
r-10111
r L X729 Hellman Ave
149216 t f
101107-► ~NW2
621117 -ti Nv
v
a ^
g
~n
m 30118
1616 Dorothy St
tr
r N
N
O
N
m
M
N
w m ~-49,32
v lc w r- 96!96
j x24123
Emerson Ave
-
~I t r
S419
44-0
f
1
961'206 Ifl OC
34.54--,%
s4 C c
v
tD oM0
^ w X131203
- 5501560
j 4. y- 33!40
Garvey Ave
38'238 ~y t
388829 ID N
33180-,A 25
N
~cc
m
Q
to
m
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
a business unll or hens, Inc.
FIGURE 10
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Cumulative Project
Cit% of Rosemead
,OMAN Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Associates
is
I.
• •
I..
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cite o; Rosemead
As can be seen in Table 7, all four intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service in
both the AM and PM peak hours. Based on the City's level of service threshold criteria, no significant
impacts are created at any of the study intersections with the construction of the proposed project. Level of
service analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix B.
SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION ANALYSIS
Access into the proposed project will be provided at two locations: a two-lane driveway located in the center
of the building frontage along Del Mar Avenue and an electronic gate located in the northeast corner of the
parking lot that provides access onto Dorothy Street. The proposed site plan is provided in Appendix C.
The expected traffic operations of the driveway located along Del Mar Avenue were analyzed to ensure that
the absence of an exclusive left-turn lane into the project for southbound traffic would not create significant
delays along Del Mar Avenue. The Cumulative Project traffic volumes, provided in Figure 10, were used to
determine the level of service of the driveway for both the AM and PM peak hours. By using the Cumulative
Project traffic volumes, the levels of service calculated in this analysis represent operating conditions when all
project-related traffic utilizes the driveway located along Del Mar Avenue. The results of this analysis are
shown in Table 8.
TABLE 8: PROJECT DRIVEWAY "1 K.ar r lk- yr r r-r%A A.,,
westbound Total
?Northbound South oach d Approach Intersection
Time Period Approach APP
LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay
AM A 0.0 A 0.3 C 22.0 A 0.6
PM A 0.0 .4 0.5 D 28.2 A 0.8
measured in seconds and is the average delay for each movement in each approach
I
L:
As shown in Table 8, the proposed location and configuration of the project driveway is not expected to
significantly impact traffic operations along Del Mar Avenue. Traffic exiting the project site may experience
some delay but this is not expected to significantly impact the internal circulation of the project site due to
waiting queue lengths of approximately one vehicle. These results are valid regardless of the number of
vehicles using the secondary point of access from Dorothy Street. Level of service worksheets for this
analysis are provided in Appendix D.
As a condition of approval, City of Rosemead staff has recommended that a minimum of 40 feet of red curb
be installed on either side of the driveway entrance. This improvement is expected to provide increased
visibility to vehicles both exiting the project and traveling along Del Mar Avenue.
The secondary point of access is not expected to create any significant impacts along the alleyway, located
approximately 125 feet east of Del Mar Avenue and traveling south from Dorothy Street. This alleyway el Mar generally provides secondary access
cated on the Uvesterni edge of the Margaret Duff ElemDentary School a and the
alleyway and to the parking lot to
A very minimal amount of project-related traffic is expected to utilize this point of access. This is primarily
due to the additional travel time and distance needed to reach this location from Del Mar Avenue. The
addition of project-related traffic to this facility is not expected to create any significant impacts as a result of
the extremely low existing traffic volumes and the lack of continuity provided by the facility.
C. B. Homes, Inc.
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
19
0 0
I
4
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study C. B. Homes, Inc.
City of Rosemead
PARKING ANALYSIS
According to City of Rosemead Municipal Code, the project is required to provide a minimum of four parking
spaces per residential unit, one parking space per 100 square feet of restaurant space, and one parking space
per 250 square feet of commercial/retail space. Using these standards, the project is required to provide a
minimum of 144 spaces for residential use, 57 spaces for restaurant use and 24 spaces for commercial/retail
use for a total of 225 on-site parking spaces, including 7 handicap accessible spaces. The total number of
available parking spaces proposed in the ground level parking lot and the subterranean parking garage is 154
with 8 handicap accessible spaces as shown in the site plan provided in Appendix C. Therefore, the project
is deficient a total of 71 parking spaces and does not meet the City municipal code regarding the number of
required parking spaces.
The applicant has requested a reduction in the City's development standards, specifically the number of on-
site parking spaces required, under State of California Senate Bill (SB) 1818 - Density Bonus Law. Under
this law, the applicant must designate a minimum ^f ten percent of the total number of dwelling units
available as "affordable to Moderate Income" households to become eiigibie for a five percent density bonus.
Once this threshold is met, the applicant is entitled to one concession from the City. New parking standards,
developed as part of SB 1818, establish the number of spaces per dwelling unit at two spaces per two to three-
bedroom units. This new standard reduces the total number of parking spaces needed for residential use from
144 to 72 and the cumulative number of spaces from 225 to 153. This also reduces the total number of
handicap-accessible parking spaces required by the project from seven to six. Under this provision, the
project provides enough on-site parking to meet the standards set under SB 1818.
SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
As requested by City of Rosemead staff, a second set of traffic counts were conducted with the purpose of
ensuring that traffic generated by Duff Elementary School, located approximately one block southeast of the
proposed project, was included in the impact analysis.
Existing Traffic Operations Analysis
New traffic counts were conducted on Tuesday September 27, 2005 at the four study intersections. Figure S-
1 illustrates the existing AM and PM peak hour turning movement volumes at the existing study intersections.
Traffic count sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Table S-1 summarizes the level of service calculations for the study intersections under existing conditions
during the AM and PM peak hours. The results indicate all four intersections operate at acceptable levels of
service during the AM and PM peak hours. Level of service analysis worksheets for this scenario are
provided in Appendix B.
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
20
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Alixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cin, of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
w
1-10 EB
Ramps
NW
n n cc
~87.'S2
j
248187
13925 Hellman Ave
2981116-4
t
1811194
5211
co N .
rv
y
a,
cc
m
c
co
r°
16128
t,
1x119 Dorothy St
t
r
pp
N e1
tin
rf
' 'mom
A
a ^ R 53.'32
cp A e 4-- 106777
♦ L ►r40'27
Emerson Ave
130794
116.'196-+ S io N
69153 a c a
C P. N
A
Ov Q+
a°oAm X1651187
1: F7
3
6
4
1
29
j r73147
Garvey Ave
165:121 1 t r
624.'175
98,E ti ` . B;
~6 Ir5 e
c v~
v
d
Q
R
d
w
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
a business unit of bens, Pic.
3220 Del N1ar ,%-enue Mixed Use Project FIGURE S-1
City of Rosemead Existing; f1011P)I Peak Hour Trarfic Volumes
Alever, Alohaddes.4ssociates
21
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
City of Rosemead C. B. Homes. Inc.
TARIT S-1: EXISTING CONDITIONS
i
Existing Conditions
Intersection
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
LOS
V/C
LOS
'%'/C
1
Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
D
0.829
B
0.694
2
Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street (U)
C
19.5
D
26.6
3
Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
B
0.627
B
0.623
4
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
D
0.812
C
0.795
(V) This intersection is unsienattzed and the LUS resuu is snown to seconas of aeiay ramm umu
Future Base Plus Related Proiects Conditions
The ambient growth rate and related project trip assigrunent utilized in the original analysis were then applied
to the supplemental traffic volumes, shown in Figure S-1. The resulting traffic volumes were utilized in
calculating the levels of service for the study intersections for the Future Base plus Related Project conditions
for the AM and PM peak hours as summarized in Table S-2 and illustrated in Figure S-2.
TABLE S-2: FUTURE BASE PLUS
RFI ATFT) PRn.TFCT CONDITIONS
Future Base Plus Related Projects
Intersection
ANN Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
LOS
V/C
LOS
V/C
]
Del Mar .Avenue at Hellman Avenue
D
0.844
C
0.708
2
Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street (U)
C
20.1
D
27.9
3
Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
B
0.639
B
0.635
4
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
D
0.827
D
rO 1
(V) This intersection is unsignalized and the LOS result is shown in seconds of aeiay rather man vn.
As can be seen in Table S-2, all four intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service in
both the AM and PM peak hours. Level of service analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in
Appendix B.
Mever, Mohaddes _Associates
22
• •
3220 Del Afar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Cit1• of Rosemead
C. B. Homes, Inc.
1-10 EB
Ramps
M
0 cc
0
rte, ~
V k 69.53
A ^ 253,'89
L `4027 Hellman Ave
304f116-a t r
185!198 c
53(73 A?, iB
m
o:
e
° 16/29
r 10/19 Dorothy St
ttr
m N
0/D
r`
w CO
-54!33
ro ~ =
J t`
110&79
p-41`28
Emerson Ave
133196'
1 r
1181200 -6.
70164 ^r
~ v ~
a
a
~
A
m Q a
L 168'192
---75af642
0,74148
Garvey Ave
168124-4
~y t r
637,791 ~
10079 -i
o N
t
o
o
o t
r v
0/r
Q
A
d
D
Y
J
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
~
w c
o
a business unifofIferfs.Inc.
FIGURE S-2
1220 Del Nlar-Avenue hlixecl Use Project
Future Base Plus Related Project
City of Rosemead
AMIPM Peal- 11our Traffic Volumes
Alever, Mohaddes Associates
23
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact study C. B. Homes. Inc.
Citi, of Rosemead
Cumulative Project Conditions
The proposed project trip generation, distribution and assignment utilized in the original analysis was applied
to the supplemental Future Base plus Related Project traffic volumes to produce the Cumulative Project
Conditions, as shown in Figure S-3. These traffic volumes were then utilized to calculate levels of service
for the study intersections for Cumulative Project conditions. Table S-3 summarizes the results of the
Cumulative Project traffic analysis.
.,r,~ tr!`T !`llA"T1TTl(11\C
TA
BLE 5-3: I'U
rva1, a v.
IVIULA 11 V J I
Future Without Project
Future With Project
All Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
ANI Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Significant
Intersection
LOS N' /C
LOS V/C
LOS N'/C 'A N7C* L05 \'/C 0 V/C*
Impact'
Del Mar Avenue at Hellman
D 0.844
C
D 0.851 0.007 C 0.718 0.010
N N
1
Avenue
Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy
C 20.1
E2277.99
D
C 20.7 0.6 D 29.6 1.7
N N
2
Street (U)
Del Mar Avenue at
B 0
639
B 0.635
B 0.645 0.006 B 0.640 0.005
N N
3
Emerson Place
.
Del Mar Avenue at Garvey
D 0.827
I
D 0.811
D 0.832 0.005 D 0.818 0.007
N N
4
Avenue
"
F,m,rr Race with Proiect and the Future Base analvsis scenarios.
A V/Crepresents the amerence to uic vu,um- <.+-F- i
I.
As can be seen in Table S-3, all four intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable level of service in
both the AM and PM peak hours. Based on the Cin,'s level of service threshold criteria, no significant
impacts are created at any of the study intersections with the construction of the proposed project. Level of
service analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix B.
TABLE S-4: PROJECT DRIVEWAY TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Northbound
Time Period Approach
Southbound
Approach
Westbound
Approach
Total
Intersection
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS Delay
LOS
Delay
AM A
0.0
A
0.3
D 25.3
A
0.6
PM A
0.0
A
0.5
D 28.5
A
0.8
Note Delay is measured in seconds and is the average delay for each movement in each approach
Site Access And Circulation Analvsis
Using the Cumulative Project traffic volumes provided in Figure S-3, the level of service of the driveway for
both the AM and PM peak hours was calculated and shown in Table S-4.
As shown in Table S-4, the proposed location and configuration of the project driveway is not expected to
significantly impact traffic operations along Del Mar Avenue. Traffic exiting the project site may experience
some delay but this is not expected to significantly impact the internal circulation of the project site due to
I.n waiting queue lengths of approximately one vehicle. Level of service worksheets for this analysis are
provided in Appendix D.
' Afever, Mohaddes Associates
21 4
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studv
City of Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
r
f'
is
1-10 EB
Ramps
c:
+253189
1
p- 41l28 Hellman Ave
3041118--4
t
185'198
54x74
N o
[ ai
N
A
6
A
O
n
R 1 h29
or 10`19 Dorothy St
t lr
m N
m
N
T 00N
m 3 ° 5534
w c 108179
1 7r 41,28
Emerson Ave
134197 t r
118'200-. 01 S R
70164 m a
'
a
~aN
m ^ 170f195
v +758:642
►r74/46
Garvey Ave
170;127 t r
637;791 e
100:79 is , o^`
cn
~Q
m
Q
to
d
O
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
a business unit of Neris. Inc
Fl CX RE S-3
3220 IM t4arAvenue Rlixed tlse 1`roject
Cunutlathe Project
City of Rosetncad
ANVI'N1 Peak Ilnur Traffic Volumes
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
25
I
3 220 De! Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studi-
On, o`Rosemead C. B. Homes, Inc.
CONCLUSIONS
The initial analysis. conducted using counts taken on Tuesday August 16, 2005, shows that the proposed
project will not significantly impact any of the study intersections in either the AM or PM peak hour. As
discussed earlier, this analysis was conducted a second time utilizing traffic counts taken after September 26,
2005 to ensure that no significant impacts occur when the Duff Elementary School is in full session. The
supplemental analysis, conducted using counts taken on Tuesday, September 27, 2005, shows again that the
proposed project will not significantly impact any of the study intersections in either the AM or PM peak
hour.
An evaluation of the traffic operations occurring at the project driveway was also conducted in both analyses.
In both scenarios, it was found that the project will not create any impacts on traffic operations along Del Mar
Avenue in the vicinity of the project driveway. As a ftirther precaution. the City of Rosemead staff, as a
condition of approval, recommended that 40 feet of red curb be installed on either side of the driveway
entrance to increase visibility for vehicles both accessing the site and traveling along Rosemead Boulevard.
No other traffic-related impacts or conditions were identified.
Associates
26
0 0
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Citv of Rosemead
•
APPENDIX A
EXISTING TRAFFIC
COUNTS
I L~
C. B. Homes, Inc.
Mever. Mohaddes Associates
0 0
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
City oTRosemead C B. Homes, Inc.
ORIGINAL ANALYSIS
,er. Mohaddes.Associates
E_
•
•
TMC Summary of Del MarA ve/Hellman A ve
Project 05-2319-001
:_'„t i : H.e11maR Ave
APPROACH LANES
0 ry .~i H
Co in 0%
a
.N-1 CO
O O O
m ~ A
- ; 356 146 0 212
$ 011151 10 0 105 1 MEN*
r 173 60 0 113
a
x
z
rn
- -n
7 -15
11 it
v
Co
M
~ o 0 0
n
fn O O
0 C,
0 I III v
APPROACH LANES
N
:.:F•Iellrrian=Ave
z
5
0
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
I~?1afA;Y~II~~m'dtk~lY6~'23
(Intersection Name)
Tuesdayic:~_~src±
Day
~
Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7:00 AM
- 9:00 AM
noon 4:00 PM
6:00 PM
m 4:00 PM
- 6:00-W
AM PEAK HOUR
NOON PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
-745 AM
0 AM
500 PM
• •
TMC Summary of Del MarA ve/Dortli v St
Project 05-2319-002
r^s
c
J ` ._Dbithy St
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
Day Cate
COUNT PERIODS
AM PEAK HOUR 800 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR 0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM
0 0
TMC Summary of Del MarAve/Emerson Place
P o)ec# 05-2319-003
t-
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
AM PEAK HOUR 806 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR 0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM
0 0
TMC Summary of De! MarA ve/Garve y A ve
Project 05-2319-004
a
v
a
0
DA
T
z
z
TOTAL AM MD PM
264 35 0 229
1291 380 0 911
110 32 0 78
>r;
APPROACH LANES
° 0 0 0
s
t
1"
4mm
tier
in
in 0 0 0
s
v
to
o ~ o m_I
APPROACH LANES
DO1
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
(Intersection Name)
,uestlau B~ibLC5
Day Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
noon 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM
m l:D0 PM - 6:00 PM
AM PEAK HOUR
730 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR
0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR
500 PM
0 0
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studf- C. B. Homes, Inc.
City of Rosemead
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
i.
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
•
•
TMC Summary of oe! MarA ve, /He/loran A ve.
Project 05-2375-001
APPRO
ACH LANES
4.::
r
co
m
p-
T
ry
~
O
O
O
. Hellman Ave.
TOTAL AM MD P•t
414 298 0 116
v
375 181 0 194
AO
52 0 71
0 12,3
I
z
I
rn
1
Hellman Ave.
AM MC
J%MW
87 0
248 0
4wgEg
• 39 0
hid
N
6 Q• ~ ~
O O O
d v .rv Co
W
APPROACH LANES
PM TOTAL
5
52 139 u
87 335 1
25 64 :11 -4
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
-~"eI MarAve.J Hellman 11ye
.':1:
(intersection Name)
Tuesday
Y7/6$:
Day
Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7:00 AM, -
9:00 AM
noon 4:00 PM
6:00 PM
jym 4:00 PM
6:00 PM
AM'PEAK HOUR
700 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR
0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR
500 PM
•
•
TMC Summary of Del MarA ve. /Dorthy St
Project 05-2375-002
rl
b
.Q
v
O
z
Ln
-
APPROACH LANES
I
0
2
o
`r
v
O
°
x
0
0
0
I gti
r`
Dorthy St
AM MD PM
AM
MD PM TOTAL
z
0
0
0
A.
16
0
29
44 "o':
b
0
0
0
d
0
0
0
0 i
0
0
o
'IV
40!01
10
0
19
29 .q
$
v`
O_
sir
c C,
° 0 0 0
s
N „y
o c m
APPROACH LANES
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
Del MarAM / DorthYSt
(Intersection Name)
Tuesday 9/37/05
Day Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7;00 AM 9:00 AM
noon 4:D0 PM 6:00 PM
m 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM
AM PEAK HOUR
700 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR
0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR
500 PM
•
TMC Summary of Del MarA ve. lEmerson Place.
Project 05-2375-003
'f
r•
~.4
f-
r•.
I
t ;
i
is
APPRO
ACH LANES
1
24
[0
Q
o
r
Ln
N
M
r
Cu
m
n
LD
E
z
n
v
Emerson Place
TOTAL AM MD PM
=1. 224 130 D 94 1,0
312 116 0 196
~1 F-- 11
p 0' 132 69 0 63
a
n
x
z
z
0
m.
n
t
Emerson Place
AM MD PM TOTAL S
a
#40 32 85 ;,0 -
77 183
27 67 D=.` °d
VA-, 1,, r
a N
Ln r, r4
O O O
f
m M o
y- ^ N
~I°II°1v
APPROACH LANES
DOI
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
Del MatAve J Eniersoii:Flaae~
(Intersection Name)
Tuesd y 9/27/05
Day Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
noon 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM I
m 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
AM PEAK HOUR - 745 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR 0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR 500 PM
•
•
TMC Summary of Del MarA ve. /Garvey A ve.
APPRO
ACH LANES
1 I
-2
0;
a -
m
Cl
tP+S
fC
f
H
Q
H
Ln
I
O
O
Q
Garvey Ave.
a
O
nD
S
2
W. MD PM
165 0 121
624 0 775
7]
98 0 7-7
.m
Cu
.
0
A.
hiP
in O Q
6 Ln K1
%0 un
APPROACH LANES
Project 05-2375-004
N
Garvey Ave.
u~
MD PM TOTAL
g
0
187
352 0
v
0
629
1372
a
0
<
0
47
120 :1;
001
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT
Del MarAve ./.:GarveyAyer"
(Intersection Name)
Tuesday 9127/05:'
Day Date
COUNT PERIODS
am 7:00 AM :00 AM
noon 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
x:00 PM 6:00 PM
AM PEAK HOUR
745 AM
NOON PEAK HOUR
0 AM
PM PEAK HOUR
500 PM
0 0
0
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study C. B. Homes, Inc.
Cin, of Rosemead
APPENDIX B
I~
I " I"
TR.A.FFIX ANALYSIS
WORKSHEETS
Mohaddes Associates
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studi,
Cin, ofRosemead
•
ORIGINAL ANALYSIS
Mohaddes Associates
C. B. Homes, Inc.
i
• •
Ex M Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:17:56 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
-
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): C.5C9
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxxA
Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service:
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L T R
I--------------- II--------------- II ll---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
II--------------- II II---------------I
5 <<
88
1.00
86
0
0
88
1.00
0.95
93
0
93
1.00
1.00
93
M
146 10 60 6 10 34
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
146 10 60 6 10 34
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
146 10 60 6 10 34
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
154 11 63 6 11 36
0 0 0 0 0 0
154 11 63 6 11 36
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
154 11 63 6 11 36
II--------------- II
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.14 0.86 1.00 0.23 0.77
Final Sat.: 1600 3155 45 1600 2841 359 1600 229 1371 1600 364 1236
------------I---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
--I
Volume Module: Count Date: 16 Aug 20(
Base Vol: 39 707 10 19 696
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 39 707 10 19 696
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0
initial Fut: 39 707 10 19 696
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 41 744 11 20 733
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 41 744 11 20 733
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 41 744 11 20 733
I II
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.24 0.24 0.01 0.26
Crit Moves:
0.26 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.03
Traffix 7.7.0715 {c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA.
0 0
I
II
r
I
IJ`:
I
Ex AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:17:56 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCN, Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 21.41
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R" L - T - R
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 18 Aug 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 0 823 24 23 752 0 0 0 0 18 0 29
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 823 24 23 752 0 0 0 0 18 0 29
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 823 24 23 752 0 0 0 0 18 0 29
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.D0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 866 25 24 792 0 0 0 0 i9 0 31
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 B66 25 24 792 0 0 0 0 19 0 31
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II--------------- II II---------------I
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1324 xxxx 447
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 769 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 150 xxxx 565
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 769 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 146 xxxx 564
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.13 xxxx 0.05
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move: * * + A * * * * * * *
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 269 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 21.4 xxxxx
Shared LOS: * A * * * * C
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 21.4
ApproachLOS: * * * C
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Ex AIM Wed Sea 7, 2005 15:17:56 Page 4-1
I.
i
It
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection €3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.548
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 36 Level Of Service: A
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes- 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I II II II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 18 Aug 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 35 720 19 65 665 44 81 94 33 24 94 47
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 35 720 19 65 665 44 81 94 33 24 94 47
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 35 720 19 65 665 44 81 94 33 24 94 47
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 37 758 20 68 700 46 85 99 35 25 99 49
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 37 758 20 68 700 46 85 99 35 25 99 49
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 37 758 20 68 700 46 85 99 35 25 99 49
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05 1.00 1.88 0.12 1.00 0.74 0.26 0.15 0.57 0.28
Final Sat.: 1600 3118 82 1600 3001 199 1600 1184 416 233 912 456
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.05 0.08 0.08 0.02 0.11 0.11
Crit Moves:
******************x*********#***********+**** #*+******+*****#******###*#*+++*i*
i Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
t.
s •
Ex AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:17:56 Page 5-1
i
3220 Del Far Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
-
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.611
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 41 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include _
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I I(--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 16 Aug 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 49 564 23 116 302 68 35 380 32 32 539 126
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 49 564 23 116 3C2 68 35 380 32 32 539 126
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 49 564 23 116 302 68 35 380 32 32 539 126
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 52 594 24 122 318 72 31 400 34 34 567 133
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 52 594 24 122 318 72 37 400 34 34 567 133
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 52 594 24 122 318 72 37 400 34 34 567 133
I II II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08. 1.00 1.63 0.37 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.62 0.38
Final Sat.: 1600 3075 125 1600 2612 588 1600 2951 249 1600 2594 606
------------I---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.22 0.22
Crit Moves: *
* * * * * * * i } } * * * + * * * * * } * * * * + * + * * * * + * * * * + * * } * * * * it * * * # * * * + * + + * * } * # } * * * * * * + + * * * * + * * *
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
I
is
• •
7x PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:51:C9 Page 2-1
322C Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU !(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.674
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 47 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 ! 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
I II II--------------- .;---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 16 Aug 2005 << PM
Base Vol: 61 7B4 33 119 875 128 212 105 113 26 14 B4
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 61 784 33 119 875 128 212 105 113 26 14 84
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 61 784 33 119 875 128 212 105 113 26 14 84
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 64 825 35 125 921 135 223 Ill 119 27 15 88
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 64 825 35 125 921 135 223 111 119 27 15 88
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 64 825 35 125 921 135 223 111 119 27 15 88
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 0.48 0.52 1.00 0.14 0.86
Final Sat.: 1600 3071 129 1600 2792 408 1600 771 829 1600 229 1371
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------1
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.33 0.33 C.14 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.06 0.06
Crit Moves W#++
i
Traffir. 7:-7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
Ex PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 1-4:5=:09 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysts
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
w*+*+*+*w,r,t*w++*+:**x+*w*~+**++*+w*+++v.*x+v.*+ir****rv.*w+***+*+ws*+:*+w,r+*~rw+kf.rt+
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 20.8]
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I I
Volume Module: Count Date:
Base Vol: 0 872 12
Grov-th Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 812 12
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0.
Initial Fut: 0 872 12
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 916 13
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 918 13
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxrx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx
Level Of Service Module:
---------------II---------------
18 Aug 2005 << PM
23 953 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
23 953 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
23 953 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
24 1003 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
24 1003 0 0 0 0
4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
---------------II---------------
931 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
743 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
743 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
8 0 18
1.00 1.00 1.00
8 0 18
0 0 0
0 0 0
8 0 18
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
8 0 19
0 0 0
8 0 19
6.8 xxxx 6.°.
3.5 xxxx 3.3
1475 xxxx 46E
119 xxxx 54S
116 xxxx 548
0.07 xxxx 0.0?
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx.
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 256 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxr:xx 0.4 xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.8 xxxxx
Shared LOS: B C
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx
ApproachLOS:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
LT_ - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
w * + * + + *
xxxxxx 20.8
* * C
•
Ex PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:51:09
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
•
Page 4-1
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.605
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 40 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II II--------------- II --------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : 1 0 i 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
) II II--------------- II---------------I
volume Module: Count-Date: 18 Aug 2005 << PM
Base Vol: 56 761 45 86 789 84 91 202 53 23 96 30
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 56 761 45 86 789 84 91 202 53 23 96 30
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 56 761 45 86 789 84 91 202 53 23 96 30
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 59 801 47 91 831 88 96 213 56 24 101 32
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 59 801 47 91 831 88 96 213 56 24 101 32
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 59 801 47 91 831 88 96 213 56 24 101 32
I II II II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
I
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.89 0.11
Final Sat.: 1600 3021 179
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.27 0.27
Crit Moves:
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.06
1600
1.00
1.81
2892
0.29
k*k**
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
0.19 1.00
308 1600
11----
0.29 0.06
1600
1.00
0.79
1267
0.17
1600
1.00
0.21
333
0.17
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.15 0.65 0.20
247 1031 322
0 .02 0.10 0.10
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
E
Ex FM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:51:09 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
i
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.845
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y}R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 79 Level Of Service:
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T R L T R
I II--------------- (I--------------- II---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I II------------II----------------II---------------{
Volume Module: Count Date: 16 Aug 2005 << PM
Base Vol: 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 78 39 569 195
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 78 39 569 195
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut• 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 7B 39 569 195
User Ad: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 C.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 120 528 68 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 120 528 68 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 120 528 66 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
I--------------- II--------------- II-------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.49 0.51
Final Sat.: 1600 2833 367 1600 2918 282 1600 2948 252 1600 2383 817
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.25 0.25
Crit Moves:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGLES, CA
L_.
• •
Ex PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:51:09 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
I,,
I
i
I ~
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
++*++++**+++*r+rarrr,wrr+r+++r++++r,w*~+*++++++++.+++++r+r+rr++*+++rrrr*++++**++r++
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
++++++*~r*++++*+*++++++++++++++++++++,t++++r+++++++r,Fr+*+++++++++++**++++++rr++*rr
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.845
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 79 Level Of Service: D
+++r++++,t*r+r+++++++++++++++++++++*+r++++++++++rrr++++++++++++**++rr++++rr+++*++
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II--------------- II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------I---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 16 Aug 2005 << PM
Base Vol: 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 78 39 569 195
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 78 39 569 195
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 114 502 65 175 744 72 229 911 78 39 569 195
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 120 528 68 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 120 528 68 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 120 528 68 184 783 76 241 959 82 41 599 205
I II--------------- II--------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.49 0.51
Final Sat.: 1600 2833 367 1600 2918 282 1600 2948 252 1600 2383 817
------------I---------------11---------------11---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.25 0.25
Crit Moves
++++rrr++rrr++rr+++++++rr+++r+r+++r++rrrr+r++*++++rr**++rr+rr*rrrrr+*++*+**++++*
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
I
• •
Fut w/o Proi AM Wed Sep 2005 15:22:58 Page 2-
3220 Del Ma= Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
I~,-
i f
L:
I
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Leng-h Method (Future Volume P.lternative)
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
*+**kk***#w+*~t#*Yr+***+++#**#*+**++#*#kt*k#+k#*k###kkk###+#++iw*rk+kkk#*#*+#+**#
Cycle (sec): '00 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.517
Loss Time (sec): -10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service: A
kYrkk##+k#+#+***#+#kkxk+###+F,:+++#++#**##k*#####k#+#+#k*###*w#++*+#++#k###*+##+t#+
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II--------------- II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
i---------------ll---------------II---------------II---------------1
Volume Module: AM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 40 726 10 19 711 90 149 10 61 6 10 35
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 40 726 10 19 711 90 149 10 61 6 10 35
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 40 726 10 19 711 90 149 10 61 6 10 35
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 42 764 11 20 748 95 157 11 64 6 11 37
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 42 764 11 20 748 95 157 11 64 6 11 37
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 42 764 11 20 748 95 157 11 64 6 11 37
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.14 0.86 1.00 0.22 0.78
Final Sat.: 1600 3157 43 1600 2840 360 1600 225 1375 1600 356 1244
I il--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.24 0.24 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves: k+## +k++
####**+#k##+F###kk+++++*###k+++ir*++k#+++i+#~r+++++#++#kk+klr+##'*+Y##+#k#+##*#*kA'**#
T-affix 7.7.0115 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Fut w/o Prcj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 7-5:22:55 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
i E
f
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
+++++++++++aa+.+++++aa++++++.+++++++a+~++.+,.*.+*+as++~++++~+xr=*+,r++~+a++++++*++
Intersection $2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
++a++++++++++*~++++++:++aaa+++a+.a++++++x+++++++++++++++aa++++++r.aaw+*+*+,raaaa++
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 21.93
*+++++a+a*+a++++,+++r+.++++++a++,+*+++++++.+++++aa+*+++++w+++++a+++a++++++~++a++++
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bo::nd
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
II---------------II---------------l7----------------I
Control Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 i 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: AM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 0 841 24 23 7,71 0 0 0 0 18 0 30
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 841 24 23 771 0 0 0 0 18 0 30
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 841 24 23 771 0 0 0 0 18 0 30
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 885 25 24 612 0 0 0 0 19 0 32
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 885 25 24 812 0 0 0 0 19 0 32
Critical Gan Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------------------
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 911 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1353 xxxx 456
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 756 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 144 xxxx 557
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 756 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 140 xxxx 556
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.14 xxxx 0_06
I---------------II---------------I!---------------7-l------------
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move: * +
Movement: LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap_: xxxx xxxx r.xxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxrr.
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shared LOS: * + a
AovroachDel: xxxxxx
ApproachLOS:
0.1 xxxx XXXXX XXXXX XXXX xxxxx xxxxx XXXX XXXXX
9.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
A a + a + + + x
LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 263 xxxxx
0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx XXXXX xxxxx 0.7 xxxxx
9.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 21.9 xxxxx
A + + + + + + C
xxxxxx xxxxxx 21.9
+ * C
Traffix 1.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA:, LOS ANGELES, CA
I`
E~
IL
0 •
Fut W/o Proj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 35:22:58 Pace 4-1
-
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.557
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 37 Level Of Service: A
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
- I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
volume Module: AM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 36 735 19 66 6B2 45 83 96 34 24 96 48
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 36 735 19 66 682 45 83 96 34 24 96 48
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 36 735 19 66 682 45 83 96 34 24 96 48
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 38 714 20 69 718 47 87 101 36 25 101 51
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 38 774 20 69 718 47 87 101 36 25 101 51
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MIFF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 38 774 20 69 718 47 87 101 36 25 101 51
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05 1.00 1.88 0.12 1.00 0.74 0.26 0.14 0.57 0.29
Final Sat.: 1600 3119 81 1600 3002 198 1600 1182 418 229 914 457
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.04 0.24 0.24 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.11 0.11
Cri-:: Moves:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LCS ANGELES, CA
r,
• •
Fut w/o Proj AM Wed Sep 2005 15:22:58 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
I(.
-
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): .ADO Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.622
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
;el
23
1.00
23
0
0
23
1.00
0.95
24
0
24
1.00
1.00
24
119 310
1.00 1.00
119 310
0 0
0 0
119 310
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
125 326
0 0
125 326
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
125 326
II---------------11---------------
70 36 388 33 33 550 129
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
70 36 388 33 33 550 129
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
70 36 388 33 33 550 129
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
74 38 408 35 35 579 136
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
74 38 408 35 35 579 136
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
74 38 408 35 35 579 136
I II II II ---------------i
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.63 0.37 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.62 0.38
Final Sat.: 1600 3077 123 1600 2611 589 1600 2949 251 1600 2592 608
------------I---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.20 D.20 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.22 0.22
Crit Moves:
I
Volume Module: AM Fut+F
Base Vol: 50 576
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 50 576
Added Vol: 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0
Initial Fut: 50 576
User Adj: 1.D0 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 53 606
Reduct Vol: 0 0
Reduced Vol: 53 606
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 53 606
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
r<
L.;
• •
Fut w/o Proj ?F, Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:52:20 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hell-mar. Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.686
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxrxxx
Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - 7 - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
t;; I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 62 805 34 121 894 131 216 107 116 28 14 86
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 62 805 34 121 894 131 216 107 116 28 14 86
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
initial Fut: 62 805 34 121 894 131 216 107 116 28 14 86
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 65 847 36 127 941 138 227 113 122 29 15 91
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 65 847 36 127 941 138 227 113 122 29 15 91
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 65 847 36 127 941 138 227 113 122 29 15 91
I II--------------- ►I--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
i' Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 0.48 0.52 1.00 0.14 0.86
Final Sat.: 1600 3070 130 1600 2791 409 1600 768 832 1600 224 1376
( II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.34 0.34 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.07 0.07
Crit Moves:
1'.
Traffix-7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LCS ANGELES, C?:
i
0 0
Fut w/o Proj PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:52:20 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
i
I~
i
I ~a
E.s
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
#**#xw+*#***ww###x**r*w**ww**ww**w+****w*#w**ww+*+**#**w#****##+*#*##x*+#*w##*##
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 21.6]
wiw*w*#wx*i+*#*+***#+#****#********x**#w##*+**#****#***w***w*#******x***###*#+#*
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R y - T - R
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------1
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes- 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
Volume Module: PM FutRel
Base Vol: 0 897 12
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 897 12
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 897 12
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 944 13
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 944 13
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx
Level of Service Module:
23 976 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
23 976 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
23 976 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
24 1027 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
24 1027 0 0 0 0
4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
---------------II---------------
957 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
727 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
727 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
8 0 18
1.00 1.00 1.00
8 0 18
0 0 0
0 0 0
8 0 18
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
8 0 19
0 0 0
8 0 19
6.8 xxxx 6.9
3_5 -xxxx ---3_3
-1514 xxxx 479
113 xxxx 538
110 xxxx 537
0.08 xxxx 0.04
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx XXXX XXXXX
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - -
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx Y.XY_X
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.1 xxxx
Shared LOS: B
Approach Del: xxxxxx XXXXX
ApproachLOS:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA;-LOS ANGELES, CA
B
X
* w w
LTR - RT LT -
xxxx xxxxx xxxx
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxxx
Y.
w
w * #
LTR - RT LT
xxxx xxxxx xxxx
XXXX XXXXX XXXXX
xxxxx xxxxx
xxxx
* #
xxxxx
#
* #
LTR - RT
249 xxxxx
0.9 YXXXx
21.6 xxxxx
C
21.6
r
i
i
}J
Fut w/o Proj PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:52:20 Page 4-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection f3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.617
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 41 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- ~I---------------I
Volume Module: PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 57 783 46 88 809 86 93 206 54 23 98 31
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 57 783 46 88 809 86 93 206 54 23 98 31
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 57 783 46 88 809 86 93 206 54 23 98 31
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 60 824 48 93 852 91 98 217 57 24 103 33
Redact Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 824 48 93 852 91 98 217 57 24 103 33
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 60 824 48 93 352 91 98 217 57 24 103 33
I II--------------- II--------------- II ---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 0.79 0.21 0.15 0.65 0.20
Final Sat.: 1600 3022 178 1600 2893 307 1600 1268 332 242 1032 326
I II--------------- II--------------- II ---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.29 0.29 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.10 0.10
Crit Moves:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MN1A, LOS ANGELES, CA
0 •
Put W/o Proj PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:52:20 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Reporr
i
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.862
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 64 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound west Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 116 517 66 180 761 74 235 929 80 40 580 200
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 116 517 66" 180 761 74 235 929 80 40 580 200
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 116 517 66 1B0 761 74 235 929 80 40 580 200
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 122 544 69 189 801 78 247 978 84 42 611 211
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 122 544 69 189 801 78 247 978 84 42 611 211
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 122 544 69 189 801 78 247 978 E4 42 611 211
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.49 0.51
Final Sat.: 1600 2838 362 1600 2916 284 1600 2946 254 1600 2379 821
I II--------------- Il--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.19 0.19 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.15 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.26 0.26
Crit Moves
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
L.
• •
Fut W/ Proj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:23:42 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic --mpact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.524
Loss Time (sec): 10 (YTR = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I 11 11 11
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
Volume Modul
Base Vol:
Growth Adj:
Initial Bse:
Added Vol:
PasserByVol:
Initial Fut:
User Adj:
PHF Adj :
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vol:
Reduced Vol:
PCE Adj:
NLF Adj :
Final Vol.:
a: Cum+Proj
42 742 12 19 727 90
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
42 742 12' 19 727 90
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
42 742 12 19 727 90
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
44 781 13 20 765 95
0 0 0 0 0 0
44 781 13 20 765 95
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
44 781 13 20 765 95
---------------II-----
149 10 62 7 10 35
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
149 10 62 7 10 35
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
149 10 62 7 10 35
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
157 11 65 7 11 37
0 0 0 0 0 0
157 11 65 7 11 37
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
157 11 65 7 11 37
------------I---------------II---------------11---------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.97 0.03 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 0.14 0.86 1.00 0.22 0.78
Final Sat.: 1600 3149 51 1600 2847 353 1600 222 1378 1600 356 1244
------------I---------------11---------------11---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.27 0.27 0.10 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves:
i
c:
f
t. i
Tra.Ffix 7.7.0715 (c)-2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
4_:
• •
Fut w/ Prcj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:23:42 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
L.
Base Vol: 0 861 24
Growth Adj: 1.00 1*.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 861 24
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 01
Initial Fut: 0 861 24
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 906 25
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 906 25
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx
Volume Module: AM Cum+Proj
2000 BCM Unsianalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
*****#k*#***#**ir+*#***#*+**#*******w***********#*+irk+x*#****#**+****#**+***++***
intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 22.7]
#*+****k****#***+*+*Yr*#*~Fk***+**k****+~4******+#k*+*k**+Y-****##*****ar+**k+kksk*k*
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes- 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
------------1---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
23 789 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
23 789 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
23 789 0 0 0 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
24 831 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
24 831 0 0 0 0
4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
---------------II---------------
932 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
743 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
743 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
0.03 xxxx xxxx . xxxx xxxx xxxx
18 0 30
1.00 1.00 1.00
18 0 30
0 0 0
0 0 0
18 0 30
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
19 0 32
0 0 0
19 0 32
6.8 xxxx 6.9
3.5 xxxx 3.3
13B4 xxxx 467
137 xxxx 548
134 xxxx 548
0.14 xxxx 0.0E
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Level Of Service Module
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shared LOS: * x
ApproachDel: xxxxxx
ApproachLOS:
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx,
10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxxx xxxxxx
* *
+ * *
LT - LTR - RT
xxxx 253 xxxxx
xxxxx 0.7 xxxxx.
xxxxx 22.7 xxxxx
* C
22.7
C
i
t,=
• •
Fut w/ Proj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:23:42 --Page 4-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
ww*##*w*#w,.++#kri#**w*,►#*+***+*##***w**w*****##w**#*t#***w*w*+#wt*i***+*w###*w*+
Intersection, #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
**#*w****#*www*****w*w***++**ww*~+.**+*:+#**##*#**www#*#****w#*+*www*#+##*#r+**#
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.562
yoss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxrxx
Optimal Cycle: 37 Level Of Service: A
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
11
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
Volume Module: AM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 36 745 19 67 693 46 84 96 34 24 96 49
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 36 745 19 67 693 46 84 96 34 24 96 49
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 36 745 19 67 693 46 84 96 34 24 96 49
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 38 784 20 71 729 48 88 101 36 25 101 52
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 38 784 20 71 729 48 88 101 36 25 101 52
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 38 784 20 71 729 48 88 101 36 25 101 52
---'1---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05
Final Sat.: 1600 3120 80
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.25 0.25
Crit Moves:
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.04
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
1.88 0.12
3001 199
0.24 0.24
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
1.00 0.74
1600 1182
0.06 0.09
w**w
1600
1.00
0.26
418
0.09
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.14 0.51 0.29
227 909 464
0 .02 0.11 0.11
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
t
• •
Fut W/ Proj AM Wed Sep 7, 2005 15:23:42 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Cf Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.628
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del.Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I
e: AM Cum+Proj
50 582 23
1.00 1.00 1.00
50 582 23
0 0 0
0 0 0
50 582 23
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
53 613 24
0 0 0
53 613 24
1.00 1.00 1.0c
1.00 1.00 1.0c
53 613 24
---------------II---------
121 317 72 38 388
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
121 317 72 38 388
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
121 317 72 .38 388
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
127 334 76 40 408
0 0 0 0 0
127 334 76 '40 408
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
127 334 76 40 408
11---------------
33 33 550 131
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
33 33 550 131
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
33 33 550 131
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
35 35 579 138
0 0 0 0
35 35 579 138
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
35 35 579 138
I II II II---------------,
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.63 0.37 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.62 0.38
Final Sat.: 1600 3078 122 1600 2608 592 1600 2949 251 1600 2584 616
I II II II ---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vow/Sat: 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.02 0.22 0.22
Crit Moves
Volume Modul
Base Vol:
Growth Adj:
Initial Bse:
Added Vol:
PasserByVol:
Initial Fut:
User Adj:
PHF Adj
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vol:
Reduced Vol:
PCE Adj :
MLF Adj:
Final Vol.:
Traffix 7.'7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Fut w/ Proj PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:53:38 Page 2-1
r
i
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
*i*#t***i#stir*****#***:k**#*ii*+***i#**r***w****kk#:***#*r#*k*****#******#***n***
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.695
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
--I---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Riahts: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes- 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------I----------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
Volume Module: PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 64 625 36 121 918 131 216 107 117 29 14 86
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 64 825 36 121 918 131 216 107 117 29 14 86
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 64 825 36 121 918 131 216 107 117 29 14 86
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 67 868 38 127 966 138 227 113 123 31 15 91
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 67 868 38 127 966 138 227 113 123 31 15 91
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 67 868 38 127 966 138 227 113 123 31 15 91
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.75 C.25 1.00 0.48 0.52 1.00 0.14 0.86
Final Sat.: 1600 3066 134 1600 2800 400 1600 764 836 1600 224 1376
------------I---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.28 0.26 0.08 0.35 0.35 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.07 0.07
Crit Moves: *t*k k***
Traffix 7.7.-0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
s •
Fut W/ Proj PM Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:53:08 rage 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
Ir.
s
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
*+x*+wr-++***,.w+w+*++*+++**i++**+++w**+**++**www***,r***+w+*:~k+**ww+*+****+++*w***
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
************++*****x*****w++w****+w**w++***ww*w**+ww***w*+.*+****+*wr*+,.w+***+*+
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 22.51
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Aooroach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0
I---------------
Volume Module: PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 0 921 12
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.-00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 921 12
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVo1: 0 0 0.
Initial Fut: 0 921 12
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 969 13
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 969 13
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx
---------------II---------------II----
23 1004 0 0 0 0 8 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
23 1004 0 0 0 0 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 1004 0 0 0 0 8 0
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
24 1057 0 0 0 0 8 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24 1057 0 0 0 0 8 0
4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx
2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx
---------------11---------------11---------
982 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1554 xxxx
711 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 106 xxxx
711 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 103 xxxx
0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.08 xxxx
0
--I
18
1.00
18
0
0
18
1.00
0.95
19
0
19
6. 9
3.3
----I
492
528
527
0.04
----I
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Level Of Service Module:
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx Xxxxx
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx XXY.X XXXX XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXYX XXXX 233 xxxx}:
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 22.5 xxxxx
Shared LOS: B C
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxr,
ApproachLOS:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LCS ANGELES, CA
LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
+ + * * * *
xxxxxx 22.5
* * C
IS
Fut w/ Proj Pty Wed Sep 7, 2005 14:53:OE Page Z-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.623
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
I II--------------- II II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include _
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
Volume Module: PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 57 799 46 89 823 87 94 206 54 23 98 32
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 57 799 46 89 823 87 94 206 54 23 98 32
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 57 799 46 89 823 87 94 206 54 23 98 32
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 60 841 48 94 866 92 99 217 57 24 103 34
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 841 48 94 866 92 99 217 57 24 103 34
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 60 841 48 94 866 92 99 217 57 24 103 34
I----------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 0.79 0.21 0.15 0.64 0.21
Final Sat.: 1600 3026 174 1600 2894 306 1600 1268 332 241 1025 335
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.26 0.28 0.06 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.10 0.10
Crit Moves:
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 20C4 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Fut W/ Proj PM Wed Sep 71, 2005 14:53:08 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
r
II
i
I
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection $4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.869
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 86 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R
I II--------------- II II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Kin. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
-------------1---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Volume Module: PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 116 527 66 183 769 77 238 929 80 40 580 203
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 116 527 66 183 769 77 238 929 80 40 580 203
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 116 527 66 183 769 77 238 929 80 40 580 203
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 122 555 69 193 809 81 251 978 84 42 611 214
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 122 555 69 193 809 81 251 978 84 42 611 214
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 122 555 69 193 809 81 251 978 84 42 611 214
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.48 0.52
Final Sat.: 1600 2844 356 1600 2909 291 1600 2946 254 1600 2370 830
II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.20 0.20 0.12 0.28 0.28 0.16 0.33 0.33 0.03 0.26 0.26
Crit Moves:
-Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
1 1-1
•
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Stud,
City of Rosemead
•
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
s,
I
tiv
Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
C. B. Homes, Inc.
• •
Ex AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:01:13 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report.
i
i
i
I
Satt:ration Flow Module:
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
* * * it * * # + * r + * * i + + + * + * r i * + * # + * * i * * « + + * i * * * * + * x # * •k * * * * * * * * * * + * Yr * * * * * * i i i * * + * i i « * *
Intersection 41 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.829
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 74 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------II---------------1(---------------II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes- 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
I II II I---=-----------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 49 812 18 36 729 123 298 181 52 39 248 87
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 49 812 18 36 729 123 298 181 52 39 248 87
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 49 812 18 36 729 123 298 181 52 39 248 87
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 52 855 19 38 767 129 314 191 55 41 261 92
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 52 855 19 38 767 129 314 191 55 41 261 92
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 52 855 19 38 767 129 314 191 55 41 261 92
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.96 0.04
Final Sat.: 1600 3131 69
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.27 0.27
Crit moves:
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.02
k*****
1600
1.00
1.71
2738
0.28
k***w
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
0.29 1.00
462 1600
11----
0.28 0.20
1600
1.00
0.78
1243
0.15
1600
1.00
0.22
357
0.15
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 0.74 0.26
1600 1184 416
0 .03 0.22 0.22
Traffix 7.7:0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
Ex AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:01:13 Page 3-1
I t. Y,
I
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 19.5]
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Sound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R - T - R L - T - R
II II II ---------------I
Control Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
r p
Critical Gp:xxxxx-xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
-----------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
I II II II
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 0 832 31 10 744 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 832 31 10 744 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 832 31 10 744 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 876 33 11 783 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 876 33 11 783 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
C itical Ga Module•
I--
.Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 908 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxr, xxxxx 1306 xxxx 455
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 758 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 154 rxxx 558
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 758 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 152 xxxx 557
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.07 xxxx 0.03
------------I---------------II---------------11---------------I1---------------I
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move: * * * A
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - R.T LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx. xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 276 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 19.5 xxxxx
Shared LOS: x # * A # + * * * * C #
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.5
ApproachLOS: # # * C
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
Ex AM Tue
Oct 4,
2005 11:01:13
Pace 4-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
I
4.4
I I.
i
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume.Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.627
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : i 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I II---------------- II--------------- I~---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 49 719 20 47 779 68 130 116 69 40 106 53
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
initial Bse: 49 719 20 47 779 68 130 116 69 40 106 53
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 49 719 20 47 779 68 130 116 69 40 106 53
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 52 757 21 49 820 72 137 122 73 42 112 56
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 52 757 21 49 820 72 137 122 73 42 112 56
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 52 757 21 49 820 72 137 122 73 42 112 56
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 0.63 0.37 0.20 0.53 0.27
Final Sat.: 1600 3113 67 1600 2943 257 1600 1003 597 322 852 426
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.24 0.24 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: *
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MINA, LOS ANGELES, CA
Ex AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:01:13 Page 5-1
3220 Del Far Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
i
1-
I,
l ,a
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): i00 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.812
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 69 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I II II I;---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM
Base Vol: 106 455 69 165 534 180 165 624 98 73 743 165
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 106 455 69 165 534 180 165 624 98 73 743 165
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 106 455 69 165 534 18C 165 624 98 73 743 165
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 112 479 73 174 562 189 174 657 103 77 782 174
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 112 479 73 174 562 169 174 657 103 77 782 174
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 112 479 73 174 562 189 174 657 103 77 782 174
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.50 0.50 1.00 1.13 0.27 1.00 1.64 0.36
Final Sat.: 1600 2779 421 1600 2393 807 1600 2766 434 1600 2619 581
I---------------Il--------------- 11---------------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.11 0.23 0.23 0.11 0.24 0.24 0.05 0.30 D.30
Crit Moves:
s + + + + + + * + + x k + i + * * w ~ + ~ + + + * + + + + + ~r ar + + + i + + + + X + i + + + + + + + it + + + + + + + : + + + + + k + + + + i. + + + ~ + * k + ~r
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
t,,
Ex Ph T.:e Oct 4, 2005 11:08:54 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analyses
City of Rosemead
revel Of Service Computation Report
i
I
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.694
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): Y.xxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: B
+*f*+***+***********+=*a..a***a,ra****w*aa****++++*.++x**a*a+*+*+****+:a*+**+++++*
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman. Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T - R
I--------------- II II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes : 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
I
Saturation Flow Module:
------------I--------------- -
Volume Module: Count Date
Base Vol: 48 622 31
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 48 822 31
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 48 822 31
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 51 865 33
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 51 865 33
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 51 865 33
27 Sep 20(
78 965
1.00 1.00
78 965
0 0
0 0
78 965
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
82 1016
0 0
82 1016
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
82 1016
15 <<
165
1.00
165
0
0
165
1.00
0.95
174
0
174
1.00
1.00
174
I
)116 194 71
1.00 1.00 1.00
116 194 71
0 0 0
0 0 0
116 194 71
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
122 204 75
0 0 0
122 204 75
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
122 204 75
25 87 52
1.00 1.00 1.00
25 87 52
0 0 0
0 0 0
25 87 52
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
26 92 55
0 0 0
26 92 55
1.00 1.00 1.0c
1.00 1.00 1.0C
26 92 55
Sat/Lane:
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
Adjustment:
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lanes:
1.00
1.93
0.07
1.00
1.71
0.29
1.00
0.73
0.27
1.00
0.63
0.37
Final Sat.:
1600
3084
116
-----1
1600
1-----
2733
467
-----I
1600
I-----
1171
429
-----I
1600
I----
1001
599
-----I
------------I---
Capacity Analysis
Modul
e:
Vol/Sat:
0.03
0.28
0.28
0.05
0.37
0.37
0.08
0.17
0.17
0.02
0.09
0.09
Crit Moves
*+a*aa**:++*++++**+++.*
t+**aa
r**+**++***
*aaaa*
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
t.
I`
I'
L
Ex PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:08:54 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street_
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: D[ 26.6]
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
Control:
- I I
Uncontrolled
I I
Uncontrolled
I I
Stop Sign
I
Stop Sign
Rights:
Include
Include
Include
Include
Lanes*
0 0 1 1 0
0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1! 0
Capacity Module
0
28
1.00
28
0
0
28
1.00
0.95
29
0
29
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II II II ---------------I
------------I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------•
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM
Base Vol: 0 823 30 46 946 0 0 0 0 19 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1-.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 823 30 46 946 0 0 0 0 19 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 823 30 46 946 0 0 0 0 19 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95. 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 866 32 48 996 0 0 0 0 20 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 866 32 48 996 0 0 0 0 20 0
Critical Gap Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 898 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1478 xxxx 450
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 765 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 119 xxxx 562
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 765 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 113 xxxx 562
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.18 xxxx 0.05
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Shared LOS:
ApproachDel: xxxxxx
ApproachLOS:
0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
B * * }
LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 215 xxxxx
0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.9 xxxxx
10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 26.6 xxxxx
B * + * * * * D +
xxxxxx xxxxxx 26.6
* * D
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
I
Ex PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:08:54 Page 4-1
I r';
1 1-.
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.623
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R a 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 42 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II--------------- II II I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1'. 0 0
I--------------- )1--------------- 11----------------II---------------~
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 « PM
Base Vol: 58 762 28 60 817 86 94 196 63 27 77 32
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 58 762 28' 60 817 86 94 196 63 27 77 32
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 58 762 28 60 817 86 94 196 63 27 77 32
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 61 802 29 63 860 91 99 206 66 28 81 34
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 61 602 29 63 860 91 99 206 66 28 81 34
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 61 802 29 63 860 91 99 206 66 28 81 34
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 0.76 0.24 0.20 0.57 0.23
Final Sat.: 1600 3087 113 1600 2895 305 1600 1211 389 318 906 376
------------I---------------11---------------II-----=---------II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.26 0.26 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.09 0.09
Crit Moves _
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES,-CA
I'.
9 •
Ex PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:08:54 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Me-:hod (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.795
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay ;sec/veh): xxxxxx
optimal Cycle: 66 Level Of Service: C
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
Volume Modul
Base Vol:
Growth Adj:
Initial Bse:
Added Vol:
PasserByVol:
Initial Fut:
User Adj:
PHF Adj:
PHF Volume:
Reduct Vol:
Reduced Vol:
PCE Adj:
MLF Adj:
Final Vol.:
I I
a: Count Date:
151 550 54
1.00 1.00 1.00
151 550 54
0 0 0
0 0 0
151 550 54
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
159 579 57
0 0 0
159 579 57
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
159 579 57
I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.82 0.18
Final Sat.: 1600 2914 286
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.20 0.20
Crit Moves:
---------------II
27 Sep 2005 << PM
179 564 190
1.00 1.00 1.00
179 564 190
0 0 0
0 0 0
179 564 190
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
188 594 200
0 0 0
188 594 200
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
188 594 200
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.12
1600
1.00
1.50
2394
0.25
---------------II---------------
'121 775 77 47 629 187
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
121 775 77 47 629 187
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
121 775 77 47 629 187
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
127 816 81 49 662 197
0 0 0 0 0 0
127 816 81 49 662 197
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
127 816 B1 49 662 197
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
0.50 1.00
806 1600
11----
0.25 0.08
1600
1.00
1.82
2911
0.28
or* * * *
1600
1.00
0.18
289
0.28
k*****
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.54 0.46
1600 2467 733
0 .03 0.27 0.27
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dcwling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
9 0
Lt W/o P=oi AN Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:12:51 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic =mpact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
S~
i
f'
I t
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
w+w++w•w++:+wwwx*x~wxt++++w++++~.w++++ww+w++wwr++;,rw~+++++*+w*w*.++ww++++w*f+w++w
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
w+w+wwww+w+ww+++++++++w+w++w+++w++,rwwwwww+w+++++*+ww++w+ww~w++w*+++++w++«++**wtyr
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.644
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R - 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 78 Level Of Service: D
w++w+wwax+w+w++xw+wx+w+s+w+w+w+++++w+wwwww+w+++++w*++++w+w+++**w+w++w+++++w+www+
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T R
II--------------- II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 50 833 18 37 745 125 304 185 53 40 253 89
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 50 633 16 37 745 125 304 185 53 40 253 89
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserHyVol: 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 50 833 18 37 745 125 304 185 53 40 253 89
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 53 877 19 39 784 132 320 195 56 42 266 94
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 53 877 19 39 784 132 320 195 56 42 266 94
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 53 677 19 39 784 132 320 195 56 42 266 94
I II--------------- Il--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.96 0.04 1.00 1.71 0.29 1.00 0.78 0.22 1.00 0.74 0.26
Final Sat.: 1600 3132 68 1600 2740 460 1600 1244 356 1600 1184 416
II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.29 0.29 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.23 0.22
Crit Moves: ww+w +w++ ww.w w+++
+w+++ww..t.ww+ww*w+-ra.ww+w~+.w+++++wwww+ww+w+~~i:+kww*+~w+wwk+ww+,k ~.ww+k+w+++ie+w+#++k+
Traffir. 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
r
0 0
Fut w/o Proj AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:12:51 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analys-s
City of Rosemead
Leve1 Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Ursignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 20.1]
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes., 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
------------I---------------If---------------11---------------II---------------I
------------I---------------II---------------Ii ---------------ii---------------
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 0 850 32 10 763 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
Growl-h Adj: -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 850 32 10 763 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 850 32 10 763 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 895 34 11 803 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 895 34 11 803 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
Critical Gap Module:
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 928 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1335 xxxx 465
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 745 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 147 xxxx 549
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 745 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 146 xxxx 549
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.07 xxxx 0.03
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling- Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
LOS by Move: A
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 9.9 xxxx xxxxx
Shared LOS: A
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxrxrx
ApproachLOS:
*
* } *
LT - LTR - RT
xxxx xxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx
xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
* # *
xxxxxx
*
#
LT
xxxx
xxxxx
+
* +
LTR - RT
266 xxxxx
0.3 xxxxx
20.1 xxxxx
C F
20.1
C
t'.
• •
Fut wio Prop A-M Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:12:51
3220 Del Mar'Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
i
i
i
Level Of Service Computation Report
Page 4-1
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Xx+X+*#+***x#*x*.}}**+*#****#*+*x****#X**#**#*x**x**X*X++X#*x*+*****,.#++#*#*#++#
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.639
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 43 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement; L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------I---------------I1---------------II---------------II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I
Saturation Flow Module:
I
Volume Module: Count
Base Vol: 50 734
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 50 734
Added Vol: 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0
Initial Fut: 50 734
User Adj: 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 53 773
Reduct Vol: 0 0
Reduced Vol: 53 773
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 53 773
Date- 27 Sep 201
20 48 799
1.00 1.00 1.00
2048 799
0 0 0
0 0 0
20 48 799
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
21 51 841
0 0 0
21 51 841
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
21 51 641
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05
Final Sat.: 1600 3115 85
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.25 0.25
Crit Moves: *x*x
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.03
1600
1.00
1.84
2946
0.29
}*#x
**:*x
)5 <<
69
1.00
69
0
0
69
1.00
0.95
73
0
73
1.00
1.00
73
I---------
kM Fut+Rel
133 118
1.00 1.00
133 118
0 0
0 0
133 118
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
140 124
0 0
140 124
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
140 124
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.16 1.00 0.63
254 1600 1004
------11---------
0.29 0.09 0.12
70 41 108 54
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
10 41 108 54
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
70 41 108 54
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
74 43 114 57
0 0 0 0
74 43 114 57
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
74 43 114 57
1600
1.00
0.37
596
0.12
k*****
1600
1.00
0.20
323
0.03
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
0.53 0.27
851 426
0.13 0.13
Traffic. 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA; LOS ANGELES, CA
Fut w/o Proj AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:12:51 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
r-
I
i
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.827
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 73 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes- 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I I
Volume Module: Count Date:
Base Vol: 106 465 70
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 108 465 10
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 10B 465 70
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 114 489 74
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 114 489 74
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 114 489 74
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26
Final Sat.: 1600 2781 419
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.18 0.18
Crit Moves:
27 Sep 201
169 547
1.00 1.00
169 547
0 0
0 0
169 547
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
178 576
0 0
178 576
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
178 576
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.11
L*+***
1600
1.00
1.49
2391
0.24
i * * * }
)5 << 7
185
1.00
185
0
0
185
1.00
0.95
195
0
195
1.00
1.00
195
I---------
>M Fut+Rel
168 637
1.00 1.00
168 637
0 0
0 0
168 637
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
177 671
0 0
177 671
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
177 671
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.51 1.00 1.73
809 1600 2766
11---------
0.24 0.11 0.24
100
1.00
100
0
0
i00
1.00
0.95
105
0
105
1.00
1.00
105
1600
1.00
0.27
434
0.24
74 758 168
1.00 1.00 1.00
74 758 168
0 0 0
0 0 0
74 75B 168
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
78 798 177
0 0 0
78 798 177
1.00 1.00 1.0C
1.00 1.00 1.00
7B 798 177
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.64 0.36
1600 2619 581
0 .05 0.30 0.30
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMP_, LOS ANGELES, CA
Fut w/o Proj PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:16:45 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
I f^
I'
I t_;
i;
t`
c ,
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
+w++++w++++++++++++*++x+**++.**++*■+w++w+•++w++w++**++w++x+*++.*+w++*++w,r+w***++
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.708
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 51 Level Of Service: C
w+++*+*++++++,t++++++*~+++*+**+*++*++++++w++**+*+tw~++*++w+w*w*++,t++w++++,r*+,r**++
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 49 844 32 80 985 168 118 198 73 27 89 53
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 49 844 32 80 985 168 118 196 73 21 89 53
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 49 844 32 80 985 168 118 198 73 27 89 53
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 52 888 34 84 1037 177 124 208 77 28 94 56
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 52 888 34 84 1037 177 124 20B 77 28 94 56
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 52 888 34 84 1037 177 124 208 77 28 94 56
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 1.71 0.29 1.00 0.73 0.27 1.00 0.63 0.37
Final Sat.: 1600 3083 117 1600 2734 466 1600 1169 431 1600 1003 597
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.05 0.38 0.38 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.02 0.09 0.09
Crit Moves
Traffic. 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, Cr
• •
Fut w/o Proj PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:16:45 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
r
I'.
I I,-
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: D[ 27.9)
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes-, 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 0 847 31 47 969 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 847 31 47 969 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 847 31 47 969 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 892 33 49 1020 0 0 0 0 20 0 31
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 892 33 49 1020 0 0 0 0 20 0 31
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II--------------- II Il---------------I
Capacity Module:
Crflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 924 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1518 xxxx 463
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 746 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 112 xxxx 551
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 748 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 106 xxxx 551
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.07 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.19 xxxx 0.06
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Level of Service Module:
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move:
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx YXXX xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 207 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx XXXXX XXXX xxxxx xxxxx 0.9 XXXXX
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 27.9 xxxxx
Shared LOS: B
ApproachDel: XXXxxx xxxxxx xxxxxr 27.9
AparoachLOS: D
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
B
+
*
i
i
f,
L
• •
Fut W/0 P--O-; PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:16:45 Page 4-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue M-'xed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.635
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 43 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------1---------------II---------------II---------------II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include -
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-anes : 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
------------I---------------11---------------II---------------II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 59 784 29 61 837 88 96 200 64 28 79 33
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
initial Bse: 59 784 29 61 837 88 96 200 64 28 79 33
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 59 784 29 61 837 88 96 200 64 28 79 33
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 62 825 31 64 881 93 101 211 67 29 83 35
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 62 825 31 64 881 93 101 211 67 29 83 35
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 'x.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 62 825 31 64 881 93 101 211 67 29 B3 35
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 0.76 0.24 0.20 0.56 0.24
Final Sat.: 1600 3086 114 1600 2896 304 1600 1212 388 320 903 377
------------I---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.30 0.30 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.09 0.09
Crit Moves w**+
*+*irw.+++,t++++wwwlr+w+~+:++++++++++*+a+f+iw++++++++++*+++w++++*,t+++ww+*+.++++++*w
Traffix 7.1.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
t'
L..
0 0
i
i
i
Fut w/o Proi PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:16:45 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.811
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 69 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound Fast Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Greer.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: i 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I II II--------------- II--------------
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Fut+Rel
Base Vol: 154 566 55 184 577 195 124 791 79 48 642 192
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 154 566 55 184 577 195 124 791 79 48 642 192
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 154 566 55 184 577 195 124 791 79 48 642 192
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 162 596 58 194 607 205 131 833 83 51 676 202
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 162 596 58 194 607 205 131 833 83 51 676 202
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 162 596 58 194 607 205 131 833 83 51 676 202
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.49 0.51 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.54 0.46
Final Sat.: 1600 2917 283 1600 2392 808 1600 29D9 291 1600 2463 737
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.08 0.29 0.29 0.03 0.27 0.27
Crit Moves: +r++
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
I
i
9 •
Put w/ Pro- ISM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:21-:09 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternat-ve)
* i •1 * * * * * + * + * # * * * + * * * * s * * * * * !r x x * * * * * + # * + * # * * * * i * * *r * * r * * * * * * * * + 1-s * * * x i f * * * * •r * * r *
Intersection #1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.851
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 80 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II II II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------I----------------H II II I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 52 849 20 37 761 125 3C4 185 54 41 253 89
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 52 849 20 37 761 125 304 185 54 41 253 89
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 52 849 20 37 761 125 304 185 54 41 253 89
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 55 894 21 39 801 132 320 195 57 43 266 94
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 55 894 21 39 801 132 320 195 57 43 266 94
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 55 894 21 39 801 132 320 195 57 43 266 94
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------)
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1_600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05 1.00 1.72 0.28 1.00 0.77 0.23 1.00 0.74 0.26
Final Sat.: 1600 3126 74 1600 2749 451 1600 1238 362 1600 1184 416
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.02 0.29 0.29 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.03 0.23 0.22
Crit Moves
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGLES, CA
0 0
I`
Fut w/ Proj AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:21:09 Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #2 Del Mar Avenue at Dorothy Street
Average Delay (sec/veh): 0.4 Worst Case Level Cf Service: C[ 20.7)
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I _
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << AM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 0 870 32 10 761 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 870 32 10 781 C 0 0 0 10 0 16
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 870 32 10 781 0 0 0 0 10 0 16
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 916 34 11 822 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 916 34 11 822 0 0 0 0 11 0 17
Critical Gap Module:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II--------------- I II---------------I
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 949 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1366 xxxx 476
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 731 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 141 xxxx 541
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 731 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 139 xxxx 540
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.08 xxxx 0.03
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move: * * A * * + + +
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT_ LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Snared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 256 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxxx
Shrd StDDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.7 xxxxx
Shared LOS: * * A * * " * " C
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.7
ApproachLOS: * * C
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
4i
Fut wl Proj AM
Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:21:09
Page 4-1
I
Volume Module: Count
Base Vol: 50 744
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 50 744
Added Vol: 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0
Initial Fut: 50 744
User Adj: 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 53 783
Reduct Vol: 0 0
Reduced Vol: 53 783
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00
YLF Adj: 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 53 783
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
* ~ * * a a * x # # * # # * * * * * # i a # * a * + * x x # # * # t a t * * * # # x * # * * * # * * + # * x * * * a a * + * * x # a a : * * # # * # * r + x * a
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
+aa,ra*#a,r.a*a*a**a#*xaa#+#+aaa**a#aaaai+a*aa,.a*a*#a#**ax##a#a***#rx+wa#*#*r+*aa*
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.645
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 44 Level Of Service: B
a********#*aaa*+#aaa*aaaa**#***a*aa***+*#a*,ra#+*#*#a##a**aa##*a*waa#aaa**+r#a..a+
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement : L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II II--------------- II ---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Greer.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I
Saturation Flow Module
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
II
Date: 27 Sep 20(
20 49 810
1.00. 1.00 1.00
20 49 810
0 0 0
0 0 0
20 49 810
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
21 52 B53
0 0 0
21 52 853
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
21 52 853
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.95 0.05
Final Sat.: 1600 3116 84
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.25 0.25
Crit Moves:
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.03
1600
1.00
1.84
2945
0.29
)5 « J
70
1.00
70
0
0
70
1.00
0.95
74
0
74
1.00
1.00
74
I il---------------
►M Cum+Proj
134 118 70 41 108 55
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
134 118 70 41 108 55
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
134 118 70 41 108 55
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
141 124 74 43 114 58
0 0 0 0 0 0
141 124 74 43 114 58
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
141 124 74 43 114 58
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.16 1.00 0.63
255 1600 1004
11---------
0.29 0.09 0.12
ax#a
*aa#a#*a**a***#a*
1600
1.00
0.37
596
0.12
****a*
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.20 0.53 0.27
322 847 431
0 .03 0.13 0.13
aaa*
*w,r**a*#*+****a**a
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MM.A, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Fut w/ Proj AM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:21:09 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss
as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 De
l Mar Avenue
at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec):
100
Critical
Vol./Cap. (X):
0.832
Loss Time (sec):
10 (Y+R -
4 sec) Average
Delay (sec/veh):
xxxxxx
optimal Cycle:
75
Level Of
Service:
D
Street Name:
Del Mar
Avenue
Garvey
Avenue
Approach: Nor
th Bound
South Bound
East Bound
We
st Bound
Movement: L -
T - R
L - T - R
I
L - T - R
I
L -
I-----
T -
R
----I
I-----
Control: Pr
II
otected
I
Protected
Protected
Pr
otected
Rights:
Include
Include
Include
Includ
e
Min. Green: 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
i'
Lanes: 1 0
1 1 0
1 0 1 1 0
1 0 1 1 0
1 0
1 1
0
I-----
II
li
I
I-----
----I
Volume Module:
Count Date:
27 Sep 2005 << AM
Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 108
471 70
171 554 187
170 13, 100
74
756
170
Growth Adj: 1.00
1.00 1.00.
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
,f
Initial Bse: 108
471 70
171 554 187
170 637 100
74
758
170
Added Vol: 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
PasserByVol: 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
Initial Fut: 108
471 70
171 554 187
170 637 100
74
758
170
User Adj: 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95
0.95 0.95
0.95 0.95 0.95
0.95 0.95 0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
PHF Volume: 114
496 74
180 583 197
179 671 105
78
798
179
Reduct Vol: 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0
Reduced Vol: 114
496 74
180 583 197
179 671 105
78
798
179
PCE Adj: 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
i.00
Final Vol.: 114
496 74
180 583 197
179 671 105
78
798
179
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600
1600 1600
1600 1600 1600
1600 1600 1600
1600
1600
1600
F'
~
Adjustment: 1.00
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Lanes: 1.00
1.74 0.26
1.00 1.50 0.50
1.00 1.73 0.27
1.00
1.63
0.37
Final Sat.: 1600
2786 414
1600 2392 808
-
1600 2766 434
1600
II-----
2614
586
----I
'
I
Capacity Analysis
II
Module:
II
Vol/Sat: 0.07
0.18 0.18
0.11 0.24 0.24
0.11 0.24 0.24
0.05
0.31
0.31
Cr;t Moves
-Traffix-7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES; CA
0 0
Fut w/ Proj PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:24:49 Page 2-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Yr * # * * * * * w * w * * * # * # r # * * + + * * * * + * * * * * * * * * 1, # * + * * * # * * # + * + * * * * * * * * * * * # * t * * * * * + + * * * * * k
Intersection r1 Del Mar Avenue at Hellman Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.718
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 52 Level Of Service: C
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Hellman Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L T R
I II II--------------- II ---------------I
Control Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 51 864 34 BO 1009 168 118 198 74 28 89 53
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 51 864 34 80 1009 168 118 198 74 28 89 53
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 51 864 34 80 1009 168 118 198 74 28 89 53
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj. 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 54 909 36 84 1062 177 124 208 78 29 94 56
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 54 909 36 84 1062 177 124 208 18 29 94 56
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 54 909 36 84 1062 177 124 208 78 29 94 56
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.71 0.29 1.00 0.73 0.27 1.00 0.63 0.37
Final Sat.: 1600 3079 121 1600 2743 457 1600 1165 435 1600 1003 597
I II--------------- ll--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.39 0.39 0.08 0.18 0.18 0.02 0.09 0.09
Crit Moves:
Traffix 7.7.0115 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
Fut w/ Proj PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:24:49
•
Page 3-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
I r
i
I ~ys
i
2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative)
ww*+w+++.+++w+t*www+ww,twwww+*.w++w**,tww*+ww**.*wx*,.*a+*www+,ta.++www~*w++www+w*t+
Intersection #2 Del Far Avenue at Dorothy Street
+*ww+w+*+w+w,t++wwx++*+w+++Ir++ww++t+w***t+*+a+**ww+wfrwtw+ww++*+*w*w**w*rww,rw**+w
Average Delay (sec/veh): 1.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: D( 29.6)
*www*wwwwwwww+wwww+++++wwww+++++++++*+w++*w*+++.+++r+++~++w++***w**+*+*+++++++++
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Dorothy Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 0 871 31 47 997 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00--1:00--1.GG-1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 871 31 47 997 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 871 31 47 997 0 0 0 0 19 0 29
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 0 917 33 49 1049 0 0 0 0 20 0 31
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Final Vol.: 0 917 33 49 1049 0 0 0 0 20 0 31
Critical Gap Nodule:
Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9
FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Capacity Module:
Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 949 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1558 xxxx 476
Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 731 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 105 xxxx 541
Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx 731 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 100 xxxx 540
Volume/Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.07 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.20 xxxx 0.06
I II--------------- II--------------- II---------------I
Level Of Service Module:
Queue: xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
Stopped Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 10.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx
LOS by Move: * * * B * * * * * * +
Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT
Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 196 xxxxx
SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx. 1.0 xxxxx
Shrd StpDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 1C.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xyxxx xxxxx 29.6 xxxxx
Shared LOS: * * * B + * * * * * D w
ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 29.6
ApproachLOS: * D
Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
0 0
I
.ut w/ P_o; PM ':ue Oct 4, 2005 11:24:49 Page 4---
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #3 Del Mar Avenue at Emerson Place
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.640
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 43 Level Of Service: B
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Emerson Place
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II--------------- II---------------I
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0
I---------------- .II II--------------- II---------------I
Volume Module: Count Date: 27 Sep 2005 << PM Cum+Proj
Base Vol: 59 800 29 62 851 89 97 200 64 28 79 34
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 59 600 29 62 851 89 97 200 64 28 79 34
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 59 800 29 62 851 89 97 200 64 28 79 34
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i.00
PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 62 842 31 65 896 94 102 211 67 29 83 36
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 62 842 31 65 896 94 102 211 67 29 83 36
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 62 842 31 65 896 94 102 211 67 29 83 36
1---------------II--------------- ((---------------II---------------I
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 0.76 0.24 0.20 0.56 0.24
Final Sat.: 1600 3088 112 1600 2897 303 1600 1212 388 318 896 386
I II II--------------- II ---------------I
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.09 0.09
Crit Moves
.Traffix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MMA, LOS ANGELES, CA
• •
Fut W/ Proj PM Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:24:49 Page 5-1
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed Use Project
Supplemental Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Rosemead
Level Of Service Computation Report
is
L.
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length Method (Future Volume Alternative)
Intersection #4 Del Far Avenue at Garvey Avenue
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.818
Loss Time (sec): 10 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 71 Level Of Service: D
Street Name: Del Mar Avenue Garvey Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
I II II II ---------------I
Control: Protected Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Greer.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
I----------
_.at.ration Flow Module:
--1--.------------- I
Volume Module: Count Date:
Base Vol: 154 576 55
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 154 576 55
Added Vol: 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 154 576 55
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
PH F Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95
PHF Volume: 162 606 58
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 162 606 58
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 162 606 58
Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.83 0.17
Final Sat.: 1600 2921 279
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.21 0.21
Crit Moves:
27 Sep 20,
187 585
1.00 1.00
187 585
0 0
0 0
187 585
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
197 616
0 0
197 616
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
197 616
1600
1.00
1.00
1600
0.12
k*****
1600
1.00
1.49
2391
0.26
)5 <<
198
1.00
198
0
0
198
1.00
0.95
208
0
208
1.00
1.00
208
I---------
?M Cum+Proj
127 791
1.00 1.00
127 791
0 0
0 0
127 791
1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95
134 833
0 0
134 833
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
134 833
1600 1600
1.00 1.00
0.51 1.00
809 1600
11----
0.26 0.08
1600
1.00
1.82
2909
0.29
79
1.00
79
0
0
79
1.00
0.95
83
0
83
1.00
1.00
83
1600
1.00
0.18
291
0.29
.V*****
48 642 195
1.00 1.00 1.00
48 642 195
0 0 0
0 0 0
48 642 195
1.00 1.00 1.00
0.95 0.95 0.95
51 676 2.05
0 0 0
51 676 205
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00 1.00
51 676 205
1600 1600 1600
1.00 1.00 1.00
1.00 1.53 0.47
1600 2454 746
0 .03 0.28 0.28
T--affix 7.7.0715 (c) 2004 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to MF,A, LOS ANGELES, CA
0 0
E
•
3,120 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Study
Citv of Rosemead C. B. Homes. Lac.
APPENDIX C
PROJECT SITE PLAN
I L.~
I .14ever, Mohaddes Associates
r
C_s
i
J
•
ME
N
NYId 316
YI i
VqML
A
w
a
M
I
,
E
x
~
~
s
re
y
~
y
khl%kl
si tR~
x
Ott
~
_
-
94..~
a
b
66
e
g
B
. I Y a
15 p
~
,
gR~.'
BB N
A~
g
-
-
S
7
F
s
-
i
p
5
02 c BE i'J6
p i
a
EG
` ~
I~
M
It
~
g Y
yy
=
3
'j8 t
•9
aq
IV
[
Z
i
7
13
p
f
tl J
Kim
w
~4
CY[~~
e
>
~
~
U$!
Ae
e
Elf It
IE~ HUN oe
~
W
vi
'
E
e
~
"
a
. pe
p
O
E N
l
.
o
i
W
>
Q
~
Sp.'j5'0
175.00
7'M 8
'
r f
o I
O '
a ~ 1;;jk
7..
Ile
0 0
OLLt6 V7 aV3H3S - _
3 VH X30 2E2E'f22E''022E'21OM2E 1N3H3SVO F
3Sn u.,.o ad3H3SOZ r_i a
I _ e=ii~ta f \11Y11 _ s_ 1~ I I I i
L
z y Ep p I
;Y Z ^ is ]I 2 E F 3' C~ s ;b ajj
> it
v~ "5 d i fit§ FC' = Y Y R n~~m
t_
[e L
u Li
ae Mg, # p =$e =11 F gyp' ;a ~€i73RE ~ i Yl~ ► S i >
x w All
Q
a'
H
1 p
Y .°o
~--y ° Y w m
I I " l y~ p N o
I f z
az
7 r.
A D
S S N v'a
o `a
S h O O J m z
e a I M 0
En
m
1 - ~ ~ , a ~ Ird x~
E- rn
lei E- m
a
as ,
,
r '
VIP-
77
1 -
z '
0
32 20 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact Studt,
City of Rosemead
APPENDIX D
PROJECT DRIVEWAY
ACCESS ANALYSIS
i
I
C. B. Homes, Inc.
MohaLides Associates
• •
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic Impact .Study
Cit>> of Rosemead
C. B. Homes, Inc.
ORIGINAL ANALYSIS
IFS
C J
I i
I Meyer, Mohaddes Associates
0 0
Intersection Capacity Utilization AM Conditions
Del Mar Avenue & Project Driveway 4/512007
t 1 1
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)
Peak Hour Factor
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free Right
Ideal Flow
Lost Time (s)
Refr Cvcle Lenqth (s)
r-
i
13 20 866 12 18 789
0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
No No
1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
120
Adjusted Volume (vph)
14
21
912
13
19
831
Volume Combined (vph)
35
0
924
0
0
849 -
Lane Utilization Factor
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Turning Factor (vph)
0.89
0.85
1.00
0.85
0.95
1.00
Saturated Flow (vph)
1426
0
3040
0
0
3043
Minimum Green (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Ped Intf Time (s)
0.0 .
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Pedestrian Frequency
)0.00
0.00
0.00
Protected Option Allowed
No
No
No
Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Adi Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Permitted Option Allowed
No
Yes
Yes
Adj Saturation A (vph)
3040
2565
Reference Time A (s)
36.5
38.8
Adj Saturation B (vph
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time B (s)
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time (s)
36.5
38.8
Adj Reference Time (s)
40.5
42.8
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)
2.9
36.5
0.0
33.5
Ref Time Seperate (s)
1.2
36.0
1.5
32.7
Reference Time (s)
2.9
36.5
33.5
33.5
Adj Reference Time (s)
8.0
40.5
37.5
37.5
Protected Option (s)
NA
NA
Permitted Option (s)
NA
42.8
Split Option (s)
8.0
78.0
Minimum (s)
8.0
42.8 50.8
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)
Combined (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.4% ICU Level of Service A
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
i
Baseline Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
meyermanah-st51
Intersection Capacity Utilization PM Conditions
Del Mar Avenue & Project Driveway 4/5/2007
'or- 4-_ t 1
Volume (vph)
16
24
907
18
28
984
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Pedestdans
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free Right
No
No
Ideal Flow
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)
120
Adjusted Volume (vph)
17
25
955
19
29
1036
Volume Combined (vph)
42
0
974
0
0
1065 '
Lane Utilization Factor
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Tuming Factor (vph)
0.89
0.85
1.00
0.85
0.95
1.00
Saturated Flow (vph)
1427
0
3038
0
0
3042
Minimum Green (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Ped Intf Time (s)
0.0 .
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Porlactrinn FrprniPnry (%'0.00
0.00
0.00
I ` r
i
Protected Option Allowed No
No
No
Reference Time (s)
0.0 0.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
0.0 0.0
Permitted Option Allowed No
Yes
Yes
Adj Saturation A (vph)
3038
2298
Reference Time A (s)
38.5
54.1
Adj Saturation B (vph
NA
NA NA
Reference Time B (s)
NA
NA NA
Reference Time (s)
38.5
54.1
Arli Rofcronra Tima (sl
42.5
58.1
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)
3.5
38.5
0.0
42.0
Ref Time Seperate (s)
1.4
37.7
2.3
40.8
Reference Time (s)
3.5
38.5
42.0
42.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
8.0
42.5
46.0
46.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)
Combined (s)
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service A
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
Baseline Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
meyermanah-st51
Protected Option (s) NA NA
Permitted Option (s) NA 58.1
Split Option (s) 8.0 88.5
Minimum (s) 8.0 58.1 66.1
0 0
Intersection Capacity Utilization PM Conditions
Del Mar Avenue & Project Driveway 4/5/2007
I 1
Lane Configurations
y
TTH
N T
Volume (vph)
16
24
907
18
28
984
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free Right
No
No
Ideal Flow
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)
120
Adjusted Volume (vph)
17
25
955
19
29
1036
Volume Combined (vph)
42
0
974
0
0
1065 -
Lane Utilization Factor
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Turning Factor (vph)
0.89
0.85
1.00
0.85
0.95
1.00
Saturated Flow (vph) 1
427
0
3038
0
0
3042
Minimum Green (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Ped Intf Time (s)
0.0 .
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Pedestrian Frequency
)D00
0.00
0.00
Protected Option Allowed
No
No
No
Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Permitted Option Allowed
No
Yes
Yes
Adj Saturation A (vph)
3038
2298
Reference Time A (s)
38.5
54.1
Adj Saturation B (vph
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time B (s)
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time (s)
38.5
54.1
Adj Reference Time (s)
42.5
58.1
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)
3.5
38.5
0.0
42.0
Ref Time Seperate (s)
1.4
37.7
2.3
40.8
Reference Time (s)
3.5
38.5
42.0
42.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
8.0
42.5
46.0
46.0
:"r.?r ,~s±
?3~Z
t
71
1.{`,"rT 4.5.,
L Protected Option (s)
Permitted Option (s)
t Split Option (s)
• Minimum (s)
'J
Right Toms'
Adj Reference Time (s)
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)
L..
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)
Combined (s)
NA
NA
NA
58.1
8.0
88.5
8.0
58.1 66.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.1% ICU Level of Service A
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
Baseline Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
meyerm anah-st51
r~
L
3220 Del Mar Avenue Mixed-Use Project
Traffic LnDact Study
Citv ofRosemead
r:
SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
f
L JI
i
Mohaddes.Associates
C. B. Homes. Inc.
•
Intersection Capacity Utiliza
tion
AM Conditions
Del Mar Avenue & Project Driveway
4/512007
r
~
t
~
1
WBL-7 'V
1lBR
°
NBT
-
NBR.
SBL
SBT -
-77
-
:
.
Lane Configurations 11'1
`fib
Volume (vph) 13
20
921
12
18
916
r
Peak Hour Factor 0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Pedestrians
Ped Button
'
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free Right
No
No
Ideal Flow 1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
Lost Time (s) 4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Refr Cycle Length s 120
Adjusted Volume (vph) 14
21
969
13
19
964
Volume Combined (vph) 35
0
982
0
0
983
t '
Lane Utilization Factor 1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Turning Factor (vph) 0.89
0.85
1.00
0.85
0.95
1.00
`
Saturated Flow (vph) 1426
0
3041
0
0
3043
Minimum Green (s) 4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Ped Intf Time (s) 0.0-
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)D00
0.00
0.00
Protected Option Allowed No
No
No
Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Adj Reference Time (s)
0.0
0.0
Permitted Option Allowed No
Yes
Yes
Adj Saturation A (vph)
3041
2565
Reference Time A (s)
38.8
45.1
Adj Saturation B (vph
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time B (s)
NA
NA
NA
Reference Time (s)
38.8
45.1
Adi Reference Time (s)
42.8
49.1
L
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s) 2.9
38.8
0.0
38.8
f
c
Ref Time Seperate (s) 1.2
38.3
1.5
38.0
Reference Time (s) 2.9
38.8
38.8
38.8
Adj Reference Time (s) 8.0
42.8
42.8
42.8
Summa" . . WB -
Co"
mbirti~~ ,
Protected Option (s)
NA
NA
Permitted Option (s)
NA
49.1
Split Option (s)
8.0
85.5
Minimum (s)
8.0
49.1
57.1
z
Tums
Right
a'
_
rY,
Adj Reference Time (s)
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)
Combined (s)
Intersection Summa -
-
- -
Intersection Capacity Utilization
47.6%
ICU Level of Service
A
Reference Times and Phasing
Option
s do not
represent an optimized timing plan.
Baseline
Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
meyermanah-st51
• •
Intersection Capacity Utilization PM Conditions
Del Mar Avenue & Project Driveway 4/512007
'r t
11,
I -
i
Lane Configurations
y
-TT*
a T
Volume (vph)
16
24
913
18
28
986
Peak Hour Factor
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.95
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free Right
No
No
Ideal Flow
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
1600
Lost Time (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)
120
Adjusted Volume (vph)
17
25
961
19
29
1038
Volume Combined (vph)
42
0
980
0
0
1067 -
Lane Utilization Factor
1.00
1.00
0.95
1.00
1.00
0.95
Turning Factor (vph)
0.89
0.85
1.00
0.85
0.95
1.00
Saturated Flow (vph)
1427
0
3038
0
0
3042
Minimum Green (s)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
Ped Intf Time (s)
0.0 .
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.00
0.00
0.00
Protected Option Allowed No
Reference Time (s)
Adj Reference Time (s)
No
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.0
No
Permitted Option Allowed No
Yes
Yes
Adj Saturation A (vph)
3038
2298
Reference Time A (s)
38.7
54.2
Adj Saturation B (vph
NA
NA NA
Reference Time B (s)
NA
NA NA
Reference Time (s)
38.7
54.2
Adi Reference Time (s)
42.7
58.2
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)
3.5
38.7
0.0
42.1
Ref Time Seperate (s)
1.4
38.0
2.3
40.9
Reference Time (s)
3.5
38.7
42.1
42.1
Adj Reference Time (s)
8.0
42.7
46.1
46.1
Summary
-
WT
-
rte..--
NB SB
.
Co
.tj Mc'1^ ~`:.M . .-.::"91!`'G. w'- ^I--.•^ -
mb~ned_ ' =
Protected Option (s)
NA
NA
Permitted Option (s)
NA
58.2
Split Option (s)
8.0
88.8
Minimum (s)
8.0
58.2
66.2
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)
Combined (s)
- - -
Intersection Summary
Intersection Capacity Utilization 55.2% ICU Level of Service A
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
Baseline
Synchro 5 Report
Page 1
meyermanah-st51
0 0
•
CITY OF ROSEMEAD
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
October 15, 2007
CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the City of Rosemead Planning Commission was called to
order by Chairman Lopez at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Rosemead City Hall at 8838 East
Valley Boulevard, Rosemead.
Chairman Lopez led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Commissioner Cam delivered the invocation.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Chairman Lopez, Vice-Chairman Kunioka, Commissioners
Bevington and Cam
ABSENT: Commissioner Vuu
EX OFFICIO: Agaba, Lopez, Trinh, and Yin
Assistant City Manager Brian Saeki introduced Matt Everling as the new Planning Services
Administrator.
EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS:
Attorney Yin explained the public hearing process and the right to appeal Planning
Commission decisions to the City Council.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Chairman Lopez asked if anyone would like to speak on any items not on the agenda, to step
forward.
Mr. Jim Flournoy of 8655 Landis View, a resident, stated he will read a couple of things
from the City's Building Codes. He said both mixed use projects today are not in the
Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. He also said single family residences need fault location
studies. He said commercial projects... He said the Del Mar project doesn't fall under
the Alquist Priolo zone, however, it falls along the fault line zone. He questioned if fault
studies are done for projects.
Chairman Lopez stated they are required prior to final building permit.
Mr. Flournoy stated he put in a public records request today, asking for copies of the fault
investigation for these projects to determine if the Building Division is doing their job and
following building codes.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 1 of 10
0 01
A.
Chairman Lopez agreed.
Mr. Flournoy stated he will get the information and bring it back in a couple of weeks.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Planned Development Review 06-04, and Tentative Tract Map 069079 - 9016 Guess
Street and 3862 Rosemead Boulevard. Long Bach Trinh has submitted applications for a
new mixed-use development project consisting of 32 residential condominium units
(totaling 38,065 square feet) above 10,845 square feet of commercial/retail/restaurant
space on 1.04 acres of land located at 9016 Guess Avenue 3862 Rosemead Boulevard, in
the R-3 (Medium Multiple Residential) zone.
Presentation: Senior Planner George Agaba
Staff Recommendation: APPROVE - subject to the conditions, for two (2) years.
Senior Planner Agaba stated the applicant and representatives were present and asked the
Commissioners if they have any questions.
Attorney Yin stated there are two additional conditions that will be added to the Conditions of
Approval. The first is, "The conditional use permit is granted or approved with the city and its
Planning Commission and City Council retaining and reserving the right and jurisdiction to
review and to modify the permit--including the conditions of approval--based on changed
circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of the
use, a change in scope, emphasis, size, or nature of the use, or the expansion, alteration,
reconfiguration, or change of use. This reservation of right to review is in addition to, and not
in lieu of, the right of the city, its Planning Commission, and City Council to review and revoke
or modify any permit granted or approved under the Rosemead Municipal Code for any
violations of the conditions imposed on this conditional use permit." He then said the second
is, "The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Rosemead or its
agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of
Rosemead or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set side, void, or annul, an approval
of the planning commission and/or city council concerning the project, which action is brought
within the time period provided by law."
Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to people in the audience:
Mrs. Marcelina Hernandez of 9020 Guess Street, a neighboring resident, questioned when
they will start their work. She said her husband has Alzheimer's and he doesn't like the
noise. She said a 10-foot wall needs to be added to protect her property. She wants to make
sure they will take responsibility if anything happens to her property.
Chairman Lopez questioned the timeframe of the projects.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated after Planning Commission recommendation
of approval, they will have to move forward to the City Council for approval. He said it
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 2 of 10
typically takes six months after they go through building plan check.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka questioned when Mrs. Hernandez would like the wall to be installed.
Mrs. Hernandez stated before the construction begins. She wants something that will screen
the dust.
Chairman Lopez said staff will make sure the dust is controlled and will look into her request.
He said he agrees with Mrs. Hernandez and staff needs to make sure it's taken care of.
Mr. Brian Lewin of 9501 Ralph Street, a resident, stated he likes the overall design of the
project and he thinks the general location is pretty good. He said there are a few
reservations that he has. The first is the retail use on Guess Street. He stated it's
problematic. He said his first thought after speaking with Senior Planner Agaba is to make it
an office space instead, since their hours of operation are at a certain time, unless they
condition the space as office use. He said the second thing he is concerned with is the traffic
coming east on Rosemead Boulevard. He said the Guess Street entrance will lead people to
use residential streets like Rio Hondo or Hart Avenue. He then said he is wondering what the
potential impact along the Guess Street entrance would be. He said that should be
considered. He also said he doesn't know how well those traffic studies studied those sites,
but he hopes they restrict the retail use on the side of Guess Street.
Mr. Flournoy stated this is a similar project to the class of project across the street from City
Hall. He said he's iffy on this project because of the Mission project. He said there are two
faults close to this project and the city needs to have a structural engineer look at it. He said
the project next to the Mc Donald's site does not have an approval by the Fire Department.
He said the city, a while ago, wanted to change rules and approve their own fire marshal, but
it didn't pass. He said he's not happy about that project. He then questioned if this project
has a basement parking.
Senior Planner Agaba answered yes.
Mr. Flournoy discussed about the Mission Drive mixed use project and said they do not follow
Caltrans standards for walls. He thinks the Mission project needs to be checked. He said
he's not confident he will get his request.
Mr. Sean Davis of 9043 Guess Street, a neighboring resident, stated he doesn't think this
project is appropriate on this street. He said there is too much traffic on Rosemead
Boulevard. He also said he doesn't know who monitored this traffic study, but they are
incorrect. He discussed about how the Mission project has created traffic. He said there is
no current retail project, so why create a project like this one. He also said this project will
create living in Rosemead more hectic. He said parking is already difficult and so is traffic.
He said he thinks this project is totally unacceptable.
Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to those IN FAVOR of this application:
Mr. Michael Sun of 529 E. Valley Blvd., Suite 228-A, the architect, stated his office has
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 3 of 10
0 0
designed several mixed use projects that are very successful. He said there are many
advantages to these projects. He said this type of project creates more lights, efficient
housing, and less traffic. He said every development will create traffic, but the mixed use
project will create less traffic impact. He also said retail and commercial will create more
traffic. He said traffic count generated by mixed use is really less. He then said if you look at
the traffic study, you'll see that there is no traffic impact with this development. He said in
terms of structural design, this project will probably have to follow the new building code,
which focuses on different detailed earthquake requirements. He said everything they do will
comply with building codes.
Chairman Lopez called for questions from Commissioners.
Chairman Lopez stated he agrees with the community regarding the retail shop on Guess
Street.
Mr. Sun stated they can rearrange the use on Guess Street to a lower impact use.
Chairman Lopez stated he understands Mr. Lewin's concern. He said the northbound on
Rosemead Boulevard will be accessed, unless you make U-turns on the south side. He said
people coming east heading west will find ways through the side streets. He said the impact
on the side streets will be bad. He also said he thinks this should be looked at more closely.
He said the access on Guess Street will tie up a lot of traffic. He then said it will create a
traffic issue.
Mr. Sun said they will work with staff and the traffic engineer to create some restrictions, so
the major accesses will be on Rosemead Boulevard. He said they can make restrictions on
the side streets, such as left and right turns only. He said they will work with staff.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka stated at some point, we should seriously think about increasing the
capacity on Rosemead and Valley Boulevard because it's currently backed up. He said
parking is another thing that will come up. He said the applicant put in a request to reduce
the number of parking spaces because of the affordable housing components, but he wants
to make sure there's enough parking. He questioned if they would consider a covenant
restricting the number of cars they could bring per unit.
Mr. Sun agreed.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka suggested a parking permit. He then said the report says, "we will
encourage employees to park underground," but he thinks it should say "required," instead.
Chairman Lopez asked the Commissioners for any other questions.
Commissioner Bevington stated his concern on the number of residential units. He said from
his calculation, its 33 units. He said another thing to look at is the layout of restaurant going
on Guess Street. He said he doesn't think it's the best location to place the restaurant. He
also said it should be placed closer to Rosemead Boulevard.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 4 of 10
• •
Senior Planner Agaba answered Commissioner Bevington's question regarding the
residential units and said it's a staff error. There are only 32 units proposed. He said as far
as traffic, the traffic study was done by Meyer, Mohaddes Associates. He said it was sent to
Caltrans and several meetings with Caltrans and the traffic engineer took place. He said
page 8 of the traffic study shows existing conditions and page 11 shows future base plus
related projects conditions. He said the overall concept of mixed use is to not create a lot of
traffic. He said the overall study is there is no traffic impact. He said this is the second traffic
study done and Caltrans has agreed with this analysis.
Chairman Lopez said he is still concerned and some limitations should be made on Guess
Street. He said conditions should be added in reference to limitations. He said it can be
added tonight or set aside for the next meeting, so everything can be looked at more
carefully. He wants the community to feel comfortable.
Planning Services Administrator Everling discussed about the access on Guess Street. He
said conditions can be added to the Conditions of Approval to limit access on Guess Street
and requiring the Guess Street drive access to be an exit only. He said the site can also be
redesigned and set at an angle to restrict people from turning left into it from the east. He
then referred to Mr. Bevington's concern and said most tenant spaces on corners encourage
restaurant uses because it's visible to the street. He said the Commission can restrict the
use of that tenant space, as well as hours of operation on Unit F.
Chairman Lopez questioned if the Commission would like to hold their decision until the next
meeting.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated staff will definitely make the changes.
Senior Planner Agaba stated the staffs recommendation is for the Planning Commission to
recommend this public hearing to City Council for approval. He said staff will bring this
project back with the appropriate changes.
Chairman Lopez said he thinks at this time it should be continued to the next meeting.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka stated there are things he must complain about in the traffic study.
He said in both cases, the studies on bus routes and frequencies are incorrect in every count.
He said we should get more updated information next time. He then referred to condition 15
and said there is a typo, the word "hall," should be replaced "shall." He said condition 67 has
a typo as well, the word "an" should be replaced with "and." He also said he would like to add
to condition 22 and suggest that it says, "The Planning Commission will direct Planning
Division to consider visual and auditory impact," not just at street level, but at everyone that
will be impacted. He added he likes the idea of affordable housing and he wants to make
sure Rosemead residents benefit from this. He said he is considering a request. He also
wants to make sure there is a lottery process. He said the parking plan should have
restrictions to make sure there aren't more than 64 cars.
Attorney Yin stated the City Attorney's office can look at Vice-Chairman Kunioka's request to
see if it's legal and constitutional.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 5 of 10
• •
Vice-Chairman Kunioka added that employees should be required to park underground.
There being no one further wishing to address the Commission; Chairman Lopez closed the
public hearing segment for this project and asked the Commissioners for a motion to continue
this public hearing to the next Planning Commission meeting.
Planning Services Administrator Everling asked Mr. Sun if two weeks is sufficient for him to
make the necessary changes.
Mr. Sun stated yes.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BEVINGTON, SECONDED BY VICE-CHAIRMAN KUNIOKA,
TO CONTINUE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 07-06, ZONE CHANGE 05-222,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-1064, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 06-04, AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 069079 TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING.
Vote results:
YES: BEVINGTON, CAM, KUNIOKA, AND LOPEZ
NO: NONE
ABSENT: VUU
ABSTAIN: NONE
Chairman Lopez declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
B.
04-325 - 3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue. Patrick Yang has submitted applications for
approval of a new mixed use development project consisting of 36 residential
condominium units (totaling 42,288 square feet) above 11,505 square feet of
commercial/retail/restaurant space on 1.28 acres of land located at
3212-3232 Del Mar Avenue, in the C-3 (Medium Commercial) and C-3D (Medium
Commercial with a Design Overlay) zone.
Presentation: Senior Planner George Agaba
Staff Recommendation: APPROVE - subject to the conditions, for two (2) years.
Senior Planner Agaba stated the applicant and representatives were present and asked the
Commissioners if they have any questions.
Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to those IN FAVOR of this application:
Mr. Flournoy stated there is new staff; so he thought he would bring up previous
correspondences. He said this project falls under the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act, Alquist-
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 6 of 10
• •
Priolo zone, and building code fault location. He said he asked for a photographic request of
the Burger King, Jack-In-The-Box, and doctor's office on San Gabriel Boulevard. He said the
doctor's office falls under the Alquist-Priolo zone, but he hasn't seen the report. He said he
had asked for a request of the studies. He then discussed about earthquakes and the new
building codes. He said site-specific visits are good.
Chairman Lopez said he'd be happy if Mr. Flournoy can
bring that information in.
Chairman Lopez opened the public hearing to those who wished to OPPOSE the application:
None.
Chairman Lopez closed the public hearing to the public and opened the public hearing to the
Commissioners.
Mr. Michael Sun stated they have gotten approval from every department. He said he
personally likes this project and asked the Commission for approval.
Chairman Lopez questioned the location of the grammar school.
Mr. Sun stated it's in the back.
Chairman Lopez questioned the wall will be soundproof.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated he received input from the school and
they desire an 8 foot concrete block wall. He said, in addition to that they requested a
vine and trellis added to the roof for safety purposes.
Chairman Lopez questioned if the applicant is okay with everything.
Mr. Sun stated yes.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated it has been incorporated in the staff
report.
Attorney Yin questioned if they are okay with the two conditions that were added to the
previous project.
Mr. Sun answered yes.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka stated employees should park in the parking lot. He referred to
page 11 of this staff report and page 9 of the previous staff report and said the required
number of parking spaces is incorrect. He said the previous report said 2 guest parking
spaces per unit, whereas this staff report says 1 per 2 units. He said he has looked at
the code and in a Planned Development zone, it's 1 per 2 units. He then asked staff
some questions. He referred to condition 79 and said the street names are incorrect. He
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 7 of 10
then referred to condition 14 on the word, "stripping" and said it should say "striping." He
said on condition 17, staff needs to make sure the screening protects everyone
impacted.
There being no one further wishing to address the Commission; Chairman Lopez closed the
public hearing segment for this project.
MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN KUNIOKA, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CAM, to
APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 05-01, ZONE CHANGE 05-221, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT 04-960, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05-02, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 061336, AND ZONE VARIANCE 04-325.
Vote results:
YES:
BEVINGTON,
NO:
NONE
ABSENT:
VUU
ABSTAIN:
NONE
4.
CAM, KUNIOKA, AND LOPEZ
Chairman Lopez declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
Commissioner Bevington questioned how many General Plan Amendments the City can
have per year.
Attorney Yin said they will look into that.
CONSENT CALENDAR - These items are considered to be routine actions that may be
considered in one motion by the Planning Commission. Any interested party may request an
item from the consent calendar to be discussed separately.
A. A pproval of Minutes - September 17, 2007
Vice-Chairman Kunioka stated he has some corrections. He referred to page and said it
should read, "dust still leaves the site," instead of "dust leaves the site." He then referred
to page 9 and said instead of using the word "shield," he would like it to say, "the sun
won't reflect off the window."
B. Resolution No. 07-47 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-1106, FOR THE
TRANSFER OF AN ON-SALE GENERAL PUBLIC PREMISES (TYPE 48) ABC LICENSE,
LOCATED AT 8921 VALLEY BOULEVARD, IN THE CBD-D (CENTRAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT WITH A DESIGN OVERLAY) ZONE. (APN: 5391-012-030).
C. Resolution No. 07-48 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROSEMEAD APPROVING COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting. October 15, 2007
Page 8 of 10
• •
AMENDMENT 07-04, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 07-1101, ZONE CHANGE 07-227,
AND DESIGN REVIEW 07-146, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW TWO-STORY
COMMERCIAL BUILDING AFFECTING THREE ADJOINING PARCELS, TOTALING
6,226 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA, TO ACCOMMODATE RETAIL AND OFFICE
USES, LOCATED AT 9800 & 9804 VALLEY BOULEVARD IN THE C3-D, MEDIUM
COMMERCIAL WITHIN A DESIGN OVERLAY ZONE AND 3852 STRANG AVENUE
LOCATED IN THE R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE, ALONG WITH A
PORTION OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT'S EATON
WASH (APN: 8578-001-003, 037, 038).
Chairman Lopez asked for a motion for approval of the other items on the Consent Calendar.
MOTION BY VICE-CHAIRMAN KUNIOKA, SECONDED BY CHAIRMAN LOPEZ TO WAIVE
FURTHER READING AND ADOPT CONSENT CALENDAR.
Vote results:
YES: BEVINGTON,
NO: NONE
ABSENT: VUU
ABSTAIN: NONE
5.
CAM, KUNIOKA, AND LOPEZ
Chairman Lopez declared said motion duly carried and so ordered.
MATTERS FROM THE CHAIRMAN & COMMISSIONERS
Chairman Lopez welcomed Planning Services Administrator Everling and Contract Senior
Planner Luis Lopez.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka discussed about Walmart's one year review.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated we are looking at putting it on a November
agenda.
Chairman Lopez discussed about the dress code and said it's pretty casual. He doesn't want
people to feel like we're more superior.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka said he is concerned about the property across the street and their
signage. He said it's tearing and looks ragged.
Planning Services Administrator Everling stated that property now has a new owner and he's
proposing a facade remodel.
Vice-Chairman Kunioka stated the palm trees in front of Lee's Sandwiches are dying and dirt
is running off.
Planning Services Administrator Everling said staff will contact the owners.
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2007
Page 9 of 10
•
n
6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF
None.
7. ADJOURNMENT:
Chairman Lopez adjourned the Planning Commission Meeting at 8:37 p.m.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BEVINGTON, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CAM to
ADJOURN UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING.
M E/LT
Rosemead Planning Commission Meeting. October 15, 2007
Page 10 of 10