IV. Environmental Impact Analysis K.1 Transportation and Circulation
1. Introduction
This section of the Draft EIR provides an analysis of the potential Project impacts associated with transportation and circulation. The analyses is based on the Traffic Study for the USC Development Plan (Traffic Study), prepared by Fehr & Peers in May 2010 and included as Appendix P. The City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) reviewed and approved the Traffic Study prior to circulation of this Draft EIR.
2. Environmental Setting
a. Existing Conditions
The Project site is located in the highly urbanized South Los Angeles and Southeast Los Angeles Community Plan areas within the City of Los Angeles. To facilitate effective movement of vehicles throughout the Project area, a network of freeway and street facilities are spread throughout the study area. Below is a brief description of the types of facilities available in the study area:
Freeway facilities are high-volume/high-speed roadways with limited access occurring only at grade-separated interchanges.
Class II major highways are generally defined as having four full- time through lanes and two part-time parking lanes with a median or left- turn lane.
Secondary facilities are generally two- to four-lane roadways that supplement the major highways. These roadways are designed to carry some level of traffic while also providing some level of access to adjacent properties.
Collector streets complement the previously listed facilities by providing connections between local streets and secondary or highway facilities.
Local streets are intended for low traffic levels generated by trips with either a destination or starting point on that local street. Local streets connect to connector streets, which, in turn, connect to the greater street network.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-1 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(1) Regional Transportation System
As shown in Figure IV.K-1 on page IV.K-3, primary regional access to the study area is provided by the Santa Monica Freeway (I-10), which runs generally in an east/west direction approximately one mile north of the USC University Park Campus (Campus), and the Harbor Freeway (I-110), which runs in a north/south direction and is located adjacent to the Campus. The I-10 Freeway varies from three to four mainline lanes in each direction along with auxiliary lanes in the Project vicinity. The Harbor Freeway provides four mainline freeway lanes and two elevated High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes (i.e., the transitway/carpool lanes) in each direction in the Project vicinity.
(2) Local Streets
Surface streets serving the study area include Figueroa Street, Flower Street, Grand Avenue, Main Street, Hoover Street, Washington Boulevard, Adams Boulevard, 30th Street, Jefferson Boulevard, Exposition Boulevard, Vermont Avenue, and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. An inventory of the physical characteristics of these streets is provided in the Traffic Study which is included as Appendix P. These streets are also shown in Figure IV.K-1 and are further described as follows:
Figueroa Street – Figueroa Street is designated as a Class II Major Highway in the Transportation Element of the City of Los Angeles General Plan. Figueroa Street provides six peak hour travel lanes between 30th Street and 37th Street, separated by a raised median and dual left-turn lanes during the A.M. and P.M. peak periods (four northbound and three southbound) in the Project area. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of Figueroa Street in the Figueroa Corridor General Plan Area (GPA) with peak hour restrictions. Adjacent to the Campus, four-hour metered parking is allowed on both sides of Figueroa Street from 9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph).
Flower Street – Flower Street is a designated as a Secondary Highway. It provides four travel lanes in the southbound direction between Adams Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard and narrows to two travel lanes southbound between Jefferson Boulevard and 37th Street. Parking is allowed on either side of the street between Adams Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard in the Project vicinity. Flower Street is posted with a 35 mph speed limit.
Adams Boulevard – Adams Boulevard, a designated Class II Major Highway, generally provides four peak hour travel lanes between Maple Avenue and Normandie Avenue, with the exception of five travel lanes (three westbound and two eastbound) between Figueroa Street and Flower Street. The travel lanes are separated by a double yellow centerline for the majority of the street except between Hill Street and the I-110 ramps and Hoover Street and Magnolia Avenue, where a dual left-turn centerline is used. Four-hour metered parking is
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-2 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review 101 OLYMPIC BLVD
1st ST
PICO BLVD 4th ST
VENICE BLVD
7th ST WASHINGTON BLVD 6th ST 10
OLYMPIC BLVD PROJECT SITE ADAMS BLVD
60 HOOVER ST HOOVER
JEFFERSON BLVD 110
HILL ST FIGUEROA ST GRAND AVE
CRENSHAW BLVD CRENSHAW MAIN ST CENTRAL AVE Page IV.K-3 WASHINGTON BLVD
BROADWAY ST
WESTERN AVE WESTERN ARLINGTON AVE ARLINGTON EXPOSITION BLVD
SAN PEDRO ST
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD
41st ST
ALAMEDA ST ALAMEDA LONG BEACH AVE BEACH LONG
VERNON AVE
MAIN ST MAIN HOOPER AVE HOOPER
48th ST BLVD AVALON
CENTRAL AVE CENTRAL
HOOVER ST HOOVER
SAN PEDRO AVE PEDRO SAN
SANTA FE AVE FE SANTA
COMPTON AVE COMPTON
VERMONT AVE VERMONT FIGUEROA ST FIGUEROA 54th ST AVE NORMANDIE
N Figure IV.K-1 Freeways and Streets
0 .5 1 Mile in the Project Area
Source: Rand McNally-Thomas Guide Digital Edition, 2008; Matrix Environmental, 2010. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
generally allowed on the south side of the street west of Figueroa Street from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M., but is restricted in the study area and restricted between Figueroa Street and Flower Street at all times. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
McClintock Avenue – McClintock Avenue is designated as a Secondary Highway and runs north/south between 30th Street and Jefferson Boulevard providing two travel lanes with a two way left-turn median in the middle, marked bike lanes in both directions and curb-side parking on both sides. South of Jefferson Boulevard, McClintock Avenue is a private street within the Campus from Jefferson Boulevard to Exposition Boulevard.
30th Street – 30th Street, a designated Secondary Highway, provides two travel lanes between Hoover Street and Main Street. Parking is provided on both sides of 30th Street in the Project area. The posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Jefferson Boulevard – Jefferson Boulevard is designated as a Class II Major Highway between Vermont Avenue and Figueroa Street and a Secondary Highway east of Figueroa Street. Jefferson Boulevard provides four travel lanes between Hoover Street and Hill Street. These travel lanes are separated by raised median between Hoover Street and Figueroa Street and by a combination of double yellow dual left-turn centerlines between Figueroa Street and Hill Street. Parking is generally allowed on the south side of Jefferson Boulevard between Hoover Street and Figueroa Street and on the north side of the street between Figueroa Street and Flower Street. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
Exposition Boulevard – Exposition Boulevard is designated as a Divided Secondary Highway west of Figueroa Street and a local roadway between Figueroa Street and the I-110 Freeway. Exposition Boulevard provides six travel lanes between Normandie Avenue and Figueroa Street. These lanes are separated by a raised median and the posted speed limit is 35 mph. Exposition Boulevard provides between two and three travel lanes in the westbound direction only between Figueroa Street and Hope Street. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street in the study area, except for the segment between Figueroa Street and Hope Street where parking is prohibited at any time.
Vermont Avenue – Vermont Avenue is a major north-south arterial designated as a Class II Major Highway. Vermont Avenue provides four travel lanes separated by a combination of double yellow striped centerline or dual left-turn centerline between Adams Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard and by a raised median between Jefferson Boulevard and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street in the study area, except for the segment between Exposition Boulevard and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard where parking is prohibited at any time. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-4 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Hoover Street – Hoover Street is classified as a Class II Major Highway providing four travel lanes separated by a dual left-turn centerline between Washington Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street in the study area. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
Grand Avenue – Grand Avenue is a major north-south arterial designated as a Class II Major Highway. In the Project vicinity, one through travel lane is provided in each direction on Grand Avenue south of Jefferson Boulevard, and two through travel lanes are generally provided in each direction north of Jefferson Boulevard. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street in the study area. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
Main Street – Main Street is a major north-south arterial, designated as a Class II Major Highway. Main Street provides four travel lanes in the Project vicinity. Parking is allowed on both sides of the street in the study area. The posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Washington Boulevard – Washington Boulevard is a major east-west arterial designated as a Major Highway, and provides three peak hour travel lanes in each direction, with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Red Line rail running along the median east of Flower Street. Parking is generally allowed on both sides of the street in the study area except during the peak hours. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard – Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, a designated Class II Major Highway, provides six travel lanes in the study area. The travel lanes are separated by a dual left-turn centerline except between Normandie Avenue and Main Street. Parking is prohibited between Figueroa Street and Hill Street on both sides of the street at any time. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
The characteristics of other streets in the Project vicinity are further described in the Traffic Study provided in Appendix P.
(3) Transit
The Project area currently benefits from three forms of mass transportation services: (1) public transit services that link the Campus to downtown and other locations in the greater Los Angeles area, (2) the Campus tram system that links points on the Campus to neighboring areas, (3) and the Campus’ rideshare program, which encourages the use of mass transportation options with a variety of incentives. These services are described in further detail as follows:
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-5 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(a) Existing Public Transit Services
The Project area is currently served by a number of bus routes operated by Metro and Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) Downtown Area Shuttle (DASH). A total of 11 public bus routes are provided in the vicinity of the Campus. Metro provides nine of the 11 routes, while LADOT provides the remaining routes. The bus routes running in the vicinity of the USC UPC Campus are illustrated in Figure IV.K-2 on page IV.K-7. The following bus lines currently serve the study area:
Metro Line 38: This line travels between the West Los Angeles Transit Center and the California State University of Los Angeles Busway Station. This line predominantly travels east and west across the across the Campus, serving Jefferson Boulevard.
Metro Line 81: This express line travels between the Harbor Freeway/Interstate 110 (I-110) station to downtown Los Angeles. These lines travel north and south on Figueroa Street in the Project area.
Metro Line 204/754: These two lines travel between Los Feliz and Athens. These lines travel north and south on Vermont Avenue in the Project area. Metro 754 is a Bus Rapid line with limited stops, one of which serves the Campus at the Jefferson Boulevard and Vermont Avenue intersection.
Metro Line 442: This line travels between South Bay Galleria Transit Center (Hawthorne) and Patsaouras Transit Plaza during weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hours by taking the Harbor Transitway (I-110). The line travels north and south on Figueroa Street in the Project area.
Metro Line 444: This express line travels between Rancho Palos Verdes and Patsaouras Transit Plaza by taking the Harbor Transitway (I-110). The line travels north and south on Figueroa Street in the Project area.
Metro Line 445: This express line travel between San Pedro and Patsaouras Transit Plaza by operating on the Harbor Transitway/I-110. The line travels north and south on Figueroa Street in the Project area.
Metro Line 446: This express line travel between San Pedro via Pacific Avenue/Wilmington/Carson and Patsaouras Transit Plaza by operating on the Harbor Transitway/I-110. The line travels north and south on Figueroa Street in the Project area.
Metro Line 550: This express line travels between San Pedro and West Hollywood by operating on the Harbor Transitway (I-110). The line travels east and west on Exposition Boulevard in the Project area.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-6 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Page IV.K-7
Figure IV.K-2 Existing Transit Service in the Project Area
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2009. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
LADOT Dash Route F: This line travels between the Financial District and Exposition Park/USC. This line encircles the entire Campus serving Figueroa Street, Vermont Avenue, Exposition Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard. The service is available from 6:30 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. with a frequency of 10 minutes Monday through Friday.
LADOT Dash Southeast: This line travels between Exposition Park/USC and Vernon Avenue. This line travels east and west on Exposition Boulevard in the study area.
(b) Existing University Tram and Campus Cruiser Program
Transit service within the USC community is provided by a tram service operated by Trojan Transportation. This service is not open to the general public. Proof of USC association (i.e., USC Identification) may be required before boarding Campus transit services.
Twenty-one active Campus tram routes are provided during the 2009 spring and fall semesters. The number of active routes during the summer is reduced in response to decreased Campus activity. Ten of the 21 routes serve the Campus. The major routes serving the Campus and area to the north are Routes A, B, C, and D, which provides approximately 50 stops. A fifth route connects the Campus to the University Parking Center. These five major routes are illustrated in Figure IV.K-3 on page IV.K-9 and are described in further detail below.
Route A: The tram travels between Leavey Library and Graduate Fine Arts Building in a clockwise direction, which is operated from 6:15 A.M. to 9:45 P.M. (Monday through Friday). The headway varies throughout the day and is 15 minutes from 8:30 A.M. to 2:15 P.M. and 8:30 P.M. to 9:45 P.M., and 30 minutes during other operating hours. Based on field observations, Route A currently has the highest number of passenger boardings among the three tram services (Route A, B, and C) serving the residential area around Campus.
Route B: The tram travels between Leavey Library and 3030 Shrine Place from 6:15 A.M. to 9:45 P.M. The tram service is in operation Monday through Friday with a frequency of 15 minutes during the peak hour and 30 minutes during the off-peak hour, similar to Route A.
Route C: The tram service starts from Leavey Library and ends at Mount Saint Mary’s (23rd Street and Estrella Place) with a headway of 20 minutes. The service is provided from 10:00 P.M. to 5:40 A.M. seven days a week.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-8 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Figure IV.K-3 Existing Major University Park Campus Tram Routes in the Project Area
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2009. Page IV.K-9 IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Route D: The tram service begins at Leavey Library and ends at the 901 Lounge with a headway of 20 minutes. The service is available between 10:00 P.M. and 5:40 A.M. seven days a week.
Parking Center Route: The tram service is available from 6:30 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. (Monday through Friday). It travels between Leavey Library and Carol Little Building. The service is operated by one vehicle, which leaves University Parking Center every 20 minutes.
The other five Campus routes are regional links:
An intercampus route which travels between the Campus and the Health Sciences Campus (HSC) with tram service available 7:00 A.M. to 8:30 P.M. (Monday through Friday).
A route which connects the Campus to Bunker Hill downtown, operating between 7:30 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. (Monday through Friday) with headways of 60 minutes throughout the day.
A University shuttle service that links the Campus to Marina del Rey from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. (Monday through Friday) with headways of 90 minutes.
A route which links the Campus to Union Station. This tram operates between 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. (Monday through Friday) with a frequency of 5 minutes/ 10 minutes during the P.M. peak hour, and 60 minutes during the morning peak and off-peak hour.
A late night fixed-route service known as the “Cruiser Express” which operates 10:00 P.M. to 2:35 A.M. seven days a week. The Cruiser Express uses 24 Campus Cruiser vehicles, including eight vans, one ADA equipped van and 14 compact cars. The boundaries of the Campus Cruiser program have been established at approximately a one-mile radius from the center of Campus. Average ridership during the fall and spring semester is approximately 605 passengers per weeknight, with a peak of 717 passengers on a Sunday night.
The remaining 11 routes are regional links. Six of the 11 routes serve the USC Health Sciences Campus, two routes serve the Downtown Health Center, two routes serve Union Station, and one route serves Alhambra.
As noted, hours of operation vary by route and time of year. All rides for USC students, faculty, staff, and guests are free of charge.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-10 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(c) Existing Campus Rideshare Programs
Trojan Transportation has organized an extensive vanpool system with 21 drop-off and pick-up locations throughout the region. Trips range from 12.5 miles from Torrance to 69.6 miles to Moreno Valley. The monthly rate varies from $108.00 a month to $193.00 a month, and is the most subsidized mode of ridershare at USC. In addition to the vanpool system, Trojan Transportation has organized a carpool program, a disability access to road transportation (DART), and Zipcar car-sharing service for USC students, faculty, and staff.
(4) Access
(a) Subarea 1
Vehicular access to the existing core Campus is provided via the following eight gates as depicted in Figure IV.K-4 on page IV.K-12:
Gate 1 is the north leg of the intersection of Watt Way and Exposition Boulevard. This intersection is signalized to allow full access (right-turn in/out and left-turn in/out) for the Campus.
Gate 2 is the north leg of the intersection of Pardee Way/Hoover Street and Exposition Boulevard. This intersection is signalized to allow full access for the Campus.
Gate 3 is the west leg of the intersection of McCarthy Way and Figueroa Street. This intersection is signalized to allow full access for the Campus and provides access to Parking Structure X.
Gate 4 is the south leg of the intersection of Royal Street and Jefferson Boulevard and provides a full signalized access for vehicles accessing Parking Structure D and Lot B.
Gate 5 is the south leg of the intersection of McClintock Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard and forms a major access to the core Campus.
Gate 6 is the east leg of the intersection of Vermont Avenue and 36th Place. This gate provides access to Parking Structure A.
Gate 7 is located along northbound Vermont Avenue and provides access to University’s facilities management staff parking and operations.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-11 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review University of Southern C alifornia University Park Campus
Map Key
Dining
Residential
Libraries
Parking Page IV.K-12 Galleries,Lectures & Performances
Figure IV.K-4 Existing Vehicular Access Gates to Campus
Source: University of Southern California, 2010. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Gate 8 is located along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard between Vermont Avenue and Orchard Avenue. This gate provides access to Parking Structure B and Parking Lot 1.
Parking Structure 1 (PS1) and Parking Structure 2 (PS2) are the other two major University-owned parking facilities around the perimeter of the core Campus. PS1 is located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Figueroa Street and Exposition Boulevard. Vehicular access to PS1 is provided from a driveway along westbound 37th Place. PS2 is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Flower Street and Exposition Boulevard. Vehicular access to PS2 is provided via driveways along Flower Street and Exposition Boulevard.
Vehicular access to the existing uses in Subarea 1B is provided primarily via driveways on the east side of Figueroa Street.
(b) Subarea 2
Subarea 2 includes the University Parking Center and administrative facilities. Vehicular access to the University Parking Center is provided via driveways along Hope Street and 35th Street. Vehicular access to the administrative facilities is provided via driveways along Grand Avenue and Hill Street. Pedestrians and bicycles use Jefferson Boulevard to travel back and forth from Subareas 1 and 3.
(c) Subarea 3
Vehicular access for Subarea 3 for each of the existing uses are described as follows:
Jessie L. Terry Manor senior housing – This senior housing development has frontage along Vermont Avenue and extends from Jefferson Boulevard to 30th Place. Vehicular access to the property is currently provided via a driveway along Vermont Avenue and 30th Place.
Century Apartments – This is an existing student housing development located between the Manor Apartments and Orchard Avenue. Vehicular access is currently provided from a driveway located along Orchard Avenue and 30th Place.
La Sorbonne Apartments - This is an existing student housing development located along the west side of Orchard Avenue between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard. Vehicular access to the property is currently provided via a driveway along Orchard Avenue.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-13 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Cardinal Gardens Apartments – This property is bound by Orchard Avenue on the west, 30th Place on the north, McClintock Avenue on the east, and Jefferson Boulevard on the south. Vehicular access to the property is provided via driveways along Orchard Avenue and 30th Place.
University Village – University Village is an existing mixed-use commercial center with uses such as retail, a movie theater, a bank, supermarket, restaurant, USC administrative office, etc. The property is bound by McClintock Avenue on the west, 30th Street on the north, Hoover Street on the east and Jefferson Boulevard on the south. Vehicular access to the development is currently provided via driveways located along northbound McClintock Avenue, 30th Street, southbound Hoover Street, and westbound Jefferson Boulevard.
(5) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
As shown in Figure IV.K-5 on page IV.K-15, the University has a network of bicycle routes throughout the Campus that connect to routes on the following perimeter roadways:
Jefferson Boulevard – Unmarked bicycle route shared with curb side travel lanes. Marked bicycle lanes are proposed for Jefferson Boulevard in the City of Los Angeles Bicycle Plan (Year 2009).
Vermont Avenue – Unmarked bicycle route shared with curbside travel lanes.
Figueroa Street – Unmarked bicycle route shared with curb side travel lanes.
Hoover Street – Marked bicycle lanes.
McClintock Avenue between Jefferson Boulevard and 30th Street – Marked bicycle lanes.
30th Street between Hoover Street and University Avenue – Marked bicycle lanes.
As part of the draft City of Los Angeles Bicycle Plan (City of Los Angeles, 2009), the City has proposed the following improvements to the existing bicycle route network:
Restriping the existing roadway to provide marked bicycle lanes is proposed along Exposition Boulevard and a section of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard within the study area.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-14 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Figure IV.K-5 Existing Bicycle Routes in the Project Area
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2009. Page IV.K-15 IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Washington Boulevard, Jefferson Boulevard and a segment of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard west of Broadway Place are identified in the Master Plan as roadways where bicycle lanes are desirable, but would either require roadway widening or removal of existing travel lanes or on-street parking.
Adams Boulevard west of Hoover Street is proposed as a bicycle route with implementation of signage and optional roadway improvements.
The above improvements are only in draft form and would require further evaluations with regards to the feasibility of the improvement.
Bicyclists and pedestrians can access the core Campus from the major gates described above as well as from the following locations listed below:
Trousdale Parkway along westbound Exposition Boulevard
Childs Way along southbound Figueroa Street
Hellman Way along southbound Figueroa Street
34th Street along southbound Figueroa Street
Trousdale Parkway along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard
Driveways of Lot M and Lot V along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard
Bicycle and pedestrian access to/from Subarea 2 uses is provided via driveways located along 35th Street and Grand Avenue.
Bicycle and pedestrian access for Subarea 3 is provided from the following major access points:
North leg of Intersection of McClintock Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard.
The northwest corner of the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Hoover Street .
Entrance located along northbound Orchard Avenue between Jefferson Boulevard and 30th Place.
Entrance located along Hoover Street, south of 32nd Street.
Entrances located along westbound Jefferson Boulevard between McClintock Avenue and Hoover Street.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-16 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Pedestrians can also access Subarea 3 from various other minor entrances that are located along the perimeter.
Additionally, the Project area has a mature network of pedestrian facilities on and around Campus. • In an effort to improve safety, USC has recently (September 2009) funded the design and installation of a pedestrian signal at the intersection of Hoover Street and 28th Street. USC is also working with LADOT in implementing various near-term pedestrian safety features including improvements at the intersections of Hoover Street and McClintock Avenue along Jefferson Boulevard. These measures focus on pedestrian and vehicle visibility, increased intersection illumination, and better driver awareness through the length of the corridor. These improvements will also include closure of the south leg of intersection of Hoover Street and Jefferson Boulevard and equipment upgrades such as enhanced illumination and signal equipment upgrades.
b. Analysis of Existing Traffic Conditions
(1) Study Intersections
In consultation with LADOT and City Planning staff, 54 study intersections were selected for detailed analysis. These 54 study intersections are as follows:
1. Normandie Avenue & I-10 westbound on-/off-ramps 2. Normandie Avenue & I-10 eastbound on-/off-ramps 3. Normandie Avenue & Adams Boulevard 4. Normandie Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard 5. Normandie Avenue & Exposition Boulevard 6. Vermont Avenue & Washington Boulevard 7. Vermont Avenue & I-10 westbound on-/off-ramps 8. Vermont Avenue & I-10 eastbound on-/off-ramps 9. Vermont Avenue & Adams Boulevard 10. Vermont Avenue & 27th Street 11. Vermont Avenue & 29th Street 12. Vermont Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard 13. Vermont Avenue & 36th Place 14. Vermont Avenue & Exposition Boulevard 15. Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-17 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
16. Watt Way & Exposition Boulevard 17. McClintock Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard 18. 20th Street & I-10 westbound on-off-ramps 19. Hoover Street & Washington Boulevard 20. Hoover Street & 20th Street 21. Hoover Street & I-10 eastbound on-/off-ramps 22. Hoover Street & 24th Street/Union Avenue 23. Hoover Street & Adams Boulevard 24. Hoover Street & 30th Street 25. Hoover Street & 32nd Street 26. Hoover Street & Jefferson Boulevard 27. Royal Boulevard & Jefferson Boulevard 28. Pardee Way & Exposition Boulevard 29. Figueroa Street & Washington Boulevard 30. I-110 southbound off-ramp & 23rd Street 31. Figueroa Street & 23rd Street 32. Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard 33. Figueroa Street & 28th Street (West) 34. Figueroa Street & 34th Street 35. Figueroa Street & Jefferson Boulevard 36. Figueroa Street & USC McCarthy Way 37. Figueroa Street & Exposition Boulevard 38. Figueroa Street & Flower Street/38th Street 39. Figueroa Street & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 40. Flower Street & Adams Boulevard 41. I-110 northbound off-ramp & Adams Boulevard 42. Flower Street & Jefferson Boulevard 43. Flower Street & Exposition Boulevard/I-110 southbound off-ramp 44. Flower Street & 37th Street/I-110 southbound on-ramp 45. Hope Street & I-110 northbound off-ramp & 37th Street 46. I-110 southbound off-ramp & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard 47. I-110 northbound ramps & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-18 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
48. Grand Avenue & Adams Boulevard 49. Grand Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard 50. Grand Avenue & 37th Street 51. Hill Street & Adams Boulevard 52. Hills Street & Jefferson Boulevard 53. Broadway & Jefferson Boulevard 54. Main Street & Jefferson Boulevard
The locations of all 54 study intersections are shown in Figure IV.K-6 on page IV.K-20.
Weekday A.M. (morning) and P.M. (afternoon) peak hour traffic volumes were obtained from traffic counts conducted at the study intersections in 2007 and 2008. The traffic counts were conducted on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, the days with the highest levels of activity on the Campus, during non-holiday weeks to represent a typical travel pattern in the vicinity. Likewise, traffic count dates were chosen in the early to middle portion of the USC spring semester to represent a typical travel patterns for Campus activities.1
Per LADOT requirements, existing and future operations for the intersections were analyzed using the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) method of intersection capacity calculation (Transportation Research Circular #212, Transportation Research Board, 1980).
The CMA methodology determines the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio of an intersection based on the number of approach lanes, the traffic signal phasing and the traffic volumes.2 The V/C ratio is then used to find the corresponding level of service based on the definitions provided in Table IV.K-1 on page IV.K-21. Level of service (LOS) is used to describe traffic flow conditions, ranging from excellent (LOS A) to overloaded (LOS F) conditions. LOS D is typically recognized as the minimum acceptable LOS in urban areas, such as the City of Los Angeles.
1 A comparative analysis of historic traffic count data at key intersections indicated that negligible to negative growth in traffic at these intersections. Therefore, per LADOT, no growth adjustment was applied to traffic counts conducted in Year 2007/2008 to estimate existing Year 2009 traffic volumes. 2 The CalcaDB software package developed by LADOT was used to implement the CMA methodology in this study.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-19 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Project Boundary
Figure IV.K-6 Study Intersections and Neighborhood Street Segments
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-20 IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-1 Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections
Level of Intersection Capacity Service Utilization Definition
A 0.000-0.600 EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer than one red light and no approach phase is fully used. B 0.601-0.700 VERY GOOD. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. C 0.701-0.800 GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; backups may develop behind turning vehicles. D 0.801-0.900 FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive backups. E 0.901-1.000 POOR. Represents the most vehicles intersection approaches can accommodate; may be long lines of waiting vehicles through several signal cycles. F >1.000 FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Tremendous delays with continuously increasing queue lengths.
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, 1994.
Of the 54 study intersections, 52 are currently controlled by both the City of Los Angeles’ Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system and the Adaptive Traffic Control System (ATCS), which is a sub-feature of the ATSAC system.3 In accordance with LADOT procedures, a 7 percent credit (0.07 reduction in V/C) was applied to reflect the benefits of ATSAC control at these intersections. Furthermore, the added capability of ATCS would add an additional 3 percent credit (0.03 reduction in V/C). As a
3 The ATSAC System represents an advanced system in computer control of traffic signals. The advantages of ATSAC controlled traffic signals include real-time adjustment of signal timing plans to reflect changing traffic conditions, identification of unusual traffic conditions caused by incidents, and the ability to identify signal equipment malfunctions quickly. The ATCS is a computer based traffic signal control program that provides fully responsive traffic signal control based on real time traffic conditions. It automatically adjusts and optimizes traffic signal timing in response to current traffic demands on the entire signal network such that the number of stops and the amount of delay is minimized along with improved traffic signal coordination throughout the network.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-21 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation result, the 52 intersections controlled by both ATSAC/ATCS would have a total of 10 percent credit towards increased capacity (0.10 reduction in V/C).
The two following intersections do not have ATSAC or ATCS capabilities:
Figueroa Street & 28th Street (West) (#33)
I-110 Northbound Ramps & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#47)
Table IV.K-2 on page IV.K-23 summarizes the existing weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hour V/C ratios and the corresponding LOS for each of the 54 study intersections. As indicated in the table, the following seven intersections are currently operating at LOS E or F (unacceptable levels) during one or both of the A.M. and P.M. peak hours:
Normandie Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#3), P.M. peak hour
Normandie Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#5), P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard (#12), P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#14), A.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#15), A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard (#32), P.M. peak hour
Figueroa Street & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#39), A.M. peak hour
(2) Regional Transportation System
Eleven freeway segments were identified for the analysis of the proposed Project’s impacts on the regional transportation system:
I-10 Freeway between San Pedro Street & Los Angeles Avenue I-10 Freeway between Los Angeles Avenue I-110 Interchange
I-10 Freeway between I-110 Interchange & Hoover Boulevard
I-10 Freeway between Hoover Boulevard & Vermont Avenue
I-10 Freeway between Vermont Avenue & Normandie Avenue
I-10 Freeway between Normandie Avenue & Western Avenue
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-22 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-2 Existing (Year 2009) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Existing Base Year (Year 2009)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
1. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.511 A I-10 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.777 C
2. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.772 C I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.708 C
3. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.761 C Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.919 E
4. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.813 D Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.785 C
5. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.868 D Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.941 E
6. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.833 D Washington Boulevard P.M. 0.800 C
7. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.671 B I-10 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.599 A
8. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.656 B I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.696 B
9. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.843 D Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.873 D
10. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.501 A th 27 Street P.M. 0.443 A
11. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.468 A th 29 Street P.M. 0.627 B
12. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.840 D Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.926 E
13. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.631 B th 36 Place P.M. 0.625 B
14. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.929 E Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.769 C
15. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.916 E Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 1.010 F
16. Watt Way * A.M. 0.374 A Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.429 A
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-23 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-2 (Continued) Existing (Year 2009) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Existing Base Year (Year 2009)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
17. McClintock Avenue * A.M. 0.393 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.580 A
18. I-10 Westbound Ramps * A.M. 0.428 A th 20 Street P.M. 0.618 B
19. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.743 C Washington Boulevard P.M. 0.722 C
20. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.475 A th 20 Street P.M. 0.524 A
21. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.744 C I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.635 B
22. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.398 A th 24 Street/Union Avenue P.M. 0.430 A
23. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.825 D Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.900 D
24. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.409 A th 30 Street P.M. 0.498 A
25. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.169 A nd 32 Street P.M. 0.324 A
26. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.450 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.516 A
27. Royal Street * A.M. 0.386 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.524 A
28. Pardee Way * A.M. 0.143 A Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.239 A
29. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.764 C Washington Boulevard P.M. 0.782 C
30. I-110 SB Off-ramp * A.M. 0.288 A rd 23 Street P.M. 0.311 A
31. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.537 A rd 23 Street P.M. 0.479 A
32. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.869 D Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.919 E
33. Figueroa Street A.M. 0.377 A th 28 Street (West) P.M. 0.548 A
34. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.444 A th 30 Street P.M. 0.625 B
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-24 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-2 (Continued) Existing (Year 2009) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Existing Base Year (Year 2009)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
35. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.577 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.842 D
36. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.252 A USC McCarthy Way P.M. 0.482 A
37. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.592 A Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.687 B
38. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.428 A th 38 Street/Flower Street P.M. 0.324 A
39. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.992 E Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 0.837 D
40. Flower Street * A.M. 0.453 A Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.793 C
41. I-110 NB Off-ramps * A.M. 0.606 B Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.562 A
42. Flower Street * A.M. 0.253 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.409 A
43. Flower Street * A.M. 0.333 A Exposition Boulevard /I-110 SB Off-ramp P.M. 0.406 A
44. Flower Street * A.M. 0.391 A th 37 Street/I-110 SB On-ramp P.M. 0.464 A
45. Hope Street/I-110 NB Off-ramp * A.M. 0.433 A th 37 Street P.M. 0.444 A
46. I-110 Southbound Ramps * A.M. 0.661 B Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 0.725 C
47. I-110 Northbound Ramps A.M. 0.807 D I-110 Northbound Ramps P.M. 0.766 C
48. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.599 A Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.501 A
49. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.503 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.628 B
50. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.429 A th 37 Street P.M. 0.442 A
51. Hill Street * A.M. 0.620 B Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.424 A
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-25 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-2 (Continued) Existing (Year 2009) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Existing Base Year (Year 2009)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
52. Hill Street * A.M. 0.597 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.575 A
53. Broadway * A.M. 0.621 B Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.715 C
54. Main Street * A.M. 0.745 C Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.833 D
Note: * Intersection is currently operating or will operate under ATSAC and ATCS systems. Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
I-110 Freeway between Olympic Boulevard & I-10 Interchange I-110 Freeway between I-20 Interchange & Flower Street
I-110 Freeway between Flower Street & Exposition Boulevard
I-110 Freeway between Exposition Boulevard & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard
I-110 Freeway between Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard & Vernon Avenue
Table IV.K-3 on page IV.K-27 shows the traffic volumes, V/C, and LOS for the eleven freeway segments during the A.M. and P.M. peak period. Eight of the analyzed freeway segments are currently operating at or near capacity (LOS E or F) during one or more peak hours in one or both directions.
(3) Neighborhood Streets
To evaluate impacts on local residential neighborhoods adjacent to the Project site, four neighborhood street segments were selected for analysis in the Traffic Study. These four neighborhood street segments are shown in Figure IV.K-1 on page IV.K-3. Existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for the nine neighborhood street segments were obtained from 24-hour traffic counts conducted in April 2009. Table IV.K-4 on page IV.K-28 lists each neighborhood street segment and its corresponding 24-hour ADT volumes. As shown in Table IV.K-4, the street segment of 30th Street between Vermont Avenue & Orchard Avenue has the greatest ADT volume with 2,667 vehicle trips.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-26 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-3 Existing Freeway Mainline Level of Service Analysis
Existing Conditions North/Eastbound South/Westbound Peak Freeway Analysis Locations Hour Volume a V/C LOS* Volume a V/C LOS*
I-10 between San Pedro Street & A.M. 6,329 0.64 C 9,946 1.00 E Los Angeles Avenue P.M. 6,739 0.68 C 10,361 1.05 F(0)
I-10 between Los Angeles Avenue & A.M. 6,203 0.63 C 9,747 1.11 F(0) I-110 Interchange P.M. 6,604 0.67 C 10,154 1.15 F(0)
I-10 between I-110 Interchange & A.M. 7,950 0.66 C 12,492 1.14 F(0) Hoover Boulevard P.M. 8,464 0.70 C 13,013 1.18 F(0)
I-10 between Hoover Boulevard & A.M. 8,000 0.61 C 12,571 0.95 E Vermont Avenue P.M. 8,518 0.65 C 13,096 0.99 E
I-10 between Vermont Avenue & A.M. 7,924 0.72 C 12,452 1.13 F(0) Normandie Avenue P.M. 8,437 0.77 C 12,972 1.18 F(0)
I-10 between Normandie Avenue & A.M. 7,798 0.71 C 12,253 1.11 F(0) Western Avenue P.M. 8,303 0.75 C 12,765 1.16 F(0)
I-110 between Olympic Boulevard & A.M. 8,444 0.96 E 9,340 1.06 F(0) I-10 Interchange P.M. 7,909 0.90 D 9,348 1.06 F(0)
I-110 between I-10 Interchange & A.M. 8,535 0.97 E 9,441 1.07 F(0) Flower Street P.M. 7,995 0.91 D 9,449 1.07 F(0)
I-110 between Flower Street & A.M. 8,535 0.71 C 9,441 0.78 D Exposition Boulevard P.M. 7,995 0.66 C 9,449 0.78 D
I-110 between Exposition Boulevard & A.M. 8,809 0.73 C 9,744 0.81 D Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 8,252 0.68 C 9,753 0.81 D
I-110 between Martin Luther King Jr. A.M. 9,754 0.81 D 10,790 0.82 D Boulevard & Vernon Avenue P.M. 9,137 0.76 C 10,799 0.82 D
Note: * F(0) through F(3) represent gradations of LOS F (see Table 12 of the Traffic Study in Appendix P of this Draft EIR). a Existing volumes based on counts from Caltrans 2008 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
c. Regulatory Framework
(1) Congestion Management Program
The Congestion Management Program (CMP) is a state-mandated program enacted by the state legislature to address the increasing concern that urban congestion is affecting the economic vitality of the state and diminishing the quality of life in some communities. The CMP provides the analytical basis for transportation decisions through the State Transportation Improvement Program.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-27 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-4 Existing Average Daily Traffic Volumes for Neighborhood Street Segments
Existing Average Daily No. Neighborhood Street Segment Traffic Volume a
1 Menlo Avenue between Adams Boulevard & 29th Street 1,320 2 Orchard Avenue between Adams Boulevard & 29th street 2,663 3 27th Street between University Avenue & Figueroa Street 2,238 4 30th Street between Vermont Avenue & Orchard Avenue 2,667 a 24 hour machine counts were conducted on April 30, 2009. Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
Metro is the local CMP agency for Los Angeles County and has established a countywide approach to implement the statutory requirements of the CMP in their 2004 CMP for Los Angeles County. The countywide approach includes designating a highway network that includes all state highways and principal arterials within the County and monitoring traffic conditions on the designated transportation network, performance measures to evaluate current and future system performance, promotion of alternative transportation methods, analysis of the impact of land use decisions on the transportation network, and mitigation to reduce impacts on the network. If LOS standards deteriorate, then local jurisdictions must prepare a deficiency plan to be in conformance with the countywide plan.
The Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines outlined in the 2004 CMP for Los Angeles County require that, when an EIR is prepared for a project, traffic and transit analyses must be conducted for select regional facilities based on the quantity of project traffic expected to utilize these facilities. The CMP guidelines for determining the study area of the analysis for CMP arterial monitoring intersections and for freeway monitoring locations are:
All CMP arterial monitoring intersections, including monitored on- or off-ramp intersections, where the proposed project will add 50 or more trips during either the A.M. or P.M. weekday peak hours of adjacent street traffic; and
Mainline freeway monitoring locations where the project will add 150 or more trips, in either direction, during either the A.M. or P.M. weekday peak hours.
There are no CMP arterial monitoring intersections in the study area. However, the two CMP arterial monitoring intersections nearest to the Project site are:
Western Avenue & 9th Street – approximately 3.5 miles from the Project site
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-28 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Alameda Street & Washington Boulevard – approximately 4.0 miles from the Project site.
All eleven of the freeway segments selected for analysis in the Traffic Study are CMP mainline freeway monitoring locations.
(2) Los Angeles Municipal Code
With regard to construction traffic, Section 41.40 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) limits construction activities to the hours from 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. on weekdays and from 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Saturdays. No construction is permitted on Sundays or national holidays.
3. Environmental Impacts
a. Methodology
(1) Construction Traffic
The analysis of construction traffic included a determination of the number of construction-related trips (i.e., construction worker trips and construction truck trips) that would occur as a result of the proposed Project. The impacts of these construction-related trips on the existing roadway system were then assessed. In addition, the proposed Project’s potential to affect access, transit access, and on-street parking during construction was assessed.
(2) Operational Traffic - Intersections
As discussed above, the analysis of existing and future (2030) traffic conditions for the study intersections was based on LADOT’s Traffic Study Policies and Procedures manual, which requires that traffic analyses use the Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) method of intersection capacity calculation (Transportation Research Circular No. 212) to analyze the LOS at signalized intersections. The CMA methodology determines the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio of an intersection based on the number of approach lanes, the traffic signal phasing and the traffic volumes. The V/C ratio is then used to find the corresponding LOS based on the definitions in Table IV.K-1 on page IV.K-21.
As discussed in greater detail below, traffic impacts were evaluated by: (1) analyzing the future (2030) “Without Project” traffic conditions; (2) determining the trip generation for the proposed Project based on the types of uses proposed and accounting for the
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-29 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation decrease in trips associated with the uses to be removed; (3) assigning these Project trips to the roadway network; (4) evaluating the service condition of the roadways with the addition of Project trips; and (5) comparing future (2030) “Without Project” conditions with the future (2030) “With Project” conditions to obtain the change in service levels caused by the proposed Project. These changes were compared to the thresholds of significance set forth by LADOT to determine whether significant impacts would occur. Where significant impacts were identified, mitigation measures were identified to reduce such impacts to less than significant levels to the extent feasible.
(a) Future (2030) Base Conditions
The Future (2030) Base conditions considers the effects of regional growth and of other developments either proposed, approved, or under construction in the study area. As discussed below, future traffic conditions were evaluated based on a comprehensive traffic demand model.
(i) Travel Demand Model Development and Validation
The travel demand model for the proposed Project was developed using TRANPLAN (version 9.2) modeling software. The model is designed to produce both A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic flows on roadway facilities in the study area based on comprehensive land use and socioeconomic data. The Project model is a “focused” version of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) regional model. The SCAG regional model was used as a starting point in the development of the Project model.
The development of the Project model consisted of several modifications to the SCAG regional model to enable it to estimate traffic more accurately in the area around USC. These modifications included adding more traffic analysis zones (TAZs) and roadway network detail in the study area. This modified roadway network and TAZ system provides a greatly refined and updated representation of all the roadway facilities of interest in the Project study area.
To validate the model, roadway traffic volumes from the base year focused model were compared to the existing (2009) traffic counts to ensure that the model produced traffic forecasts that reasonably matched empirically collected traffic counts. In addition to testing the model’s ability to reproduce base conditions, the model’s ability to predict realistic changes in traffic conditions as inputs was evaluated. The focused model exceeded all relevant validation criteria, and was accepted by LADOT for use in the Traffic Study. A detailed description of the model development and calibration/validation process, and the criteria used to assess model performance is provided in the Traffic Study included in Appendix P.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-30 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Following validation of the existing base year (2009) model, the travel demand model was used along with future year SCAG and Project land use projections to produce forecasts of future traffic flows in the study area.
(ii) Future Year Roadway Network and Trip Table Development
The TAZ and highway network refinements developed in the validated base year model were then applied to the Year 2030 SCAG model. In addition to these refinements, modifications to the Year 2030 trip tables and highway network were made to account for assumptions related to Future Base (Year 2030) traffic, related projects and future baseline roadway improvements in the study area. These modifications are described in detail below:
Future (2030) Base Traffic Assumptions
The following two-step process was used for the Future Base (Year 2030) model to produce traffic projections that reflected no growth in University traffic:
1. Estimate Existing (Year 2009) Traffic Generation by University Operations – A trip generation model was prepared to estimate existing 2009 University traffic based on University population groups on Campus. These population groups include faculty, staff, undergraduate students, graduate students and visitors. As shown in Table IV.K-5 on page IV.K-32, it is estimated that the University currently generates approximately 55,438 daily trips, of which 5,216 (4,172 inbound/1,044 outbound) occur during the A.M. peak hour and 4,893 (1,468 inbound/3,425 outbound) occur during the P.M. peak hour. 2. Trip Generation Modifications to Future Base (Year 2030) Travel Demand Model – In order to provide a conservative (i.e., worst case) impact analysis, the Future Base (2030) travel demand model assumes no growth in University traffic beyond existing levels; therefore, all USC growth is reflected in the proposed Project. The trip tables for all TAZs that include USC parking facilities for students, faculty, staff and visitors directly related to University operations were modified and replaced with USC‘s Year 2009 trip generation estimates. No modifications were made to trip tables for any non-USC TAZs in the model to ensure that these TAZs reflect SCAG projected socioeconomic growth up to Year 2030.
Related Projects
As indicated in Section III, Environmental Setting, of this Draft EIR in consultation with LADOT, a total of 30 related projects have been identified within a two-mile radius of the Project site. In order to ensure that all the specific related projects were accounted for in the growth projected in the SCAG model, a TAZ-by-TAZ comparison was made between the base year and future model trip tables to ensure that the growth in trips generated by
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-31 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-5 Year 2009 USC Trip Generation Summary
Estimated Trip Generation
ITE Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Land Use Code Size a Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total Faculty 1,732 1,810 262 208 Staff 5,716 6,693 1,538 1,372 Undergraduate Enrollment 16,023 9,005 849 641 Graduate Enrollment 14,805 14,805 1,347 1,036 Visitors 1,400 2,289 176 168 Existing Year 2009 Trips b 55,438 4,172 1,044 5,216 1,468 3,425 4,893 Trips per student
Note: FTE = Full Time Equivalent a Represent Year 2008 fall semester population numbers. b Daily trips were calibrated by multiplying calibrated P.M. peak hour trips with a factor of 11.33 as derived from ITE Generation rates for University/College land use. Trip generation estimates for the major direction are based on rates derived from surveys and equal to 80 percent of total A.M. peak hour trips and 70 percent of total P.M. peak hour trips. Trip generation for the minor direction was interpolated from the major direction using ITE recommended directional split of 20 percent of total A.M. peak hour trips and 30 percent of total P.M. peak hour trips.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-32 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation and attracted to each TAZ was sufficient to include the trip generation estimates for the related projects. If the growth projected in the model was greater than that reflected in the related projects for a particular TAZ, then the growth reflected in the SCAG model trip table was retained to represent a worst case condition.
Future (2030) Base Roadway Network
The roadway network for the Future (2030) Base conditions in the study area will be affected by regional improvement plans and specific programmed improvements with partial or full funding secured. The elements described below are reflected in the Year 2030 model.
(iii) Regional Improvement Plans
SCAG Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Transportation Improvement Program
The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), prepared by SCAG, is a planning document required under State and Federal statutes. The RTP forecasts long-term transportation demands, and identifies policies, actions, and funding sources to accommodate these demands. The RTP contemplates construction of new transportation facilities, transportation system management (TSM) strategies, transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, and land-use strategies. The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) (2006), also prepared by SCAG and based on the RTP, lists all the regional funded and programmed improvements in the next seven years. The RTIP provides updates to the list of regionally funded/programmed improvements in the next improvement cycle. The improvements included in the RTP have committed funding. The SCAG Year 2035 model is the tool by which the facilities proposed in the RTP and RTIP are analyzed for effectiveness. Several regional facility improvements contained in the SCAG Year 2035 highway network are adjacent to the study area:
Southbound Harbor Freeway (I-110) Project: The Southbound Harbor Freeway project would construct an auxiliary lane and modify ramps on the southbound I-110 from the 8th Street on-ramp to the I-110/I-10 connector. Project completion is scheduled for 2010.
Northbound Harbor Freeway (I-110) Project: The Northbound Harbor Freeway project would add an auxiliary lane and reconstruct the ramp on the northbound I-110 from the north end of the 12th Street undercrossing to the north end of the 7th Street undercrossing. The northbound I-110 would go from three to four lanes. Project completion is scheduled for 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-33 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Metro Long Range Transportation Plan
Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan is a strategic document that serves as a framework for meeting the current and projected mobility needs of Los Angeles County. The Metro Long Range Transportation Plan recommends highway, HOV, bus, rail, and travel demand management improvements, and identifies Metro’s funding sources and implementation schedules over the 20-year period. In addition to the highway facility improvements detailed in the RTP/RTIP, the Long Range Transportation Plan includes the following transit improvements in the study area:
Mid-City/Exposition Corridor Project: The Mid-City/Exposition Corridor is Phase I of the Exposition Line project. This corridor would provide light rail service between Downtown Los Angeles (Union Station) and Culver City, with a terminus station at Venice Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard. This project was under construction at the time the traffic counts were conducted and is nearing completion scheduled for 2010. The Final EIS/EIR for the project recommends the following mitigation measures:
o Normandie Avenue & Exposition Boulevard: The Mid-City/Exposition Corridor Project proposes the widening and restriping of Normandie Avenue at Exposition Boulevard to provide an exclusive right-turn lane for the southbound approach.
o Pardee Way & Exposition Boulevard: Changes at this intersection would involve narrowing and restriping the westbound approach of Exposition Boulevard at Pardee Way to provide a through lane and a shared-through- right-turn lane. Exposition Boulevard will maintain three through lanes and a shared-through-left-turn lane eastbound.
o Figueroa Street & Exposition Boulevard: Changes at this intersection include narrowing and restriping the westbound approach of Exposition Boulevard at Figueroa Street to provide two through lanes and an exclusive right-turn lane. Exposition Boulevard will be narrowed and restriped to provide two through lanes and two exclusive left-turn lanes, and a free-flow right-turn lane in the eastbound direction.
o Flower Street & Jefferson Boulevard: Flower Street will be narrowed and restriped at the intersection with Jefferson Boulevard to provide a shared- through-right-turn lane, a through lane, and a shared-through-left-turn lane at the southbound approach.
USC Near Term Pedestrian Safety Measures:
Per the recent pedestrian safety measures proposed by USC in conjunction with the City of Los Angeles, the south leg of the intersection of Hoover Boulevard and Jefferson
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-34 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Boulevard will be closed to traffic. This leg of the intersection served as a driveway to the United University Church parking lot. The access to the church is proposed to be provided via a driveway located on the south side of Jefferson Boulevard west of the intersection of Hoover Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard. These improvements will be partially funded by USC and are estimated to be completed by Fall 2010.
Other Local Improvements (City of Los Angeles)
The following plans recommend a number of improvements that would enhance the transportation system in the study area but were not included because they were determined to have no effect on the analyzed intersections, or improvements are not funded at this time.
Exposition Park Traffic Circulation Improvements: The Exposition Park Traffic Circulation Improvements consists of widening and restriping Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard at Vermont Avenue to provide exclusive right-turn lanes for both the westbound and eastbound approaches and widening and restriping Figueroa Street at Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to provide an exclusive right-turn lane for the southbound approach.
Equipping all Signalized Study Intersections with the ATSAC/ATCS system: The current City of Los Angeles improvement plan would equip all remaining intersections with ATSAC and install the state-of-the-art ATCS as an additional feature of the ATSAC system. ATCS is the latest enhancement to the ATSAC and uses a personal computer-based traffic signal control software program that provides fully traffic-adaptive signal control based on real-time traffic conditions. ATCS allows for the automatic adjustment to the traffic signal timing strategy and control pattern in response to current traffic demands by allowing ATCS to control all three critical components of traffic signal timing simultaneously, namely cycle length, phase split and offset. In the analysis of future operating conditions, a capacity increase of 10% (0.10 V/C adjustment) was applied to all signalized intersections in the City of los Angeles. Per this proposed improvement, it is assumed that the two intersections of Figueroa Street & 28th Street (west) (#33) and I-110 Northbound Ramps & Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (#47) will be installed with ATSAC and ATCS systems, and therefore, a V/C adjustment of 0.10 was applied to these intersections under the Future Base (2030) conditions and Future (2030) With Project conditions.
After inputting the trip table and network modifications detailed above, the development of the forecast volumes for this analysis followed the approach presented in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255 (Transportation Research Board, 1982). This method is the accepted professional standard for preparing traffic forecasts for urbanized area planning applications.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-35 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
The NCHRP Report 255 approach involves post-processing model data and applying the growth to existing counts collected in the field. The first step in the process is to run the validated base year model and collect data for the desired segments and intersection turning movements. The model is then updated with future year land use changes and highway network improvements and run again. The data for the same study segments and turning movements is again collected from the future year model run.
The data from both model runs is then compared and applied to the existing counts using a variety of methods. The method selected for this analysis is the difference method, which directly applies the difference between the future and base year model runs. The difference in traffic was linearly interpolated to adjust the data to represent a growth of 21 years to Year 2030.
(b) Future (2030) With Project Conditions
(i) Project Trip Generation
For the purposes of calculating trip generation for the proposed Project, proposed land uses were divided into the following two categories:
University Uses: This category includes the proposed land uses that are directly related to University operations and includes academic buildings, University buildings, faculty offices, on-Campus student housing, etc. The uses included as part of this category are:
o 1,500,000 square feet of academic/University uses in Subarea 1
o 200 student beds in Subarea 1
o 500,000 square feet of academic/University uses in Subarea 2
o 500,000 square feet of academic/University uses in Subarea 3
o 5,200 student beds in Subarea 3
University- and Community Uses: This category includes the proposed uses of the Proposed Project that would not be directly part of University operations but would primarily serve the University’s patrons as well as the community. These uses include the majority of the uses in Subarea 3:
o 202,000 square feet of retail uses
o 45,000 square feet of restaurant uses
o 40,000 square feet of grocery store uses
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-36 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
o 43,000 square feet of (approximately 2,000 seats) cinema uses
o 20,000 square feet of fitness center uses
o 150 room hotel which includes a conference center
o 80,000 square feet of laboratory school/community educational academy uses (540 seats)
o 250 faculty housing units
Trip Generation of University Uses
The purpose of the proposed University uses is to modernize, enlarge and consolidate existing facilities at a mature and stable university. Although the size of the Campus would increase, the growth in students, faculty and staff would not be proportional, since the goal of the proposed development is to enhance, not grow, the University. The trip generation for the proposed University uses is based on all the population groups on Campus rather than other parameters such as building square footage. This is consistent with the methodology used to determine University’s existing trip generation. A detailed summary of the trip generation methodology, approach and calculations as approved by LADOT is presented in the Traffic Study. The Campus population groups include:
Undergraduate students; Graduate students; Faculty; Staff; and Visitors.
As indicated in Section II, Project Description, it is anticipated that by the Year 2030, the University community would be composed of approximately 17,800 undergraduate students, 18,200 graduate students, 1,900 faculty members, and 7,000 staff workers. Additionally, the number of visitors (including contract employees) is anticipated to be approximately 2,500.
One of the primary goals of the proposed Project is to provide more on-Campus housing for both undergraduate and graduate students. As part of the proposed Project, the University would provide a total of 5,400 new on-Campus student beds, which would enable some of the students living near Campus or commuting to the University to move into the new on-Campus housing. Table IV.K-6 on page IV.K-38 indicates the change in distribution of undergraduate and graduate student mix between living on Campus, living near Campus or commuting as a result of new on-Campus housing. As can be seen in the
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-37 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-6 Changes in Distribution of Student Residents as a Result of Proposed New On-Campus Housing
Year 2030 with Project Year 2009 Housing Beds Project Number of Housing Number of Component % Students Beds % Students Undergraduate Students 16,023 17,800 a On Campus 4,447 b 30.6% 5,445 75.9% 998 78.7% Near Campus 7,714 48.1% 8,570 Commute 24.1% 3,862 21.3% 21.3% 3,785 Graduate Students 14,805 18,200 a On Campus 210 c 19.0% 3,450 26.8% 3,240 44.3% Near Campus 3,758 25.4% 4,620 Commute 73.2% 10,837 55.7% 55.7% 10,130 a Actual student beds on Campus per the USC website. Total number of on-Campus and near Campus students still consistent with surveys conducted as part of the Parking and Transportation Survey Study (Kaku Associates, March 2006). b The proposed Project would provide approximately 2,160 undergraduate beds and remove 1,162 existing beds in Subarea 3. Therefore, the net is 998 undergraduate beds. c The proposed Project would provide approximately 3,240 graduate beds.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
table, approximately 78.7 percent of the undergraduate students are projected to live on Campus or near Campus in Year 2030 as compared to 75.9 percent in the existing Year 2009. Also, approximately 44.3 percent of the graduate students are projected to live on or near Campus in Year 2030 as compared to only 26.8 percent in the existing Year 2009. The Year 2030 population projections, including the effect of projected change in distribution of students living on Campus, living near Campus and commuters, were applied to the base year trip generation model to arrive at Year 2030 unadjusted trip generation estimates. The resulting trip generation is provided in Table IV.K-7 on page IV.K-39. As shown therein, 63,448 daily trips are estimated to be generated by University uses, of which 5,770 trips (4,616 inbound/1,154 outbound) are estimated to occur during the morning peak hour, while 5,600 trips (1,680 inbound/3,920 outbound) are estimated to occur during evening peak hour.
Transit Credit
One of the key issues in the development of the transportation and circulation element of the proposed Project for the Campus is anticipated completion of the Exposition (Expo) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Line running immediately adjacent to the Project area along Flower Street and Exposition Boulevard directly joining downtown Los Angeles to Culver City. The Expo LRT will have direct connections to the Blue Line and Red Lines, which in turn have connections to Union Station, the Gold Line and the Green Line, providing the USC
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-38 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-7 Future With Project (Year 2030) Summary of Trip Generation Estimates- University Uses
Estimated Trip Generation
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Weekday Land Use a Size b Daily Trip In Out Total In Out Total
Base Population: Faculty 1,900 1,985 288 229
Base Population: Staff 7,000 8,194 1,884 1,680
Base Population - Undergraduate Students: 17,800 Residing on-Campus 30.6% 5,445 1,136 34 97 Residing near Campus 48.1% 8,570 2,031 244 152 Commuter students 21.3% 3,785 6,064 546 425 Base Population - Graduate Students: 18,200 Residing on-Campus 19.0% 3,450 582 17 50 Residing near Campus 25.4% 4,620 886 107 66 Commuter students 55.7% 10,130 13,130 1,181 920 Base Population: Others 2,500 Visitors e 82% 2,050 3,465 173 173 Contract Employees Visitors f 18% 450 621 142 128
TOTAL UNIVERSITY RELATED TRIPS (ADJUSTED) c,d 63,448 4,616 1,154 5,770 1,680 3,920 5,600
Note: Detailed trip generation approach, methodology and assumptions are provided in Appendix D of the Traffic Study. a Mode split and arrival/departure patterns obtained from Parking and Transportation Survey Study (Kaku Associates, March 2006) conducted for University of Southern California - University Park Campus. b Obtained from USC. c Daily trips generation estimates is calibrated based on p.m. peak hour trips with a factor of 11.33 as derived from ITE Generation rates for University/College land use. d Trip generation estimates for the major direction are based on rates derived from surveys and equal to 80 percent of total A.M. peak hour trips and 70 percent of total P.M. peak hour trips. Trip generation for the minor direction was interpolated from the major direction using ITE recommended directional split of 20 percent of total A.M. peak hour trips and 30 percent of total P.M. peak hour trips. e Mode split assumed to be similar to that of commuter students. f Mode split assumed to be similar to that of staff.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-39 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation population with access to an expansive regional rail and bus transit system. It is anticipated that this improvement to the transportation system would result in reduced auto usage by all components of the University population. It has been estimated that a 5 percent reduction in the total number of auto trips generated by the Campus population would be an expectation for conditions in Year 2030.
Trip Generation of University and Community Uses
Traffic volumes to be generated by the proposed Project’s University and Community uses are based on the standard trip generation rates derived from the Trip Generation, 7th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003). Adjustments to the trip generation were made to account for trip reduction credits associated with the removal of the existing land uses in Subarea 3, internal trips, pass-by trips, and transit trips. These trip reduction credits are discussed in further detail in the Traffic Study provided in Appendix P of this Draft EIR.
Project Trip Distribution
Vehicle trips generated by the proposed Project were assigned to the regional roadway network using the proposed Project’s travel demand model. The result of these assignments is Future (2030) with Project traffic volumes on streets and freeways in the study area. These traffic volumes are further expressed into turning movement traffic volumes at the study intersections as further described in the Traffic Study provided in Appendix P of this Draft EIR.
(3) Regional Transportation System
For the CMP mainline freeway monitoring locations, a traffic impact analysis was prepared to determine the potential impacts of the proposed Project on these CMP monitoring locations. Existing peak hour traffic volumes were established via information published in the State of California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans) 2008 Traffic Volumes on California State Highways.
Future base traffic volumes were estimated using the Project travel demand model. Future Year (2030) model projections at the analyzed freeway segments were compared to the Base Year model projections. The change in traffic projections between the Base Year and the Future Year 2030 was added to existing freeway volumes to estimate Future Base (Year 2030) morning and evening peak hour traffic.
The change in freeway segment volume as a result of the proposed Project was estimated using a similar method as described above. Future (Year 2030) plus Project
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-40 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation travel demand model projections at the analyzed freeway segments were compared with the Future Base (Year 2030) model projections. The difference of the two, or the “project effect” was added to Future Base (Year 2030) freeway segment traffic estimates to calculate Future With Project morning and evening peak hour traffic volumes.
(4) Neighborhood Streets
For the analysis of Project impacts on neighborhood streets, the USC travel demand model, based on the SCAG 2008 RTP, was used to determine the percentage growth in daily traffic on the analyzed street segments. Future base traffic volumes were developed by determining a percentage growth in traffic between existing and future year (2030) travel demand model traffic data and then applying this growth percentage to the existing daily traffic count. The travel model was also used to determine percentage growth in traffic on the analyzed segments attributable to the proposed Project. The percentage growth was compared to the City’s significance thresholds.
(5) Public Transit
The analysis of the proposed Project’s potential impacts on transit is based on the methodology provided in Appendix B-4 of the 2004 CMP. This methodology estimates the number of person trips by utilizing an average vehicle ridership (AVR) factor of 1.4 applied to the Project-generated trips calculated without the LADOT 5 percent transit credit that is taken in the Project trip generation calculations. The methodology then assigns a percentage of the total person trips as transit riders as a function of the type of use (commercial/other versus residential) and the proximity to transit services. For the purposes of this study and in order to maintain consistency with the transit credit applied in the Project trip generation development, a transit mode share of 5 percent is applied for this analysis. Appendix B-4 of the 2004 CMP recommends observing the fixed route local bus services within a quarter-mile of the project and express bus routes and rail service within two miles of the project site.
(6) Access
The analysis of the proposed Project’s potential access impacts included a review of all project access points, internal circulation, and parking access. Per the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide, intersections nearest to the Project site’s access points were analyzed for their level of service after Project buildout to determine whether impacts at the access points near these intersections would result.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-41 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(7) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety The analysis of the proposed Project’s potential impacts associated with pedestrian/bicycle safety included a review of all pedestrian/bicycle routes, vehicular access points, and potential roadway hazards. Where driveways would cross pedestrian facilities or bicycle facilities, operational and safety issues related to the potential for vehicular/pedestrian and vehicular/bicycle conflicts were considered.
(8) Consistency with Plans The methodology for this analysis includes a review of relevant transportation regulations, plans, and policies and a determination of whether the proposed Project would conflict with these regulations, plans, and policies.
b. Significance Thresholds
(1) Construction Traffic
Given the temporary nature of construction, LADOT considers construction-related traffic effects to be less than significant. Notwithstanding, LADOT typically requires implementation of worksite traffic control plans to ensure that any construction-related effects are minimized to the extent possible.
The City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide does not specify a threshold of significance for a project’s impact associated with construction traffic, stating that the determination of significance shall be made on a case by case basis, considering the temporary traffic impacts, temporary loss of access, temporary loss of bus stops or rerouting of bus lines, and temporary loss of on-street parking. Based on these considerations, for the purposes of this analysis, Project construction would have a significant impact on traffic and circulation if construction activities were to: (1) cause substantial delays and disruption of existing traffic flow; (2) require temporary relocation of existing bus stops to more than one-quarter mile from their existing stops; (3) result in impacts based on the operational thresholds at intersections during peak hours (refer to intersection thresholds below); or (4) would result in the substantial loss of on-street parking such that the parking needs of the Project area would not be met.
(2) Intersections
LADOT has established threshold criteria used to determine the significant traffic impact of a proposed project on signalized intersections in its jurisdiction. Under the
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-42 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
LADOT guidelines, a signalized intersection would be significantly impacted with an increase in V/C ratio equal to or greater than 0.04 for intersections operating at LOS C, equal to or greater than 0.02 for intersections operating at LOS D, and equal to or greater than 0.01 for intersections operating at LOS E or F after the addition of project traffic. Intersections operating at LOS A or B after the addition of the project traffic are not considered significantly impacted regardless of the increase in V/C ratio. It should be noted that the significant impact criteria for intersections identified in the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide is consistent with the LADOT criteria. The following summarizes the impact criteria:
Intersection Conditions with Project-Related Increase in V/C Project Traffic Ratio Equal to or Greater Than C 0.701 - 0.800 0.04 D 0.801 - 0.900 0.02 E or F > 0.900 0.01
(3) Regional Transportation System (Freeway) Impacts
The City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide and the CMP traffic impact analysis guidelines establish that a significant project impact occurs when the following threshold is exceeded:
The proposed project increase traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2 percent of capacity (V/C increase of 0.02), causing LOS F (V/C > 1.00)
If the facility is already at LOS F, a significant impact occurs when the proposed project increases traffic demand on a CMP facility by 2% of capacity (V/C increase of 0.02).
(4) Neighborhood Streets
Under the City of Los Angeles’ guidelines, a project impact on a local residential street would be considered significant if the project’s share of daily traffic volumes is as follows:
Projected Average Daily Traffic with Project (Final ADT) Project-Related Percent of Final ADT 0 to 999 16 percent or more of final ADT 1,000 or more 12 percent or more of final ADT 2,000 or more 10 percent or more of final ADT 3,000 or more 8 percent or more of final ADT
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-43 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(5) Public Transit
The City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide does not specify a threshold of significance for a project’s impact on transit system capacity, stating that the determination of significance shall be made on a case by case basis, considering the projected number of additional transit passengers expected with implementation of the proposed project and available transit capacity.
Based on these factors, the proposed Project would have a significant impact if transit trips generated by the proposed Project could not be accommodated within the capacity of the existing and future bus transit lines serving the Project site.
(6) Access
The following threshold of significance is set forth in the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide, which states that a project would normally have a significant project access impact if the intersection(s) nearest the primary site access is/are projected to operate at LOS E or F during the A.M. or P.M. peak hour, under Future “With Project” Traffic (2030) conditions.
(7) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety
The following factors are set forth in the City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide, which states that the determination of significance shall be on a case-by-case basis, considering the following factors:
The amount of pedestrian activity at project access points.
Design features/physical configurations that affect the visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists to drivers entering and exiting the site, and the visibility of cars to pedestrians and bicyclists.
The type of bicycle facility the project driveway(s) crosses and the level of utilization.
The physical conditions of the site and surrounding area, such as curves, slopes, walls, landscaping or other barriers, that could result in vehicle/pedestrian, vehicle/bicycle or vehicle/vehicle impacts.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-44 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Based on all of the above factors, the proposed Project would have a significant impact if Project development would substantially increase hazards to bicyclists or pedestrians.
(8) Consistency with Plans
The City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide does not specify a threshold of significance for a project’s consistency with relevant transportation plans and policies. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, significant impacts related to consistency with plans would result if the proposed Project would conflict with the implementation of adopted transportation programs, plans, and policies.
c. Project Design Features
(1) Construction
The proposed Project would comply with the Los Angeles Municipal Code, requirements that limit construction activities to the hours from 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. on weekdays and from 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Saturdays and holidays. No construction is permitted on Sundays.
The construction route for construction vehicles traveling to and from the western portion of Subarea 1 and Subarea 3 would consist of northbound travel along Vermont Avenue (via Jefferson Boulevard or Exposition Boulevard) to/from the I-10 Freeway. For the eastern portion of Subarea 1 and Subarea 2, construction trucks would travel eastbound along Jefferson Boulevard to/from the I-110 Freeway or northbound along Figueroa Street to the I-10 Freeway.
As part of the proposed Project, a Construction Traffic Management Plan would be implemented during construction to ensure that adequate and safe access remains available within the Project site during construction activities. The Construction Traffic Management Plan would accomplish the following:
Maintain access for land uses in proximity to the Project site during Project construction.
Schedule deliveries and pick-ups of construction materials to non-peak travel periods, to the extent feasible.
Coordinate deliveries and pick-ups to reduce the potential of trucks waiting to load or unload for protracted periods of time.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-45 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes on surrounding public streets.
Construction equipment traffic access to City streets from the site shall be controlled by flagmen.
Identify designated transport routes for haul trucks and heavy trucks to be used over the duration of the proposed Project. Develop a plan for staging trucks prior to arriving at the site. Trucks should not be permitted to travel along residential streets serving the neighborhoods surrounding the Project site.
Schedule vehicle movements to ensure that there are no vehicles waiting off-site and impeding public traffic flow on the surrounding streets.
Establish requirements for loading/unloading and storage of materials on the Project site where parking spaces would be encumbered and length of time in traffic travel lanes can be encumbered. These requirements would include sidewalk closings or pedestrian diversions to ensure the safety of pedestrians and access to local businesses.
Coordinate with the City and emergency service providers to ensure adequate access is maintained to the Project site and neighboring businesses.
In the event of temporary lane or sidewalk closures, a worksite traffic control plan, approved by the City of Los Angeles, should be implemented to route vehicular traffic or pedestrians around any such closures.
Coordinate with all concerned agencies (LADOT, Metro, etc) regarding temporary relocation or removal of bus-stops during the construction period. This would include:
o Follow agency procedures to obtain necessary temporary permits. This could include the review and approval of temporary signage and equipment required for temporary closure or relocation of bus-stops.
o Notify appropriate agencies including LADOT prior to the actual date.
o Follow all safety required procedures required by the concerned agency.
o Make efforts to minimize the time period of temporary bus-stop closure or relocation.
In addition to the Construction Traffic Management Plan, in order to ensure that traffic associated with construction activities would not impact existing pedestrian routes, the following Project Design Features would be implemented:
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-46 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
A Construction Period Pedestrian Routing Plan would be prepared and submitted prior to commencement of construction that identifies safe walking routes to the Campus through the construction affected streets. The Plan would, at a minimum, require the following:
o Maintain pedestrian access for land-uses within the vicinity of the Project site including the various Campus facilities. o Follow generally accepted construction safety standards to separate pedestrians from construction activity. o Maintain sidewalk access at least along one side of the roadway. o Provide adequate signage to guide pedestrians.
If necessary, appropriate traffic controls (signs and temporary signals) shall be installed to ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety during construction.
Barriers and/or fencing shall be installed around construction sites to secure construction equipment and to prevent trespassing, vandalism, and attractive nuisances.
Security patrols shall be provided to minimize trespassing, vandalism, and short- cut attractions. In addition, a Construction Worker Parking Plan would be prepared prior to commencement of construction that identifies parking locations for construction workers to accomplish the following:
To the maximum extent feasible, construction worker parking shall be accommodated on the Project site.
During construction activities when construction worker parking cannot be accommodated on the Project site, the plan shall identify alternate parking location(s) for construction workers and the method of transportation to and from the Project site (if beyond walking distance) for approval by the City 30 days prior to commencement of construction.
The Construction Worker Parking Plan must include appropriate measures to ensure that the parking location requirements for construction workers would be strictly enforced. These could include but are not limited to the following measures:
Provide all construction contractors with written information on where their workers and their subcontractors are permitted to park, and provide clear consequences to violators for failure to follow these regulations. This information would clearly state that no parking is permitted on residential streets in the neighborhood north of Jefferson Boulevard.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-47 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
No construction worker parking shall be permitted within 500 feet of the nearest point of the Project active construction site except within designated areas. The contractor shall be responsible for informing subcontractors and construction workers of this requirement, for monitoring compliance of the subcontractors, and if necessary, for hiring a security guard to enforce these parking provisions. The contractor shall be responsible for all costs associated with enforcement of this requirement.
(2) Access Improvements
One of the proposed Project objectives is to promote pedestrian and bicycle safety and minimize opportunities for pedestrian and vehicular conflict. Thus, as described below several improvements have been proposed to address this objective.
A high volume of pedestrians and cyclists cross Jefferson Boulevard between Vermont Avenue and Figueroa Street in traveling to and from the core campus. Much of this activity is focused at the intersections of McClintock Avenue, Hoover Street, and Royal Street. Currently, the segment of Jefferson Boulevard between Orchard Avenue and Hoover Street consists of five travel lanes, two travel lanes in each direction and one raised median/turn lane. In addition, parking is provided on the south side of the street (eastbound) through most of this segment and on the north side of the street (westbound) only between Orchard Avenue and McClintock Avenue (8 spaces). In order to achieve improvements in pedestrian and bicycle safety, without reducing traffic capacity, the Project proposes to eliminate the on-street parking between Orchard Avenue and Hoover Street in favor of an on-street bicycle lane and wider sidewalks. The resulting improvement would provide for five automobile travel lanes on Jefferson Boulevard (two in each direction with a raised median/turn lane and bicycle lanes on both sides). The narrowing would provide an on-street facility for cyclists traveling along Jefferson Boulevard and reduce the crossing distance for cyclists and pedestrians. This improvement would also retain vehicular travel capacity during the peak traffic periods.
Another improvement that is proposed to be implemented as part of the proposed Project is the conversion of McClintock Avenue between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard to a bicycle- and pedestrian-only street. This proposed roadway change would result in closure of the north leg of the intersection of McClintock Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard to vehicular traffic.
With regard to proposed access to each of the Subareas, the proposed Project would not make changes to the existing access scheme for Subareas 1 and 2, which is described above. However, modifications would be made to the pedestrian/bicycle system within Subarea 1, with measures to minimize vehicular movement and improve pedestrian and bicycle accommodations within the core Campus. These improved pedestrian and bicycle accommodations would link to other such improvements along Jefferson Boulevard
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-48 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation and Hoover Street, and extend into the other Subareas, particularly Subarea 3 to the north of Subarea 1.
As illustrated in Figure IV.K-7 on page IV.K-50 access to Subarea 3 would be modified and would include the following three main access points:
A driveway would be provided along southbound Orchard Avenue between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard.
The south leg of the existing intersection of McClintock Avenue and 30th Street would be modified to serve as a major vehicular access to the parking structure within the eastern portion of Subarea 3. The intersection of McClintock Avenue and 30th Street is currently configured such that McClintock Avenue merges into 30th Street. Motorists traveling eastbound on 30th Street are directed to turn right on to southbound McClintock Avenue. Motorists traveling westbound on 30th Street have the choice of traveling straight on westbound 30th Street or turn left on to southbound McClintock Avenue. Motorists traveling northbound on McClintock Avenue cannot turn left on to westbound 30th Street. The proposed Project proposes to signalize the intersection and allow full access from McClintock Avenue to/from 30th Street.
A second major vehicular access would be provided from the west leg of the signalized intersection of 32nd Street & Hoover Street.
A valet pick-up/drop-off plaza is also proposed to be located on McClintock Avenue, south of the parking structure driveway. Limited access for loading/unloading may also be provided via the non-vehicular driveways located along westbound Jefferson Boulevard, 30th Street, 30th Place, and Orchard Avenue.
Bicycle and pedestrian access for Subarea 3 would be provided from the following major access points:
North leg of Intersection of McClintock Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard. - The Project proposes to convert the north leg of the intersection of McClintock Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard into a “bicycle and pedestrian” only street. This access point would serve as a major entry point for bicycles and pedestrians traveling to/from the campus (Subarea 1).
Northwest corner of Jefferson Boulevard and Hoover Street - The northwest corner of the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Hoover Street is also proposed to serve as a major access for bicycles and pedestrians to Subarea 3.
Entrance located along northbound Orchard Avenue between Jefferson Boulevard and 30th Place.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-49 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Page IV.K-50
Figure IV.K-7 Subarea 3 - Proposed Access Plan
Source: Fehr & Peers Transpotation Consultants, 2010. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Entrance located along Hoover Street, south of 32nd Street.
Entrances located along westbound Jefferson Boulevard between McClintock Avenue and Hoover Street.
Pedestrians would also be able to access Subarea 3 from other minor entrances that would be located along the perimeter of the development.
(3) Transit
In addition, the Project site would continue to be served by the existing University- operated tram system which would link the planning Subareas together and reduce vehicle travel. Rerouting of the tram system would occur as necessary. The Project site would also be served in the future by the Exposition Boulevard Light Rail Transit Line that is anticipated to be completed by 2011.
(4) Transportation Demand Management
The University, for a number of years, has been committed to encouraging alternative modes of travel for students, staff and faculty. As part of its commitment, USC currently has a comprehensive TDM program for the Campus. A TDM Program is a set of strategies, measures, and incentives to encourage Campus commuters to walk, bicycle, use public transportation, carpool, or use other alternatives to driving alone. TDM measures produce more mobility using existing transportation systems, boost economic efficiency of the current transportation infrastructure, improve air quality, save energy, and reduce traffic congestion. The following is a summary of USC’s existing TDM program, which it plans to continue:
USC Shuttle/Tram Service - Transit service within the USC community is provided by a tram service operated by Trojan Transportation. Twenty-one active routes are provided during spring and fall semesters. The number of active routes during the summer semester is reduced in response to decreased Campus activity. Ten of the 21 routes serve the UPC. Four routes serve the campus and University Park area with approximately 50 stops. A fifth route connects the campus to the Parking Center. In addition to the above tram routes, USC also provides shuttle service to/from various regional links. These include Health Sciences Campus (HSC), the Union Station, Bunker Hill (Downtown), Marina Del Rey, Alhambra, and a late night fixed- route service known as the “Campus Cruiser”.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-51 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Car Sharing Program - Zipcar is a car sharing program available to faculty, staff and students. The program currently has 16 cars on the UPC and the North Campus. The program allows drivers 18 years and older to become a member and have access to an automobile per their need. There are currently over 1,000 members enrolled in this program. The vehicles are hybrid or highly rated “green” vehicles and the membership includes car insurance, gas and maintenance costs. Each Zipcar is currently being used between 48% and 75% of the time.
Carpool - Carpooling is the shared use of a car by the driver and one or more passengers, usually for commuting. Carpoolers use pool members’ private cars, or a jointly hired vehicle, for private shared journeys. USC has issued approximately 570 carpool permits and offers discounts on permits. According to recent data from the AQMD, just the employee carpool has increased from approximately 2010 trips in Year 2005 to approximately 5750 trips in Year 2009.
Vanpool - USC currently has 20 vanpools in operation. At this time, there a total of 180 full-time and part-time riders with open seats available. The vans for this program are available through Midway Rideshare. Maintenance (vehicle insurance, fuel, washing and cleaning) of the vans is arranged by USC on a weekly basis. The program features a “guaranteed emergency ride home” available through USC Transportation. Each Vanpool rider receives 3 free parking passes monthly.
Metro (Bus) and Metrolink (Rail) - USC subsidizes Metro Bus and Metrolink monthly passes for faculty, staff and students (over and above student discount) Individuals can decline their monthly parking permit in favor of a $30 discount on a transit pass. In addition, the University also runs free shuttle service from Union Station, Downtown, Marina Del Rey, and Alhambra to assist Metro and Metrolink riders to travel to/from UPC. The program has seen a constant increase in transit passes from an average of 1,500 per month in 2005 to 2,520 per month in Year 2009.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities - The University maintains a network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities both within the campus and on the perimeter of the campus. These facilities require constant maintenance and provide improved connectivity with the city facilities off-campus such that University staff and student are encouraged to use these facilities, thus reducing the auto-trips to/from campus.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-52 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
The extensive TDM program described above contributes to significant levels of trip reduction at USC. The existing TDM program is reflected in the trip generation rates for the proposed Project. Additionally, a five percent credit, on all campus-generated trips, was taken to account for the pending Exposition LRT, which would include two stations adjacent to the campus.
d. Analysis of Proposed Project Impacts
(1) Construction
Construction of the proposed Project would be implemented in phases over a number of years extending to 2030. Specifically, construction in Subareas 1 and 2 could occur as early as 2011 with buildout of the proposed uses occurring through 2030. Construction for the proposed uses in Subarea 3 would occur in two phases. Each phase of Subarea 3 construction would require approximately 24 months to complete with a possible overlap period.
(a) Construction Traffic
Most of the traffic attributable to construction activity would result from the following three components:
Haul Truck Traffic;
Construction Worker Traffic; and
Delivery of Materials and Equipment.
(i) Haul Truck Traffic
Demolition associated with the proposed Project would involve the removal of approximately 81,202 tons of demolition debris in all four phases of construction. Project construction could involve the removal of up to approximately 901,900 cubic yards of soil for all three Subareas.
Maximum haul truck trips would occur during the site grading phases of all three Subareas. Specifically, Subarea 1 construction would result in a maximum of approximately 60 daily haul truck trips, which are expected to occur during the site grading phase (3-month period). Subarea 2 construction would result in a maximum of approximately 90 daily haul truck trips, which are expected to occur during the site grading phase (5-month period). During the first phase of Subarea 3 construction, a maximum of
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-53 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation approximately 400 daily haul truck trips are expected to occur during an approximate 11- month site grading period while the second phase of Subarea 3 construction activity could result in a maximum of approximately 150 daily haul trips during an approximate 2 month site grading period.
Although it is unlikely that development in all three Subareas would occur concurrently, Table IV.K-8 on page IV.K-55 presents an analysis whereby it was conservatively assumed that all haul truck traffic from all Subareas would occur concurrently. As indicated in Table IV.K-8, this worst-case conditions analysis shows that Project construction activities for haul truck trips would result in 1,375 daily passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips.4 Most, if not all, of the PCE 1,375 truck trips would be scheduled during the first eight hours of the permitted construction work period (7:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M.) to avoid generating trips during the P.M. peak hour. Excavation truck trips are expected to be relatively constant throughout the excavation period.
(ii) Construction Worker Traffic
The number of construction workers would vary throughout the construction period. Construction activity at the Project site is projected to generate a maximum of 250 employee-related trips on a daily basis, including 125 arrivals and 125 departures. All of these trips are not likely to arrive at the construction site within the same hour nor would they leave the site at the same time.
(iii) Delivery and Staging of Material and Equipment
Another source of Project construction traffic would result from the transport of materials (e.g., concrete, plumbing fixtures, electrical equipment, building materials, etc.) and equipment to the Project site. These materials would be delivered to the site and stored on-site. These deliveries are expected to occur in variously sized vehicles including small delivery trucks, cement mixer trucks and 18-wheel trucks. Additionally, construction equipment would be delivered to the site. This equipment could include cranes, bulldozers, excavators, and other large items of machinery. Most of the heavy equipment is expected to be transported to the site on large trucks such as 18-wheelers or other similar vehicles. Traffic generated from deliveries of materials and equipment is included in the maximum estimates presented for the haul truck trips presented in Table IV.K-8.
4 The PCE represents the equivalent congestion impact of passenger vehicles.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-54 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-8 Project Construction Truck Trips
Location of Estimate of Maximum Daily Passenger Car Construction Activity Daily Haul Truck Trips a Equivalent (PCE) Trips b
Subarea 1 60 150 Subarea 2 90 225 Subarea 3 400 1,000 Total 1,375 a Estimates include truck trips attributable to delivery of materials and equipment. b A passenger car equivalent (PCE) factor of 2.5 was used to convert haul trips into PCE trips.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2010.
(iv) Total Construction Traffic
Table IV.K-9 on page IV.K-56 provides a summary of daily trips attributable to haul trucks; deliveries; and construction workers traveling to/from the Project Site.
As shown in the table, peak construction activity is estimated to generate a maximum of approximately 1,625 daily PCE trips. This very conservative forecast of construction activity is expected to occur during the construction Subareas 1 and 2, and the first phase of Subarea 3, which involves the removal of buildings within the existing University Village. Per the trip generation estimates provided in the traffic impact analysis, the University Village currently generates a total of 5,593 daily trips. These trips would be removed during the first phase of Subarea 3 construction. Therefore, comparing the estimated daily construction trips (1,625 trips) with the number of existing daily trips that would be removed as part of demolition of the existing University Village development (5,593 trips) shows that the number of trips added as a result of construction activity would be less than the number of existing trips that would no longer occur with the removal of the existing University Village development. Based on this, Project construction traffic would result in a less than significant impact on the level of service of the adjacent roadway network.
(b) Construction Period Access
Potential access impacts attributable to the delivery and staging of material and equipment could occur because there may be intermittent periods when large numbers of material deliveries are required, such as when concrete trucks would be needed for the parking structures and the buildings. In addition, some of the materials and equipment could require the use of large trucks (18-wheelers), which could create additional
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-55 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-9 Estimated Project Construction Trips
Construction Traffic Components Estimated Daily Trips (PCEs)
Haul Truck Trips (Including Deliveries of Materials and Equipment) 1,375 Construction Worker Trips 250 Total 1,625
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2010. congestion on the adjacent roadways. Furthermore, construction delivery vehicles may need to park temporarily on adjacent roadways such as Orchard Avenue, McClintock Avenue and Hoover Street as they deliver their items. It is not uncommon for these types of deliveries to result in temporary lane closures.
Additionally, it is anticipated that sidewalks along the Hoover Street (west side), McClintock Avenue, Orchard Avenue, 30th Street (south side) and Jefferson Boulevard (north side) frontages could be closed to pedestrian traffic during portions of the construction period. As a substantial amount of University related pedestrian traffic uses these sidewalks particularly around Subarea 1 and Subarea 3; the temporary closure of sidewalks along major pedestrian routes to Campus could adversely affect pedestrian access and safety.
However, as previously described, as part of the proposed Project, a Construction Traffic Management Plan would be implemented during construction to ensure that adequate and safe access remains available within the Project site during construction activities. With implementation of the Construction Traffic Management Plan, impacts on access during construction would be less than significant.
(c) Construction Period Transit Access
Public transit lines providing service to the Project site travel along the following streets:
Vermont Avenue;
Jefferson Boulevard;
Figueroa Street;
Exposition Boulevard;
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-56 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Grand Avenue; and
39th Street.
Project construction activity is unlikely to result in re-routing of any of the existing public transit service. Relocation or removal of a bus-stop may be needed for a temporary period during construction activity. This may be due to the closure of a sidewalk or for other safety related reasons. Such temporary removal or relocation could result in a temporary adverse impact related to transit access.
However, as previously described, a Construction Traffic Management Plan would be implemented during construction to ensure that adequate and safe access remains available within the Project site during construction activities. The Construction Traffic Management Plan would include the requirement for the Project Applicant to coordinate with all concerned agencies (LADOT, Metro, etc) regarding temporary relocation or removal of bus-stops during the construction period. This would include:
Follow agency procedures to obtain all necessary temporary permits. This could include review and approval of temporary signage and equipment required for temporary closure or relocation of bus-stops.
Notify appropriate agencies include LADOT prior to the actual date.
Follow all safety required procedures required by the concerned agency.
Make efforts to minimize the time period of temporary bus-stop closure or relocation.
With implementation of the Construction Traffic Management Plan, impacts on transit access during construction would be less than significant.
(d) Construction and On-Street Parking
During construction in Subarea 1, a majority of the haul truck queuing is likely to occur on streets internal to Campus. Some queuing is also anticipated along the perimeter streets such as Figueroa Street, Vermont Avenue, Jefferson Boulevard, and Exposition Boulevard. In addition, a majority of queuing for Subarea 2 construction would occur along Hope Street and Grand Avenue. For construction in Subarea 3, excavation trucks would queue along Orchard Avenue, McClintock Avenue, 30th Street (between McClintock Avenue and Hoover Street), Hoover Street, and Jefferson Boulevard. In order to provide space for these trucks to queue along these streets, temporary on-street parking prohibitions would be required. The removal of on-street parking adjacent to the Project
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-57 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation site, particularly near Subarea 1 and Subarea 3, to accommodate truck queuing during the excavation period would have a temporary adverse impact on street parking.
Construction worker parking during construction activity in Subareas 1 and 2 would be provided in University parking facilities located within these subareas respectively. During the first phase of construction (demolition) for Subarea 3, it is anticipated that construction employees would park on-site on a portion of the existing parking area which is part of the University Village shopping center. During the excavation phase and the first portion of the building construction while the parking structure is under construction, it is anticipated that construction employees would be parked in other University or non- University owned parking facilities around or within the Project site. Potential off-site parking locations, if needed, would be identified in the Construction Worker Parking Plan. Once the parking structure component of the proposed Project is complete, Subarea 3 construction workers would be parked on-site in the parking structure.
In the absence of measures to control construction worker parking, such parking could spill over into adjacent areas, such as the residential streets north of Jefferson Boulevard. However, as previously described, a Construction Worker Parking Plan would be prepared prior to commencement of construction that identifies parking locations for construction workers.
(e) Conclusion
With implementation of the Project Design Features listed above (e.g., the Construction Traffic Management Plan, the Construction Worker Parking Plan, and the Construction Period Pedestrian Routing Plan), construction traffic impacts would be less than significant.
(2) Operation
(a) Intersections
The analysis of Project traffic impacts on the 54 study intersections is based on a comparison of the Future (2030) Base traffic conditions against the Future (2030) “With Project” traffic conditions. As previously stated, all 54 of the study intersections are signalized.
With regard to unsignalized intersections, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation Traffic Study Policies and Procedures (May 2009) states the following:
“Effective immediately, when determining which intersections should be included in the impact analysis of development projects, only signalized
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-58 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
intersections should be selected. Unsignalized intersections should be evaluated solely to determine the need for the installation of a traffic signal or other traffic control device, but will not be included in the impact analysis. When choosing which unsignalized intersections will be reviewed, intersections that are adjacent to the project or that are expected to be integral to the project’s site access and circulation plan should be identified.” (Attachment N)
In the case of the proposed Project, no current or proposed access driveway is proposed for signalization and therefore no unsignalized intersections were deemed necessary for evaluation as part of this transportation impact analysis. The major Project access points along all four sides of the Campus already have traffic signals controlling the major driveway points. Minor driveways are controlled by stop signs and most are limited to right turns in and out of the driveways. These are no candidates for signalization, and therefore were not included in the analysis. Therefore, as per LADOT policy, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on unsignalized intersections that should be included as study locations.
In the previous LADOT-approved methodology, unsignalized intersections were analyzed as if they were two-phase traffic signals with an assumption of 1,200 vehicles per hour per lane capacity. This is the methodology that is still included in the City’s CEQA Guidelines because the guidelines have not yet been updated to reflect LADOT’s new policy as described above. Under the previous methodology, unsignalized intersections would be selected for study if they were key access points to/from the project or if the project sent enough traffic through the controlled legs of the intersection to potentially cause an impact. Again, since the Project traffic does not depend on any unsignalized intersections for primary access, nor does it generate substantial Project traffic through existing unsignalized intersections, no unsignalized intersections would have been selected for study as part of this analysis even under the previous methodology.
(i) Future (2030) Base Conditions
As discussed above, the Future (2030) Base traffic conditions considers the effects of regional growth and of other developments either proposed, approved, or under construction in the study area. Figures IV.K-8 through IV.K-12 on pages IV.K-60 through IV.K-64 show the traffic volumes for the Future (2030) Base Conditions. Table IV.K-10 on page IV.K-65 provides the V/C ratios and corresponding LOS during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours for the 54 study intersections in the Future Base (Year 2030) traffic conditions. As indicated therein, 41 of the 54 analyzed intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both beak periods. The following 13 intersections would operate at LOS E or F in either one or both peak hours:
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-59 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Page IV.K-60
Figure IV.K-8 Future Base (Year 2030) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-61
Figure IV.K-9 Future Base (Year 2030) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-62
Figure IV.K-10 Future Base (Year 2030) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-63
Figure IV.K-11 Future Base (Year 2030) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-64
Figure IV.K-12 Future Base (Year 2030) Without Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-10 Future Base (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Future Base (Year 2030)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
1. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.560 A I-10 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.791 C
2. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.812 D I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.725 C
3. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.780 C Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.995 E
4. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.840 D Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.867 D
5. Normandie Avenue * A.M. 0.893 D Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.991 E
6. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.880 D Washington Boulevard P.M. 1.020 F
7. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.791 C I-10 Westbound Ramps P.M. 0.695 B
8. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.765 C I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.718 C
9. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.915 E Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.991 E
10. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.540 A th 27 Street P.M. 0.520 A
11. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.613 B th 29 Street P.M. 0.610 B
12. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.947 E Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 1.078 F
13. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.743 C th 36 Place P.M. 0.681 B
14. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.991 E Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.889 D
15. Vermont Avenue * A.M. 0.873 D Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 1.042 F
16. Watt Way * A.M. 0.509 A Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.658 B
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-65 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-10 (Continued) Future Base (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Future Base (Year 2030)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
17. McClintock Avenue * A.M. 0.471 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.657 B
18. I-10 Westbound Ramps * A.M. 0.553 A th 20 Street P.M. 0.770 C
19. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.778 C Washington Boulevard P.M. 0.875 D
20. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.521 A th 20 Street P.M. 0.630 B
21. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.774 C I-10 Eastbound Ramps P.M. 0.656 B
22. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.440 A th 24 Street/Union Avenue P.M. 0.511 A
23. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.885 D Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.951 E
24. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.447 A th 30 Street P.M. 0.603 B
25. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.190 A nd 32 Street P.M. 0.343 A
26. Hoover Street * A.M. 0.463 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.728 C
27. Royal Street * A.M. 0.473 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.656 B
28. Pardee Way * A.M. 0.320 A Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.583 A
29. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.811 D Washington Boulevard P.M. 0.869 D
30. I-110 SB Off-ramp * A.M. 0.320 A rd 23 Street P.M. 0.377 A
31. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.559 A rd 23 Street P.M. 0.537 A
32. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.942 E Adams Boulevard P.M. 1.009 F
33. Figueroa Street A.M. 0.285 A th 28 Street (West) P.M. 0.570 A
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-66 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-10 (Continued) Future Base (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Future Base (Year 2030)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
34. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.522 A th 30 Street P.M. 0.717 C
35. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.607 B Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.936 E
36. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.255 A USC McCarthy Way P.M. 0.495 A
37. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.680 B Exposition Boulevard P.M. 0.901 E
38. Figueroa Street * A.M. 0.453 A th 38 Street/Flower Street P.M. 0.386 A
39. Figueroa Street * A.M. 1.022 F Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 0.826 D
40. Flower Street * A.M. 0.467 A Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.867 D
41. I-110 NB Off-ramps * A.M. 0.691 B Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.607 B
42. Flower Street * A.M. 0.309 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.570 A
43. Flower Street * A.M. 0.363 A Exposition Boulevard /I-110 SB Off-ramp P.M. 0.472 A
44. Flower Street * A.M. 0.452 A th 37 Street/I-110 SB On-ramp P.M. 0.567 A
45. Hope Street/I-110 NB Off-ramp * A.M. 0.480 A th 37 Street P.M. 0.499 A
46. I-110 Southbound Ramps * A.M. 0.693 B Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard P.M. 0.817 D
47. I-110 Northbound Ramps A.M. 0.787 C I-110 Northbound Ramps P.M. 0.753 C
48. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.670 B Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.610 B
49. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.523 A Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.647 B
50. Grand Avenue * A.M. 0.473 A th 37 Street P.M. 0.473 A
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-67 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-10 (Continued) Future Base (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Future Base (Year 2030)
Intersection Peak Hour V/C or Delay LOS
51. Hill Street * A.M. 0.667 B Adams Boulevard P.M. 0.580 A
52. Hill Street * A.M. 0.633 B Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.623 B
53. Broadway * A.M. 0.657 B Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.787 C
54. Main Street * A.M. 0.773 C Jefferson Boulevard P.M. 0.940 E
Note: * Intersection is currently operating or will operated under ATSAC and ATCS systems. Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
Normandie Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#3) – P.M. peak hours
Normandie Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#5) – P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Washington Boulevard (#6) – P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#9) – A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard (#12) – A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#14) – A.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#15) – P.M. peak hours
Hoover Street & Adams Boulevard (#23) – P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard (#32) – A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#35) – P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Exposition Boulevard (#37) – P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#39) – A.M. peak hours
Main Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#54) – P.M. peak hours
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-68 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(ii) Future (2030) With Project Conditions
As discussed previously, for the purposes of calculating trip generation for the USC Development Plan, proposed uses were categorized either as University uses or University and Community uses. Tables IV.K-11 and IV.K-12 on pages IV.K-70 and IV.K-71 presents a summary of the Year 2030 trip generation due to full buildout of the University uses and University and Community uses, respectively. As shown in Table IV.K-11, after trip reduction credits, University uses would result in a net increase of 60,276 daily trips, of which 5,481 trips (4,385 inbound/1,096 outbound) are estimated to occur during the A.M. peak hour, while 5,320 trips (1,596 inbound/3,724 outbound) are estimated to occur during P.M. peak hour. Additionally as shown in Table IV.K-12, after taking credit for removal of existing uses in Subarea 3 and trip reduction credits, University and Community uses in Year 2030 would result in a trip generation of approximately 8,736 daily trips, of which 467 auto trips (256 inbound/212 outbound) would occur during the A.M. peak hour, and 630 auto trips (362 inbound/268 outbound) would occur during the P.M. peak hour.
In total, buildout of the proposed Project would generate approximately 13,574 net new daily trips, of which 732 trips (469 inbound/264 outbound) are projected to occur during the A.M. peak hour and 1,057 trips (490 inbound/567 outbound) are projected to occur during the P.M. peak hour. Table IV.K-13 on page IV.K-73 provides a summary of the proposed Year 2030 Project trip generation estimates.
The weekday A.M. and P.M. peak hour traffic volumes for the Future (2030) With Project conditions were analyzed using the CMA methodology. Figures IV.K-13 through IV.K-17 on pages IV.K-74 through IV.K-78 show the traffic volumes for the Future (2030) With Project scenario. As shown in Table IV.K-14 on page IV.K-79, under this scenario, 41 of the 54 analyzed intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during both peak periods while the following 13 intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or F during one or both peak hours:
Normandie Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#3) - P.M. peak hour
Normandie Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#5) - P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Washington Boulevard (#6) - P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#9) - A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard (#12) - A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Vermont Avenue & Exposition Boulevard (#14) - A.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#15) - P.M. peak hour
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-69 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-11 Summary of Trip Generation Estimates for Project University Land Uses
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Weekday Land Use Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total Year 2030 with Project 63,448 4,616 1,154 5,770 1,680 3,920 5,600 Less: 5% Transit Credit (3,172) (231) (58) (289) (84) (196) (280) Total Year 2030 University Trips (Existing 60,276 4,385 1,096 5,481 1,596 3,724 5,320 + Project)
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development plan, 2010.
Hoover Street & Adams Boulevard (#23) - A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard (#32) - A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Figueroa Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#35) - P.M. peak hour
Figueroa Street & Exposition Boulevard (#37) - P.M. peak hour
Figueroa Street & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#39) - A.M. peak hour
Main Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#54) - A.M. peak hour
As indicated in Table IV.K-14 on page IV.K-79, prior to mitigation, the proposed Project would result in significant traffic impacts at the following eight intersections during one or both peak hours:
Vermont Avenue & Washington Boulevard (#6) – P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#9) – P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard (#12) – P.M. peak hour
Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#15) – P.M. peak hour
Hoover Street & Adams Boulevard (#23) – A.M. and P.M. peak hours
Hoover Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#26) – P.M. peak hour
Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard (#32) – P.M. peak hour
Main Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#54) – P.M. peak hour
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-70 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-12 Summary of Trip Generation Estimates for Project University- and Community Land Uses
Estimated Trip Generation
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Weekday Land Use ITE Code Size Units Daily Trip In Out Total In Out Total
Subarea 3 – Proposed Commercial Land Uses Retail 820 202.000 ksf 4,879 71 46 117 205 221 426 Restaurant a 932 45.000 ksf 3,204 150 139 289 168 107 275 Cinema 443 2,000 seats 2,218 12 1 13 66 22 88 Supermarket 850 40.000 ksf 1,472 28 19 47 77 74 151 Fitness Center 492 20.000 ksf 148 2 3 5 9 9 18 Hotel 310 150 rooms 1,226 51 33 84 47 42 89 Subarea 3 – Proposed Faculty Housing Faculty Housing 220 250 du 1,260 25 39 64 66 35 101 Subarea 3 – Proposed Lab School Laboratory School b 534 540 students 382 74 47 121 11 15 26 Subarea 3 Subtotal 14,789 413 327 740 649 525 1,174
Existing to be Removed University Village Retail 820 73.400 ksf 1,773 25 16 41 74 80 154 Cinema Cinema 485 seats 538 3 0 3 16 5 21 Bank c 12.953 ksf 218 11 4 15 22 24 46 Supermarket 850 39.047 ksf 1,437 28 18 46 75 72 147 Restaurant a 932 20.576 ksf 1,465 69 64 133 77 50 127 Dental Office 720 6.638 ksf 162 8 2 10 4 12 16 Existing to be Removed 5,593 144 104 248 268 243 511
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-71 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-12 (Continued) Summary of Trip Generation Estimates for Project University- and Community Land Uses
Estimated Trip Generation
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Weekday Land Use ITE Code Size Units Daily Trip In Out Total In Out Total Net New Trips From Subarea 3 (Subtract Line Existing and Subarea 3) 9,196 269 223 492 381 282 663 Less: 5% Transit Credit (460) (13) (11) (25) (19) (14) (33) NET NEW TRIPS FROM SUBAREA 3 AFTER TRANSIT CREDIT 8,736 256 212 467 362 268 630
Notes: KSF = 1,000 square feet; DU = dwelling units. * The trip generation estimates are net trips after taking credit for internal capture and pass-by trips. These credits are described in detail in the Trip Generation Analysis provided in Appendix D of the Traffic Study. a ITE - 932 High Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant rates were used for the proposed restaurant land use. b Daily and P.M. peak hour rate for a Private School (K-8) is unavailable in the ITE and derived from morning peak hour trip for a ITE-536 Private School (K-12) as a proportion of weekday daily and P.M. c Empirical rates used for Bank. Empirical data was collected at three free standing franchise commercial banks. Following are the average A.M. and P.M. peak hour trips observed: A.M. Peak hour - 2.43 per 1,000 sq. ft. (75% IN / 25% OUT) P.M. Peak hour - 7.41 per 1,000 sq. ft. (48% IN / 52% OUT) Daily - Daily rate was estimated based on the ITE rate for P.M. peak hour trip as a proportion of weekday daily trips = 21.18%
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-72 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-13 Project Trip Generation Summary
Weekday A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips Daily Land Use Trips In Out Total In Out Total Future Year 2030 University Uses Trip Generation 60,276 4,385 1,096 5,481 1,596 3,724 5,320 Future Year 2030 University- and Community 8,736 256 212 467 362 268 630 Serving Development Net New Trips Future Year 2030 Total Project Traffic Generation 69,012 4,641 1,308 5,948 1,958 3,992 5,950 Year 2009 Existing Trip Generation 55,438 4,172 1,044 5,216 1,468 3,425 4,893 Project Total Net New Trips 13,574 469 264 732 490 567 1,057
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
(b) Regional Transportation System
(i) CMP Arterial Monitoring Intersections
As previously indicated, there are no CMP arterial monitoring intersections in the study area. However, the two CMP arterial monitoring intersections nearest to the Project site are:
Western Avenue & 9th Street – approximately 3.5 miles from the Project site; and
Alameda Street & Washington Boulevard – approximately 4.0 miles from the Project site.
According to the Project trip generation estimates, a review of the travel demand assignment of the Project traffic, and the geographical location of the CMP arterial monitoring intersections in relation to the Project site, the proposed Project would add fewer than 50 vehicles per hour to these locations during the peak hour. Therefore, a CMP arterial intersection analysis is not required, and impacts on these CMP arterial monitoring intersections are less than significant.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-73 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review Page IV.K-74
Figure IV.K-13 Future (Year 2030) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-75
Figure IV.K-14 Future (Year 2030) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-76
Figure IV.K-15 Future (Year 2030) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-77
Figure IV.K-16 Future (Year 2030) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. Page IV.K-78
Figure IV.K-17 Future (Year 2030) With Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
Source: Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants, 2010. IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis
Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
1. Normandie Avenue * AM 0.560 A 0.562 A 0.002 No 0.562 A 0.002 No 0.562 A 0.002 No I-10 Westbound Ramps PM 0.791 C 0.798 C 0.007 No 0.796 C 0.005 No 0.796 C 0.005 No
2. Normandie Avenue * AM 0.812 D 0.817 D 0.005 No 0.816 D 0.004 No 0.816 D 0.004 No I-10 Eastbound Ramps PM 0.725 C 0.725 C 0.000 No 0.725 C 0.000 No 0.725 C 0.000 No
3. Normandie Avenue * AM 0.780 C 0.780 C 0.000 No 0.780 C 0.000 No 0.780 C 0.000 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.995 E 0.995 E 0.000 No 0.995 E 0.000 No 0.995 E 0.000 No
4. Normandie Avenue * AM 0.840 D 0.850 D 0.010 No 0.847 D 0.007 No 0.847 D 0.007 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.867 D 0.873 D 0.006 No 0.871 D 0.004 No 0.871 D 0.004 No
5. Normandie Avenue * AM 0.893 D 0.893 D 0.000 No 0.893 D 0.000 No 0.893 D 0.000 No Exposition Boulevard PM 0.991 E 0.995 E 0.004 No 0.995 E 0.004 No 0.995 E 0.004 No
6. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.880 D 0.889 D 0.009 No 0.886 D 0.006 No 0.886 D 0.006 No [3] Washington Boulevard PM 1.020 F 1.043 F 0.023 Yes 1.037 F 0.017 Yes 1.037 F 0.017 Yes [3]
7. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.791 C 0.791 C 0.000 No 0.791 C 0.000 No 0.791 C 0.000 No I-10 Westbound Ramps PM 0.695 B 0.695 B 0.000 No 0.695 B 0.000 No 0.695 B 0.000 No
8. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.765 C 0.765 C 0.000 No 0.765 C 0.000 No 0.765 C 0.000 No I-10 Eastbound Ramps PM 0.718 C 0.723 C 0.005 No 0.722 C 0.004 No 0.722 C 0.004 No
9. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.915 E 0.922 E 0.007 No 0.920 E 0.005 No 0.920 E 0.005 No [3] Adams Boulevard PM 0.991 E 1.038 F 0.047 Yes 1.027 F 0.036 Yes 1.027 F 0.036 Yes [3]
10. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.540 A 0.575 A 0.035 No 0.566 A 0.026 No 0.566 A 0.026 No 27th Street PM 0.520 A 0.553 A 0.033 No 0.545 A 0.025 No 0.545 A 0.025 No
11. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.613 B 0.623 B 0.010 No 0.621 B 0.008 No 0.621 B 0.008 No 29th Street PM 0.610 B 0.610 B 0.000 No 0.610 B 0.000 No 0.610 B 0.000 No
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-79 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 (Continued) Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
12. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.947 E 0.947 E 0.000 No 0.947 E 0.000 No 0.947 E 0.000 No[2] Jefferson Boulevard PM 1.078 F 1.104 F 0.026 Yes 1.097 F 0.019 Yes 0.951 E -0.127 No[2]
13. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.743 C 0.755 C 0.012 No 0.752 C 0.009 No 0.752 C 0.009 No 36th Place PM 0.681 B 0.706 C 0.025 No 0.700 B 0.019 No 0.700 B 0.019 No
14. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.991 E 0.991 E 0.000 No 0.991 E 0.000 No 0.991 E 0.000 No Exposition Boulevard PM 0.889 D 0.889 D 0.000 No 0.889 D 0.000 No 0.889 D 0.000 No
15. Vermont Avenue * AM 0.873 D 0.873 D 0.000 No 0.873 D 0.000 No 0.873 D 0.000 No [3] Martin Luther King Jr. PM 1.042 F 1.056 F 0.014 Yes 1.052 F 0.010 Yes 1.052 F 0.010 Yes [3] Boulevard
16. Watt Way * AM 0.509 A 0.510 A 0.001 No 0.509 A 0.000 No 0.509 A 0.000 No Exposition Boulevard PM 0.658 B 0.673 B 0.015 No 0.669 B 0.011 No 0.669 B 0.011 No
17. McClintock Avenue * AM 0.471 A 0.386 A -0.085 No 0.371 A -0.100 No 0.371 A -0.100 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.657 B 0.397 A -0.260 No 0.391 A -0.266 No 0.391 A -0.266 No
18. I-10 Westbound Ramps * AM 0.553 A 0.553 A 0.000 No 0.553 A 0.000 No 0.553 A 0.000 No 20th Street PM 0.770 C 0.798 C 0.028 No 0.791 C 0.021 No 0.791 C 0.021 No
19. Hoover Street * AM 0.778 C 0.793 C 0.015 No 0.789 C 0.011 No 0.789 C 0.011 No Washington Boulevard PM 0.875 D 0.889 D 0.014 No 0.885 D 0.010 No 0.885 D 0.010 No
20. Hoover Street * AM 0.521 A 0.526 A 0.005 No 0.525 A 0.004 No 0.525 A 0.004 No 20th Street PM 0.630 B 0.669 B 0.039 No 0.659 B 0.029 No 0.659 B 0.029 No
21. Hoover Street * AM 0.774 C 0.785 C 0.011 No 0.781 C 0.007 No 0.781 C 0.007 No I-10 Eastbound Ramps PM 0.656 B 0.679 B 0.023 No 0.673 B 0.017 No 0.673 B 0.017 No
22. Hoover Street * AM 0.440 A 0.440 A 0.000 No 0.440 A 0.000 No 0.440 A 0.000 No 24th Street/Union Avenue PM 0.511 A 0.520 A 0.009 No 0.517 A 0.006 No 0.517 A 0.006 No
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-80 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 (Continued) Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
23. Hoover Street * AM 0.885 D 0.920 E 0.035 Yes 0.911 E 0.026 Yes 0.813 D -0.072 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.951 E 1.015 F 0.064 Yes 0.997 E 0.046 Yes 0.906 E -0.045 No
24. Hoover Street * AM 0.447 A 0.533 A 0.086 No 0.533 A 0.086 No 0.533 A 0.086 No 30th Street PM 0.603 B 0.665 B 0.062 No 0.665 B 0.062 No 0.665 B 0.062 No
25. Hoover Street * AM 0.190 A 0.238 A 0.048 No 0.238 A 0.048 No 0.238 A 0.048 No 32nd Street PM 0.343 A 0.344 A 0.001 No 0.344 A 0.001 No 0.344 A 0.001 No
26. Hoover Street * AM 0.463 A 0.616 B 0.153 No 0.576 A 0.113 No 0.576 A 0.113 No [3] Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.728 C 0.897 D 0.169 Yes 0.853 D 0.125 Yes 0.853 D 0.125 Yes [3]
27. Royal Street * AM 0.473 A 0.477 A 0.004 No 0.476 A 0.003 No 0.476 A 0.003 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.656 B 0.657 B 0.001 No 0.657 B 0.001 No 0.657 B 0.001 No
28. Pardee Way * AM 0.320 A 0.347 A 0.027 No 0.340 A 0.020 No 0.340 A 0.020 No Exposition Boulevard PM 0.583 A 0.593 A 0.010 No 0.591 A 0.008 No 0.591 A 0.008 No
29. Figueroa Street * AM 0.811 D 0.817 D 0.006 No 0.816 D 0.005 No 0.816 D 0.005 No Washington Boulevard PM 0.869 D 0.869 D 0.000 No 0.869 D 0.000 No 0.869 D 0.000 No
30. I-110 SB Off-ramp * AM 0.320 A 0.327 A 0.007 No 0.325 A 0.005 No 0.325 A 0.005 No 23rd Street PM 0.377 A 0.395 A 0.018 No 0.390 A 0.013 No 0.390 A 0.013 No
31. Figueroa Street * AM 0.559 A 0.565 A 0.006 No 0.563 A 0.004 No 0.563 A 0.004 No 23rd Street PM 0.537 A 0.541 A 0.004 No 0.539 A 0.002 No 0.539 A 0.002 No
32. Figueroa Street * AM 0.942 E 0.942 E 0.000 No 0.942 E 0.000 No 0.942 E 0.000 No [3] Adams Boulevard PM 1.009 F 1.053 F 0.044 Yes 1.041 F 0.032 Yes 1.041 F 0.032 Yes [3]
33. Figueroa Street * AM 0.285 A 0.285 A 0.000 No 0.285 A 0.000 No 0.285 A 0.000 No 28th Street (West) PM 0.570 A 0.587 A 0.017 No 0.583 A 0.013 No 0.583 A 0.013 No
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-81 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 (Continued) Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
34. Figueroa Street * AM 0.522 A 0.532 A 0.010 No 0.529 A 0.007 No 0.529 A 0.007 No 30th Street PM 0.717 C 0.737 C 0.020 No 0.731 C 0.014 No 0.731 C 0.014 No
35. Figueroa Street * AM 0.607 B 0.618 B 0.011 No 0.614 B 0.007 No 0.614 B 0.007 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.936 E 0.939 E 0.003 No 0.938 E 0.002 No 0.938 E 0.002 No
36. Figueroa Street * AM 0.255 A 0.256 A 0.001 No 0.256 A 0.001 No 0.256 A 0.001 No USC McCarthy Way PM 0.495 A 0.520 A 0.025 No 0.513 A 0.018 No 0.513 A 0.018 No
37. Figueroa Street * AM 0.680 B 0.682 B 0.002 No 0.681 B 0.001 No 0.681 B 0.001 No Exposition Boulevard PM 0.901 E 0.901 E 0.000 No 0.901 E 0.000 No 0.901 E 0.000 No
38. Figueroa Street * AM 0.453 A 0.453 A 0.000 No 0.453 A 0.000 No 0.453 A 0.000 No 38th Street/Flower Street PM 0.386 A 0.392 A 0.006 No 0.392 A 0.006 No 0.392 A 0.006 No
39. Figueroa Street * AM 1.022 F 1.022 F 0.000 No 1.022 F 0.000 No 1.022 F 0.000 No Martin Luther King Jr. PM 0.826 D 0.845 D 0.019 No 0.834 D 0.008 No 0.834 D 0.008 No Boulevard
40. Flower Street * AM 0.467 A 0.479 A 0.012 No 0.476 A 0.009 No 0.476 A 0.009 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.867 D 0.880 D 0.013 No 0.877 D 0.010 No 0.877 D 0.010 No
41. I-110 NB Off-ramps * AM 0.691 B 0.698 B 0.007 No 0.696 B 0.005 No 0.696 B 0.005 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.607 B 0.639 B 0.032 No 0.628 B 0.021 No 0.628 B 0.021 No
42. Flower Street * AM 0.309 A 0.340 A 0.031 No 0.338 A 0.029 No 0.338 A 0.029 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.570 A 0.681 B 0.111 No 0.679 B 0.109 No 0.679 B 0.109 No
43. Flower Street * AM 0.363 A 0.375 A 0.012 No 0.372 A 0.009 No 0.372 A 0.009 No Exposition Bl/I-110 SB Off-ramp PM 0.472 A 0.479 A 0.007 No 0.477 A 0.005 No 0.477 A 0.005 No
44. Flower Street * AM 0.452 A 0.472 A 0.020 No 0.466 A 0.014 No 0.466 A 0.014 No 37th St/I-110 SB On-ramp PM 0.567 A 0.567 A 0.000 No 0.567 A 0.000 No 0.567 A 0.000 No
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-82 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 (Continued) Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
45. Hope St/I-110 NB Off-ramp * AM 0.480 A 0.480 A 0.000 No 0.480 A 0.000 No 0.480 A 0.000 No 37th Street PM 0.499 A 0.503 A 0.004 No 0.501 A 0.002 No 0.501 A 0.002 No
46. I-110 Southbound Ramps * AM 0.693 B 0.693 B 0.000 No 0.693 B 0.000 No 0.693 B 0.000 No Martin Luther King Jr. PM 0.817 D 0.817 D 0.000 No 0.817 D 0.000 No 0.817 D 0.000 No Boulevard
47. I-110 Northbound Ramps * AM 0.787 C 0.787 C 0.000 No 0.787 C 0.000 No 0.787 C 0.000 No Martin Luther King Jr. PM 0.753 C 0.753 C 0.000 No 0.753 C 0.000 No 0.753 C 0.000 No Boulevard
48. Grand Avenue * AM 0.670 B 0.670 B 0.000 No 0.670 B 0.000 No 0.670 B 0.000 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.610 B 0.640 B 0.030 No 0.632 B 0.022 No 0.632 B 0.022 No
49. Grand Avenue * AM 0.523 A 0.523 A 0.000 No 0.523 A 0.000 No 0.523 A 0.000 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.647 B 0.647 B 0.000 No 0.647 B 0.000 No 0.647 B 0.000 No
50. Grand Avenue * AM 0.473 A 0.484 A 0.011 No 0.481 A 0.008 No 0.481 A 0.008 No 37th Street PM 0.473 A 0.473 A 0.000 No 0.473 A 0.000 No 0.473 A 0.000 No
51. Hill Street * AM 0.667 B 0.675 B 0.008 No 0.667 B 0.000 No 0.667 B 0.000 No Adams Boulevard PM 0.580 A 0.623 B 0.043 No 0.611 B 0.031 No 0.611 B 0.031 No
52. Hill Street * AM 0.633 B 0.633 B 0.000 No 0.633 B 0.000 No 0.633 B 0.100 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.623 B 0.631 B 0.008 No 0.629 B 0.006 No 0.629 B 0.006 No
53. Broadway * AM 0.657 B 0.657 B 0.000 No 0.657 B 0.000 No 0.657 B 0.000 No Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.787 C 0.791 C 0.004 No 0.790 C 0.003 No 0.790 C 0.003 No
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-83 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-14 (Continued) Future With Project (Year 2030) Intersection Level of Service Analysis Future with Project Plus TDM Measures Plus Future Base Future with Project Future with Project Plus TDM Measures [1] Physical Mitigations V/C or V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant V/C or Project Significant Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Delay LOS Effect Impact? Intersection Hour
54. Main Street * AM 0.773 C 0.773 C 0.000 No 0.773 C 0.000 No 0.773 C 0.000 No [3] Jefferson Boulevard PM 0.940 E 0.961 E 0.021 Yes 0.955 E 0.015 Yes 0.955 E 0.015 Yes [3]
Notes: * Per City of Los Angeles Department Of Transportation direction, all intersections are conservatively assumed to operate under ATSAC and ATCS systems in future year 2030. [1] The new TDM measures described in Chapter 5 of the traffic study are estimated to result in an additional 5% reduction in campus-wide trip generation during the peak hours. [2] Implementation of this mitigation, namely the removal of parking, will require involvement and consent of representatives of the affected Council District and relevant members of the community. USC is committed to supporting and participating in this process but cannot guarantee a specific outcome. Since the mitigation is dependent upon the results of the aforementioned process, for purposes of this document, the project traffic impacts at the intersection are determined to be significant and unavoidable. [3] Mitigation not feasible
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-84 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(ii) Freeways
Table IV.K-15 on page IV.K-86 shows the volumes, V/C, and LOS of the eleven analyzed freeway segments (which are all CMP mainline freeway monitoring locations) in the Future (2030) With Project Conditions. As shown therein, based on the CMP impact criteria, buildout of the proposed Project would not create significant impacts at any of the freeway segments.
(c) Neighborhood Streets
Table IV.K-16 on page IV.K-87 shows the projected volumes on the neighborhood street segments at Project buildout. As indicated therein, based on the City’s significance criteria, the proposed Project would result in significant impacts at one neighborhood street in the future (2030) conditions:
30th Street between Vermont Avenue & Orchard Avenue
(d) Public Transit
As part of the Project trip generation estimates, a transit credit of 5 percent of total projected trips was taken, in consultation with LADOT. Without this transit credit, the proposed Project would have a net vehicular trip generation of approximately 1,046 trips during the A.M. peak hour and 1,370 during the P.M. peak hour. Applying the AVR factor of 1.4 results in a total of 1,464 and 1,918 trips during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, respectively. For the purposes of the public transit analysis, a credit of 5 percent of the total net person trips has been assigned to transit trips because a similar vehicle trip credit was taken from the proposed Project’s vehicle trip generation.5 Following this approach, approximately 74 new transit riders in the morning peak hour and 95 new transit riders in the evening peak hour would use transit services.
Within one-quarter mile of the Project site, LADOT operates five commuter express routes and two DASH bus routes. Metro operates 10 local bus lines, eight express lines,
5 This transit credit represents not only the Project transit ridership, but also the existing University patrons choosing transit in future to travel to/from the University. This is equivalent to 440 person trips (314 trips x 1.4 AVR) in the morning peak hour and 438 person trips (313 trips x 1.4 AVR) in the evening peak hour.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-85 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-15 Freeway Mainline Level of Service Analysis
Future With Project
Future Base Conditions (Year 2030) Project Level of Service Significant Impact North/Eastbound South/Westbound Trips North/Eastbound South/Westbound North/Eastbound South/Westbound Peak North/ South/ Project V/C Signif. Project V/C Signif. Freeway Analysis Locations Hour Volume V/C Los** Volume V/C Los** East West Volume V/C Los** Volume V/C Los** Change Impact? Change Impact? I-10 between San Pedro St & A.M. 6,807 0.69 C 9,946 1.00 E 61 14 6,868 0.69 C 9,960 1.01 F(0) 0 No 0.01 No Los Angeles Av P.M. 7,569 0.76 C 10,725 1.08 F(0) 105 23 7,674 0.78 D 10,748 1.09 F(0) 0.02 No 0.01 No I-10 between Los Angeles Av & A.M. 6,679 0.67 C 9,747 1.11 F(0) 62 27 6,741 0.68 C 9,774 1.11 F(0) 0.01 No 0 No I-110 Interchange P.M. 7,433 0.75 C 10,368 1.18 F(0) 106 0 7,539 0.76 C 10,368 1.18 F(0) 0.01 No 0 No I-10 between I-110 Interchange & A.M. 8,133 0.67 C 12,492 1.14 F(0) 0 0 8,133 0.67 C 12,492 1.14 F(0) 0 No 0 No Hoover Bl P.M. 8,517 0.70 C 13,237 1.20 F(0) 0 1 8,517 0.7 C 13,238 1.2 F(0) 0 No 0 No I-10 between Hoover Bl & A.M. 8,039 0.61 C 12,571 0.95 E 45 0 8,084 0.61 C 12,571 0.95 E 0 No 0 No Vermont Av P.M. 8,518 0.65 C 13,250 1.00 E 67 46 8,585 0.65 C 13,296 1.01 F(0) 0 No 0.01 No I-10 between Vermont Av & A.M. 7,924 0.72 C 12,452 1.13 F(0) 82 90 8,006 0.73 C 12,542 1.14 F(0) 0.01 No 0.01 No Normandie Av P.M. 8,437 0.77 C 12,980 1.18 F(0) 45 90 8,482 0.77 C 13,070 1.19 F(0) 0 No 0.01 No I-10 between Normandie Av & A.M. 7,798 0.71 C 12,253 1.11 F(0) 0 90 7,880 0.72 C 12,343 1.12 F(0) 0.01 No 0.01 No Western Av P.M. 8,303 0.75 C 12,773 1.16 F(0) 58 90 8,348 0.76 C 12,863 1.17 F(0) 0.01 No 0.01 No I-110 between Olympic Bl & A.M. 8,444 0.96 E 9,340 1.06 F(0) 0 21 8,444 0.96 E 9,361 1.06 F(0) 0 No 0 No I-10 Interchange P.M. 7,909 0.90 D 9,990 1.14 F(0) 0 164 7,967 0.91 D 10,154 1.15 F(0) 0.01 No 0.01 No I-110 between I-10 Interchange & A.M. 8,535 0.97 E 9,441 1.07 F(0) 0 0 8,535 0.97 E 9,441 1.07 F(0) 0 No 0 No Flower St P.M. 7,995 0.91 D 9,449 1.07 F(0) 0 0 7,995 0.91 D 9,449 1.07 F(0) 0 No 0 No I-110 between Flower St & A.M. 8,551 0.71 C 9,441 0.78 D 0 39 8,551 0.71 C 9,480 0.78 D 0 No 0 No Exposition Bl P.M. 7,995 0.66 C 9,449 0.78 D 0 0 7,995 0.66 C 9,449 0.78 D 0 No 0 No I-110 between Exposition Bl & A.M. 8,809 0.73 C 9,744 0.81 D 0 0 8,809 0.73 C 9,744 0.81 D 0 No 0 No Martin Luther King Jr Bl P.M. 8,252 0.68 C 9,753 0.81 D 19 0 8,271 0.68 C 9,753 0.81 D 0 No 0 No I-110 between Martin Luther King Jr A.M. 9,754 0.81 D 10,790 0.82 D 16 0 9,770 0.81 D 10,790 0.82 D 0 No 0 No Bl & Vernon Av P.M. 9,137 0.76 C 12,010 0.91 D 0 0 9,137 0.76 C 12,010 0.91 D 0 No 0 No
Note: * A half-lane indicates an auxiliary lane or HOV lane in this section of freeway. ** F(0) through F(3) represent gradations of LOS F. a Capacity of 2,200 vehicles per hour per lane assumed.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-86 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-16 Neighborhood Street Impact Analysis
Future with Project
Future Base Project Future Project Impact Significant Street Segment Existing* (Year 2030) Only With Project % Criteria Impact? Menlo Avenue between Adams Boulevard & 29th Street 1,320 1,320 136 1,456 9% 12% NO
Orchard Avenue between Adams Boulevard & 29th Street 2,663 2,831 136 2,967 5% 8% NO
27th Street between University Avenue & Figueroa Street 2,238 2,583 136 2,719 5% 10% NO
30th Street 2,667 3,504 679 4,183 16% 8% YES between Vermont Avenue & Orchard Avenue
Notes: * 24-Hour machine counts were conducted on April 30, 2009.
Source: Fehr & Peers, Traffic Study for the University of Southern California Development Plan, 2010.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-87 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation and two rapid lines. The Metro Exposition Light Rail Line service has proposed future stations at Exposition Boulevard & Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard & Flower Street, which are both within one-quarter mile of the Project site. Additionally, Orange County Transportation Authority operates two fixed-route buses, Santa Monica Big Blue Bus operates one fixed-route bus, and Torrance Transit operates two fixed-route bus services within one-quarter mile of the Project site on Harbor Transitway (I-110).
A majority of the new transit riders are expected to ride the EXPO LRT, which has two stations serving the USC Campus. The Project location is also well served by numerous other established transit routes. Therefore, Project impacts on transit would be less than significant.
(e) Access
As described above, no material changes to access are proposed for Subareas 1 and 2 of the Project. site. Vehicular access to Subarea 3 would be provided from three main access points: (1) driveway along southbound Orchard Avenue (between Jefferson Boulevard and 30th Place); (2) south leg of the intersection of McClintock Avenue and 30th Street; and (3) west leg of the signalized intersection of 32nd Street and Hoover Street. In addition, a valet pick-up/drop-off plaza is also proposed to be located on McClintock Avenue, south of the parking structure driveway. Limited access for loading/unloading may also be provided via the non-vehicular driveways located along westbound Jefferson Boulevard, 30th Street, 30th Place, and Orchard Avenue.
The access analysis assessed the operating conditions of the proposed Project’s access points. Table IV.K-17 on page IV.K-89 summarizes the results of the access analysis. As shown therein, the following three access points would operate at a LOS E or F during Future (2030) With Project Conditions. (However, it is important to note that the LOS E or F conditions would also occur for these three access points under Future (2030) Base Conditions and thus are not caused by the proposed Project).
Driveway along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard (between Vermont Avenue and Orchard Avenue) – This access is in close proximity to the analyzed intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard, which is projected to operate at an LOS E in the A.M. peak hour and LOS F in the P.M. peak hour. It should be noted that the intersection is projected to operate at an LOS E in the A.M. peak hour and LOS F in the P.M. peak hour under Future (2030) Base Conditions.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-88 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-17 Project Vehicular Access Impact Analysis
Cumulative Level Cumulative + Nearest Analyzed Major Peak of Service Project Significant Project Access Intersections Hour (Without Project) Level of Service Impact? a
Subarea 1 b Gate 1 – North leg of Watt Wy Int# 16 A.M. A A NO & Exposition Bl P.M. B B NO
b Gate 2 – North leg of Pardee Int# 28 A.M. A A NO Wy & Exposition Bl P.M. A A NO
b Gate 3 – West leg of Int# 36 A.M. A A NO McCarthy Wy & Figueroa St P.M. A A NO
b Gate 4 - South leg of Royal Int# 27 A.M. A A NO St & Jefferson Bl P.M. B B NO
b Gate 5 - South leg of Int# 17 A.M. A A NO McClintock Av & Jefferson Bl P.M. B A NO
b Gate 6 - East leg Vermont Int# 13 A.M. C C NO Av & 36th Pl P.M. B C NO
Gate 8 - Driveway along Int# 12 - A.M. E E YES eastbound Jefferson Bl Vermont Av & Jefferson Bl P.M. F F YES between Vermont Av &
Orchard Av Int# 17 - A.M. A A NO McClintock Av & Jefferson Bl P.M. B A NO
Parking Structure 1 - Int# 37 - A.M. B B NO Driveway along 37th Pl Exposition Bl & Figueroa St P.M. E E YES between Figueroa St &
Flower St Int# 38 - A.M. A A NO Figueroa St & Flower St P.M. A A NO
Int# 44 - A.M. A A NO Exposition Bl & Flower St P.M. A A NO
Parking Structure 2 - Int# 43 - A.M. A A NO Driveway along southbound Flower St & Exposition Bl P.M. A A NO Flower St between Jefferson Bl & Exposition Bl
Parking Structure 2 - Int# 43 - A.M. A A NO Driveway along Exposition Bl Flower St & Exposition Bl P.M. A A NO between Flower St & Figueroa St
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-89 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Table IV.K-17 (Continued) Major Vehicular Access Significant Impact Analysis
Cumulative Level Cumulative + Nearest Analyzed Major Peak of Service Project Significant Project Access Intersections Hour (Without Project) Level of Service Impact? a
Subarea 2
Parking Center driveway Int# 42 - A.M. A A NO along westbound 35th Street Jefferson Bl & Flower St P.M. A B NO
3434 Grand driveway along Int# 49 - A.M. A A NO northbound Grand Avenue Jefferson Bl & Grand Av P.M. B B NO
Subarea 3
Driveway along southbound Int# 12 - A.M. E E YES Orchard Avenue between 30th Vermont Av & Jefferson Bl P.M. F F YES Pl and Jefferson Bl
Int# 17 - A.M. A A NO McClintock Av & Jefferson Bl P.M. B A NO
South leg of the intersection A M th Int# 24 . . A A NO of McClintock Av & 30 St th Hoover St & 30 St P.M. B B NO
b West leg of intersection of Int# 25 A.M. A A NO 32nd St & Hoover St P.M. A A NO
a City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guidelines provides significance thresholds relating to the operation of Project access impacts. Per the guidelines, a project would normally have a significant project access impact if the intersection(s) nearest the primary site access is/are projected to operate at LOS E or F during the A.M. or P.M. peak hour, under cumulative plus project conditions. b Intersection was studied as part of intersection traffic impact analysis in the Traffic Study.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2010.
Proposed access along southbound Orchard Avenue (between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard) – This is determined to be significantly impacted during both the AM and the PM peak hours for the same reason as the driveway along Jefferson Boulevard (i.e., it is in close proximity to the analyzed intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard). This intersection is projected to operate at an LOS E in the A.M. peak hour and LOS F in the P.M. peak hour under Future (2030) Base Conditions and the level of service remains the same under Future (2030) With Project conditions.
PS1 Access Driveway – This access is in close proximity to the analyzed intersection of Exposition Boulevard & Figueroa Street, which is projected to operate at LOS E in the evening peak hour.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-90 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
With regard to the first two locations, the intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard is projected to be significantly impacted as a result of the Project per the intersection traffic impact analysis conducted in the traffic study. The proposed Project has included a mitigation which would allow three travel lanes in the evening peak hour for the southbound approach. Although this mitigation is expected to result in an improvement in operation of this intersection during the evening peak hour from a LOS F to a LOS E, the intersection would continue to operate at an LOS E during both morning and evening peak hour after mitigation. Thus, while the proposed Project would improve conditions at these intersections compared to the cumulative without project conditions, the access impacts at both the locations identified above are conservatively concluded to remain significant and unavoidable.
With regard to the PS1 Access Driveway, no physical improvements were identified for the intersection of Exposition Boulevard & Figueroa Street. Therefore, the access impact at PS1 driveway along 37th Place (between Figueroa Street and Flower Street) is concluded to remain significant and unavoidable.
In conclusion, while the Future (2030) Base Conditions and Future (2030) With Project conditions would provide the same overall level of service for the three access points, per the City criteria, the proposed Project was conservatively concluded to result in a significant impact at three access locations.
As discussed in Section IV.E, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, although additional traffic generated by the proposed Project could potentially cause delays in emergency response times, with implementation of the University’s Emergency Operations Plan, emergency access to the Project site would be maintained at all times. Thus, the additional traffic would not significantly impact emergency vehicle access or response times.
(f) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety
A majority of the bicycle and pedestrian activity is currently concentrated along Jefferson Boulevard with most of the crossings (between the north and south side of Jefferson Boulevard) occurring at the intersections of McClintock Avenue and Hoover Street along Jefferson Boulevard. The City of Los Angeles currently operates these intersections with a pedestrian scramble phase which allows for bicycles and pedestrians to cross in all directions while vehicular traffic stops on all approaches. The proposed Project is likely to result in an increase in bicycle and pedestrian activity. However, the proposed Project’s physical configuration is not anticipated to affect the visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists to drivers entering and exiting the site or visibility of cars to pedestrians and bicyclists. The physical conditions of the Project site and the surrounding area are not anticipated to result in a negative impact to the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists. Furthermore, to improve bicycle safety, the Project proposes to convert McClintock Avenue between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard to a bicycle- and
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-91 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation pedestrian-only street. This proposed roadway change would result in closure of the north leg of the intersection of McClintock Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard to vehicular traffic.
Additionally, as previously described, in an effort to improve pedestrian safety, USC has recently (September 2009) funded the design and installation of a pedestrian signal at the intersection of Hoover Street & 28th Street. USC is also working with LADOT in implementing various near-term pedestrian safety features including improvements at the intersections of Hoover Street and McClintock Avenue along Jefferson Boulevard. These measures focus on pedestrian and vehicle visibility, increased intersection illumination, and better driver awareness through the length of the corridor. These measures also include closure of the south leg of the intersection of Hoover Street and Jefferson Boulevard and equipment upgrades such as enhanced illumination and signal equipment upgrades at the two intersections.
As described above, in order to achieve improvements in pedestrian and bicycle safety, without reducing traffic capacity along Jefferson Boulevard, the Project proposes to eliminate the on-street parking between Orchard Avenue and Hoover Street in favor of an on-street bicycle lane and wider sidewalks. The resulting improvement would provide for five automobile travel lanes on Jefferson Boulevard (two in each direction with a raised median/turn lane and bicycle lanes on both sides). The narrowing would provide an on- street facility for cyclists traveling along Jefferson Boulevard and reduce the crossing distance for cyclists and pedestrians. This improvement would also retain vehicular travel capacity during the peak traffic periods.
With regard to the Exposition LRT, this LRT is under construction and expected to open in 2011. The track will be grade-separated through most of this area, including the key intersections of Figueroa/Jefferson and Figueroa/Exposition. The only at-grade crossing will be at the Vermont/Exposition intersection. The proposed Project does not call for any physical changes at this intersection, and the proposed student housing on the north side of campus (north of Jefferson) will only serve to reduce pedestrian volumes near Vermont/Exposition, as students will relocate to this new housing in-lieu of areas west and south of campus. The proposed Project, including the potential laboratory school, the resulting increase in traffic and changes to pedestrian circulation, would not present any safety impacts with respect to the LRT facilities and no changes to the LRT facilities would be required.
Based on the above, with the University’s near-term and long-term bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements, Project impacts on pedestrian/bicycle safety would be less than significant.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-92 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(g) Transfers of Floor Area
The proposed Project would include flexibility to allow for transfers of floor area for academic/University uses and student housing between Subarea 1 and Subarea 3A on a per square foot basis. While transfers of floor area between Subareas 1 and 3A would be permitted, the maximum amount of floor area would not exceed 30 percent of the Subarea total for Subarea 1 and 15 percent of the Subarea total for Subarea 3A. In addition, the maximum proposed Project total of 5,230,000 square feet may not be exceeded. Floor area transfers would not result in new impacts with regard to traffic. Floor area transfers for academic/University land uses and student housing would be trip neutral. Specifically, floor area transfers would not change the types and amounts of proposed land uses, and thus would not change the estimated number of Project vehicle trips (approximately 13,574 net new daily trips at maximum including 732 trips A.M. peak hour and 1,057 trips P.M. peak hour trips) that was calculated for the proposed Project. Therefore, as floor area transfers would be trip neutral, traffic impacts would be similar to that analyzed herein. In summary, floor area transfers would not alter the conclusions with regard to traffic impacts. Should academic/University or student residential floor be transferred across the Subareas, the resulting impacts would be similar to those evaluated herein.
4. Cumulative Impacts
a. Construction
Cumulative construction traffic impacts would occur if construction traffic from related projects would impact the same streets and access points as the proposed Project. There are eight related projects that are either on the Project site or in close enough proximity to the Project site so as to contribute to cumulative land use impacts by potentially altering existing land use relationships: Related Project No. 2, Related Project No. 5, Related Project No. 8, Related Project No. 10, Related Project No. 25, Related Project No. 26, Related Project No. 27, and Related Project No. 28. The balance of the related projects would not cause cumulative land use impacts due to either distance and/or existing intervening development.
Related Project No. 2 is the renovation of the USC building at 3434 Grand Avenue that was already completed on Subarea 2 of the Project site. Related Project No. 5 is the USC Parkside II Residential Tower that was also completed on Subarea 1A of the Project site. Thus, as these related projects are completed, these related projects would not contribute to cumulative construction traffic impact. Related Project No. 8 is the University Gateway Project, a student housing project currently under construction north of Subarea 1A. Related Project No. 10 is the USC Cinematic Arts Project, which is currently under
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-93 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation construction, within Subarea 1A of the Project site. This related project is anticipated to be completed prior to commencement of construction of the proposed Project, and thus would not contribute to cumulative construction traffic impacts.
Related Project No. 25, a mixed use student housing/commercial project to be developed by a third-party developer, is located within Subarea 1B of the Project site. This related project could contribute to potential cumulative construction traffic impacts. However, the proposed Project’s construction plans would address potential adverse cumulative construction traffic impacts associated with this related project. Related Project No. 26, Related Project No. 27, and Related Project No. 28 are University-affiliated infill development within the core Campus. Since these related projects are University-affiliated projects, the University would also ensure that the proposed Project’s construction plans would address potential adverse cumulative construction traffic impacts. Therefore, cumulative construction traffic impacts due to related projects would be less than significant.
b. Operation
The traffic models utilized in the above analysis incorporated forecasted traffic increases due to regional growth through the Project buildout year of 2030. As indicated previously, the 2030 growth projections are based on the Southern California Association of Government’s (SCAG’s) 2008 Regional Transportation Plan. As indicated in Section III, Environmental Setting, of this Draft EIR, the growth associated with the 30 identified related projects are within SCAG growth forecasts. Thus, trips associated with related projects have been accounted for and incorporated into the Project traffic model that was utilized.
Therefore, cumulative impacts on intersections, the regional transportation (freeway) system, and access have been analyzed and incorporated. After implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and additional TDM features, the proposed Project would result in significant impacts on up to seven study intersections.
A number of related projects would generate passengers that would use the same transit lines as the proposed Project and thus would cumulatively increase the demand for transit. As analyzed above, given the availability of bus routes and the future Metro Exposition Light Rail Line that will serve the Project area, the proposed Project’s contribution of transit person trips would not result in significant impacts on transit. Similarly, with the number of public transit service routes in the area, regional growth would not be expected to contribute to a significant cumulative demand for transit. Rather, the infill development of future projects would increase the availability of a mix of various land uses, thus creating opportunities to utilize alternative modes of transportation. Thus, the proposed Project’s cumulative impacts on transit would be less than significant.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-94 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
With regard to parking and emergency access, it is anticipated that future related projects would be subject to City review to ensure that adequate parking and access would be maintained in the Project vicinity. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to these issues would be less than significant.
5. Mitigation Measures
a. Construction
With implementation of the Project Design Features, construction-related traffic impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required. Please also refer to Section IV.J.3, Public Services – Schools for mitigation measures which address Project-related construction activities on the existing pedestrian routes, school related access and traffic and transportation safety issues for the various LAUSD schools in the Project area.
b. Operation
(1) Intersections
(a) Transportation Demand Management
Mitigation Measure K.1-1: Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. As part of the proposed Project, USC would expand its existing TDM program. A preliminary TDM program shall be prepared and provided for DOT review prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Project’s first new building that is more than 50,000 square feet and a final TDM program approved by DOT is required prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project’s first new building that is more than 50,000 square feet. The TDM plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following measures:
Tram/Shuttle System Modifications: USC would modify its tram and shuttle system and make route, shuttle-stop modifications, and additions which would result in increased connectivity to the Expo LRT.(currently under construction) and other public transit services like the Downtown Area Shuttle (DASH), Metro bus lines, Metro Rapid, etc.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-95 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
On-Campus TDM Coordinator: USC would employ a full-time on- campus TDM coordinator to implement the various TDM programs provided by the University. Some of the activities a coordinator would oversee include assisting students, faculty and staff with questions about various TDM programs offered, coordinating University’s efforts with other public/private agencies, etc.
Transit-Use Training during Student Orientations: USC would include transit-use (rail, bus, University tram, and shuttle-bus) training as part of new student orientations. This would inform new students about the various programs and subsidies offered by the University to encouraging transit use. The training may also include information relating to other TDM programs such as Carpool, Vanpool, Ride-Share etc.
Subsidize Transit Passes: USC would continue to subsidize transit passes in exchange for parking permits to encourage transit use among students, faculty and staff as their primary mode of transportation to/from the University.
Mobility Hub: USC would contribute towards establishing a “Mobility Hub” on- or along the perimeter of the campus. The “Mobility Hub” is likely to include secure bike parking, bike sharing, fold-n-go bike leasing program, and car sharing system. USC would provide a storefront space (approx 250 square feet) on-campus and shared car parking spaces within its parking facilities to facilitate the Mobility Hub operations.
Transportation Information Center: USC would establish a transportation information center on-campus which would provide transit-maps, schedules, and information related to available alternative transportation modes and TDM programs offered by the University.
Work with MTA and LADOT to Implement First/Last Mile Strategies: USC would work with MTA and LADOT to assist in implementing first/last mile strategies to connect students, faculty, staff and visitors to various transit lines, stations, bus-stops, etc.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-96 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
Shuttle To/From LA Live and USC: USC would provide a shuttle-bus between LA Live and the University campus for students traveling to/from LA Live.
Expansion of Car Share Program: USC would expand its existing car-sharing program, ZipCar, by adding 6 more cars in the immediate future to the 16 cars that are currently available to students, faculty and staff.
Daily Car Rentals: USC would collaborate with a national car rental company to establish a car rental facility on-campus. The rental car company would provide daily car rentals to students, faculty and staff.
Expansion of Vanpool Program: USC would expand the existing Vanpool program by adding services to Santa Clarita and Oxnard in the immediate future. This service could also be extended to other locations over time if demand becomes feasible.
Ride-Share Matching System: USC is collaborating with Zimride, an online social networking site for ridesharing. Membership to the site would be free and the system would allow for student, faculty and staff to share seats in cars or ride with other USC patrons to/from common locations. The site would help USC patrons to offer or request rides for commutes, road trips, and popular events.
The new TDM measures described above would further reduce the trip generation of both the Project and the existing campus population. It is conservatively assumed that, in aggregate, these new measures would result in an additional five percent reduction in campus-wide trip generation during the peak hours.
(b) Physical Mitigation Measures
As set forth by LADOT, the following mitigation measures are proposed to reduce intersection impacts to the extent feasible:
Mitigation Measure K.1-2: Adams Boulevard and Hoover Street – Restripe the eastbound and westbound approaches at this intersection to accommodate two left-turn only lanes on the eastbound approach. The ultimate configuration will be two left-turn lanes, one through lane, and one shared through/right-turn lane for the eastbound
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-97 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
approach. This improvement, with any necessary traffic signal modifications, is acceptable to DOT and would mitigate the project’s impact to a level of insignificance. However, this improvement should be appropriately phased by the applicant and not implemented until merited by an increase in eastbound left-turn traffic volumes. This improvement would be guaranteed through the B-permit process but should not be installed until deemed warranted by DOT.
Mitigation Measure K.1-3: Jefferson Boulevard and Vermont Avenue – Restrict parking on the west side of Vermont Avenue during the p.m. peak hours between 36th Street and Exposition Boulevard, and restripe Vermont Avenue to provide one left-turn lane, two through lanes, and one shared through/right-turn lane for the southbound approach. Although this measure would mitigate the significant impact, it would result in the loss of on-street parking along Vermont Avenue. The Applicant has indicated that the loss of street parking could be mitigated by providing substitute parking at the USC-controlled public parking lot located at the southeast corner of this intersection. However, this improvement should not be conditioned on the project without consent from the affected Council Office and any impacted stakeholders. Therefore, without this final approval of this mitigation proposal, the impact at this intersection would remain significant.
Mitigation Measure K.1-4: Traffic Signal Upgrades. The Applicant shall provide funds to DOT for any necessary upgrades to the existing traffic signal equipment within the Project study area. These upgrades may include the installation of left-turn phasing, new traffic signal controllers, closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, vehicle detector loops, etc. The Applicant shall provide up to $400,000 to DOT to fund the cost of any necessary traffic signal upgrades. This fee would be required prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project’s first building that is more than 50,000 sf.
The following potential mitigation measures were considered to reduce Project impacts at six of the significantly impacted intersections but were rejected due to secondary impacts and/or infeasibility:
Vermont Avenue & Washington Boulevard (#6) – Potential mitigation at this intersection would allow for three travel lanes in the evening peak hour for the eastbound approach. This can be achieved by restricting parking along the south side of Washington Boulevard (between Normandie Avenue and Hoover Street) during the PM peak hour. Washington Boulevard currently has parking restrictions during the morning peak hour to allow for three eastbound travel lanes. The potential mitigation would result in secondary impacts on-street parking during the evening peak period. Approximately 75 parking
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-98 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation spaces and 4 loading spaces would be unavailable during the evening peak hour period along eastbound Washington Boulevard between Normandie Avenue and Hoover Street. Given the secondary impacts on on-street parking and the lack of available surplus parking to mitigate such parking loss, the mitigation is determined to be infeasible. Therefore, the traffic impact at this intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
Vermont Avenue & Adams Boulevard (#9) – A potential mitigation would involve the construction of an exclusive eastbound right-turn lane. Currently, the eastbound approach consists of one left-turn lane, one through lane and one shared through/right-turn lane. Implementation of the improvement would require a combination of new roadway width, roadway restriping/signage, and relocation of utility equipment etc. Approximately 5 feet of new roadway width could be acquired from the sidewalk along the south-side of Adams Boulevard, west of Vermont Avenue. The existing sidewalk is approximately 15 feet wide. The improvement would result in the reduction of this sidewalk to approximately 10 feet. The reduction in sidewalk width to less than 12 feet (City of Los Angeles sidewalk width for a secondary highway such as Adams Boulevard) would not meet City of Los Angeles standards. Also the proposed improvement would result in removal of approximately 15 parking spaces and relocation of two existing bus stops located at the northwest and southeast corners of the intersection respectively. Given the secondary impacts related to a reduction in sidewalk width, loss of on-street parking, and relocation of bus stops as a result of the potential mitigation, the mitigation is determined to be infeasible. Therefore, the traffic impact at this intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
Vermont Avenue & Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (#15) –– This potential mitigation would involve the construction of an exclusive southbound right-turn lane to mitigate the significant impact at this intersection. The north leg of the roadway currently does not have adequate ROW to accommodate a southbound right-turn lane; therefore, the improvement would require ROW from either the west side or the east side of Vermont Avenue. The construction of this improvement would result in a southbound lane configuration of one left-turn lane, two through lanes, and one exclusive right-turn lane. Since the proposed mitigation is dependent on the acquisition of ROW, it is deemed infeasible, the impact at the intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
Hoover Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#26) – Construction of a second eastbound left-turn lane at this intersection would reduce the significant impact to less than significant levels. This improvement would require removal of the raised median in the middle of the west leg of the intersection. The improvement could also require physical modifications, realignments, striping, and signal phasing changes to accommodate the second eastbound left-turn lane. The construction of this improvement would result in a eastbound lane configuration of two left-turn lanes and two through lanes. Although the improvement would benefit traffic flow, it would create pedestrian/bicycle safety issues since the
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-99 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation intersection is a major access point for students walking or biking in/out of Campus. Since the mitigation would conflict with the Project objective of narrowing Jefferson Boulevard to enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety, no mitigation is recommended at this intersection, and the impact at this intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
Figueroa Street & Adams Boulevard (#32) – Construction of an eastbound exclusive right-turn lane would mitigate the significant impact at this intersection. The improvement would require ROW acquisition from the property (AAA building) on the southwest corner of the intersection. The construction of this improvement would result in an eastbound lane configuration of one left-turn lane and two through lanes, and one right-turn lane. Since the current AAA building structure is near the public ROW, this mitigation is considered infeasible at this time. Therefore, the impact at this intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
Main Street & Jefferson Boulevard (#54) – The existing intersection configuration does not allow for any physical improvement to any of the approaches within the roadway width available. The intersection currently has building structures at all four corners, thus reducing the potential of ROW acquisition for roadway improvements. No other feasible mitigation was identified for this intersection; therefore, the impact at this intersection would remain significant and unavoidable.
(2) Regional Transportation System
As analyzed, buildout of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts to any of the freeway segments. Therefore, no mitigation measures addressing this issue would be required.
(3) Neighborhood Streets
As analyzed, based on the City’s significance criteria, buildout of the proposed Project would significantly impact the following neighborhood street segment:
30th Street between Vermont Avenue & Orchard Avenue
Thus, the following mitigation measure is proposed:
Mitigation Measure K.1-5: Neighborhood Traffic Management The Applicant shall conduct public outreach and develop a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, in consultation with DOT, the affected Council District office and the affected neighborhood. Coordination with the appropriate Council District office may be
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-100 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
necessary to designate the stakeholders that should facilitate the public outreach. The Applicant shall also be responsible for conducting the engineering evaluation of the potential measures to determine the feasibility in regards to drainage, constructability, street design, etc. A preliminary Neighborhood Traffic Management Implementation Plan shall be prepared and provided for DOT review prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the proposed Project and a final Neighborhood Traffic Management Implementation Plan approved by DOT is required prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the proposed Project. The Applicant shall be responsible for implementing any Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan measures approved by DOT and supported by stakeholders. Prior to the outreach, a cost estimate on the potential Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan shall be determined in consultation with DOT but shall not exceed $50,000. The cost should be commensurate with the size of the proposed Project and with the level of residential street impacts that are expected. The development of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan shall include an analysis of traffic data and conditions of the impacted residential street segments identified in the study.
The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan should be phased and prioritized for implementation so that only nonrestrictive traffic calming measures are implemented. Non-restrictive traffic calming measures may include, but are not limited to, traffic circles, speed humps, roadway narrowing effects (raised medians, traffic chokers, etc.), landscaping features, roadway striping changes, and stop sign pattern. The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan should also consider and evaluate neighborhood improvements that can offset the effects of added traffic, including street trees, sidewalks, landscaping, neighborhood identification features, and pedestrian amenities. Such measures can support trip reduction efforts by encouraging walking, bicycling, and the use of public transit. A temporary certificate of occupancy may be granted in the event of any delay through no fault of the Applicant, provided that, in each case, the applicant has demonstrated reasonable efforts and due diligence to the satisfaction of LADOT.
(4) Public Transit
Based on the preceding analysis, Project impacts on public transit would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-101 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation
(5) Access
As described above, the proposed Project would result in significant access impacts at the driveway along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard (between Vermont Avenue and Orchard Avenue) and the access point along southbound Orchard Avenue (between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard). These access points are in proximity to the intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard, which is projected to be significantly impacted as a result of the proposed Project. The proposed Project has proposed a mitigation which would allow three travel lanes in the evening peak hour for the southbound approach. Although this mitigation is expected to result in an improvement in operation of this intersection during the evening peak hour from a LOS F to a LOS E, the intersection would continue to operate at an LOS E during both morning and evening peak hours after mitigation. Thus, the access impacts at the driveway along eastbound Jefferson Boulevard (between Vermont Avenue and Orchard Avenue) and the access point along southbound Orchard Avenue (between 30th Place and Jefferson Boulevard) are concluded to remain significant and unavoidable. In addition, the proposed Project would result in a significant access impact at the PS1 Access Driveway since no physical improvements were identified for the nearby intersection of Exposition Boulevard & Figueroa Street. Therefore, the access impact at the PS1 driveway along 37th Place (between Figueroa Street and Flower Street) is concluded to remain significant and unavoidable. (6) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety
With the University’s near-term and long-term bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements, Project impacts on pedestrian/bicycle safety would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required.
6. Level of Significance After Mitigation
a. Construction
With implementation of the Project Design Features, construction-related traffic impacts would be less than significant.
b. Operation
(1) Intersections
The TDM measures proposed to be implemented as part of Mitigation Measure K.1-1 would result in a reduction in the level of impact at the significantly impacted intersections. Mitigation Measure IV.K-2 would mitigate the significant impact at the intersection of Hoover Street and Adams Boulevard, thereby reducing the number of
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-102 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation significantly impacted intersections from eight to seven. As described above, Mitigation Measure IV.K.-3 is proposed at the intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard and its implementation would be dependent upon involvement and consent from the Council District with the community. If that improvement is ultimately found to be viable, the number of significantly impacted intersections would be reduced to six. Nonetheless, the proposed Project would result in significant impacts at up to seven intersections.
(2) Regional Transportation System
As previously stated, impacts on freeway segments would be less than significant.
(3) Neighborhood Streets
As previously discussed, mitigation of the neighborhood traffic impact would require development and implementation of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan that would identify measures to make local routes less attractive to through traffic, such as traffic circles, speed humps, roadway narrowing effects, landscaping features, roadway striping changes and stop sign patterns.. Because implementation of neighborhood traffic controls on one street can cause intruding traffic to shift to other streets, an effective neighborhood traffic management plan can only be implemented on an area-wide basis with all affected parties, including neighborhood residents, involved in development of the plan. Since USC cannot unilaterally impose neighborhood traffic improvements/traffic calming measures, impacts at the neighborhood street segment would be considered significant and unavoidable.
(4) Public Transit
As previously stated, Project impacts on public transit would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required.
(5) Access
As discussed above, the Project could improve the LOS at the intersection of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard with implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, but the intersection would continue to operate at an LOS E during both morning and evening peak hours after mitigation. In addition, even without the proposed Project, the intersections of Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard and Figueroa Street would operate at a LOS E or F during the peak hours in 2030. Nonetheless, based on the City’s significance thresholds, the access impacts at the three
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-103 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review IV.K.1 Transportation and Circulation access points that are near these intersections have been conservatively concluded to remain significant and unavoidable.
(6) Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety
With the University’s near-term and long-term bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements, Project impacts on pedestrian/bicycle safety would be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required.
City of Los Angeles USC Development Plan SCH. No. 2009011101 May 2010
Page IV.K-104 WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review