West Covina Self-Storage Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration
Site Address: 1388 E. Garvey Avenue
Prepared for:
C. Jamie Alai, Vice President Development Westport Properties, Inc. US Storage Centers 2201 DuPont Drive, Suite 700 Irvine, California 92612
Independently Reviewed by:
City of West Covina Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue West Covina, California 91793
Prepared by:
MIG | Hogle-Ireland, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, California 92507
July 2014 - This document is designed for double-sided printing -
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 – Purpose of CEQA ...... 1 1.2 – Public Comments ...... 2 1.3 – Availability of Materials ...... 3 2 Project Description ...... 5 2.1 – Project Title ...... 5 2.2 – Lead Agency Name and Address ...... 5 2.3 – Contact Person and Phone Number ...... 5 2.4 – Project Location...... 5 2.5 – Project Sponsor’s Name and Address ...... 5 2.6 – General Plan Land Use Designation ...... 5 2.7 – Zoning District ...... 5 2.8 – Project Description...... 5 2.9 – Surrounding Land Uses ...... 6 2.10 – Environmental Setting ...... 7 2.11 – Required Approvals ...... 7 2.12 – Other Public Agency Whose Approval is Required ...... 7 3 Determination ...... 21 3.1 – Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...... 21 3.2 – Determination ...... 21 4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ...... 23 4.1 – Aesthetics ...... 23 4.2 – Agriculture and Forest Resources ...... 26 4.3 – Air Quality ...... 28 4.4 – Biological Resources ...... 34 4.5 – Cultural Resources ...... 37 4.6 – Geology and Soils ...... 39 4.7 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 42 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 44 4.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 48 4.9 – Land Use and Planning ...... 53 4.10 – Mineral Resources...... 54 4.11 – Noise ...... 55 4.12 – Population and Housing ...... 63 4.13 – Public Services ...... 65 4.14 – Recreation ...... 67 4.15 – Transportation and Traffic ...... 68 4.16 – Utilities and Service Systems ...... 74 4.17 – Mandatory Findings of Significance ...... 79 5 References 85 5.1 – List of Preparers ...... 85 5.2 – Persons and Organizations Consulted ...... 85 6 Summary of Mitigation Measures ...... 87 Appendix Materials ...... 90 Appendix A Air Quality Data Appendix B Noise Data Appendix C Traffic Impacts Memorandum
West Covina Self-Storage i Table of Contents
Appendix D Parking Study
List of Tables Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses ...... 6 Table 2 South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status – South Los Angeles County ...... 30 Table 3 Tentative Construction Schedule ...... 30 Table 4 Unmitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day) ...... 31 Table 5 Mitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions for ROG (lbs/day))...... 31 Table 6 Long-Term Daily Emissions (lbs/day) ...... 32 Table 7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory ...... 43 Table 8 Reference Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment ...... 58 Table 9 Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria ...... 58 Table 10 Vibration Annoyance Potential Threshold Criteria ...... 58 Table 11 Distance to Vibration Receptors ...... 59 Table 12 Construction Vibration Impacts ...... 59 Table 13 City of West Covina Intersection Impact Threshold Criteria ...... 70 Table 14 Intersection Level of Service Summary ...... 70 Table 15 Planned/Pending Projects for Cumulative Impact Consideration ...... 80
List of Figures Figure 4.11-1 Construction Equipment Noise ...... 61
List of Exhibits Exhibit 1 Regional Context-Vicinity Map ...... 9 Exhibit 2 Site Plan ...... 11 Exhibit 3 Elevations ...... 13
ii Initial Study
1 Introduction The City of West Covina (Lead Agency) received applications for a Site Plan prepared by DFI Properties, LLC (project proponent) for the development of an 78,474 square-foot public storage facility on the northwest corner of Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue. The approval of the application constitutes a project that is subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1970 (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq.).
This Initial Study has been prepared to assess the short-term, long-term, and cumulative environmental impacts that could result from the proposed public storage facility.
This report has been prepared to comply with Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which sets forth the required contents of an Initial Study. These include:
. A description of the project, including the location of the project (See Section 2); . Identification of the environmental setting (See Section 2.11); . Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other methods, provided that entries on the checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries (See Section 4); . Discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any (See Section 4); . Examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls (See Section 4.10); and . The name(s) of the person(s) who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study (See Section 5).
1.1 – Purpose of CEQA
The body of state law known as CEQA was originally enacted in 1970 and has been amended a number of times since then. The legislative intent of these regulations is established in Section 21000 of the California Public Resources Code, as follows:
The Legislature finds and declares as follows: a) The maintenance of a quality environment for the people of this state now and in the future is a matter of statewide concern. b) It is necessary to provide a high-quality environment that at all times is healthful and pleasing to the senses and intellect of man. c) There is a need to understand the relationship between the maintenance of high-quality ecological systems and the general welfare of the people of the state, including their enjoyment of the natural resources of the state. d) The capacity of the environment is limited, and it is the intent of the Legislature that the government of the state take immediate steps to identify any critical thresholds for the health and safety of the people of the state and take all coordinated actions necessary to prevent such thresholds being reached. e) Every citizen has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. f) The interrelationship of policies and practices in the management of natural resources and waste disposal requires systematic and concerted efforts by public and private interests to enhance environmental quality and to control environmental pollution. g) It is the intent of the Legislature that all agencies of the state government which regulate activities of private individuals, corporations, and public agencies which are found to affect the quality of the environment, shall regulate such activities so that major consideration is given
West Covina Self-Storage 1 Introduction
to preventing environmental damage, while providing a decent home and satisfying living environment for every Californian.
The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the State to: h) Develop and maintain a high-quality environment now and in the future, and take all action necessary to protect, rehabilitate, and enhance the environmental quality of the state. i) Take all action necessary to provide the people of this state with clean air and water, enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic, and historic environmental qualities, and freedom from excessive noise. j) Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man's activities, insure that fish and wildlife populations do not drop below self-perpetuating levels, and preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities and examples of the major periods of California history. k) Ensure that the long-term protection of the environment, consistent with the provision of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian, shall be the guiding criterion in public decisions. l) Create and maintain conditions under which man and nature can exist in productive harmony to fulfill the social and economic requirements of present and future generations. m) Require governmental agencies at all levels to develop standards and procedures necessary to protect environmental quality. n) Require governmental agencies at all levels to consider qualitative factors as well as economic and technical factors and long-term benefits and costs, in addition to short-term benefits and costs and to consider alternatives to proposed actions affecting the environment.
A concise statement of legislative policy, with respect to public agency consideration of projects for some form of approval, is found in Section 21002 of the Public Resources Code, quoted below:
The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.
1.2 – Public Comments
Comments from all agencies and individuals are invited regarding the information contained in this Initial Study. Such comments should explain any perceived deficiencies in the assessment of impacts, identify the information that is purportedly lacking in the Initial Study or indicate where the information may be found. All comments on the Initial Study are to be submitted to:
Ron Garcia, Senior Planner City of West Covina Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue, Room 208 West Covina, California 91970 626-939-8422
2 Initial Study Introduction
Following a 20-day period of circulation and review of the Initial Study, all comments will be considered by the City of West Covina prior to adoption.
1.3 – Availability of Materials
All materials related to the preparation of this Initial Study are available for public review. To request an appointment to review these materials, please contact:
Ron Garcia, Senior Planner City of West Covina Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue, Room 208 West Covina, California 91970 626-939-8422
West Covina Self-Storage 3 Introduction
4 Initial Study
2 Project Description
2.1 – Project Title
West Covina Self-Storage
2.2 – Lead Agency Name and Address
City of West Covina Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue, Room 208 West Covina, California 91970
2.3 – Contact Person and Phone Number
Ron Garcia, Planning Associate 626-939-8422
2.4 – Project Location
Latitude 34° 4’ 18.41” North, Longitude 117° 55’ 1.33” West (See Exhibit 1, Regional Context and Vicinity Map) APN 8476-001-013 Northwest corner of Garvey Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue, West Covina, California 91792
2.5 – Project Sponsor’s Name and Address
C. Jamie Alai, Vice President Development Westport Properties, Inc. US Storage Centers 2201 DuPont Drive, Suite 700 Irvine, California 92612
2.6 – General Plan Land Use Designation
Office
2.7 – Zoning District
Office Professional (O-P)
2.8 – Project Description
The proposed project is located on an approximately 31,639 square-foot vacant lot and includes the construction of a new 78,474 square-foot public storage facility. A total of 10 parking spaces, including one employee parking space, and three loading spaces (0.18 acres) are proposed. The proposed building consists of four levels including a partially subterranean basement level. The project site is a triangular shaped lot adjacent to the eastbound side of Interstate 10 along the north side of the site, bound by Lark Ellen Avenue on the east and Garvey Avenue on the south.
West Covina Self-Storage 5 Project Description
Along Garvey Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue, the project site slopes upward and northerly approximately 12 to 15 feet. The proposed building will be constructed at the same elevation as Garvey Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue with the basement level of the new building built into the slope of the site. A 15 foot landscaping easement has been leased to the project by Caltrans along the northern boundary of the site; immediately adjacent to the freeway. The easement will span the entire northern boundary of the site, at approximately 395 feet in length. This easement will be maintained by the project proponent in much the same way that it is currently maintained by Caltrans.
Architecturally, the proposed building will be comprised primarily of stucco plaster and brick façade in a mixed pattern of reds and browns (Dunn Edwards DE 5264 Saddle Brown, DE 5263 Sonora Shade, and DE 5265 Brown Eyes) with a neutral color to accentuate window frames and the top level of the building (Dun Edwards DE 6261 Casher Nut LRV 60). A dark grey is proposed for decorative window awnings, trims, and capping to crown the building (Dun Edwards DE 6314 Dark Pewter) (see Exhibit 3, Project Elevations).
Vehicular access will be provided from Garvey Avenue via two 25-foot wide driveways along the southerly edge of the project site. The two driveways connect into a circular driveway on the property that provides access to the parking and loading areas. The project will provide 12 off- street parking spaces plus three spaces for loading.
The project will generally follow the existing drainage pattern of the site and discharge into an existing storm drain pump under Lark Ellen Avenue at the northeast corner of the site. The project will include construction of a five-foot sidewalk along Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue and connect to the existing curbs along the streets. Development of the site will also include installation of existing overhead utilities underground.
Development of the site will require removal of 14 trees and installation of 29 trees. The project includes installation of 14,396 square feet of landscaping to include a variety of trees, shrubs and vegetative groundcover within the setback along the perimeter of the project site.
Construction of the public storage facility is estimated to begin in the fall of 2015 and take approximately six months to complete. Construction will require excavation activities to provide a level base for the new building. Construction activities will also include asphalt paving for parking and drive aisles and concrete paving for installation of the sidewalk in the public right-of-way. On-site soils will balance and no import or export of soil will be required.
2.9 – Surrounding Land Uses
Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses General Plan Direction Zoning District Existing Land Use Designation Project Site Office Office Professional Vacant North* None None Freeway R-1 Residential Single Single Family South Residential Low Medium Family Residential East Office Office Professional Vacant Regional Commercial and Commercial Center Regional Commercial and West R-1 Residential Single and Single Family Residential Low Medium Family Residential * Interstate 10
6 Initial Study Project Description
2.10 – Environmental Setting
The project site is located on a vacant lot in West Covina. The site has a triangular shape adjacent to Interstate 10 along the north, bound by Lark Ellen Avenue at the east and Garvey along the south and southwest. The topography of the site is such the northeastern portion sits approximately 12 to 15 feet higher than the street along Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue, and is primarily covered in tall grass with 10 trees of varying sizes. To the south and southwest of the project site, across Garvey Avenue, are single family residences, and there is a vacant lot to the east across Lark Ellen Avenue. The project site and the driving lanes of Interstate 10 are separated by approximately 25 feet of landscaping along the north side of the site. To the west of the site is a commercial center and single family residences.
2.11 – Required Approvals
The City of West Covina is the only land use authority for this project requiring the following approvals:
General Plan Amendment – from Office to Service and Neighborhood Commercial Zone Change – from Office Professional to Service Commercial Precise Plan – Site Plan and Architecture Plan Review Conditional Use Permit for operation of the public storage facility Variance – lot coverage and side yard setback
2.12 – Other Public Agency Whose Approval is Required
None
West Covina Self-Storage 7 Project Description
8 Initial Study Project Description
Exhibit 1 Regional Context-Vicinity Map
West Covina Self-Storage 9 Project Description
10 Initial Study
Exhibit 2 Site Plan
West Covina Self Storage 11 Project Description
12 Initial Study
Exhibit 3 Elevations
West Covina Self-Storage 13 Project Description
14 Initial Study
West Covina Self-Storage 15 Project Description
16 Initial Study
West Covina Self-Storage 17 Project Description
18 Initial Study
West Covina Self-Storage 19 Project Description
20 Initial Study
3 Determination
3.1 – Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a ‘Potentially Significant Impact’ as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
□ Aesthetics □ Agriculture Resources □ Air Quality
□ Biological Resources □ Cultural Resources □ Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology / Water □ Emissions □ Materials □ Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise □ □ □ Population / Housing Public Services Recreation □ □ □ Utilities / Service Mandatory Findings Transportation/Traffic □ □ Systems □ of Significance
3.2 – Determination
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
□ environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
□ an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a ‘potentially significant impact’ or
□ ‘potentially significant unless mitigated’ impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
□ environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Name: Ron Garcia, Planning Associate Date
West Covina Self-Storage 21 Determination
22 Initial Study
4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.1 – Aesthetics
Would the project:
Less Than Potentially Less Than Significant with No Significant Significant Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporation a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? □ □ □
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic □ □ □ buildings within view from a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its □ □ □ surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or □ □ □ nighttime views in the area? a) No Impact. Scenic vistas can be impacted by development in two ways. First, a structure may be constructed that blocks the view of a vista. Second, the vista itself may be altered (i.e., development on a scenic hillside). The primary scenic vistas in West Covina are of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north, visible on clear days. These views of the mountainside are generally obstructed by trees, utility poles, and other buildings throughout the San Gabriel Valley. While the proposed project is located on a vacant site, it is just south of Interstate 10 (I-10), within a fully urbanized area visually dominated by commercial and residential land uses and surface street features. This site is not considered to be within or to comprise a portion of a scenic vista.1 Construction of a new public storage facility, parking, and accessory landscaping elements will have no effect on a scenic vista. The proposed development is generally consistent in type and scale with similar developments along the existing and planned surrounding development. Furthermore, development to the north substantially diminishes any potential for views of the San Gabriel Mountains. As such, the proposed project will result in no impact with respect to view of a scenic vista.
1 California Department of Transportation. California Scenic Highway Mapping System: Los Angeles County. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm. [May 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 23 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts b) No Impact. The project is not adjacent to a designated state scenic highway or eligible state scenic highway as identified on the California Scenic Highway Mapping System.2 Lark Ellen Avenue, Garvey Avenue and the project vicinity are not listed in the General Plan for consideration as an urban or hillside scenic highway. 3 While the project site is vacant, it is located in an urbanized area and contains no scenic resources. Therefore, no impact to scenic resources visible from a state scenic highway will occur. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project could result in a significant impact if it resulted in substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Degradation of visual character or quality is defined by substantial changes to the existing site appearance through construction of structures such that they are poorly designed or conflict with the site’s existing surroundings.
Construction of the proposed building on the project site will alter the existing visual character of the site. The proposed project will help to buffer against noise and visibility of freeway traffic along Interstate 10 from the residential neighborhoods to the south and southwest of the project site across Garvey Avenue. The area to the east of the project site, across Lark Ellen Avenue is also vacant and the area to the west is developed with a regional commercial center consisting of one- to three-story buildings. The residential buildings to the south of the project site are primarily single-story structures. The project site is currently vacant with minimal vegetation. Ten trees will be removed and replaced with 23 trees and a variety of shrubs and one four-story building with associated parking areas will be constructed.
Construction of the proposed project will result in short-term impacts to the existing visual character and quality of the area. Construction activities will require the use of equipment and storage of materials within the project site. However, construction activities are temporary and will not result in any permanent visual impact. Project construction will result in the removal of all existing landscaping, including some mature trees, which will result in a temporary change to the aesthetic environment. However, Section 26-572 of the West Covina Municipal Code establishes landscape criteria for parking lots and commercial properties. A minimum of eight percent of the lot must be landscaped. An average of at least one tree (minimum 15 gallon) of a species satisfactory to the Planning Director is required to be planted for every ten single row parking stalls for every 20 double row parking stalls within the parking lot. With the replacement trees, shrubs and groundcover, impacts on landscaping will be less than significant.
Upon project completion, the proposed project will consist of a four-story (one level subterranean) self-storage facility located on the east half of the site with frontage along the west side of Lark Ellen Avenue and north side Garvey Avenue. Main entry into the parking area for the self-storage facility will be located along the southwest end of the project site, along the north side of Garvey Avenue. Due to the topography of the project the site, the building height will vary between 31.5 feet at the highest grade elevation and 43.5 feet at the lowest grade elevation. The building will have a contemporary design with different wall depths and window sizes. The building facades will include stucco and brick finishes in varying shades of brown and red. A dark grey will be used for finishing accents including awnings over windows and doors and a decorative capping along the top edges of the building. The proposed storage facility will
2 California Department of Transportation. California Scenic Highway Mapping System: Los Angeles County. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm. [May 2014] 3 City of West Covina. West Covina General Plan. 1985.
24 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts have a modern architectural theme compatible with the visual character and quality of other projects located in proximity to the east and west of the site along the freeway.
Once constructed, the proposed project will represent a new urban feature with a low intensity commercial use within the area. Because the area currently has a residential character and the project site is vacant, the scale and modern architectural aesthetic experience associated with the proposed project will be consistent with neighboring commercial uses to the west and provide relief from the adjacent freeway. Project plans include landscaping within the parking lot portion of the site. This landscaping will contribute to the aesthetic experience of the site. With specified design features included, the project will have less than significant impacts on the visual character of the site and the surroundings. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact night-time views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars. Glare can be caused from unshielded or misdirected lighting sources. Reflective surfaces (i.e., polished metal) can also cause glare. Impacts associated with glare range from simple nuisance to potentially dangerous situations (i.e., if glare is directed into the eyes of motorists). There are lighting sources adjacent to this site, including free-standing street lights, traffic signals and vehicle headlights. The proposed project includes exterior parking lot and security lighting and building interior lighting. Light spillover and glare will be prevented by requiring lights to be designed to prevent the light from shining directly onto surrounding properties per the requirements of the West Covina Municipal Code Section 26-570 and the Parking Lot Design and Lighting Standards Guidelines (Planning Commission Resolution No. 2513, Revision No. 8). Outdoor architectural building lighting will also be subject to West Covina Municipal Code Section 26-570 that requires all luminaries to be designed and placed to complement the development and reflect away from adjoining properties. Compliance with the Municipal Code standards and Planning Commission guidelines for lighting will ensure that lighting and glare impacts associated are less than significant. In addition, the project site is not directly adjacent to residential uses as it is bound by the I-10 freeway on the north, Lark Ellen Avenue on the east and Garvey Avenue on the south.
Sources of daytime glare are typically concentrated in commercial areas and are often associated with retail uses. The proposed project is for a low intensity self-storage facility. Glare results from development and associated parking areas that contain reflective materials such as glass, highly polished surfaces, and expanses of pavement. The proposed buildings will have stucco and cement board finish, which is not a surface that causes glare. Limited metal accents are proposed on the façade of the building as window treatments; however these areas represent a minor percentage of the square footage of the building. Given the minimal use of glare-inducing materials in the design of the proposed building, reflective glare impacts will be less than significant.
West Covina Self-Storage 25 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.2 – Agriculture and Forest Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring □ □ □ Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? □ □ □ c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code □ □ □ section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 (g))? d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use? □ □ □ e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non- □ □ □ agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? a) No Impact. The proposed project will be located in a fully urbanized area that does not contain agriculture or forest uses. The map of Important Farmland in California (2010) prepared by the Department of Conservation does not identify the project site as being Prime Farmland,
26 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.4 The City of West Covina is located in an area that is not mapped, indicating that there is no land considered as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City. In addition, the West Covina General Plan does not identify any areas for agriculture use. Therefore, there will be no conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non- agricultural use as a result of this project. No impact will occur. b) No Impact. No Williamson Act contracts are active for the project site.5 In addition the project site is zoned Office Professional, which does not permit agricultural uses. Therefore, there will be no conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact will occur. c) No Impact. Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. The project site and surrounding properties are not currently being managed or used for forest land as identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). The project site is vacant with no substantial vegetation onsite, and is located within a fully urbanized area. Therefore, development of this project will have no impact to any timberland zoning. d) No Impact. The project site is vacant with limited vegetation; thus, there will be no loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use as a result of this project. No impact will occur. e) No Impact. The project site is a vacant site within a highly urbanized environment. The project is surrounded by commercial and residential uses, including a freeway. None of the surrounding sites contain existing forest uses. Development of this project will not change the existing environment in a manner that will result in the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. No impact will occur.
4 California Department of Conservation. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2010/los10.pdf [May 2014] 5 California Department of Conservation. Williamson Act Program. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/LA_12_13_WA.pdf [May 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 27 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.3 – Air Quality
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan? □ □ □ b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality □ □ □ violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard □ □ □ (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? □ □ □ e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people? □ □ □ a) Less than Significant Impact. A significant impact could occur if the proposed project conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the South Coast Air Basin 2012 Air Quality Management Plan. Conflicts and obstructions that hinder implementation of the AQMP can delay efforts to meet attainment deadlines for criteria pollutants and maintaining existing compliance with applicable air quality standards. Pursuant to the methodology provided in Chapter 12 of the 1993 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency with the South Coast Air Basin 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is affirmed when a project (1) does not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new violation and (2) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP.6 Consistency review is presented below:
6 South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 1993
28 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
(1) The project will result in short-term construction and long-term pollutant emissions that are less than the CEQA significance emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD, as demonstrated in Section 4.3 et seq of this report; therefore, the project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of any air quality standards violation and will not cause a new air quality standard violation.
(2) The CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that consistency with AQMP growth assumptions must be analyzed for new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significant projects. Significant projects include airports, electrical generating facilities, petroleum and gas refineries, designation of oil drilling districts, water ports, solid waste disposal sites, and off-shore drilling facilities. This project requires a General Plan Amendment and therefore is considered a significant project.
Residential uses are not included as part of the proposed project; therefore, this project could not result in any direct residential growth. Based on studies conducted by the Self Storage Association, a self storage facility will generate 3.5 employees. 7 According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), employment in the City is projected to increase by 3,200 jobs between 2008 and 2035. 8 Project employment is within the employment growth assumptions for the City. The SCAG growth assumptions are utilized directly in the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and the 2012 AQMP.
Based on the consistency analysis presented above, the proposed project will not conflict with the AQMP; impacts will be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporation. A project may have a significant impact if project-related emissions will exceed federal, state, or regional standards or thresholds, or if project-related emissions will substantially contribute to existing or project air quality violations. The proposed Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin, where efforts to attain state and federal air quality standards are governed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Both the State of California (State) and the Federal government have established health-based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants (known as ‘criteria pollutants’). These pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), inhalable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5), and lead (Pb). The State has also established AAQS for additional pollutants. The AAQS are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace within a reasonable margin of safety. Where the state and federal standards differ, California AAQS are more stringent than the national AAQS.
Air pollution levels are measured at monitoring stations located throughout the air basin. Areas that are in nonattainment with respect to federal or state AAQS are required to prepare plans and implement measures that will bring the region into attainment. Table 2 (South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status – South Los Angeles County) summarizes the attainment status in the project area for the criteria pollutants. Discussion of potential impacts related to short-term construction impacts and long-term area source and operational impacts are presented below.
7 Self Storage Association. 2013-14 Self Storage Industry Fact Sheet. http://www.selfstorage.org/ssa/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutSSA/FactSheet/2013SSAFACTSHE ETrevised11-22-13.pdf [June 2014] 8 Southern California Association of Governments. 2012 Adopted Growth Forecast.
West Covina Self-Storage 29 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table 2 South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status – South Los Angeles County Pollutant Federal State
O3 (1-hr) N/A Nonattainment
O3 (8-hr) Nonattainment Nonattainment PM10 Nonattainment Nonattainment PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment CO Attainment Attainment
NO2 Attainment Nonattainment
SO2 Attainment Attainment Pb Nonattainment Nonattainment Sources: CARB 2011, U.S. EPA 2012
Construction Emissions The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2013.2.2 was utilized to estimate emissions from the proposed construction activities (see Appendix A, Air Quality Modeling Data). CalEEMod default construction phase lengths were utilized, as summarized in Table 3 (Tentative Construction Schedule).
Table 3 Tentative Construction Schedule Phase Start End Days Site Preparation 01/01/15 01/01/15 1 Grading 01/02/15 01/05/15 2 Building Construction 01/06/15 05/25/15 100 Paving 05/26/15 06/01/15 5 Architectural Coating 06/02/015 06/08/15 5 Total 113 Source: MIG | Hogle-Ireland 2014
CalEEMod defaults were utilized for construction equipment and other construction parameters in the model. The maximum (summer or winter) results of the analysis are summarized in Table 4 (Unmitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day)). The model indicates that construction of the proposed project will result in excessive emissions of volatile organic chemicals (identified as reactive organic gases) associated with interior and exterior coating activities.
30 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table 4 Unmitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (lbs/day) 10 2.5 Year ROG NOX CO SO2 PM PM Summer 407 16 13 <1 2 1 Winter 407 16 13 <1 2 1 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Potential Impact? Yes No No No No No Source: MIG | Hogle-Ireland 2014 Note: Volatile organic compounds are measured as reactive organic compounds
To compensate for excessive VOC emissions from coating activities, the model includes use of a maximum 25 g/l VOC content for interior coatings and 50 g/l VOC content for exterior coatings. Use of low-VOC coatings during construction activities will reduce VOC emissions to 69.99 in winter and summer months (as shown in Table 5), less than the threshold established by SCAQMD. The requirement of use of low-VOC coatings has been included as Mitigation measure AQ-1 below. The results of the CalEEMod outputs with mitigation incorporated are summarized in Table 5 (Mitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions for ROG (lbs/day)) below.
Table 5 Mitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions for ROG (lbs/day)) Source ROG Summer 51 Winter 51 Threshold 75 Substantial? No Source: MIG | Hogle-Ireland 2014
Operational Emissions Long-term criteria air pollutant emissions will result from the operation of the project. Long-term emissions are categorized as area source emissions, energy demand emissions, and operational emissions. Operational emissions will result from automobile and other vehicle sources associated with daily trips to and from the proposed development. CalEEMod was utilized to estimate mobile source emissions. Trip generation is based on the project traffic analysis prepared by KOA Corporation. 9 Area source emissions are the combination of many small emission sources that include use of outdoor landscape maintenance equipment, use of consumer products such as cleaning products, and periodic repainting of the proposed structure. Energy demand emissions result from use of electricity and natural gas. Emissions from area sources were estimated using CalEEMod using program default values for area and energy demand emissions. Operational emissions are summarized in Table 6 (Long-Term Daily Emissions (lbs/day)). Long-term emissions will not exceed the daily thresholds established by SCAQMD; impacts will be less than significant.
9 KOA Corporation. Traffic Impact Study: West Covina Self-Storage Project. June 2014
West Covina Self-Storage 31 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table 6 Long-Term Daily Emissions (lbs/day) 10 2.5 Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM PM Summer 3 1 3 <1 1 <1 Winter 3 1 3 <1 1 <1 Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Potential Impact? No No No No No No Source: MIG | Hogle Ireland 2014 Note: Volatile organic compounds are measured as reactive organic compounds
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City of West Covina Planning Department, a Coating Restriction Plan (CRP), consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and a letter agreeing to include in any construction contracts and/or subcontracts a requirement that the contractors adhere to the requirements of the CRP. The CRP measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Building Department. These may include the following:
The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 25 g/l for interior applications. The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 50 g/l for exterior applications.
This measure shall conform to the performance standard that emissions of volatile organic compounds from application of interior or exterior coatings shall not exceed the daily emissions thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The CRP shall specify use of High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) spray guns for application of coatings. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Cumulative short-term, construction-related emissions and long-term, operational emissions from the project will not contribute considerably to any potential cumulative air quality impact because short-term project and operational emissions will not exceed any SCAQMD daily threshold with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 above. As required of the proposed project, other concurrent construction projects and operations in the region will be required to implement standard air quality regulations and mitigation pursuant to State CEQA requirements. Impacts will be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are those segments of the population that are most susceptible to poor air quality such as children, the elderly, the sick, and athletes who perform outdoors. Land uses associated with sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, outdoor athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. The nearest land uses that are considered sensitive receptors are the residential dwelling units located south of the proejct site along East Garvey Avenue South. The proposed project will not generate toxic pollutant emissions because the proposed self-storage use is characterized as typical commercial use that does not produce such emissions. The proposed project, therefore, will have a less than significant impact on sensitive receptors relating to toxic pollutant emissions.
A carbon monoxide (CO) hotspot is an area of localized CO pollution that is caused by severe vehicle congestion on major roadways, typically near intersections. CO hotspots have the
32 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts potential for violation of state and federal CO standards at study area intersections, even if the broader Basin is in attainment for federal and state levels.
SCAQMD had established a CO hotspot screening threshold in the 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook; however, those tables are no long valid and the Lead Agency is directed to consider an alternative screening method. The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SAQMD) developed a screening threshold that states that any project involving an intersection experiencing 31,600 vehicles per hour or more will require detailed analysis.10 The project will not involve an intersection experiencing this level of traffic; therefore, the project passes the screening analysis and is deemed acceptable. Impacts to sensitive receptors due to localized carbon monoxide emissions will be less than significant. e) No Impact. According to the CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural operations, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and certain industrial operations (such as manufacturing uses that produce chemicals, paper, etc.). Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving the use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong-smelling elements used in manufacturing processes, as well as sewage treatment facilities and landfills. The proposed projects do not include any of the above noted uses or process; no impact will occur.
10 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. CEQA Guide. May 2011
West Covina Self-Storage 33 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.4 – Biological Resources
Would the project:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies, □ □ □ or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by □ □ □ the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, □ □ □ coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife □ □ □ corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree □ □ □ preservation policy or ordinance?
34 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other □ □ □ approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a) No Impact. The project site is currently vacant with minimal vegetation consisting of grass and few shrubs and trees. A recent survey of the project site indicates that there are four Chinese elm shrubs ranging between 8 and 12 feet in height, four Washington palm trees between 7 and 60 feet tall, and two jacaranda trees each with two 15-inch diameter trunks. The development of the site will require removal of the existing vegetation, including the 10 trees, and installation of ornamental landscaping consisting of 23 trees and various groundcover and shrubs. The existing vegetation is not habitat for any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. The project site is not identified as critical habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species.11 Considering the highly developed nature of the project site and surrounding area, the probability of existence of designated species under the federal Endangered Species Act or California Special Concern Species is low. The proposed project will, therefore, not have a substantial adverse effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Considering the lack of habitat on the property, no impacts to wildlife species of concern will occur. b) No Impact. The project site is located on a vacant site with minimal vegetation. Based on a recent tree survey, there is no riparian habitat on site. As such, no impact to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural habitat will occur. c) No Impact. According to the federal National Wetlands Inventory, the project site does not contain any wetlands and the proposed project will not disturb any offsite wetlands (see Section 4.9 for discussion of project drainage features).12 There is no vegetation or on-site water features indicative of potential wetlands. No impact will occur. d) No Impact. The project site is currently vacant and is surrounded on the north, south and west by development, preventing the use of the project site and surrounding area as a wildlife corridor. The project site contains minimal vegetation in the context of a completely urbanized setting located to the east of a regional shopping center, north of residential uses, and south of an interstate highway. There are no substantial vegetated areas or waterbodies located on-site. The project site does not provide for the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife. No impact will occur. e) No Impact. Section 26-294 of the West Covina Code of Ordinances regulates the preservation, protection, and removal of trees during development on public and private property in the City. The ordinance includes protective measures that must be exercised by all individuals, developers, and contractors working near preserved trees. The ordinance requires that all
11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species. http://criticalhabitat.fws.gov/ [June 2014] 12 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. http://107.20.228.18/Wetlands/WetlandsMapper.html# [June 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 35 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts construction preserves and protects the health of trees to remain, relocated trees, and new trees planted to replace those removed.
Consistent with the Tree Protection Ordinance, no tree permit shall be issued for the removal of any heritage tree or significant tree on any lot associated with a development application, unless all discretionary approvals have been obtained from the City. Subsequent to site investigation regarding specific trees, condition, and topography considerations, the Planning Director may approve, conditionally approve, or deny the removal application. The Planning Director may place conditions on the tree removal permit, including replacement of the removed trees with comparable species, size, sand condition, or relocation of the existing trees.
The project site contains minimal vegetation with 10 non-native trees. No heritage trees were identified on the project site. None of the other specific species of trees protected by the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (California native oak or sycamore) are located on the site. Loss of these existing non-native trees will not result in a significant impact to biological resources and will be offset with numerous replacement trees such as the Crape Myrtle, Burgundy Leaf Peppermint Tree, Brisbane Box, and Village Green Sawleaf trees. No impact will occur. f) No Impact. The proposed project site is not within the planning area of any Habitat Conservation Plan or a Natural Community Conservation Plan area,13 or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. No impact will occur.
13 California Department of Fish and Game. Natural Community Conservation Planning. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/habcon/nccp/ [June 2014]
36 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.5 – Cultural Resources
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in '15064.5? □ □ □ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to □ □ □ '15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature? □ □ □ d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? □ □ □ a) No Impact. This property does not satisfy any of the criteria for a historic resource defined in Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. No known historically or culturally significant resources, structures, buildings, or objects are located on the project site. The project site is not listed on the City’s list of most significant historic properties.14 As such, the proposed project will not cause an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, and impacts to historic resources are not anticipated. No impact will occur. b-d) Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. While the project site is vacant, it is located in heavily urbanized area that has been previously disturbed and heavily affected by past activities. The project consists of the construction of a four-story storage facility with parking and loading areas and installation of ornamental landscaping. The potential for uncovering significant resources at the project site during construction activities is considered unlikely given that no such resources have been discovered during the prior development activity in the surrounding area nor during the installation of the freeway adjacent to the site (Interstate 10). In the unlikely event that archaeological or paleontological materials are uncovered, Mitigation Measures C-1, C-2, and C-3 are incorporated to ensure that uncovered resources are evaluated, left in place if possible, or curated as recommended by a qualified anthropologist or paleontologist. Impacts to buried cultural resources will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
No known human burials have been identified on the project site or its vicinity. However, it is possible that unknown human remains could be located on the project site, and if proper care is
14 City of West Covina. Most Significant Historic Properties. http://www.westcovina.org/cityhall/planning/properties/default.asp [June 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 37 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts not taken during proposed project construction, particularly during excavation activities, damage to or destruction of these unknown remains could occur. To ensure that any such materials or human remains, if found, are properly identified (and the resource recovered, if necessary), before grading or other earthmoving activities proceed in that immediate area, Mitigation Measure C-4 is included. Mitigation Measure C-4 requires compliance with state law for the notification and recovery of buried remains. Impacts to buried remains will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures C-1 Prior to excavation and construction of the project site, the prime construction contractor(s) shall be cautioned on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying cultural resources or removing artifacts, human remains, bottles and other cultural materials from the project site. A signed statement of understanding shall be provided to the City Planning Director prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
C-2 If potential archaeological materials are uncovered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find and to retain a professional archaeologist to examine the materials to determine whether it is a unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2(g) of the State CEQA Statutes. If this determination is positive, the resource shall be left in place, if determined feasible by the project archaeologist. Otherwise, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the archaeologist. Work may continue outside of the area of the find; however, no further work shall occur in the immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning it filed with the City Planning Director. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
C-3 If paleontological materials are uncovered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find, and to retain a professional paleontologist to examine the materials to determine whether it is a significant paleontological resource. If this determination is positive, resource shall be left in place, if determined feasible by the project paleontologist. Otherwise, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the paleontologist. Work may continue outside of the area of the find; however, no further work shall occur in the immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning it filed with the Planning Director. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
C-4 If suspected human remains are encountered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find and to notify the County Coroner, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, who must then determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If the Coroner, with the aid of a supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are or appear to be of a Native American, he/she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission for further investigations and proper recovery of such remains, if necessary. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
38 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.6 – Geology and Soils
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence □ □ □ of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? □ □ □ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? □ □ □ iv) Landslides? □ □ □ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? □ □ □ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral □ □ □ spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997),
creating substantial risks to life or □ □ □ property?
West Covina Self-Storage 39 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not □ □ □ available for the disposal of waste water? a.i) No Impact. Although the project site is located in seismically active Southern California, the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.15 No impact will occur. a.ii) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will be subject to ground shaking impacts should a major earthquake occur in the future. Potential impacts include injury or loss of life and property damage.
The project site is subject to strong seismic ground shaking, as are virtually all properties in Southern California. The proposed building is subject to the seismic design criteria of the California Building Code (CBC). The 2010 California Building Code (CBC; Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Part 2) contains seismic safety provisions with the aim of preventing building collapse during a design earthquake, so that occupants will be able to evacuate after the earthquake. A design earthquake is one with a two percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, or an average return period of 2,475 years. Adherence to these requirements will reduce the potential of the building from collapsing during an earthquake, thereby minimizing injury and loss of life. Although structures may be damaged during earthquakes, adherence to seismic design requirements will minimize damage to property within the structure because the structure is designed not to collapse. The CBC is intended to provide minimum requirements to prevent major structural failure and loss of life. Adherence to existing regulations will reduce the risk of loss, injury, and death; impacts due to strong ground shaking will be less than significant. a.iii) Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs when soil undergoes transformation from a solid state to a liquefied condition due to the effects of increased pore-water pressure. This typically occurs where susceptible soils (particularly the medium sand to silt range) are located over a high groundwater table. Affected soils lose all strength during liquefaction and foundation failure can occur.
According to the Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Baldwin Park 7.5 minute quadrangle, the site is not located in a Zone of Required Investigation for liquefaction.16 This indicates that the area has not been subject to historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical, and groundwater conditions do not indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement such that mitigation as defined in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) will be required. The site exhibits a very low seismic settlement potential and liquefaction will not be significant to the proposed development. Impacts due to seismically induced liquefaction will be less than significant. a.iv) Less than Significant Impact. According to the Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Baldwin Park 7.5 minute quadrangle, the site is not located in a Zone of Required Investigation
15 California State Department of Conservation. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Maps. http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/WH/regulatorymaps.htm [June 2014] 16 California State Department of Conservation. California Geological Survey, Seismic Hazard Zones. Baldwin Park Quadrangle, March 25, 1999.
40 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts for liquefaction. The project site is located in an urbanized area that is relatively flat and is not located near an area with potential for landslides. There will be a less than significant impact. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Topsoil is used to cover surface areas for the establishment and maintenance of vegetation due to its high concentrations of organic matter and microorganisms. Little, if any, native topsoil is likely to occur on site since the site is covered with paving and structures. The project has the potential to expose surficial soils to wind and water erosion during construction activities. Wind erosion will be minimized through soil stabilization measures required by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), such as daily watering. Water erosion will be prevented through the City’s standard erosion control practices required pursuant to the California Building Code and the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), such as silt fencing or sandbags. Following project construction, the site will be covered completely by paving, a structure, and landscaping. Impacts related to soil erosion will be less than significant with implementation of existing regulations. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed above in Section 4.6.a. Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface layer. The downslope movement is due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Such movement can occur on slope gradients of as little as one degree. Lateral spreading typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures.
Lateral spreading of the ground surface during a seismic activity usually occurs along the weak shear zones within a liquefiable soil layer and has been observed to generally take place toward a free face (i.e. retaining wall, slope, or channel) and to lesser extent on ground surfaces with a very gentle slope. Due to the absence of any channel within or near the subject site, and the subsurface soil conditions that are not conducive to liquefaction, the potential for lateral spread occurring within the site is considered to be negligible. The project is required to be constructed in accordance with the CBC. The CBC includes a requirement that any City-approved recommendations contained in the soil report be made conditions of the building permit. Compliance with existing CBC regulations will limit hazard impacts arising from unstable soils to less than significant. d) No Impact. The CBC requires special design considerations for foundations of structures built on soils with expansion indices greater than 20. The proposed Project is not located in soil subject to liquefaction or landslide hazards. No impact will occur. e) No Impact. The project site is served by a fully functional municipal sewer system. The project will connect to this system and will not require use of septic tanks. No impact will occur.
West Covina Self-Storage 41 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.7 – Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the □ □ □ environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions □ □ □ of greenhouse gases? a) Less Than Significant Impact. Climate change is the distinct change in measures of climate for a long period of time.17 Climate change is the result of numerous, cumulative sources of greenhouse gas emissions all over the world. Natural changes in climate can be caused by indirect processes such as changes in the Earth’s orbit around the Sun or direct changes within the climate system itself (i.e. changes in ocean circulation). Human activities can affect the atmosphere through emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and changes to the planet’s surface. Human activities that produce GHGs are the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas for heating and electricity, gasoline and diesel for transportation); methane from landfill wastes and raising livestock, deforestation activities; and some agricultural practices.
Greenhouse gases differ from other emissions in that they contribute to the “greenhouse effect.” The greenhouse effect is a natural occurrence that helps regulate the temperature of the planet. The majority of radiation from the Sun hits the Earth’s surface and warms it. The surface in turn radiates heat back towards the atmosphere, known as infrared radiation. Gases and clouds in the atmosphere trap and prevent some of this heat from escaping back into space and re-radiate it in all directions. This process is essential to supporting life on Earth because it warms the planet by approximately 60° Fahrenheit. Emissions from human activities since the beginning of the industrial revolution (approximately 250 years ago) are adding to the natural greenhouse effect by increasing the gases in the atmosphere that trap heat, thereby contributing to an average increase in the Earth’s temperature. Greenhouse gases occur naturally and from human activities. Greenhouse gases produced by human activities include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Since 1750, it is estimated that the concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere have increased over 36 percent, 148 percent, and 18 percent, respectively, primarily due to human activity. Emissions of greenhouse gases affect the atmosphere directly by changing its chemical composition while changes to the land surface indirectly affect the atmosphere by changing the way the Earth absorbs gases from the atmosphere.
17 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Frequently Asked Questions About Global Warming and Climate Change. Back to Basics. April 2009.
42 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
GHG emissions for the project were quantified utilizing the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2013.2.2 to determine if the project could have a cumulatively considerable impact related to greenhouse gas emissions (see Appendix A, Air Quality Modeling Data), and summarized in Table 7 (Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory). The emissions inventory accounts for GHG emissions from construction activities and operational activities.
Operation emissions associated with the proposed project will include GHG emissions from mobile sources (transportation), energy, water use and treatment, and waste disposal. GHG emissions from electricity use are indirect GHG emissions from the energy (purchased energy) that is produced offsite. Construction activities are short term and cease to emit greenhouse gases upon completion, unlike operational emissions that are continuous year after year until operation of the use ceases. Because of this difference, SCAQMD recommends amortizing construction emissions over a 30-year operational lifetime. This normalizes construction emissions so that they can be grouped with operational emissions in order to generate a precise project-based GHG inventory.
Table 7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Source CO2E (MT/YR) Construction (amortized) 3 Operational 495 Total 498 Threshold 3,000 Exceeds? No Source: MIG | Hogle-Ireland 2014
A numerical threshold for determining the significance of greenhouse gas emissions in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) has not officially been adopted by the SCAQMD. As an interim threshold based on guidance provided in the CAPCOA CEQA and Climate Change white paper, a non-zero threshold based on Approach 2 of the handbook will be used. 18 Threshold 2.5 (Unit-Based Thresholds Based on Market Capture) establishes a numerical threshold based on capture of approximately 90 percent of emissions from future development. The latest threshold developed by SCAQMD using this method is 3,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2E) per year for residential and commercial projects.19 This threshold is based on the review of 711 CEQA projects. Greenhouse gas emissions associated with the proposed project will not exceed the
3,000 MTCO2E threshold; therefore, impacts will be less than significant. b) No Impact. The City West Covina in September 2011 adopted an Energy Action Plan to guide the City of West Covina toward attainable conservation goals that may also significantly reduce the impact of greenhouse gas emissions within the community. The City has adopted the 2013 edition of the California Building Code (Title 24), including the California Green Building Standards Code. The project will be subject to the California Green Building Standards Code, which requires new buildings to reduce water consumption, employ building commissioning to increase building system efficiencies for large buildings, divert construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting finish materials. The project does not include any feature (i.e. substantially alter energy demands) that will interfere with implementation of these State and City codes and plans. No impact will occur.
18 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. CEQA and Climate Change. January 2008 19 South Coast Air Quality Management District. CEQA Significance Thresholds Working Group. Meeting # 15, Main Presentation. September 28, 2010
West Covina Self-Storage 43 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or □ □ □ disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the □ □ □ release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an □ □ □ existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it □ □ □ create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the □ □ □ project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project □ □ □ area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or □ □ □ emergency evacuation plan?
44 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or □ □ □ where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project could result in a significant hazard to the public if the project includes the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or places housing near a facility which routinely transports, uses, or disposes of hazardous materials. The proposed project is located within a commercial and residential area within the city, and is located adjacent to an interstate highway (I-10). The proposed project is for the development of a self-storage facility. However, the project does not involve the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials. Furthermore, the proposed project site is not located near any industrial uses and will therefore not be placed near any hazardous materials facilities. The routine use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials is primarily associated with industrial uses which require such materials for manufacturing operations or produce hazardous wastes as by-products of production applications. The proposed project does not propose or facilitate any activity involving significant use, routine transport, or disposal of hazardous substances as part of the self-storage use. Furthermore, according to the EPA, the proposed project is not located near any listed facilities that emit toxic air contaminants, utilize toxic or radioactive materials, produce hazardous wastes, or discharge to surface water bodies.20
During construction, there will be a minor level of transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes that are typical of construction projects. This will include fuels and lubricants for construction machinery, coating materials, etc. Routine construction control measures and best management practices for hazardous materials storage, application, waste disposal, accident prevention and clean-up, etc. will be sufficient to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
With regard to project operation, widely used hazardous materials common at commercial uses such as office, retail, and self-storage facililties include paints and other solvents, cleaners, and pesticides. The remnants of these and other products are disposed of as household hazardous waste (HHW) that includes used dead batteries, electronic wastes, and other wastes that are prohibited or discouraged from being disposed of at local landfills. Regular operation and cleaning of the self-storage facility will not result in significant impacts involving use, storage, transport or disposal of hazardous wastes and substances. Use of common household hazardous materials and their disposal does not present a substantial health risk to the community. Impacts associated with the routine transport, use of hazardous materials or wastes will be less than significant.
20 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. DTSC’s Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List – Site Cleanup (Cortese List). http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Cortese_List.cfm [June 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 45 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts b) No Impact. There are no open cases of leaking underground storage tanks (LUST) on the project site or in the project vicinity.21 There will be no impact related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
Construction of the proposed project will require the use and transport of hazardous materials such as asphalt, paints, and other solvents. Construction activities could also produce hazardous wastes associated with the use of such products. Construction of the proposed project requires ordinary construction activities and will not require a substantial or uncommon amount of hazardous materials to complete. All hazardous materials are required to be utilized and transported in accordance with their labeling pursuant to federal and state law. Routine construction practices include good housekeeping measures to prevent/contain/clean-up spills and contamination from fuels, solvents, concrete wastes and other waste materials.
The project includes the development of a self-storage facility on a vacant site with no existing structures. The proposed project will not include any activities associated with the demolition or renovation of structures constructed prior to the 1980s, and will not pose a hazard with regard to asbestos containing materials (ACM) and lead-based paints. There will be no impacts due to asbestos exposure. c) No Impact. There are no schools located within close proximity, one quarter mile, to the project site; Cameron Elementary School is located approximately one mile from the project site to the southwest. Cameron Elementary School is approximately three quarter miles southwest of the project site. West Covina High School is approximately three quarter miles southeast of the project site. Saint Christopher Parish School is 0.85 miles from the project site to the southwest. Vincent Children’s Center is located 0.67 miles northwest of the project site. Rowland Avenue Elementary School is located approximately half a mile from the project site to the north. Pioneer Center School is 0.67 miles northeast of the project site. Workman Avenue Elementary School is approximately three quarter miles from the project site to the northeast. Traweek Middle School and Covina High School are both just under a mile northwest from the project site. Operation of the proposed project will not generate any hazardous emissions, and storage, handling, production or disposal of acutely hazardous materials is not required or proposed for any aspect of this project. d) No Impact. The proposed project is not located on a site listed on the State Cortese List, a compilation of various sites throughout the state that have been compromised due to soil or groundwater contamination from past uses. 22
Based upon review of the Cortese List, the project site is not:
. listed as a hazardous waste and substance site by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC),23 . listed as a leaking underground storage tank (LUFT) site by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB),24
21 State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ [June 2014] 22 California Environmental Protection Agency. Cortese List Data Resources. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ [June 2014] 23 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. EnviroStor. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp [June 2014]
46 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
. listed as a hazardous solid waste disposal site by the SWRCB,25 . currently subject to a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) or a Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) as issued by the SWRCB,26 or . developed with a hazardous waste facility subject to corrective action by the DTSC.27 e-f) No Impact. There are no public airports or private airstrips within two miles of the project site. No impact will occur. g) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is an infill project involving the construction of a new building with a total of 78,474 square feet to be used as a self-storage facility. As there are no residential uses associated with the project, the project will not increase the population of the area. Given the increase in built square footage on the site, the proposed project may increase employment in the area. Per State Fire and Building Codes, sufficient space will have to be provided around the building for emergency personnel and equipment access and emergency evacuation. All project elements, including landscaping, will be sited with sufficient clearance from existing and proposed structures so as not to interfere with emergency access to and evacuation from the facility. The project will comply with the California Fire Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Section 9). The site plan includes multiple building ingress/egress access points.
The project driveways will allow emergency access and evacuation from the site, and will be constructed to California Fire Code specifications. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan because no permanent public street or lane closures are proposed. Construction work in the street associated with the buildings will be limited to lateral utility connections that will be limited to nominal potential traffic diversion. Traffic control will be provided for any lane closures. Project impacts will be less than significant. h) No Impact. The project site is not located within a fire hazard zone, as identified on the latest Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE).28 There are no wildland conditions in the urbanized area that the project site is located. No impact will occur.
24 California State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ [June 2014] 25 California State Water Resources Control Board. Sites Identified with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/CurrentList.pdf [June 2014] 26 California State Water Resources Control Board. List of Active CDO and CAO. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/CDOCAOList.xlsx [June 2014] 27 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Cortese List: Section 65962.5(a). http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/SectionA.htm#Facilities [June 2014] 28 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Incorporated Fire Hazard Severity Zone: City of West Covina. September 2011.
West Covina Self-Storage 47 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.8 – Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? □ □ □ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre-existing □ □ □ nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in □ □ □ substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or □ □ □ amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide □ □ □ substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? □ □ □
48 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other □ □ □ flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows? □ □ □ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of □ □ □ a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? □ □ □ a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation. A project normally will have an impact on surface water quality if discharges associated with the project will create pollution, contamination, or nuisance as defined in Section 13050 of the California Water Code (CWC), or that cause regulatory standards to be violated as defined in the applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit or Water Quality Control Plan for the receiving water body. For the purpose of this specific issue, a significant impact could occur if the project will discharge water that does not meet the quality standards of the agencies which regulate surface water quality and water discharge into stormwater drainage systems. Significant impacts could also occur if the project does not comply with all applicable regulations with regard to surface water quality as governed by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). These regulations include preparation of a Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to reduce potential post-construction water quality impacts.
Construction Impacts Three general sources of potential short-term, construction-related stormwater pollution associated with the proposed project include: 1) the handling, storage, and disposal of construction materials containing pollutants; 2) the maintenance and operation of construction equipment; and 3) earth-moving activities which, when not controlled, may generate soil erosion via storm runoff or mechanical equipment. The proposed project will disturb approximately 0.82 acres of land and therefore will be subject to NPDES permit requirements during construction activities in addition to standard NPDES operational requirements. As required under NPDES, the project applicant is responsible for preparing a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to identify specific measures to prevent erosion and mitigate the inherent potential for sedimentation and other pollutants entering the stormwater system during construction. The primary objective of the NPDES stormwater program requirements are to: 1) effectively prohibit non-storm water discharges, and 2) reduce the discharge of pollutants from storm water conveyance systems to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP statutory standard). The SWPPP will incorporate the required implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion control and other measures to meet the NPDES requirements for storm water quality. The City will require that the project construction plan include establishing sand bags, silt fencing, or
West Covina Self-Storage 49 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts similar erosion control features around the perimeter to prevent off-site sediment discharges. Implementation of the BMPs identified in the SWPPP and compliance with the NPDES and City discharge requirements will ensure that the construction of the proposed project will not violate any water quality standards or discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade water quality. Mitigation Measures WQ-1 thru WQ-4 will also be implemented to ensure that the proposed project’s construction-related water quality impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures WQ-1 Appropriate erosion control and drainage devices shall be incorporated to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division, such as interceptor terraces, vee-channels, and inlet and outlet structures, as specified by Section 91.7013 of the Building Code.
WQ-2 Leaks, drips and spills shall be cleaned up immediately to prevent contaminated soil on paved surfaces that can be washed away into the storm drains.
WQ-3 Dumpsters shall be covered and maintained. Uncovered dumpsters shall be placed under a roof or cover with tarps or plastic sheeting.
WQ-4 All vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and washing shall be conducted away from storm drains. All major repairs shall be conducted off-site. Drip pans or drop cloths shall be used to catch drips and spills.
Long-Term Operational Impacts Proposed construction of the self-storage facility will not substantially increase impervious areas, as the site is less than an acre and located in a highly urbanized area. A minimum eight percent of the site is required to be landscaped as part of the project design in the form of parking lot landscaping and setback areas. Runoff from the developed site could result in increased potential water contamination from urban pollutants that are commonly found in surface parking lots, ornamental landscape planters and from atmospheric buildup on rooftops. In order to mitigate those potential impacts to a less than significant level, the proposed project will be subject to post-construction BMPs per the City’s NPDES permit to address increases in impervious surfaces, methods to decrease incremental increases in off-site stormwater flows, and methods for decreasing pollutant loading in off-site discharges. A key design criterion is to treat the first ¾- inch rainstorm flows, since the first rains typically carry the most concentrated levels of pollution that have built up since the last storm. Common post-construction BMPs include filtering stormwater through vegetated areas prior to discharge into the City’s storm drain system or retaining stormwater on-site to filter back into the groundwater. The proposed self-storage facility will not generate hazardous wastewater that will require any special waste discharge permits. All wastewater associated with the buildings’ interior plumbing system will be discharged into the local sewer system for treatment at the regional wastewater treatment plant.
Mitigation Measures WQ-5 The project applicant shall implement stormwater BMPs to retain or treat runoff from a storm event producing ¾ inch of rainfall in a 24-hour period. The design of structural BMPs shall be in accordance with the Development Best Management Practices Handbook, Part B – Planning Activities. A signed certificate from a California Licensed civil engineer or licensed architect confirming the proposed BMPs meet this numerical threshold standard is required.
WQ-6 Post development peak stormwater runoff discharge rates shall not exceed the estimated pre-development rate for developments where the increase peak stormwater discharge rate will result in increased potential for downstream erosion.
50 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
WQ-7 All storm drain inlets and catch basins within, and immediately adjacent to the Project Site, as permitted and approved by the Department of Public Works, must be stenciled with prohibitive language (such as “NO DUMPING – DRAINS TO OCEAN”) and/or graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. Legibility of stencil and signs must be maintained at all times.
WQ-8 Materials with the potential to contaminate stormwater must be: (1) placed in an enclosure such as, but not limited to, a cabinet, shed, or similar structure that prevents contact with runoff spillage to the stormwater conveyance system; or (2) protected by secondary containment structures such as berms, dikes, or curbs.
WQ-9 Storage areas shall be paved and sufficiently impervious to contain leaks and spills.
WQ-10 An efficient irrigation system shall be designed to minimize runoff, including: drip irrigation for shrubs to limit excessive spray; shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation; and flow reducers. b) Less Than Significant Impact. If the project removes an existing groundwater recharge area or substantially reduces runoff that results in groundwater recharge, a potentially significant impact could occur.
The project site is located in the Puente Basin. Groundwater levels measure groundwater elevations within the Basin at approximately 420 feet below the ground surface.29 Project-related grading will not reach these depths and no disturbance of groundwater is anticipated. Since the proposed building footprint area and paved parking areas will increase impervious surface coverage on the site, thereby reducing the total amount of infiltration on-site, the project will be subject to post-construction BMPs per the City’s NPDES permit to address increases in impervious surfaces, methods to decrease incremental increases in off-site stormwater flows, and methods for decreasing pollutant loading in off-site discharges (see mitigation measures WQ-5 through WQ-10 above). With mitigation, the potential impacts will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Potentially significant impacts to the existing drainage pattern of the site or area could occur if development of the project results in substantial on- or off-site erosion or siltation. The project will collect and convey off-site run-off from upstream areas and convey these flows through the site, to the surrounding streets and the storm drainage system. The drainage will largely be accommodated within the streets surrounding the project site. A site drainage plan is required by the City of West Covina and will be reviewed by the City Engineer. The final grading and drainage plan will be approved by the City Engineer during plan check review. Erosion and siltation reduction measures will be implemented during construction consistent with an approved SWPPP, which will demonstrate compliance with the City’s NPDES permit. At the completion of construction, the project will consist of impervious surfaces and landscaped areas, and will therefore not be prone to substantial erosion. No streams cross the project site; thus, the project will not alter any stream course. Impacts will be less than significant. d-e) Less Than Significant Impact. No streams traverse the project site; thus, the project will not result in the alteration of any stream course. During construction, the project applicant will be required to develop and implement a SWPPP as required by law; this will prevent polluted runoff from leaving the construction site.
29 Rowland Water District. 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. July 2011.
West Covina Self-Storage 51 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
With regard to project operation, on-site drainage will function through sheet flow to the driveways, discharging onto Garvey Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue. Although construction of the proposed project will increase the net area of impermeable surfaces on the site because the site is currently vacant, the site is less than an acre in a highly urbanized area surrounded by streets, residential and commercial developments, and a freeway. Therefore, substantially increased discharges to the City’s existing storm drain system will not likely occur and will not impact local storm drain capacity. The project is not an industrial use and therefore will not result in substantial pollutant loading such that treatment control BMPs will be required to protect downstream water quality. Impacts will be less than significant. f) No Impact. The project does not propose any uses that will have the potential to otherwise degrade water quality beyond those issues discussed in Section 4.9 herein. g) No Impact. The project does not propose any housing, therefore no impact will occur. h) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not located within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The project site is identified as Zone X, defined by FEMA as areas outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain. 30 Therefore, no rising of a flood plain will occur. i) Less than Significant Impact. The City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan indicates that there is no potential for flooding due to dam failure.31 As stated above, the proposed project is not located within a 100-year floodplain. Impacts will be less than significant. j) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not subject to tsunami due to its elevation and distance (over 35 miles) from the ocean. There is one open reservoir in the City of West Covina that is utilized for landscape irrigation at South Hills Country Club. The reservoir is fed by pipeline from Suburban Water Company and minimal slope runoff. The natural reservoir holds over 10,000 gallons of water and is located between Crescent View Drive, Sandy Hill Drive, and Golden Vista Drive. The reservoir is referred to by local citizens as Lake West Covina. 32 The possibility of a seiche from Lake West Covina affecting the project site is considered extremely low, given the project’s location 3.3 miles south of the reservoir. As noted in Section 4.6.a, the project site has not been identified in an area susceptible to landslides or mudflows. Furthermore, the potential for mudflow is relatively low, since the project does not lie in a landslide hazard zone. The project is not located adjacent to any substantial drainage area. Impacts will be less than significant.
30 Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map. Map Number 06037C1700F. September 26, 2008. 31 City of West Covina. Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. 2004. 32 City of West Covina. Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. 2004.
52 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.9 – Land Use and Planning
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Physically divide an established community? □ □ □ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning □ □ □ ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan? □ □ □ a) No Impact. The proposed project is surrounded by commercial and residential uses. There are commercial and residential uses to the west, residential uses to the south and east, and an interstate highway to the north (Interstate 10). The proposed project is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses and will not divide an established community. The project does not propose construction of any roadway, flood control channel, or other structure that will physically divide any portion of the community. Therefore, no impact will occur. b) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is designated as Office Professional in the City’s General Plan and is zoned Office Professional (O-P). The project is requesting a General Plan amendment to the Service and Neighborhood Commercial General Plan land use designation in order to accommodate the proposed self-storage facility use. The proposed use is consistent with other commercial designations and uses along the freeway and within proximity of the project site. The proposed use and change in General Plan designation does not conflict with policies designed to protect the environment and the project is consistent with the Service & Neighborhood Commercial land use designation which is designed to be developed with trade and business uses which by their nature of a moderate to relatively high intensity. These commercial uses should be located with primary access to a four-lane or wider street, preferable at the intersection of a major and collector street or two four-lane or wider streets. The project does not conflict with the intent or implementation of these designations as the project site is adjacent to a freeway along the north (Interstate 10), and two major streets along the east and south (Garvey Avenue and Lark Ellen Avenue). Impacts will be less than significant. c) No Impact. As discussed in Checklist Response 4.4.f above, the proposed project site and surrounding areas are not part of any habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. As such, no impact will occur.
West Covina Self-Storage 53 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.10 – Mineral Resources
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the □ □ □ residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other □ □ □ land use plan? a-b) No Impact. The project site is located in a completely urbanized area. There are no mineral extraction or process facilities on or near the site. No mineral resources are known to exist within the vicinity. The City does not delineate any important mineral resources in its General Plan or in any other plan. 33 No impact will occur.
33 City of West Covina. General Plan. 1985.
54 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.11 – Noise
Would the project result in:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or □ □ □ applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or □ □ □ groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing □ □ □ without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels □ □ □ existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the □ □ □ project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive □ □ □ noise levels?
Fundamentals of Sound and Environmental Noise Noise can be defined as unwanted sound. 34 Sound (and therefore noise) consists of energy waves that people receive and interpret. Sound pressure levels are described in logarithmic units of ratios of sound pressures to a reference pressure, squared. These units are called bels. In
34 City of West Covina. General Plan. 1985.
West Covina Self-Storage 55 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts order to provide a finer description of sound, a bel is subdivided into ten decibels, abbreviated dB. To account for the range of sound that human hearing perceives, a modified scale is utilized known as the A-weighted decibel (dBA). Since decibels are logarithmic units, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by ordinary arithmetic means. For example, if one automobile produces a sound pressure level of 70 dBA when it passes an observer, two cars passing simultaneously would not produce 140 dBA. In fact, they would combine to produce 73 dBA. This same principle can be applied to other traffic quantities as well. In other words, doubling the traffic volume on a street or the speed of the traffic will increase the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. Conversely, halving the traffic volume or speed will reduce the traffic noise level by 3 dBA. A 3 dBA change in sound is the beginning at which humans generally notice a barely perceptible change in sound and a 5 dBA change is generally readily perceptible.35
Noise consists of pitch, loudness, and duration; therefore, a variety of methods for measuring noise has been developed. According to the California General Plan Guidelines for Noise Elements, the following are common metrics for measuring noise:36
LEQ (Equivalent Energy Noise Level): The sound level corresponding to a steady-state sound level containing the same total energy as a time-varying signal over given sample periods. LEQ is typically computed over 1-, 8-, and 24-hour sample periods.
CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00pm to 10:00pm and after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night from 10:00pm to 7:00am.
LDN (Day-Night Average Level): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after the addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00pm and before 7:00am.
CNEL and LDN are utilized for describing ambient noise levels because they account for all noise sources over an extended period of time and account for the heightened sensitivity of people to noise during the night. LEQ is better utilized for describing specific and consistent sources because of the shorter reference period.
Proposed Project Noise Conditions The proposed project is located in a fully urbanized area and is surrounded by residential uses to the south, Interstate 10 to the north and a vacant lot to the east. Existing noise conditions are representative of this environment. Traffic noise from Interstate 10 to the north and Garvey and Lark Ellen Avenues to the south and east are the greatest contributors to ambient noise levels near the project site. There are no discernable stationary noise sources within the area, as surrounding development generally consists of residential uses with retail, restaurant, commercial uses, and offices to the west. There are no sensitive receptors immediately adjacent to the project boundary; however, there are single-family residences located approximately 60 feet to the south of the project site, to the south of Garvey Avenue.
35 California Department of Transportation. Basics of Highway Noise: Technical Noise Supplement. November 2009. 36 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines. 2003
56 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Project-related construction will result in short-term increases in noise levels and vibration on and immediately surrounding the project site. Project construction is estimated to begin early 2015 and take approximately six months to complete. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments establishes noise exposure levels that are “normally acceptable” for a variety of land uses.37 Noise exposure for single-family residences is normally acceptable up to 60 dBA CNEL. Ambient noise in the project vicinity is generally defined by traffic on I-10, Garvey Avenue South, and South Lark Ellen Avenue. Traffic on Garvey Avenue south is consistent with traffic on a residential street. Given that there is not anticipated to be a significant increase in traffic levels on Garvey Avenue South because of the proposed project, it is not expected that ambient noise levels will increase beyond the 60 dBA standard set out by the City. As previously noted, temporary noise impacts from construction activities will occur, however, given the small scale and nature of the proposed project, the noise increase is not expected to exceed State recommended noise compatibility standards or local noise ordinances; impacts will be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Vibration is the movement of mass over time. It is described in terms of frequency and amplitude and unlike sound; there is no standard way of measuring and reporting amplitude. Vibration can be described in units of velocity (inches per second) or discussed in decibel (dB) units in order to compress the range of numbers required to describe vibration. Vibration impacts to buildings are generally discussed in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) that describes particle movement over time (in terms of physical displacement of mass). For purposes of this analysis, PPV will be used to describe all vibration for ease of reading and comparison. Vibration can impact people, structures, and sensitive equipment.38 The primary concern related to vibration and people is the potential to annoy those working and residing in the area. Vibration with high enough amplitudes can damage structures (such as crack plaster or destroy windows). Groundborne vibration can also disrupt the use of sensitive medical and scientific instruments such as electron microscopes. Common sources of vibration within communities include construction activities and railroads. Operation of the proposed residences will not include uses that cause vibration.
Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition-related activities. Next to pile driving, grading activity has the greatest potential for vibration impacts if large bulldozers, large trucks, or other heavy equipment are used. Construction of the proposed storage facility will not include demolition activities as the site is currently vacant. Site clearing and grading activities will require heavy construction equipment. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 15-95, the operation of construction equipment that causes noise levels to exceed ambient noise levels at the property line by 5 dB is prohibited within 500 feet of a residential zone between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. Groundborne vibration and noise levels associated with various types of construction equipment and activities are summarized in Table 8 (Reference Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment).
37 State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines: Noise Element Guidelines. 2003. 38 California Department of Transportation. Transportation- and Construction-Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. June 2004.
West Covina Self-Storage 57 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Table 8 Reference Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment Reference PPV at 25 ft (in/sec) Pile driver 0.484 – 1.876 Vibratory roller 0.210 Large bulldozer 0.089 Caisson drilling 0.089 Loaded trucks 0.076 Jackhammer 0.035 Small bulldozer 0.003 Notes: PPV is the peak particle velocity. Pile driver amplitude varies greatly based on equipment type and size. Source: Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. June 2004
According to the Caltrans vibration manual, large bulldozers, vibratory rollers (used to compact earth), and loaded trucks utilized during grading activities can produce vibration, and depending on the level of vibration, could cause annoyance at uses within the project vicinity or damage structures. Caltrans has developed a screening tool to determine if vibration from construction equipment is substantial enough to impact surrounding uses.
The Caltrans vibration manual establishes thresholds for vibration impacts on buildings and humans. These thresholds are summarized in Tables 9 (Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria) and 10 (Vibration Annoyance Potential Threshold Criteria).
Table 9 Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria Structural Integrity Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Continuous Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10 Historic and some older buildings 0.50 0.25 Older residential structures 0.50 0.30 New residential structures 1.00 0.50 Modern industrial and commercial structures 2.00 0.50 Source: Caltrans 2004
Table 10 Vibration Annoyance Potential Threshold Criteria Human Response PPV Threshold (in/sec) Transient Continuous Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01 Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04 Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10 Severely perceptible 2.00 0.40 Source: Caltrans 2004
Construction activities that use vibratory rollers, large bulldozers, and loaded trucks are repetitive sources of vibration; therefore, the continuous threshold is used. The single-family residences to the south, southwest, and southeast of the project site were constructed in 1953. As such, the Older Residential Structures threshold is used. Based on the threshold criteria summarized in
58 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Tables 9 and 10, vibration from use of heavy construction equipment for the proposed project will be below the thresholds to cause damage to nearby structures or result in above barely perceptible vibration as shown in Table 11 (Distance to Vibration Receptors) and 12 (Construction Vibration Impacts). Furthermore, these construction activities will be limited to the times of day allowed by the Noise Ordinance (between 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M.). Short-term construction impacts will be less than significant.
Table 11 Distance to Vibration Receptors Receptors Distance (ft) 1 – Single-Family Residence (SW) 95 2 – Single-Family Residence (S) 73 3 – Single-Family Residence (S) 80 4 – Single-Family Residence (S) 75 5 – Single-Family Residence (SE) 145
Table 12 Construction Vibration Impacts Equipment PPVref Distance PPV Vibratory Roller 0.25 95 0.037025 Vibratory Roller 0.25 73 0.052146 Vibratory Roller 0.25 80 0.046294 Vibratory Roller 0.25 75 0.050346 Vibratory Roller 0.25 145 0.021368 Small Bulldozer 0.003 95 0.000529 Small Bulldozer 0.003 73 0.000745 Small Bulldozer 0.003 80 0.000661 Small Bulldozer 0.003 75 0.000719 Small Bulldozer 0.003 145 0.000305 Loaded Truck 0.076 95 0.0134 Loaded Truck 0.076 73 0.018872 Loaded Truck 0.076 80 0.016754 Loaded Truck 0.076 75 0.01822 Loaded Truck 0.076 145 0.007733
With regard to short- and long-term operational impacts, activities associated with construction and operation of the residences will not result in any vibration-related impacts to adjacent properties. Impacts will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will increase ambient noise levels due to increased traffic generation in the project vicinity. Based on the traffic impact study prepared by KOA Corporation, the proposed project is anticipated to generate 193 daily vehicle trips with 11 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 20 trips during the PM peak hour.39 The proposed project will not double traffic on Lark Ellen Avenue or Garvey Avenue and therefore will not result in an ambient increase in traffic-related noise by 3 dBA; thus, traffic-related noise increase due to
39 KOA Corporation. Traffic Impact Study West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina. June 6, 2014
West Covina Self-Storage 59 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts the project will not be perceptible by the surrounding community. Traffic increases are such that no significant increase in ambient noise will occur. d) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Operationally, the project will result in periodic noise outdoors associated with landscaping activities, solid waste and recycling pick-up, and people talking in the parking lot and outside the building. These activities are common in a variety of commercial uses and do not represent a substantial increase in periodic noise in consideration that the project vicinity is designated for commercial uses. There are no operable windows which will allow interior noise to escape the building and affect surrounding properties. Periodic operational noise increase will be less than significant.
Temporary Construction Noise The project will result in temporary construction-related noise increases to on-site ground disturbing and construction activities. Construction noise levels vary, depending on the type and intensity of construction activity, equipment type and duration of use, and the distance between the noise sources and the receiver. Typical sound emission characteristics of construction equipment are provided in Figure 4.12-1 (Construction Equipment Noise).
60 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Figure 4.11-1 Construction Equipment Noise
Construction noise levels were estimated using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (see Appendix B Noise Data). According to the California Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments, noise exposure levels for single-family residential are considered “normally acceptable” up to 60 dBA CNEL.40 Temporary noise increases will be greatest during grading activities where tractors, backhoes, and dozers can produce noise levels up to 86.3 dBA at 73 feet (single-family residence to the south) from the equipment source. This noise level will be considered “clearly unacaceptable” by the State noise compatibility standard. Construction noise in excess of noise standards is permitted by the City’s Noise Ordinance between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. or as otherwise allowed per a noise permit. This will reduce noise impacts to nearby uses by limiting construction activities to regular working hours, particularly to residences to the south that are more sensitive to noise disturbances during evening and nighttime hours. While this will reduce impacts at nearby residences, residents who remain at
40 State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. General Plan Guidelines: Noise Element Guidelines. 2003
West Covina Self-Storage 61 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts home during the day will continue to be impacted and additional mitigation is required. In order to ensure that construction noise is minimized at nearby receptors, Mitigation Measure N-1 will be incorporated requiring construction equipment to be properly maintained so that factory noise- reducing devices are operating at maximum efficiency. Mitigation Measure N-2 will be incorporated requiring stationary equipment to be centralized on the project site, thereby maximizing the range to nearby receptors. Mitigation Measure N-3 requires equipment staging and materials storage areas to be placed at maximum distance from receptors, thereby reducing noise impacts from the use and handling of equipment and materials. Temporary construction- related noise impacts will be less than significant with implementation of existing performance standards and mitigation incorporation.
Mitigation Measures N-1 During excavation and grading activities, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer’s standards.
N-2 Construction contractors shall place all stationary construction equipment in a central site location, where possible, so as to maximize the distance from nearby receptors.
N-3 Construction contractors shall locate equipment and materials staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between equipment and materials staging and nearby receptors. e,f) No Impact. No airport land use plans apply to the area, and the proposed project site is not located within two miles of an airport. No impacts to airport land use plans or airports could occur. There are also no private airstrips in the project vicinity; there will be no impacts related to excessive noise near a private airstrip.
62 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.12 – Population and Housing
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly □ □ □ (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement □ □ □ housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement □ □ □ housing elsewhere? a) Less Than Significant Impact. Residential uses are not included as part of the proposed project; therefore, this project could not result in any direct residential growth. No new expanded infrastructure is proposed that could accommodate additional growth in the area that is not already possible with existing infrastructure, so no indirect population growth will occur. The project is directly bringing a single new business to the area by constructing a self-storage facility to provide a service for local businesses and residents. Based on studies conducted by the Self Storage Association, a self storage facility will generate 3.5 employees. 41 According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), employment in the city is projected to increase by 3,200 jobs between 2008 and 2035.42 Project employment represents less than one percent of this growth which is not substantial and is within the employment growth assumptions for the City. Due to the urban nature of the City and surrounding area, this potential minimal increase in population is expected to be accommodated by existing housing in the City and neighboring communities. Impacts will be less than significant. b) No Impact. The project site is currently vacant and will be developed with a self-storage facility as part of project construction. The project site does not contain any housing units and does not require removal of any residential units, thus no impact will occur. c) No Impact. Displacement, in the context of housing, can generally be defined as persons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to flee or to leave their homes or places of
41 Self Storage Association. 2013-14 Self Storage Industry Fact Sheet. http://www.selfstorage.org/ssa/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutSSA/FactSheet/2013SSAFACTSHE ETrevised11-22-13.pdf [June 2014] 42 Southern California Association of Governments. 2012 Adopted Growth Forecast.
West Covina Self-Storage 63 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts habitual residence.43 There is no housing located onsite, and therefore no residents. As such, there is no forced or obliged removal of persons, and therefore no displacement. No impact will occur.
43 The Brookings Institute. Handbook for Applying the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. 1999.
64 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.13 – Public Services
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation
a) Fire protection? □ □ □
b) Police protection? □ □ □
c) Schools? □ □ □
d) Parks? □ □ □
e) Other public facilities? □ □ □ a) Less Than Significant Impact. The West Covina Fire Department (WCFD) provides fire protection and emergency medical response services in the City of West Covina. The fire department includes 70 full time employees and one full time equivalent employee. 44 The project site is an infill site, located in closest proximity to Station No. 2. Station No. 2 is located at 2441 E. Cortez Street, approximately 1.4 miles southeast of the project site.
The West Covina Fire Department provides technical fire prevention activities by checking building construction plans to make sure all proposed buildings meet appropriate safety codes prior to construction. Fire inspectors perform plan review on all proposed fire sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, and restaurant hood extinguishing system installation. WCFD will review site plans for the proposed project as part of the City’s standard review process.
The project is a proposed infill site, constructing one structure for self-storage. The project will not have a significant impact on fire response times and will not otherwise create a substantially greater need for fire protection services than already exists. No new or expanded fire protection facilities will be required as a result of this project. Furthermore, the proposed self-storage facility does not propose to use substantially hazardous materials or engage in hazardous activities that will require new or modified fire protection equipment to meet potential emergency demand. Impacts related to expansion of fire protection services will be less than significant.
44 City of West Covina. The City of West Covina, California 2013-2014 Adopted Budget.
West Covina Self-Storage 65 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts b) Less Than Significant Impact. The West Covina Police Department (WCPD) provides police protection services in the City of West Covina. For 2013-2014, WCPD has an authorized full-time workforce of 90 sworn officers and 63 civilians, including 10 dispatchers. WCPD also has approximately 20.5 full time equivalent staff, including crossing guards, reserve officers and clerical staff. 45 WCPD staffs three major divisions: Patrol, Investigative, and Administrative Support. The WCPD also utilizes volunteer programs. The WCPD Police Station is located at 1444 W. Garvey Avenue, at the Civic Center property. The WCPD has an estimated average response time of five minutes and 28 seconds to Priority 1 calls to any part of the City, as of 2012-2013.
The proposed self storage facility will not result in any unique or more extensive crime problems that cannot be handled with the existing level of police resources. The proposed project is located within the WCPD service area. No new or expanded police facilities will need to be constructed as a result of this project. Impacts related to expansion of police protection services will be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As a commercial land use, this project will not have any residential population and will not generate any direct demand for school facilities. There is a potential for households with school-age children relocating to the West Covina area as a result of employment at the proposed storage facility. Pursuant to the Leroy F. Green School Facilities Act (AB 2926), the project proponent will be required to pay developer fees to the Rowland Unified School District, prior to the issuance of building permits, at the then current rate charged to commercial development projects. This fee will help support provision of school services for the community as a whole. According to AB 2926, payment of developer fees constitutes adequate mitigation for any project-related impacts to school facilities. Impacts to the school facilities will be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Demand for park and recreational facilities are generally the direct result of residential development. However, as indicated above, no residential dwelling units are proposed as part of this project. The project will also not substantially contribute a new employment base to the City which could impact public services (see Section 14.3). As a result, no substantial demand for park and recreation facilities will result. Impacts will be less than significant. e) No Impact. The proposed project, a nonresidential use, will not result in any population growth that will require expansion of any other public services such as libraries or hospitals. The proposed self-storage facility will not rely on any such services to conduct normal business operations. No impact will occur.
45 City of West Covina. The City of West Covina, California 2013-2014 Adopted Budget.
66 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.14 – Recreation
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial □ □ □ physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might □ □ □ have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) No Impact. The proposed self-storage facility project will not increase use of existing recreational facilities, because employees and patrons are not expected to combine a trip to a local park with a trip to this development. All activities associated with this use are programmed to occur within the building. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are needed. b) No Impact. The project does not include outdoor recreational facilities and does not necessitate expansion of existing outdoor recreational facilities. The proposed project is an 78,474 square-foot self-storage facility. Therefore, there will be no adverse physical effect on the environment caused by expansion or construction of outdoor recreational facilities. No impact will occur.
West Covina Self-Storage 67 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.15 – Transportation and Traffic
Would the project:
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Mitigation Impact Incorporation
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of □ □ □ the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other □ □ □ standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in □ □ □ substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm □ □ □ equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ □
68 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the □ □ □ performance or safety of such facilities?
a) Less than Significant Impact. A traffic analysis, prepared by KOA Corporation, dated June 6, 2014, (Appendix C Traffic Impacts Memorandum) was prepared to assess project traffic impacts. The traffic analysis evaluated potential project-related traffic impacts at six key intersections in the vicinity of the project site:
South Lark Ellen Avenue/Workman Avenue South Lark Ellen Avenue/South Garvey Avenue Lakes Drive/Glendora Avenue Vincent Avenue/ Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive South Lark Ellen Avenue/Stuart Avenue South Lark Ellen Avenue/Cameron Avenue
The traffic study presents existing traffic volumes, forecasts existing-plus-project traffic volumes, forecasts future traffic volumes with and without the proposed project, and identifies project- related impacts using the methodology outlined in Appendix C.
Street Network Regional access to the project site is provided by the Interstate 10 (I-10) freeway. West- and eastbound ramps are provided on Vincent Avenue and on Azusa Avenue in the project area. Immediate access to the project site is provided via Garvey Avenue and South Lark Ellen Avenue.
South Lark Ellen Avenue is a north-south oriented roadway that is adjacent to the project site to the east. South Lark Ellen Avenue extends southerly from Workman Avenue to Cameron Avenue in the City of West Covina. Two through travel lanes are provided in each direction on South Lark Ellen Avenue from the north end to Garvey Avenue near the project site and narrows down to a single through lane in each direction from Garvey Avenue at the project site and continuing south. South Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue intersect at the project site.
Garvey Avenue is an east-west oriented roadway that is located adjacent to the project site to the south. Garvey Avenue extends easterly from Glendora Avenue to Cherrywood Street in the City of West Covina. One through travel lane is provided in each direction on Garvey Avenue in the project vicinity.
Thresholds of Significance For analysis of level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the City of West Covina has designated the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology as the desired tool. The concept of roadway level of service under the ICU methodology is calculated as the volume of vehicles at the critical movements that pass through the facility divided by the capacity of that facility. A ten percent adjustment to the clearance and loss time factor based on the critical phases of the signalized control was included in the traffic analysis. A facility is “at capacity” (ICU value of 1.00 or greater) when extreme congestion occurs. This value is a function of hourly volumes and approach lane configurations on each leg of the intersection.
West Covina Self-Storage 69 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
LOS values range from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A indicates excellent operating conditions with little delay to motorists, whereas LOS F represents congested conditions with excessive vehicle delay. LOS E is typically defined as the operating “capacity” of a roadway.
According to the City of West Covina, a significant transportation impact is determined based on the impact threshold criteria in Table 13 (City of West Covina Intersection Impact Threshold Criteria). Table 13 City of West Covina Intersection Impact Threshold Criteria Final V/C Level of Service Project Related Increase in V/C > 0.800 D, E, F Equal to or greater than 0.02 Source: City of West Covina, June 2012.
The City of West Covina requires mitigation of project traffic impacts whenever traffic generated by the proposed development exceeds the criteria above.
Existing Traffic Volumes Manual counts of vehicular turning movements were conducted in May 2014 at each of the study intersections during the weekday morning and afternoon commuter periods to determine the peak-hour traffic volumes. The manual counts were conducted at the study intersections from 7:00 to 9:00 A.M. to determine the weekday morning peak commuter hour, and from 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. to determine the weekday afternoon/evening peak commuter hour.
The results of the counts were utilized to determine existing A.M. and P.M. peak-hour traffic conditions. The existing levels of service were calculated based on the traffic counts and intersection geometrics. Table 14 (Intersection Level of Service Summary) below indicates that the study intersections are currently operating at LOS C or better during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, except for Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive, which is currently operating at LOS D during the p.m. peak hour.
Table 14 Intersection Level of Service Summary Cumulative Existing Cumulative With Peak Conditions Base Project Change Sig Study Intersections Hour (2014) (2021) (2021) in ICU Impact S Lark Ellen Avenue/Workman AM 0.549 A 0.582 A 0.584 A 0.001 No 1 Avenue PM 0.736 C 0.782 C 0.785 C 0.002 No S Lark Ellen Avenue/E Garvey AM 0.489 A 0.520 A 0.522 A 0.003 No 2 Avenue PM 0.632 B 0.674 B 0.678 B 0.006 No AM 0.224 A 0.233 A 0.235 A 0.002 No 3 S Glendora Avenue/Lakes Drive PM 0.341 A 0.359 A 0.362 A 0.003 No Vincent Avenue/Lakes Drive- AM 0.601 B 0.680 B 0.681 B 0.001 No 4 Plaza Drive PM 0.847 D 0.964 E 0.965 E 0.002 No S Lark Ellen Avenue/Stuart AM 0.378 A 0.401 A 0.402 A 0.001 No 5 Avenue PM 0.356 A 0.378 A 0.379 A 0.001 No S Lark Ellen Avenue/Cameron AM 0.642 B 0.685 B 0.686 B 0.000 No 6 Avenue PM 0.646 B 0.690 B 0.691 B 0.001 No Source: KOA Corporation June 2014
Project Traffic The Project trip generation estimates were based on trip rates defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (9th Edition). Trip rates for mini warehouse (self storage) were utilized to calculate the trip generation for the proposed Project use.
70 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The project will generate a total of 193 daily vehicle trips, with 11 trips (six inbound and five outbound) occurring during the a.m. peak hour, and 20 trips (10 inbound and 10 outbound) occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
Trip distribution is the process of assigning the directions from which traffic will access a project site. Trip distribution is dependent upon the land use characteristics of the project, the local roadway network, and the general locations of other land uses to which project trips will likely originate or terminate.
Based on the trip generation and distribution assumptions described above, the Project traffic was assigned to the roadway system based on the proposed driveway location and the roadways that will likely be used at access the regional highway system.
Future 2021 Traffic Conditions The following section summarizes traffic conditions at the six study intersections under both future “Cumulative Base” and “Cumulative With Project” scenarios. The year 2021 was selected for analysis based on the anticipated 2016 opening date of the proposed Project plus five years pursuant to the City’s traffic study guidelines.
Cumulative Base Conditions The future traffic forecasts include an ambient growth rate of 1.07 percent per year which was applied to the existing traffic counts to define the future 2021 cumulative base conditions. The ambient growth rate for the City of West Covina is generally 1.0 percent per year, but an ambient growth rate of 1.07 percent per year was used to account for regional population and employment growth outside the study area.
Due to the location of the project site, cumulative projects were researched within the City limits. City staff provided a list of area projects that has been included in the future without-Project analysis.
Based on the forecast parameters, the Cumulative Base level of service analysis was conducted for the six study intersections, as summarized in Table 17 above. The results indicated that the study intersections continue to operate at LOS C or better during A.M. and P.M. peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive intersection, which will worsen to LOS E during the p.m. peak hour.
Cumulative With Project Conditions The Project trips were added to the future cumulative base traffic forecasts to estimate future cumulative with Project traffic volumes. The cumulative with-Project level of service analysis results are also summarized in Table 17 above.
The six study intersections are projected to continue to operate at LOS C or better with Project traffic during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive- Plaza Drive intersection, which will continue to operate at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour.
Project Impacts The project will generate a total of 193 vehicle trips per day, with 11 trips occurring during the morning peak hours and 20 trips occurring in the afternoon/evening peak period. Five of the six study intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service of D or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive intersection, which will worsen within the LOS E during the p.m. peak hours. The incremental change in operations will not be large enough to create a significant impact. The addition of Project-related trips to the
West Covina Self-Storage 71 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts surrounding traffic network will not impact the study intersections during the a.m or p.m. peak hours. Therefore, mitigation measures are not recommended.
As shown in Table 17 above, under the future year 2021 cumulative base condition and the future year 2021 cumulative with project conditions (which include the project, ambient growth, and other anticipated projects), the project will result in a minor, incremental increase in traffic and no change to LOS during both peak hours, except for the intersection at Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive. Change in V/C or delay will be 0.003 or less. Based on the City of West Covina’s established thresholds for project related increases, a project will not have a significant impact if it does not increase the volume-to-capacity ratio by equal to or greater than 0.02. No mitigation measures or changes to the roadway will be required.46 Impact will be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Pursuant to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Congestion Management Plan (CMP), any project that adds 150 or more vehicle trips to freeway segments or 50 or more vehicle trips to roadway segments during peak hours must be examined for impact of CMP roadways and intersections.
The nearest CMP arterial monitoring intersections to the Project site are at:
CMP #157 – Azusa Avenue and Amar Road (2.7 miles from the Project site) CMP #158 – Azusa Avenue and Cameron Avenue (0.9 miles from the Project site) CMP #159 – Azusa Avenue and Workman Avenue (0.6 miles from the Project site)
Based on the trip generation and distribution of the project, it is not expected that 50 or more new project trips per hour will be added at these CMP intersections.47
The nearest CMP mainline freeway-monitoring location to the Project site is on the Interstate 10 freeway, east of the Puente Avenue, approximately three miles away. The project site is expected to add less than 150 new trips per hour to any freeway segments.48
The project will not, therefore, conflict with an applicable congestion management program or level of service standard established by the congestion management agency. 49 Less than significant impacts will occur. c) No Impact. A significant impact will occur if the proposed project caused a change in air traffic patterns that will result in a substantial safety risk. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan and does not include any structures that will change air traffic patterns or uses that will generate air traffic. Therefore, no impacts related to a change in air traffic patterns will occur.
46 KOA Corporation. Technical Memorandum. Traffic Impact Analysis – 2649 E. Valley Boulevard, West Covina. June 6, 2014. 47 KOA Corporation. Technical Memorandum. Traffic Impact Analysis – 2649 E. Valley Boulevard, West Covina. June 6, 2014.Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Congestion Management Program. 48 KOA Corporation. Technical Memorandum. Traffic Impact Analysis – 2649 E. Valley Boulevard, West Covina. June 6, 2014. 49 Congestion Management Program. http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/cmp/images/CMP_Final_2010.pdf [June 2014]
72 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts d) No Impact. A significant impact will occur if the proposed project substantially increased an existing hazardous design feature or introduced incompatible uses to the existing traffic pattern. Access to the project site is proposed via two driveways on Garvey Avenue. All driveways will continue to provide one inbound lane and one outbound lane. The design of the proposed project will comply with all applicable City regulations. Furthermore, the proposed project does not involve changes in the alignment of Garvey Avenue or Lark Ellen Avenue, the streets adjacent to the project site. This project will not result in a traffic safety hazard due to any design features. e) No Impact. A significant impact will occur if the design of the proposed project will not satisfy emergency access requirements of the City of West Covina Fire Department or in any other way threaten the ability of emergency vehicles to access and serve the project site or adjacent uses. The proposed project will not result in inadequate emergency access. As discussed above, access to the project site is proposed via driveways on Garvey Avenue. The widths are of sufficient length to provide access to fire and emergency vehicles and are consistent with the California Fire Code. All access features are subject to and must satisfy the City of West Covina design requirements, including the Fire Department’s requirements. This project will not result in adverse impacts with regard to emergency access. f) Less than Significant Impact. Public bus transit service in the project vicinity is currently provided by the City of West Covina and Foothill Transit bus lines. Transit service that is accessible from the Project site is operated by the City of West Covina. Commuter service by Foothill Transit is provided at West Covina Parkway bus stops/transfer points.
The proposed project will not result in any changes to lane or street configuration of Garvey Avenue or Lark Ellen Avenue, or to existing sidewalks that could affect performance or safety of alternative transportation facilities. Impact will be less than significant.
West Covina Self-Storage 73 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.16 – Utilities and Service Systems
Would the project: Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control □ □ □ Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction □ □ □ of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which □ □ □ could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded □ □ □ entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s □ □ □ projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid □ □ □ waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste? □ □ □ a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project could affect Regional Water Quality Control Board treatment standards by increasing wastewater production, which will require expansion of existing facilities or construction of new facilities. Exceeding the RWQCB treatment
74 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts standards could result in contamination of surface or ground waters with pollutants such as pathogens and nitrates.
New development in the city is required to install wastewater infrastructure concurrent with project development. Sewer service in West Covina is provided by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. Local flood control facilities are maintained by the City, with regional facilities under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. All wastewater generated by the interior plumbing system of the proposed project will be discharged into the local sewer main and conveyed for treatment at the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County’s Reclamation Plants. Wastewater from the area is generally treated at the County’s San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant, located near the City of Whittier, although it may also be treated by plants located closer to the project site. Wastewater flows will consist of the same kinds of substances typically generated by warehouse buildings and no modifications to any existing wastewater treatment systems or construction of any new ones will be needed to treat this project’s wastewater. The San Jose Creek treatment facility has a capacity of treating 100 million gallons/day (mgd). Wastewater flows associated with the proposed project will consist of the same kinds of substances typically generated by warehouse uses, and no modifications to any existing wastewater treatment systems or construction of any new ones will be needed to treat this project’s wastewater. The Districts estimated wastewater generated by the proposed self- storage facility is similar that of warehouse uses at approximately 25 gallons per day (gpd).50 The San Jose Creek facility has a 100 mgd total treatment capacity. This project will thus have a less-than-significant impact on the ability of the San Jose Creek facility to operate within its established wastewater treatment requirements, which are enforced via the facility’s NPDES permit authorized by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB). Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact related to wastewater treatment requirements of the LARWQCB. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Suburban Water Systems (District) will supply water to the project. Suburban Water System’s service area is divided into two regions: the San Jose Hills Service Area and the Whittier/La Mirada Service Area. The project site is located within the San Jose Hills Service Area. The two service areas are about three miles apart, separated by the La Puente Hills. The total population served is about 300,000. About 80 percent of the District’s water supply comes from groundwater that is pumped from district-owned wells. These wells are located in the San Gabriel Valley and Central Basins. The Main San Gabriel Basin is 167 square miles and contains an estimated 8.6 million acre-feet of water. The Central Basin is 278 square miles with a capacity to store 13 million acre-feet of water. Suburban Water obtains its remaining supplies from surface waters. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which imports water via aqueducts from Northern California and the Colorado River, is the District’s largest provider of surface water. In addition, the District receives water from Covina Irrigating Company and California Domestic Water Company.
Sections 10910-10915 of the State Water Code require the preparation of a water supply assessment (WSA) demonstrating sufficient water supplies for any subdivision that involves the construction of more than 500 dwelling units, or the equivalent thereof. As the project is below the established thresholds, no WSA is required. The project is located within the San Jose Hills District of the Southwest Water Company: Suburban Water Systems. Suburban Water Systems serves a population of about 300,000 through a water distribution system that includes 18 wells, 32 reservoirs, and more than 800-miles of pipeline. About 80% of its water supply comes from
50 County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. Loadings for Each Class of Land Use. http://www.lacsd.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=3531 [June 2014]
West Covina Self-Storage 75 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts groundwater that is pumped by local wells. Suburban Water Systems obtains its remaining supply from surface water, the majority of which is purchased from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. Its network of facilities pumps and distributes approximately 56,000 acre- feet of water annually. Groundwater comes from suburban Water Systems-owned wells in the Main San Gabriel Basin and Central Basin. The well water is disinfected and treated prior to entering the distribution system. The proposed project’s estimated water demand is approximately 14.6 AFY. This demand falls well within the District’s annual water distribution capacity. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.
Regarding wastewater facilities, as discussed in the preceding response, wastewater generated at the project site is treated at the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant. The proposed project is estimated to have a wastewater generation of approximately 25 gpd. This generation is well within the existing remaining treatment capacity of the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant of the 100 million gpd treatment capacity.
Connections to local water and sewer mains will involve temporary and less than significant construction impacts that will occur in conjunction with other on-site improvements. No additional improvements are needed to either sewer lines or treatment facilities to serve the proposed project, as the project will connect to existing lines at the boundaries of the project site. Standard connection fees will address any incremental impacts of the proposed project. Therefore, the project will result in less than significant impacts as a result of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Potentially significant impacts could occur as a result of this project if storm water runoff was increased to a level that will require construction of new storm drainage facilities. As discussed in the Hydrology section, the proposed project will not generate any increased runoff from the site that will require construction of new storm drainage facilities. A NPDES permit will be required for the proposed project, which requires adoption of appropriate Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). The proposed project’s storm drainage system will include treatment methods to ensure the storm water will be cleaned and retained onsite to a level equal to or greater than the NPDES mandates. Implementation of BMPs will reduce pollutants in stormwater and urban runoff from the project site. The proposed storm drainage system, in combination with the SWPPP and BMPs, must be designed to the satisfaction of the City’s Public Works Director and in conformance with all applicable permits and regulations. The project applicant/developer will be required to provide all necessary on-site infrastructure. Impacts will be less than significant, and no mitigation beyond compliance with existing laws is required. The project will have a less than significant impact on requiring the construction of new facilities or expansion of existing storm drainage facilities. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project could result in significant impacts if the project required additional water supplies than are currently entitled. As discussed in Section b), the project will not substantially increase water demand beyond the demand assumed in the Suburban Water Systems 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Water demand is provided by survey data utilized in the CalEEMod air quality model. Water demand is estimated at 4,770,690 gallons per year or 14.6 acre feet per year. Water use within District’s service area remained fairly steady between 1998 and 2008. Water demand within the District is anticipated to increase by 4,743 acre feet per year (AFY) between 2010 and 2035 (10,664 acre AFY to 15,407 AFY). The proposed project’s estimated water demand is approximately 14.6 AFY. Based on the Suburban Water Systems UWMP, there are sufficient water supplies to meet the project’s estimated water demand and long-term demand. The project will not substantially deplete water supplies, and the project will have a less than significant impact on entitled water supplies.
76 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts e) Less Than Significant Impact. As detailed in Sections 4.17.a and 4.17.b, the proposed project will be adequately served by existing facilities. Therefore a less than significant impact will occur. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Significant impacts could occur if the proposed project will exceed the existing permitted landfill capacity or violates federal, state, and local statutes and regulations.
Regional landfill capacity fluctuates daily and is regularly monitored by the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County to ensure there is sufficient landfill space available to dispose of municipal solid wastes throughout the San Gabriel Valley. This project’s additional solid waste stream will have a less than significant impact on regional landfill capacity. The tenant will be required to dispose of their solid waste in accordance with the citywide commercial waste disposal program, including any requirements for recycling or other methods of diverting wastes from landfills. The City contracts with Athens Disposal for waste collection and disposal services. Athens transports citywide wastes to a Materials Recovery Facility in Industry, where recyclable materials are sorted and removed from the wastes delivered to landfills, for sale to companies that use these recovered materials to manufacture a variety of products. In 2012, the per employee disposal rate was 13.2 pounds per day, exceeding the target of no more than 16.7 pounds per day and significantly less than waste in 2007 (16.9 pounds per day). The City disposes of waste at several area landfills, including:
Antelope Valley Public Landfill Azusa Land Reclamation Co. Landfill Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill El Sobrante Landfill Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill Puente Hills Landfill Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill Victorville Sanitary Landfill
The majority of waste in 2013 (total solid waste disposal in West Covina in 2012 totaled 64,34451 tons) went to the Puente Hills Landfill and the Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill. The Puente Hills Landfill had a permitted daily capacity of 13,200 tons (4,821,300 tons per year), with a permitted total capacity of 74,000,000 cubic yards. This landfill had reached its capacity and closed in October 2013.52 The Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill, located in Castaic, has a permitted daily capacity of 6,000 tons per day and a total capacity of 63,900,000 cubic yards, with a remaining capacity of 29,300,000 cubic yards or 45.9%. The Chiquita Canyon Landfill is estimated to close in 2019.53 Although one of these existing landfills used by West Covina closed in 2013, other
51 CalRecycle. Disposal Reporting System (DRS): Jurisidiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/Reports/Viewer.aspx?P=OriginJurisdictionIDs%3d569%2 6ReportYear%3d2013%26ReportName%3dReportEDRSJurisDisposalByFacility [June 26, 2014] 52 CalRecycle. Facility/Site Summary Details: Puente Hills Landfill (19-AA-0053) http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/19-AA-0053/Detail/ [February 2013] 53 CalRecycle. Facility/Site Summary Details: Chiquita Canyon Sanitary Landfill (19-AA-0052) http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/19-AA-0052/Detail/ [February 2013]
West Covina Self-Storage 77 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts regional landfills have remaining capacity as shown above. Also, regional plans are underway to transport waste by rail to landfill sites in the desert areas to the east.
Different uses have varying levels of estimated solid waste production. Using a conservative estimate for typical solid waste generation rate for open storage use (0.09 lbs per 1,000 square feet per day), the proposed project will generate approximately 1.29 (78,474 square feet * 0.09 lbs/1,000 square feet/day = 1.29 tons per year) tons of solid waste per year. There is adequate landfill capacity in the region to accommodate project-generated waste. Considering the availability of landfill capacity and the relatively nominal amount of solid waste generation from the proposed project, project solid waste disposal needs can be adequately met without a significant impact on the capacity of the nearest and optional, more distant, landfills. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project will impact the City’s compliance with State-mandated (AB 939) waste diversion requirements. Impacts will be less than significant. g) No Impact. The proposed project is required to comply with all applicable Federal, State, County, and City statutes and regulations related to solid waste as a standard project condition of approval. Therefore, no impact will occur.
78 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.17 – Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporation a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal □ □ □ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? □ □ □ c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or □ □ □ indirectly? a) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. The proposed project will not substantially impact any scenic vistas, scenic resources, or the visual character of the area, as discussed in Section 4.1, and will not result in excessive light or glare. The project site is located within an urbanized area with no natural habitat. The project will not significantly impact any sensitive plants, plant communities, fish, wildlife or habitat for any sensitive species after incorporation of mitigation, as discussed in Section 4.4. Adverse impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources will not occur. Construction-phase procedures will be implemented in the event any important archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during grading, consistent with Mitigation Measures C-1, C-2, and C-3. This site is not known to have any association with an important example of California’s history or prehistory. The environmental analysis provided in Section 4.2 concludes that impacts related to operational emissions of criteria pollutants and other air quality impacts will be less than significant. Emissions during construction of the proposed project will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 requires the use of low-VOC architectural coatings. Section 4.7 concludes the impacts related to climate change will be less than significant. Section 4.9 concludes that impacts related to hydrology and water quality will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Based on the preceding analysis of potential impacts in the responses to items 4.1 thru 4.17, no evidence is presented that this project will degrade the quality of the environment. The City hereby finds that impacts related to degradation of the environment,
West Covina Self-Storage 79 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
biological resources, and cultural resources will be less than significant with mitigation incorporation.
b) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. Cumulative impacts can result from the interactions of environmental changes resulting from one proposed project with changes resulting from other past, present, and future projects that affect the same resources, utilities and infrastructure systems, public services, transportation network elements, air basin, watershed, or other physical conditions. Such impacts could be short-term and temporary, usually consisting of overlapping construction impacts, as well as long term, due to the permanent land use changes involved in the project.
Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines identify two methods to determine the scope of related projects for cumulative impact analysis:
List-of-Projects Method: a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency.
Summary-of-Projections Method: a summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document or in a prior environmental document that has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency.
To assess potential cumulative impacts associated with this project, an inventory of other proposed development projects was prepared. The distance from the project site of each project is indicated in Table 15. Other projects currently being planned to occur within the same approximate time frame as the proposed project are identified below.
Table 15 Planned/Pending Projects for Cumulative Impact Consideration
Map Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location Land Use Intensity Units ID Total Total In Out Total In Out Retail 20,000 k.s.f. 854 19 12 7 74 36 38 1 301 S. Glendora Ave. Apartment 450 d.u. 2,993 230 46 184 279 181 98 2 512 S. Valinda Ave. Single-Family Residential 19 d.u. 181 14 4 10 19 12 7
Retail 5.160 k.s.f. 220 5 3 2 19 9 10 3 4101/4111 Nogales St. Townhouse/Condominium 33 d.u. 192 15 3 12 17 11 6 4141 Nogales St./ 4 Medical, Office, Retail 23.588 k.s.f. 694 35 19 16 53 27 26 2649 Valley Blvd.
5 1030 S. Glendora Ave. Retail 2.000 k.s.f. 85 2 1 1 7 3 4
1611 W. San 6 Townhouse/Condominium 135 d.u. 784 59 10 49 70 47 23 Bernardino Rd. 7 520 S. Lark Ellen Ave. Single-Family Residential 45 d.u. 428 34 9 25 45 28 17 NW Corner S. Lark 8 Self-Storage Facility 77.142 k.s.f. 193 11 6 5 20 10 10 Ellen and Garvey Ave. 9 1800 E. Garvey Ave. Auto Dealership 38.750 k.s.f. 541 32 24 8 44 18 26 Total 7,165 456 137 319 647 382 265
80 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
Because of the location of the Project site, cumulative projects were researched within the City limits. Many of these projects are low in intensity or will occur a sufficient distance away so as cumulative construction impacts will be nominal.
Non-Cumulative Impacts Impacts related to aesthetics, geology and soils, and airport hazards at the project-level have no potential for cumulative impacts because impacts are limited to on-site conditions and include no component that could result in similar impacts over time or space. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to these topics will occur.
Local Impacts Projects can contribute considerably to cumulative impacts in context of the local environment. Local cumulative impacts are limited to agricultural and forestry resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials, wildfires, groundwater levels, drainage and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. A general discussion of potentially significant cumulative impacts in the local context is summarized below.
The analysis provided in Sections 4.2, 4.11 and 4.15 found that no individual impacts will occur; therefore, the project could not contribute considerably to local agricultural, forestry, mineral resources, or recreation resources impacts. The analysis provided in Section 4 related to biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and services systems found that impacts will be less than significant; therefore, while the project will contribute to localized cumulative impacts, the project contribution will not be considerable.
Impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality, and noise were found to be potentially significant and require mitigation to reduce to less than significant levels; therefore, the project could contribute considerably to significant localized cumulative impacts in these topical areas. These topics are discussed in detail below.
Air Quality. The context for assessing cumulative air quality impacts is the immediate project vicinity with respects to emissions generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project. As mentioned in Section 4.3, use of low-VOC coatings during construction activities could reduce VOC emissions to a maximum of 51 pounds per day, which is less than the threshold established by SCAQMD. The requirement for use of low-VOC coatings has been included as Mitigation Measure AQ-1. The proposed project will not exceed established thresholds during operation. As demonstrated in Section 4.3 of this report, the project could not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of any air quality standards violation and will not cause a new air quality standard violation. Impacts to sensitive receptors due to localized carbon monoxide emissions were determined to be less than significant and the proposed project will not subject a substantial number of people to objectionable odors. Therefore, the project will have no contribution to a cumulative increase in air quality impacts in the immediate project vicinity.
Cultural Resources. The context for assessing cumulative impacts to local archeological knowledge of our past is the geographical extent of local historic and pre-historic knowledge. Loss of historic structures will result in the loss of the historic integrity of an area. The project site is currently vacant; therefore there will be no impact related to the loss of historic structures. Loss of on-site archaeological and paleontological resources could reduce or eliminate important information relevant to the City of West Covina and/or the San Gabriel Valley. Mitigation Measures C-1, C-2 and C-3 requiring evaluation of any discovered potential archaeological or paleontological resources, the uniqueness of the sample, and appropriate steps to preserve or curate the artifact. This will eliminate any potential loss of important local archaeological and
West Covina Self-Storage 81 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts paleontological information that may be buried under the project site; therefore, the project will have no contribution to a cumulative loss of important local archaeological or paleontological knowledge. Mitigation Measure C-4 requiring that the County Coroner be notified if suspected human remains are encountered has been incorporated. Impacts to archeological and paleontological resources and human remains will be less than significant.
Hydrology and Water Quality. The context for assessing cumulative impacts to local hydrology and water quality is the extent to which construction of the proposed project will have an impact on surface water quality if the project will discharge water that does not meet the quality standards of the agencies that regulate surface water quality and water discharge into stormwater drainage systems. The proposed project will disturb approximately 0.18 acres of land and therefore will not be subject to either NPDES permit requirements during construction activities or standard NPDES operational requirements. Mitigation Measures WQ-1, WQ-2, WQ-3 and WQ-4 have been incorporated so that the proposed project’s construction-related water quality impacts will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures WQ-5 through WQ-10 have been incorporated so that the proposed project’s operational-related water quality impacts will be less than significant. The proposed project will not significantly contribute to cumulative construction and operational impacts regarding local hydrology and water quality.
Noise. The project is not a substantial source of operational noise, as discussed in Section 4.11, and therefore will not contribute considerably to noise levels in the immediate vicinity of the project. The project will continue to contribute to temporary increases in noise levels in the immediate project vicinity during construction activities; however, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3 have been incorporated to minimize construction-related noise and therefore the project’s contribution will not be considerable. The project will increase traffic in the project area; however, project traffic-related noise will not be discernible to the public and therefore will have no considerable contribution to cumulative localized traffic-related noise.
Regional Impacts Projects can contribute considerably to cumulative impacts in context of the regional environment. Regional cumulative impacts are limited to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials, wildfires, groundwater levels, drainage and water quality, flooding, land use and planning, mineral resources, transportation and traffic, and utilities and service systems. A general discussion of potentially significant cumulative impacts in the regional context is summarized below.
The analysis provided in Sections 4.2, 4.11 and 4.15 found that no individual impacts will occur; therefore, the project could not contribute considerably to local agricultural, forestry, mineral resources, or recreation resources impacts. The analysis provided in Section 4 related to biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, population and housing, public services, transportation and traffic, and utilities and services systems found that impacts will be less than significant; therefore, while the project will contribute to regional cumulative impacts, the project contribution will not be considerable.
Impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, hydrology and water quality, and noise were found to be potentially significant and require mitigation to reduce to less than significant levels; therefore, the project could contribute considerably to significant regional cumulative impacts in these topical areas. These topics are discussed in detail below.
Air Quality. The context for assessing cumulative air quality impacts is the region with respects to emissions generated by the construction and operation of the proposed project. As mentioned in Section 4.3, use of low-VOC coatings during construction activities could reduce VOC emissions to a maximum of 51 pounds per day, which is less than the threshold established by SCAQMD. The
82 Initial Study Evaluation of Environmental Impacts requirement for use of low-VOC coatings has been included as Mitigation Measure AQ-1. The proposed project will not exceed established thresholds during operation. As demonstrated in Section 4.3 of this report, the project could not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of any air quality standards violation and will not cause a new air quality standard violation. Therefore, the project will have no contribution to a cumulative increase in air quality impacts in the region.
Cultural Resources. The context for assessing cumulative impacts to regional archeological knowledge of our past is the geographical extent of regional historic and pre-historic knowledge. Loss of historic structures will result in the loss of the historic integrity of an area. The project site is currently vacant; therefore there will be no impact related to the loss of historic structures. Loss of on-site archaeological and paleontological resources could reduce or eliminate important information relevant to the City of West Covina and/or the San Gabriel Valley. Mitigation Measures C-1, C-2 and C-3 requiring evaluation of any discovered potential archaeological or paleontological resources, the uniqueness of the sample, and appropriate steps to preserve or curate the artifact. This will eliminate any potential loss of important regional archaeological and paleontological information that may be buried under the project site; therefore, the project will have no contribution to a cumulative loss of important local archaeological or paleontological knowledge. Mitigation Measure C-4 requiring that the County Coroner be notified if suspected human remains are encountered has been incorporated. Impacts to archeological and paleontological resources and human remains will be less than significant.
Hydrology and Water Quality. The context for assessing cumulative impacts to a regional hydrology and water quality is the extent to which construction of the proposed project will have an impact on surface water quality if the project will discharge water that does not meet the quality standards of the agencies that regulate surface water quality and water discharge into stormwater drainage systems. The proposed project will disturb approximately 0.18 acres of land and therefore will not be subject to either NPDES permit requirements during construction activities or standard NPDES operational requirements. Mitigation Measures WQ-1, WQ-2, WQ-3 and WQ-4 have been incorporated so that the proposed project’s construction-related water quality impacts will be less than significant. Mitigation Measures WQ-5 through WQ-10 have been incorporated so that the proposed project’s operational-related water quality impacts will be less than significant. The proposed project will not significantly contribute to cumulative construction and operational impacts regarding regional hydrology and water quality.
Noise. The project is not a substantial source of operational noise, as discussed in Section 4.11, and therefore will not contribute considerably to noise levels in the region. The project will continue to contribute to temporary increases in noise levels in the immediate project vicinity during construction activities; however, Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3 have been incorporated to minimize construction-related noise and therefore the project’s contribution will not be considerable. The project will increase traffic in the project area; however, project traffic- related noise will not be discernible to the public and therefore will have no considerable contribution to cumulative localized traffic-related noise.
Global Impacts One topic of global concern is climate change. As discussed in Section 4.7, climate change is the result of numerous, cumulative sources of greenhouse gas emissions all over the world. The project will not contribute considerably to global climate change.
Based on the above analysis concerning the local, regional, and global impacts of the project in consideration of past, current, and future projects, the City hereby finds that the contribution of the proposed project to cumulative impacts will be less than significant with mitigation incorporation.
West Covina Self-Storage 83 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
c) Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. Based on the analysis of the project’s impacts in the responses to items 4.1 thru 4.17, there is no indication that this project could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings. While there will be a variety of temporary adverse effects during construction related to noise and criteria pollutant emissions, these will be reduced to less than significant levels through mitigation and incorporation of standard requirements for air quality protection. Long-term effects will include increased vehicular traffic, traffic-related noise, periodic on-site operational noise, and changes to on-site drainage, with a majority of these impacts affecting adjacent roadway segments and intersections. The analysis herein concludes that direct and indirect environmental effects will at worst require mitigation to reduce to less than significant levels. Generally, environmental effects will result in less than significant impacts. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, the City finds that direct and indirect impacts to human beings will be less than significant with mitigation incorporation.
84 Initial Study
5 References
5.1 – List of Preparers
City of West Covina (Lead Agency) Planning Department 1444 West Garvey Avenue, Room 208 West Covina, California 91790 626-939-8422
. Jeff Anderson, Planning Director . Ron Garcia, Senior Planner
MIG|Hogle-Ireland (Environmental Analysis) 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 110 Riverside, California 92507 951-787-9222
. Christopher Brown, Director of Environmental Services . Olivia Chan, Project Associate . Noemi Bass, Project Associate
5.2 – Persons and Organizations Consulted
None
West Covina Self-Storage 85 References
86 Initial Study Summary of Mitigation Measures
6 Summary of Mitigation Measures
AQ-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the project proponent shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City of West Covina Planning Department, a Coating Restriction Plan (CRP), consistent with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) guidelines and a letter agreeing to include in any construction contracts and/or subcontracts a requirement that the contractors adhere to the requirements of the CRP. The CRP measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. These may include the following:
The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 25 g/l for interior applications. The volatile organic compounds (VOC) of proposed architectural coatings shall not exceed 50 g/l for exterior applications.
This measure shall conform to the performance standard that emissions of volatile organic compounds from application of interior or exterior coatings shall not exceed the daily emissions thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The CRP shall specify use of High-Volume, Low Pressure (HVLP) spray guns for application of coatings.
C-1 Prior to excavation and construction of the project site, the prime construction contractor(s) shall be cautioned on the legal and/or regulatory implications of knowingly destroying cultural resources or removing artifacts, human remains, bottles and other cultural materials from the project site. A signed statement of understanding shall be provided to the City Planning Director prior to issuance of grading permits. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
C-2 If potential archaeological materials are uncovered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find and to retain a professional archaeologist to examine the materials to determine whether it is a unique archaeological resource as defined in Section 21083.2(g) of the State CEQA Statutes. If this determination is positive, the resource shall be left in place, if determined feasible by the project archaeologist. Otherwise, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the archaeologist. Work may continue outside of the area of the find; however, no further work shall occur in the immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning it filed with the City Planning Director. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
C-3 If paleontological materials are uncovered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find, and to retain a professional paleontologist to examine the materials to determine whether it is a significant paleontological resource. If this determination is positive, resource shall be left in place, if determined feasible by the project paleontologist. Otherwise, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered by the paleontologist. Work may continue outside of the area of the find; however, no further work shall occur in the immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been completed and a report concerning it filed with the Planning Director. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
West Covina Self-Storage 87 Summary of Mitigation Measures
C-4 If suspected human remains are encountered during grading or other earth moving activities, the contractor shall be required to halt work in the immediate area of the find and to notify the County Coroner, in accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, who must then determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If the Coroner, with the aid of a supervising archaeologist, determines that the remains are or appear to be of a Native American, he/she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission for further investigations and proper recovery of such remains, if necessary. The applicant shall bear the cost of implementing this mitigation.
WQ-1 Appropriate erosion control and drainage devices shall be incorporated to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division, such as interceptor terraces, vee-channels, and inlet and outlet structures, as specified by Section 91.7013 of the Building Code.
WQ-2 Leaks, drips and spills shall be cleaned up immediately to prevent contaminated soil on paved surfaces that can be washed away into the storm drains.
WQ-3 Dumpsters shall be covered and maintained. Uncovered dumpsters shall be placed under a roof or cover with tarps or plastic sheeting.
WQ-4 All vehicle/equipment maintenance, repair, and washing shall be conducted away from storm drains. All major repairs shall be conducted off-site. Drip pans or drop cloths shall be used to catch drips and spills.
WQ-5 The project applicant shall implement stormwater BMPs to retain or treat runoff from a storm event producing ¾ inch of rainfall in a 24-hour period. The design of structural BMPs shall be in accordance with the Development Best Management Practices Handbook, Part B – Planning Activities. A signed certificate from a California Licensed civil engineer or licensed architect confirming the proposed BMPs meet this numerical threshold standard is required.
WQ-6 Post development peak stormwater runoff discharge rates shall not exceed the estimated pre-development rate for developments where the increase peak stormwater discharge rate will result in increased potential for downstream erosion.
WQ-7 All storm drain inlets and catch basins within, and immediately adjacent to the Project Site, as permitted and approved by the Department of Public Works, must be stenciled with prohibitive language (such as “NO DUMPING – DRAINS TO OCEAN”) and/or graphical icons to discourage illegal dumping. Legibility of stencil and signs must be maintained at all times.
WQ-8 Materials with the potential to contaminate stormwater must be: (1) placed in an enclosure such as, but not limited to, a cabinet, shed, or similar structure that prevents contact with runoff spillage to the stormwater conveyance system; or (2) protected by secondary containment structures such as berms, dikes, or curbs.
WQ-9 Storage areas shall be paved and sufficiently impervious to contain leaks and spills.
WQ-10 An efficient irrigation system shall be designed to minimize runoff, including: drip irrigation for shrubs to limit excessive spray; shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after significant precipitation; and flow reducers.
88 Initial Study Summary of Mitigation Measures
N-1 During excavation and grading activities, construction contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturer’s standards.
N-2 Construction contractors shall place all stationary construction equipment in a central site location, where possible, so as to maximize the distance from nearby receptors.
N-3 Construction contractors shall locate equipment and materials staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between equipment and materials staging and nearby receptors.
West Covina Self-Storage 89 Appendix Materials
Appendix Materials
90 Initial Study Appendix Materials
West Covina Self-Storage 91 Appendix A Air Quality Data This Page Intentionally Left Blank CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/30/2014 5:11 PM
West Covina Self Storage South Coast Air Basin, Summer
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Parking Lot 0.18 Acre 0.18 7,840.80 0
General Light Industry 20.63 1000sqft 0.47 80,038.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 7.43 1000sqft 0.17 7,430.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2016
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 630.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Adjust to Match Project Specifications Construction Phase - Vehicle Trips - Adjust to Trip Rates Used in Traffic Study Architectural Coating - Compensate for Low-VOC Paints
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 25.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 20,630.00 80,038.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2016
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 2.50
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 2.50
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 2.50
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 406.9492 16.1808 12.8980 0.0205 0.8645 1.0306 1.7403 0.4434 0.9481 1.2802
Total 406.9492 16.1808 12.8980 0.0205 0.8645 1.0306 1.7403 0.4434 0.9481 1.2802 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 51.2568 16.1808 12.8980 0.0205 0.8645 1.0306 1.7403 0.4434 0.9481 1.2802
Total 51.2568 16.1808 12.8980 0.0205 0.8645 1.0306 1.7403 0.4434 0.9481 1.2802
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Energy 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mobile 0.2180 0.7129 2.8944 7.1700e- 0.4842 0.0105 0.4947 0.1294 9.6700e- 0.1390 003 003
Total 2.7067 1.1173 3.2371 9.6000e- 0.4842 0.0413 0.5255 0.1294 0.0404 0.1698 003
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Energy 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mobile 0.2180 0.7129 2.8944 7.1700e- 0.4842 0.0105 0.4947 0.1294 9.6700e- 0.1390 003 003
Total 2.7067 1.1173 3.2371 9.6000e- 0.4842 0.0413 0.5255 0.1294 0.0404 0.1698 003
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction 3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/1/2015 1/1/2015 5 1
2 Grading Grading 1/2/2015 1/5/2015 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2015 5/25/2015 5 100
4 Paving Paving 5/26/2015 6/1/2015 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/2/2015 6/8/2015 5 5
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 131,555; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,852 (Architectural Coating
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 226 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 125 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 255 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 40.00 16.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 8.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Low-VOC Coatings
3.2 Site Preparation - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573
Off-Road 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.8797 0.8797 0.8093 0.8093 003
Total 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.5303 0.8797 1.4100 0.0573 0.8093 0.8666 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0231 0.0289 0.3582 7.1000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Total 0.0231 0.0289 0.3582 7.1000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573
Off-Road 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.8797 0.8797 0.8093 0.8093 003
Total 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.5303 0.8797 1.4100 0.0573 0.8093 0.8666 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0231 0.0289 0.3582 7.1000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Total 0.0231 0.0289 0.3582 7.1000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
3.3 Grading - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138
Off-Road 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.8748 0.8748 0.8359 0.8359
Total 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.7528 0.8748 1.6276 0.4138 0.8359 1.2496
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0461 0.0577 0.7163 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Total 0.0461 0.0577 0.7163 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138
Off-Road 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.8748 0.8748 0.8359 0.8359
Total 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.7528 0.8748 1.6276 0.4138 0.8359 1.2496 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0461 0.0577 0.7163 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Total 0.0461 0.0577 0.7163 1.4200e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
3.4 Building Construction - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Total 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1512 1.5723 1.7344 3.4900e- 0.1000 0.0272 0.1272 0.0285 0.0250 0.0535 003
Worker 0.1845 0.2309 2.8653 5.6700e- 0.4471 3.9300e- 0.4510 0.1186 3.6100e- 0.1222 003 003 003
Total 0.3357 1.8031 4.5997 9.1600e- 0.5471 0.0311 0.5782 0.1470 0.0286 0.1756 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Total 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1512 1.5723 1.7344 3.4900e- 0.1000 0.0272 0.1272 0.0285 0.0250 0.0535 003
Worker 0.1845 0.2309 2.8653 5.6700e- 0.4471 3.9300e- 0.4510 0.1186 3.6100e- 0.1222 003 003 003
Total 0.3357 1.8031 4.5997 9.1600e- 0.5471 0.0311 0.5782 0.1470 0.0286 0.1756 003
3.5 Paving - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2092 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Paving 0.0943 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.3035 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1039 1.2894 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Total 0.0830 0.1039 1.2894 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2092 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Paving 0.0943 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.3035 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0830 0.1039 1.2894 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Total 0.0830 0.1039 1.2894 2.5500e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 406.5057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Total 406.9123 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0369 0.0462 0.5731 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Total 0.0369 0.0462 0.5731 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 50.8133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Total 51.2199 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0369 0.0462 0.5731 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Total 0.0369 0.0462 0.5731 1.1300e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.2180 0.7129 2.8944 7.1700e- 0.4842 0.0105 0.4947 0.1294 9.6700e- 0.1390 003 003
Unmitigated 0.2180 0.7129 2.8944 7.1700e- 0.4842 0.0105 0.4947 0.1294 9.6700e- 0.1390 003 003
4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
General Light Industry 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388
4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by W General Light Industry 16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.514315 0.060290 0.180146 0.1394580.042007 0.006636 0.015782 0.029894 0.001929 0.002512 0.004343 0.000595 0.002093 5.0 Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Mitigated 003
NaturalGas 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Unmitigated 003
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated
NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
General Light 4124.7 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mitigated
NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
General Light 4.1247 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Industry 003
Total 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003 6.0 Area Detail
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Unmitigated 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural 0.5569 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 1.8871 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 2.9000e- 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005
Total 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Mitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural 0.5569 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 1.8871 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 2.9000e- 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005
Total 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
7.0 Water Detail
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
8.0 Waste Detail
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/30/2014 5:15 PM
West Covina Self Storage South Coast Air Basin, Winter
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Parking Lot 0.18 Acre 0.18 7,840.80 0
General Light Industry 20.63 1000sqft 0.47 80,038.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 7.43 1000sqft 0.17 7,430.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2016
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 630.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Adjust to Match Project Specifications Construction Phase - Vehicle Trips - Adjust to Trip Rates Used in Traffic Study Architectural Coating - Compensate for Low-VOC Paints
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Exterior 250.00 50.00
tblArchitecturalCoating EF_Nonresidential_Interior 250.00 25.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 20,630.00 80,038.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2016
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 2.50
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 2.50
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 2.50
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 406.9501 16.2445 13.0056 0.0201 0.8645 1.0309 1.7403 0.4434 0.9484 1.2802
Total 406.9501 16.2445 13.0056 0.0201 0.8645 1.0309 1.7403 0.4434 0.9484 1.2802 Mitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Year lb/day lb/day
2015 51.2577 16.2445 13.0056 0.0201 0.8645 1.0309 1.7403 0.4434 0.9484 1.2802
Total 51.2577 16.2445 13.0056 0.0201 0.8645 1.0309 1.7403 0.4434 0.9484 1.2802
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Energy 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mobile 0.2239 0.7514 2.7896 6.8100e- 0.4842 0.0106 0.4948 0.1294 9.7000e- 0.1391 003 003
Total 2.7127 1.1558 3.1322 9.2400e- 0.4842 0.0413 0.5255 0.1294 0.0404 0.1698 003
Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Energy 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mobile 0.2239 0.7514 2.7896 6.8100e- 0.4842 0.0106 0.4948 0.1294 9.7000e- 0.1391 003 003
Total 2.7127 1.1558 3.1322 9.2400e- 0.4842 0.0413 0.5255 0.1294 0.0404 0.1698 003
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction 3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week
1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/1/2015 1/1/2015 5 1
2 Grading Grading 1/2/2015 1/5/2015 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2015 5/25/2015 5 100
4 Paving Paving 5/26/2015 6/1/2015 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/2/2015 6/8/2015 5 5
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 131,555; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,852 (Architectural Coating
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 226 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 125 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 255 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 40.00 16.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 8.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Low-VOC Coatings
3.2 Site Preparation - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573
Off-Road 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.8797 0.8797 0.8093 0.8093 003
Total 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.5303 0.8797 1.4100 0.0573 0.8093 0.8666 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0236 0.0317 0.3313 6.6000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Total 0.0236 0.0317 0.3313 6.6000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573
Off-Road 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.8797 0.8797 0.8093 0.8093 003
Total 1.4222 14.2999 7.4063 9.3600e- 0.5303 0.8797 1.4100 0.0573 0.8093 0.8666 003
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0236 0.0317 0.3313 6.6000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004
Total 0.0236 0.0317 0.3313 6.6000e- 0.0559 4.9000e- 0.0564 0.0148 4.5000e- 0.0153 004 004 004 3.3 Grading - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138
Off-Road 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.8748 0.8748 0.8359 0.8359
Total 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.7528 0.8748 1.6276 0.4138 0.8359 1.2496
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0472 0.0634 0.6625 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Total 0.0472 0.0634 0.6625 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.7528 0.0000 0.7528 0.4138 0.0000 0.4138
Off-Road 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.8748 0.8748 0.8359 0.8359
Total 1.4120 11.9409 8.8138 0.0120 0.7528 0.8748 1.6276 0.4138 0.8359 1.2496
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0472 0.0634 0.6625 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004
Total 0.0472 0.0634 0.6625 1.3300e- 0.1118 9.8000e- 0.1128 0.0296 9.0000e- 0.0306 003 004 004 3.4 Building Construction - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Total 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1661 1.6131 2.0572 3.4600e- 0.1000 0.0275 0.1275 0.0285 0.0253 0.0538 003
Worker 0.1890 0.2537 2.6502 5.3100e- 0.4471 3.9300e- 0.4510 0.1186 3.6100e- 0.1222 003 003 003
Total 0.3551 1.8668 4.7073 8.7700e- 0.5471 0.0315 0.5785 0.1470 0.0289 0.1760 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Total 1.4538 14.3777 8.2983 0.0113 0.9995 0.9995 0.9195 0.9195
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.1661 1.6131 2.0572 3.4600e- 0.1000 0.0275 0.1275 0.0285 0.0253 0.0538 003
Worker 0.1890 0.2537 2.6502 5.3100e- 0.4471 3.9300e- 0.4510 0.1186 3.6100e- 0.1222 003 003 003
Total 0.3551 1.8668 4.7073 8.7700e- 0.5471 0.0315 0.5785 0.1470 0.0289 0.1760 003 3.5 Paving - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2092 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Paving 0.0943 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.3035 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0850 0.1141 1.1926 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Total 0.0850 0.1141 1.1926 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.2092 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703
Paving 0.0943 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.3035 11.5427 7.3586 0.0111 0.7247 0.7247 0.6703 0.6703 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0850 0.1141 1.1926 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
Total 0.0850 0.1141 1.1926 2.3900e- 0.2012 1.7700e- 0.2030 0.0534 1.6200e- 0.0550 003 003 003
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 406.5057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Total 406.9123 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0378 0.0507 0.5300 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Total 0.0378 0.0507 0.5300 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 50.8133 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4066 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003
Total 51.2199 2.5703 1.9018 2.9700e- 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 0.2209 003 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0378 0.0507 0.5300 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
Total 0.0378 0.0507 0.5300 1.0600e- 0.0894 7.9000e- 0.0902 0.0237 7.2000e- 0.0244 003 004 004
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.2239 0.7514 2.7896 6.8100e- 0.4842 0.0106 0.4948 0.1294 9.7000e- 0.1391 003 003
Unmitigated 0.2239 0.7514 2.7896 6.8100e- 0.4842 0.0106 0.4948 0.1294 9.7000e- 0.1391 003 003
4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
General Light Industry 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388
4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by W General Light Industry 16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.514315 0.060290 0.180146 0.139458 0.042007 0.006636 0.015782 0.0298940.001929 0.002512 0.004343 0.000595 0.002093
5.0 Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Mitigated 003
NaturalGas 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Unmitigated 003 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
General Light 4124.7 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
General Light 4.1247 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 0.0445 0.4044 0.3397 2.4300e- 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 0.0307 003
6.0 Area Detail
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
Unmitigated 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural 0.5569 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 1.8871 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 2.9000e- 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005
Total 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005 Mitigated
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural 0.5569 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 1.8871 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 2.9000e- 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 004 005 003 005 005 005 005
Total 2.4443 3.0000e- 2.9600e- 0.0000 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 1.0000e- 005 003 005 005 005 005
7.0 Water Detail
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
8.0 Waste Detail
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Vegetation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/30/2014 4:58 PM
West Covina Self Storage South Coast Air Basin, Annual
1.0 Project Characteristics
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population
Parking Lot 0.18 Acre 0.18 7,840.80 0
General Light Industry 20.63 1000sqft 0.47 80,038.00 0
Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 7.43 1000sqft 0.17 7,430.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s) 2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days) 31
Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2016
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity 630.89 CH4 Intensity 0.029 N2O Intensity 0.006 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics - Land Use - Adjust to Match Project Specifications Construction Phase - Vehicle Trips - Adjust to Trip Rates Used in Traffic Study
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 20,630.00 80,038.00
tblProjectCharacteristics OperationalYear 2014 2016
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.32 2.50
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 0.68 2.50
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 6.97 2.50
2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2015 96.7834 0.0186 0.0000 97.1746
Total 96.7834 0.0186 0.0000 97.1746 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2015 96.7834 0.0186 0.0000 97.1745
Total 96.7834 0.0186 0.0000 97.1745
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
Energy 358.3104 0.0143 4.1200e- 359.8872 003
Mobile 100.0162 4.0500e- 0.0000 100.1013 003
Waste 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
Water 19.2900 0.1563 3.8400e- 23.7619 003
Total 482.8099 0.4815 7.9600e- 495.3879 003
Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
Energy 358.3104 0.0143 4.1200e- 359.8872 003
Mobile 100.0162 4.0500e- 0.0000 100.1013 003
Waste 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
Water 19.2900 0.1562 3.8300e- 23.7595 003
Total 482.8099 0.4815 7.9500e- 495.3855 003
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.00 Reduction
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Num Days Phase Description Number Week 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/1/2015 1/1/2015 5 1
2 Grading Grading 1/2/2015 1/5/2015 5 2
3 Building Construction Building Construction 1/6/2015 5/25/2015 5 100
4 Paving Paving 5/26/2015 6/1/2015 5 5
5 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 6/2/2015 6/8/2015 5 5 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0
Acres of Paving: 0
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 131,555; Non-Residential Outdoor: 43,852 (Architectural Coating –
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Grading Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 226 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 174 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 125 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 255 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Trip Vendor Trip Hauling Trip Worker Vehicle Vendor Hauling Count Number Number Number Length Length Length Class Vehicle Class Vehicle Class
Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Grading 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Building Construction 5 40.00 16.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
Architectural Coating 1 8.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Site Preparation - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4466 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.4494 004
Total 0.4466 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.4494 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0266 0.0000 0.0000 0.0267
Total 0.0266 0.0000 0.0000 0.0267
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.4466 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.4494 004
Total 0.4466 1.3000e- 0.0000 0.4494 004
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.0266 0.0000 0.0000 0.0267
Total 0.0266 0.0000 0.0000 0.0267
3.3 Grading - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0892 2.2000e- 0.0000 1.0939 004
Total 1.0892 2.2000e- 0.0000 1.0939 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1065 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1066 005
Total 0.1065 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1066 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 1.0892 2.2000e- 0.0000 1.0939 004
Total 1.0892 2.2000e- 0.0000 1.0939 004
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.1065 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1066 005
Total 0.1065 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.1066 005
3.4 Building Construction - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 54.0547 0.0161 0.0000 54.3936
Total 54.0547 0.0161 0.0000 54.3936 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 15.9555 1.3000e- 0.0000 15.9582 004
Worker 21.2938 1.2000e- 0.0000 21.3191 003
Total 37.2494 1.3300e- 0.0000 37.2773 003
Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 54.0546 0.0161 0.0000 54.3935
Total 54.0546 0.0161 0.0000 54.3935
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 15.9555 1.3000e- 0.0000 15.9582 004
Worker 21.2938 1.2000e- 0.0000 21.3191 003
Total 37.2494 1.3300e- 0.0000 37.2773 003
3.5 Paving - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 2.4801 6.7000e- 0.0000 2.4943 004
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 2.4801 6.7000e- 0.0000 2.4943 004 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.4791 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.4797 005
Total 0.4791 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.4797 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 2.4801 6.7000e- 0.0000 2.4943 004
Paving 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 2.4801 6.7000e- 0.0000 2.4943 004
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.4791 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.4797 005
Total 0.4791 3.0000e- 0.0000 0.4797 005
3.6 Architectural Coating - 2015 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.6383 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6401 005
Total 0.6383 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6401 005 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.2129 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2132 005
Total 0.2129 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2132 005
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Off-Road 0.6383 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6401 005
Total 0.6383 8.0000e- 0.0000 0.6401 005
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Worker 0.2129 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2132 005
Total 0.2129 1.0000e- 0.0000 0.2132 005
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 100.0162 4.0500e- 0.0000 100.1013 003
Unmitigated 100.0162 4.0500e- 0.0000 100.1013 003
4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
General Light Industry 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 51.58 51.58 51.58 228,388 228,388 4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by W General Light Industry 16.60 8.40 6.90 59.00 28.00 13.00 92 5 3 Other Non-Asphalt Surfaces 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH 0.514315 0.060290 0.180146 0.139458 0.042007 0.006636 0.015782 0.0298940.001929 0.002512 0.004343 0.000595 0.002093
5.0 Energy Detail 4.4 Fleet Mix Historical Energy Use: N
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity Mitigated 277.9704 0.0128 2.6400e- 279.0583 003
Electricity 277.9704 0.0128 2.6400e- 279.0583 Unmitigated 003
NaturalGas 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 Mitigated 003 003
NaturalGas 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 Unmitigated 003 003
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated
NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
General Light 1.50551e+ 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 Industry 006 003 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 003 003
Mitigated NaturalGa ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e s Use PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
General Light 1.50551e+ 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 Industry 006 003 003
Total 80.3400 1.5400e- 1.4700e- 80.8289 003 003 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use
Land Use kWh/yr t MT/yr o n General Light 964458 275.9959 0.0127 2.6200e- 277.0760 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 6899.9 1.9745 9.0000e- 2.0000e- 1.9823 005 005
Total 277.9704 0.0128 2.6400e- 279.0583 003
Mitigated
Electricity Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Use
Land Use kWh/yr t MT/yr o n General Light 964458 275.9959 0.0127 2.6200e- 277.0760 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 6899.9 1.9745 9.0000e- 2.0000e- 1.9823 005 005
Total 277.9704 0.0128 2.6400e- 279.0583 003
6.0 Area Detail
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
Unmitigated 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
Total 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004 Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Coating
Consumer 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Products
Landscaping 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
Total 7.0000e- 0.0000 0.0000 7.4000e- 004 004
7.0 Water Detail
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category t MT/yr o n Mitigated 19.2900 0.1562 3.8300e- 23.7595 003
Unmitigated 19.2900 0.1563 3.8400e- 23.7619 003
7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated
Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e door Use
Land Use Mgal t MT/yr o n General Light 4.77069 / 0 19.2900 0.1563 3.8400e- 23.7619 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 19.2900 0.1563 3.8400e- 23.7619 003
Mitigated
Indoor/Out Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e door Use
Land Use Mgal t MT/yr o n General Light 4.77069 / 0 19.2900 0.1562 3.8300e- 23.7595 Industry 003
Other Non-Asphalt 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 19.2900 0.1562 3.8300e- 23.7595 003 8.0 Waste Detail
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
t MT/yr o n Mitigated 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
Unmitigated 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed
Land Use tons t MT/yr o n General Light 25.58 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368 Industry
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
Mitigated
Waste Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Disposed
Land Use tons t MT/yr o n General Light 25.58 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368 Industry
Other Non-Asphalt 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Surfaces
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 5.1925 0.3069 0.0000 11.6368
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Vegetation Appendix B Noise Data This Page Intentionally Left Blank Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/1/2014 Case Description: West Covina Self Storage Site Preparation
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SW) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 95 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 72 68 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 72 68 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #2 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 73 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 74.3 70.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 74.3 70.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #3 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 80 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 73.5 69.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 73.5 69.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #4 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 75 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 74 70.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 74 70.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #5 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SE) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Backhoe No 40 77.6 145 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 68.3 64.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 68.3 64.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/1/2014 Case Description: West Covina Self Storage Grading
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SW) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 95 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 95 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 95 0 Tractor No 40 84 95 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Saw 84 77 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 72 68 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 76.1 72.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 16.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 78.4 74.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 84 80 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #2 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 73 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 73 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 73 0 Tractor No 40 84 73 0 Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Saw 86.3 79.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 74.3 70.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 78.4 74.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 80.7 76.7 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 86.3 82.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #3 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 80 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 80 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 80 0 Tractor No 40 84 80 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Saw 85.5 78.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 25.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 73.5 69.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 77.6 73.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 79.9 75.9 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 19.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 85.5 81.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 25.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #4 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 75 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 75 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 75 0 Tractor No 40 84 75 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Saw 86.1 79.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 74 70.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 78.1 74.2 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 80.5 76.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 86.1 82.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #5 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SE) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 145 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 145 0 Dozer No 40 81.7 145 0 Tractor No 40 84 145 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Concrete Saw 80.3 73.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 68.3 64.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 72.4 68.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 74.8 70.8 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 80.3 76.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/1/2014 Case Description: West Covina Self Storage Construction
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SW) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Crane No 16 80.6 95 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 95 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 95 0 Tractor No 40 84 95 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 95 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 75 67 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 72 68 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 69.1 62.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 78.4 74.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 69.1 62.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 78.4 76.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #2 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Crane No 16 80.6 73 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 73 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 73 0 Tractor No 40 84 73 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 73 0 Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 77.3 69.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 74.3 70.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 71.4 64.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 80.7 76.7 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 71.4 64.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 80.7 78.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #3 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Crane No 16 80.6 80 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 80 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 80 0 Tractor No 40 84 80 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 80 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 76.5 68.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 16.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 73.5 69.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 70.6 63.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 79.9 75.9 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 19.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 70.6 63.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 79.9 77.8 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 19.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #4 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Crane No 16 80.6 75 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 75 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 75 0 Tractor No 40 84 75 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 75 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 77 69.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 17 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 74 70.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 71.2 64.2 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 80.5 76.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 71.2 64.2 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 80.5 78.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #5 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SE) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Crane No 16 80.6 145 0 Backhoe No 40 77.6 145 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 145 0 Tractor No 40 84 145 0 Man Lift No 20 74.7 145 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 71.3 63.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Backhoe 68.3 64.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 65.5 58.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 74.8 70.8 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Man Lift 65.5 58.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 74.8 72.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 7/1/2014 Case Description: West Covina Self Storage Architectural Coating
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SW) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 95 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Compressor (air) 72 68 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 78.4 76.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 18.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #2 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 73 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Compressor (air) 74.3 70.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 80.7 78.6 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #3 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 80 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Compressor (air) 73.5 69.5 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 79.9 77.8 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 19.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #4 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (S) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 75 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Compressor (air) 74 70.1 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 14 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 80.5 78.3 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 20.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value. ‐‐‐‐ Receptor #5 ‐‐‐‐ Baselines (dBA) Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night Single Family Residence (SE) Residential 60 60 60
Equipment Spec Actual Receptor Estimated Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA) Compressor (air) No 40 77.7 145 0
Results Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Compressor (air) 68.4 64.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 68.4 64.4 60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Vibration Screening Receptors Distance (ft) 1 - Single-Family Residence (SW) 95 2 - Single-Family Residence (S) 73 3 - Single-Family Residence (S) 80 4 - Single-Family Residence (S) 75 5 - Single-Family Residence (SE) 145
Equipment PPVref D n Eref Eequip PPV
Vibratory Roller 0.21 95 1.3 0.0370 Vibratory Roller 0.21 73 1.3 0.0521 Vibratory Roller 0.21 80 1.3 0.0463 Vibratory Roller 0.21 75 1.3 0.0503 Vibratory Roller 0.21 145 1.3 0.0214
Small Bulldozer 0.003 95 1.3 0.0005 Small Bulldozer 0.003 73 1.3 0.0007 Small Bulldozer 0.003 80 1.3 0.0007 Small Bulldozer 0.003 75 1.3 0.0007 Small Bulldozer 0.003 145 1.3 0.0003
Loaded Truck 0.076 95 1.3 0.0134 Loaded Truck 0.076 73 1.3 0.0189 Loaded Truck 0.076 80 1.3 0.0168 Loaded Truck 0.076 75 1.3 0.0182 Loaded Truck 0.076 145 1.3 0.0077
Table Equipment PPVref Distance PPV Vibratory Roller 0.21 95 0.037025 Vibratory Roller 0.21 73 0.052146 Vibratory Roller 0.21 80 0.046294 Vibratory Roller 0.21 75 0.050346 Vibratory Roller 0.21 145 0.021368 Small Bulldozer 0.003 95 0.000529 Small Bulldozer 0.003 73 0.000745 Small Bulldozer 0.003 80 0.000661 Small Bulldozer 0.003 75 0.000719 Small Bulldozer 0.003 145 0.000305 Loaded Truck 0.076 95 0.0134 Loaded Truck 0.076 73 0.018872 Loaded Truck 0.076 80 0.016754 Loaded Truck 0.076 75 0.01822 Loaded Truck 0.076 145 0.007733
Appendix C Traffic Impacts Memorandum This Page Intentionally Left Blank Traffic Impact Study West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina
June 6, 2014
Prepared for:
DFI Properties, LLC 4120 Douglas Boulevard, Suite #306-521 Granite Bay, CA 95746
Prepared by:
1100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201 Monterey Park, California 91754 (323) 260-4703
JB41045 Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... I
PROPOSED PROJECT ...... I SCOPE OF STUDY ...... I TRIP GENERATION FINDINGS ...... I STUDY INTERSECTION SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ...... I RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES ...... I 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 1
A. PROPOSED PROJECT ...... 1 B. PROJECT LOCATION ...... 1 C. INTERSECTIONS AFFECTED ...... 1 D. PROJECT ANALYSIS SCOPE AND DETAIL ...... 5 E. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE METHODOLOGY ...... 6 2. EXISTING (YEAR 2014) CONDITIONS ...... 9
A. EXISTING STREET SYSTEM...... 9 B. EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE ...... 11 C. EXISTING (YEAR 2014) CONDITIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ...... 13 3. PROJECT TRAFFIC ...... 16
A. PROJECT TRIP GENERATION...... 16 B. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ...... 16 4. EXISTING (2014) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS ...... 22 5. CUMULATIVE BASE (YEAR 2021) CONDITIONS ...... 25
A. AMBIENT GROWTH ...... 25 B. CUMULATIVE PROJECTS ...... 25 C. CUMULATIVE BASE (YEAR 2021) CONDITIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ...... 29 6. CUMULATIVE BASE (YEAR 2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS ...... 32 7. CMP ANALYSIS ...... 35
A. CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ...... 35 8. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... 36
A. METHODOLOGY FOR STUDY INTERSECTION IMPACTS ...... 36 B. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS – EXISTING (2014) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS ...... 36 C. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS – CUMULATIVE (2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS ...... 36
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page i Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 List of Figures FIGURE 1 – PROJECT LOCATION 2 FIGURE 2 – PROJECT SITE PLAN 3 FIGURE 3 – STUDY INTERSECTIONS 4 FIGURE 4 – EXISTING LANE CONFIGURATION 10 FIGURE 5 – EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE 12 FIGURE 6 – EXISTING (2014) – AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 14 FIGURE 7 – EXISTING (2014) – PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 15 FIGURE 8 - PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION - INBOUND 18 FIGURE 9 - PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION - OUTBOUND 19 FIGURE 10 - PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT - AM PEAK HOUR 20 FIGURE 11 - PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT – PM PEAK HOUR 21 FIGURE 12 - EXISTING WITH-PROJECT – AM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 23 FIGURE 13 - EXISTING WITH-PROJECT – WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 24 FIGURE 14 – LOCATIONS OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS 26 FIGURE 15 – CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRIP ASSIGNMENT – AM PEAK HOUR 27 FIGURE 16 – CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRIP ASSIGNMENT – PM PEAK HOUR 28 FIGURE 17 – CUMULATIVE BASE (2021) CONDITIONS – AM PEAK-HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 30 FIGURE 18 – CUMULATIVE BASE (2021) CONDITIONS – PM PEAK-HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 31 FIGURE 19 – CUMULATIVE (2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS – AM PEAK-HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 33 FIGURE 20 – CUMULATIVE (2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS – PM PEAK-HOUR INTERSECTION VOLUMES 34
List of Tables TABLE 1 – LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS 7 TABLE 2 – STUDY AREA ROADWAY DESCRIPTIONS 9 TABLE 3 – EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES 11 TABLE 4 – INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE – EXISTING (2014) CONDITIONS 13 TABLE 5 – PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 17 TABLE 6 – INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE – EXISTING (2014) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS 22 TABLE 7 – TRIP GENERATION OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS 25 TABLE 8 – INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CUMULATIVE BASE (2021) CONDITIONS 29 TABLE 9 – INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE CUMULATIVE (2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS 32 TABLE 10 – DETERMINATION OF EXISTING WITH-PROJECT IMPACTS 37 TABLE 11 – DETERMINATION OF CUMULATIVE WITH-PROJECT IMPACTS 38
Appendices
APPENDIX A – STUDY SCOPING DOCUMENT APPENDIX B – TRAFFIC COUNT DATA APPENDIX C – STUDY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS – EXISTING (2014) CONDITIONS APPENDIX D – STUDY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS – EXISTING (2014) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS APPENDIX E – STUDY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS – CUMULATIVE BASE (2021) CONDITIONS APPENDIX F – STUDY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS – CUMULATIVE (2021) WITH-PROJECT CONDITIONS
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page ii Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Executive Summary
Proposed Project
A traffic impact study was conducted for a proposed self-storage project (Project) located on the northwest corner of South Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue within the City of West Covina. The proposed Project would construct a three-story with basement self-storage building with 77,142 square feet of floor area.
Vehicular access to the project site will be provided via two driveways on Garvey Avenue. The proposed Project would provide 12 off-street parking spaces plus three spaces for loading.
Scope of Study
The Project study area extents, as defined through consultation with City staff, included weekday peak- hour impact analysis at six study intersections. Traffic impacts were analyzed during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours and included the following scenarios:
x Existing (2014) Conditions x Existing (2014) with-Project Conditions x Cumulative Base (2021) Conditions x Cumulative (2021) with-Project Conditions
Trip Generation Findings
Trip generation calculations for the proposed Project land use included rates established by Trip Generation, 9th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Based on these approved rates, the Project would generate a total of 193 daily vehicle trips, with 11 trips (six inbound and five outbound) occurring during the a.m. peak hour, and 20 trips (10 inbound and 10 outbound) occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
Study Intersection Significant Impacts
Five of the six study intersections under future conditions would operate at acceptable levels of service of D or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive intersection, which would worsen within LOS E during the p.m. peak hour. The incremental change in operations would not be large enough to create a significant impact. Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause significant traffic impacts at any of the study intersections during the a.m. or p.m. peak hours.
Recommended Mitigation Measures
Based on the level of service analysis conducted for the six study intersections, the addition of Project- related trips to the surrounding traffic network would not impact the study intersections based on the City’s significant traffic impact thresholds. Therefore, mitigation measures are not recommended.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page ES-1 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 1. Project Description
This study report identifies the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed self-storage development (Project) in the City of West Covina. KOA Corporation was retained by DFI Properties, LLC to study the traffic impacts of the proposed Project. Scoping efforts and report submittals were conducted directly with the City of West Covina.
A. Proposed Project
The proposed Project would construct a three-story with basement self-storage building with 77,142 square feet of floor area. Vehicular access to the project site will be provided via two driveways on Garvey Avenue. The proposed Project would provide 12 off-street parking spaces plus three spaces for loading.
The following sections examine the potential impacts of Project-generated vehicle trips on weekday peak-hour operations at the study area intersections. Prior to the start of the study, KOA coordinated with staff from the City of West Covina to obtain consensus on the traffic scope, methodology and assumptions. A scoping document was prepared and submitted for review and comment by the City, and final revision by KOA.
B. Project Location
The proposed Project site is located on the northwest corner of South Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue.
Figure 1 illustrates the study area and the site location in relation to the surrounding street system.
C. Intersections Affected
For the Project traffic impact analysis, six study intersections were defined for the study area analyzed intersections:
1. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 2. South Lark Ellen Avenue / South Garvey Avenue 3. Lakes Drive / Glendora Avenue 4. Vincent Avenue /Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 5. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Stuart Avenue 6. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Cameron Avenue
Figure 2 illustrates the proposed Project site plan. Figure 3 illustrates the locations of the study intersections.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 1 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 N No Scale
Figure 1
.
e v
Project Location A
y
e
v
r
a G
Azusa Ave. . . ve . A St St. rt od na o . ua w rdi St ve m a A Ma h Holly Oak Dr. S on er . e m . a St Av C d n o a o
km Garvey Ave. S. kw or ar W L
Lark Ellen Ave.
k
e
e
r
C
ut
n
l
a W Mobek St. Stuart Ave.
.
y
w
k 10 P
.
e. k
v . A e r Ave
e D dy r
ce
C d an
B o
rvi
. o
. e t
v u w N A Se
n k
. l r
e a a
v a
L
r W
A o
Charlinda St.
d
y n
e
e l
v G West Covina Self-Storage Project
r
.
a r
G D
s
e
k
a Valinda Ave. L
Ave. Maplewood
. e
v
A
t
n e c n i
. V ve A ia rn fo li a C LEGEND Project Site West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 2 Project Site Plan N No Scale
Figure 3
.
e
v
A
y
e
v Study Intersections r
a G
Azusa Ave. . . ve . A St St. rt od na o . ua w rdi St ve m a A Ma h Holly Oak Dr. S on er . e m . a St Av C d n o a o
km Garvey Ave. S. kw or ar W L 6 5 2
1 Lark Ellen Ave.
k
e
e
r
C
ut
n
l
a W Mobek St. Stuart Ave.
.
y
w
k 10 P
.
e. k
v . A e r Ave
e D dy r
ce
C d an
B o
rvi
. o
. e t
v 3 u w N A Se
n k
. l r
e a a
v a
L
r W
A o
Charlinda St.
d
y n
e
e l
v G West Covina Self-Storage Project
r
.
a r
G D
s
e
k
a Valinda Ave. L
Ave. Maplewood
4
. e
v
A
t
n e c n i
. V ve A ia rn fo li a C LEGEND Study Intersection Project Site # Introduction
D. Project Analysis Scope and Detail
The proposed Project site is located within the City of West Covina. KOA coordinated with the City at the start of this study to achieve consensus on assumptions such as study intersections, ambient growth and area/cumulative projects.
A scoping document was prepared and submitted to the City of West Covina for review and comment. A copy of the finalized scoping document is provided in Appendix A.
The Project study area extents, as defined through consultation with City staff, included weekday peak- hour impact analysis at six study intersections.
Traffic impacts were analyzed for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours, within the following scenarios:
x Existing (2014) Conditions x Existing (2014) plus-Project Conditions x Cumulative Base (2021) Conditions x Cumulative (2021) with-Project Conditions
The TRAFFIX software was used to perform the analysis of level of service at the study intersections.
Existing (Year 2014) Conditions
Fieldwork within the Project study area was undertaken to identify the condition of major roadways, to identify traffic controls, approach lane configuration, and other characteristics of each study intersection.
KOA compiled manual intersection counts for these six intersections, which were conducted on Thursday, May 1, 2014, during the 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. peak periods.
Traffic count summaries are provided in Appendix B of this report. Existing level of service values at the study intersections are discussed within Section 2 of this report.
Project Trip Generation and Distribution
Project trip generation was based on trip rates defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition. The detailed methodology utilized for the Project trip generation and distribution calculations is discussed in Section 3 of this report.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 5 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Introduction
Existing (Year 2014) with-Project Condition
Based on the traffic that is projected for the proposed Project and the traffic count totals, an Existing with-Project conditions scenario was analyzed per the Sunnyvale and Expo Line California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) court case decisions that required impacts be analyzed against existing conditions. The level of service values for existing with-Project conditions at the study intersections are discussed in Section 4 of this report.
Cumulative Base (Year 2021) Conditions
Per the City traffic study guidelines, the year 2021 was selected as the future/cumulative analysis year, based on the anticipated 2016 opening date of the proposed Project plus an additional five years after the Project is completed. In order to acknowledge regional traffic growth that would affect operations at the study intersections, an ambient/background traffic growth rate was applied. The future traffic forecasts include an ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year for a total of 7.0 percent, which was applied to the existing peak hour counts. The rate is consistent with the general traffic growth in the study area and complies with the City traffic study guidelines.
In addition to future ambient growth, traffic from area/cumulative projects (approved and pending developments) was also included as part of the year-2021 analysis. KOA obtained information from planning staff at the City of West Covina pertaining to area projects that would add measurable volumes to the study area intersections and are located within the City. Peak-hour trips that would be generated from each of the area projects were computed based on Trip Generation (9th edition), published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).
Operations at the study intersections for the cumulative base scenario are discussed in Section 5 of this report.
Cumulative Base (Year 2021) with-Project Condition
Based on the Cumulative Base (Year 2021) without-Project volumes plus traffic from the proposed Project, the Cumulative Base (Year 2021) with-Project traffic volume conditions were determined and analyzed. The level of service values at the study intersections for Cumulative Base (Year 2021) with- Project conditions are discussed in Section 6 of this report.
E. Intersection Level of Service Methodology
For analysis of level of service (LOS) at signalized intersections, the City of West Covina has designated the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology as the desired tool. The concept of roadway level of service under the ICU methodology is calculated as the volume of vehicles that pass through the facility divided by the capacity of that facility. A 10% adjustment to the clearance and loss time factor based on the critical phases of the signalized control were included in the traffic analysis. A facility is “at capacity” (ICU value of 1.00 or greater) when extreme congestion occurs. This value is a function of hourly volumes, signal phasing, and approach lane configuration on each leg of the intersection.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 6 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Introduction
Level of service values range from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A indicates excellent operating conditions with little delay to motorists, whereas LOS F represents congested conditions with excessive vehicle delay. The upper range of LOS E is typically defined as the operating “capacity” of a roadway.
Table 1 provides descriptions of general roadway operations for each LOS value, as defined within the Highway Capacity Manual (published by the Transportation Research Board).
Table 1 – Level of Service Definitions
Intersection Volume/Capacity Ratio LOS Definition (ICU) Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection appear quite open, turning movements are A 0.000 - 0.600 easily made, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation. Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles. This B represents stable flow. An approach to an intersection 0.601 - 0.700 may occasionally be fully utilized and traffic queues start to form. Good operation. Occasionally backups may develop C behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat 0.701 - 0.800 restricted. Fair operation. There are no long-standing traffic D queues. This level is typically associated with design 0.801 - 0.900 practice for peak periods. Poor operation. Some long standing vehicular queues E 0.901 - 1.000 develop on critical approaches. Forced flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups from locations downstream or on the cross street may restrict or prevent movements of vehicles out of the F Greater than 1.000 intersection approach lanes; therefore, volumes carried are not predictable. Potential for stop and go type traffic flow. Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2000 and Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, NCHRP Circular 212, 1982
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 7 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Introduction
Significant Traffic Impacts
Traffic impacts are identified if a proposed development will result in a significant change in traffic conditions at a study intersection. A significant impact is typically identified if project-related traffic will cause service levels to deteriorate beyond a threshold limit specified by the overseeing agency. Impacts can also be significant if an intersection is already operating below acceptable level of service values and project traffic will cause a further decline below a threshold.
As defined by City of West Covina traffic study review policies, significant impacts of a proposed project at an intersection must be mitigated to a level of insignificance. In cases where capacity increases are possible, KOA analyzed mitigation measures that would restore operations commensurate with the removal of the incremental impacts of the Project. The City significant impact standard is as follows:
Significant Project Traffic Impact Threshold Level of Project-Related Increase Service Volume/Capacity Ratio in V/C D to F 0.800 or greater Equal to or greater than 0.02
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 8 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 2. Existing (Year 2014) Conditions
This section describes the existing conditions within the study area, in terms of roadway facilities and operational characteristics.
A. Existing Street System
Fieldwork within the Project study area was undertaken to identify traffic control and approach lane configuration at each study intersection, and to identify the locations of on-street parking availability and the locations of transit stops. The discussion presented here is limited to specific roadways that traverse the study intersections and serve the Project site.
Primary roadways within the study area are described below in Table 2. Figure 4 illustrates the existing approach lane and signalized control configurations of the study intersections.
Table 2 – Study Area Roadway Descriptions
Posted # Lanes Median Parking Restrictions General Segment From To Speed Type Land Use NB / EB SB / WB NB / WB SB / EB Limit Workman Ave Toland Ave Homerest Ave 1 1 ST Permitted Permitted Residential 35 Garvey Ave Glendora Ave Cherrywood St 1 1 DY No Parking No Parking Residential 35 Stuart Ave S Pima Ave S Turner Ave 1 1 ST Permitted Permitted Residential 25 Service Avenue Valinda Ave S Lark Ellen Ave 1 1 ST Permitted Permitted Residential 25 Recreational / Valinda Ave S Lark Ellen Ave 2 2 DY No Parking No Parking 25 / 40 Residential Cameron Avenue No Parking / No Parking / School / S Lark Ellen Ave Azusa Ave 2 2 2LT 25 / 40 Permitted Permitted Residential West Covina Vincent Avenue I-10 Freeway 3 3 Median No Parking No Parking Commercial 35 Pkwy West Covina No Stopping California Ave Glendora Ave 2 2 Median No Parking Commercial 35 Parkway Anytime No Stopping Glendora Ave Service Ave 2 2 DY No Parking Commercial 25 / 40 Valinda Avenue Anytime Service Ave Cameron Ave 2 2 DY Permitted Permitted Residential 40 No Parking / No Parking / Glendora Avenue Lakes Dr Vincent Ave 2 2 DY Commercial 35 Permitted Permitted Permitted / No Permitted / No Workman Ave Garvey Ave 2 2 DY Residential 40 Parking Parking Garvey Ave Stuart Ave 1 1 DY Permitted Permitted Residential 40 S Lark Ellen Avenue Stuart Ave Service Ave 1 1 DY Permitted Permitted Residential 40 School / Service Ave Cameron Ave 2 2 DY Permitted Permitted 25 / 40 Residential ST- Striped DY - Double Yellow 2LT - Dual Left Turn RM - Raised Median
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 9 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 1 4
S 1 Workman Ave. S
Shamwood St.
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 2 ia 5
A L
v a
e
r
k . r. * D E
l
s l * e e
k n La 4 . A e S v v S
A e
. 3 . ra e o v Stuart Ave. d A n * le ndy 5 G a Stuart Ave. A
B z Holly O ak Dr. u
s
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l alnut Creek i W
n V
d
a
A 6 3 v
e . ServiceAve. * Larkwood St. S Larkwood Dr. S
Mobek S t. *
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site
# Study Intersection S Signalized Intersection N
STOP Stop Sign Controlled Intersection Note
Stop Sign *De facto right turn lane assumed due to wide curb lane Intersection Lane Geometry No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 4 Existing Lane Configuration Existing (Year 2014) Conditions
B. Existing Public Transit Service
The Project study area is served by bus transit lines operated by the City of West Covina and Foothill Transit. Transit service that is accessible from the Project site is operated by the City of West Covina. Commuter service by Foothill Transit is provided at West Covina Parkway bus stops/transfer points.
Table 3 summarizes the existing bus lines within the study area.
Table 3 – Existing Transit Services
Agency Line From To Via Peak Frequency Lark Ellen Avenue / Cameron Avenue / Valinda Avenue / West Covina Blue Route Circular Loop Within City Limit 65 Minutes Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive / West Covina Parkway Cameron Avenue / Lark Ellen Avenue / Garvey Avenue / West Covina Red Route Circular Loop Within City Limit 56 Minutes Lakes Drive / West Covina Parkway / Workman Avenue Cameron Avenue / Lark Ellen West Covina Green Route Circular Loop Within City Limit 30 - 60 Minutes Avenue Valinda Avenue / West Covina Foothill Transit 178 City of Industry El Monte 30 Minutes Parkway Glendora Avenue / Vincent Foothill Transit 185 City of Industry Azusa 30 Minutes Avenue Foothill Transit 280 City of Industry Azusa Azusa Avenue 20 Minutes West Covina Parkway / Foothill Transit 281 City of Industry Glendora Valinda Avenue / Cameron 30 Minutes Avenue
I-10 Freeway / Vincent Avenue Foothill Transit 480 Montclair West Covina 25- 30 Minutes / West Covina Parkway
Cameron Avenue / Valinda Foothill Transit 488 Glendora El Monte 30 - 60 Minutes Avenue / Glendora Avenue I-10 Freeway / West Covina Foothill Transit 498 Azusa Los Angeles 5 to 10 Minutes Parkway / Workman Avenue Foothill Transit 499 San Dimas Los Angeles I-10 Freeway 4 to 15 Minutes Foothill Transit 699 Montclair Los Angeles I-10 Freeway 7 to 20 Minutes I-10 Freeway / West Covina Foothill Transit Silver Streak Montclair Los Angeles 7 to 20 Minutes Parkway
Figure 5 illustrates the routes of these transit lines within the study area.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 11 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 N No Scale
Figure 5
.
e
v
A
y
e
v
r
a G Existing Transit Service
Azusa Ave. . . ve A St St. rt od na o . ua w rdi St ve m a A Ma h Holly Oak Dr. S on er . e m . a St Av C d n o a o
km Garvey Ave. S. kw or ar W L
Lark Ellen Ave.
k
e
e
r
C
ut
n
l
a W Mobek St. Stuart Ave.
.
y
w
k 10 P
.
e. k
v . A e r Ave
e D dy r
ce
C d an
B o
rvi
. o
. e t
v u w N A Se
n k
. l r
e a a
v a
L
r W
A o
Charlinda St.
d
y n
e
e l
v G West Covina Self-Storage Project
r
.
a r
G D
s
e
k
a Valinda Ave. L
Foothill 488 Foothill 498 Foothill 499 & 699 West Covina Blue Line West Covina Red Line West Covina Green Line
. e
v
A
t
n
e c n i V
. LEGEND ve A ia rn fo li a C Project Site Foothill Silver Streak Foothill 178 Foothill 185 Foothill 280 Foothill 281 Foothill 480 Existing (Year 2014) Conditions
C. Existing (Year 2014) Conditions Level of Service Analysis
The results of the counts were utilized to determine existing a.m. and p.m. peak-hour traffic conditions. The existing levels of service were calculated based on the traffic counts and intersection geometrics. Table 4 provides the level of service results at each study intersection under existing (year 2014) conditions.
Table 4 – Intersection Level of Service – Existing (2014) Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak Study Intersections V/C or V/C or LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 0.549 A 0.736 C 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue 0.489 A 0.632 B 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive 0.224 A 0.341 A 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 0.601 B 0.847 D 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue 0.378 A 0.356 A 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue 0.642 B 0.646 B
All of the study intersections are currently operating at LOS C or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive, which is currently operating at LOS D during the p.m. peak hour.
Traffic count summaries are provided in Appendix B of this report. The existing peak-hour intersection volumes are illustrated on Figure 6 (a.m. peak hour) and Figure 7 (p.m. peak).
Level of service worksheets for existing conditions are provided in Appendix C of this report.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 13 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 428 1117 64 105 214 139
49 36 76 46 1 169 1 196 Workman Ave. 25 4 21 60 59 16 27
48 71 29 30 Shamwood St. 476 1298
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 432 ia 419
A La 86 9 v 13 18
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 86 20 ke en 16 29 La
4 . A 2 e 5 20 76 v v 35 29 A e
. 3 . 3 7 e 36 110 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 8 15 G a Stuart Ave. A 9 85
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 430 s 437
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
102 A 358
v
e
33 2 . 87 127 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 13 2 28 67 Larkwood Dr. 10 3 10 508 6 642 22 4 50 76 Mobek S t. 33 14 109 140 90 374
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 6 Existing (2014) - AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 605 1095 31 138 537 237
48 71 550 224 1 347 1 162 Workman Ave. 169 4 104 61 97 183 112
35 116 130 93 Shamwood St. 537 1189
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 560 ia 555
A La 118 30 v 12 29
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 221 11 ke en 8 28 La
4 . A 2 e 5 113 50 v v 24 26 A e
. 3 . 17 11 e 18 63 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 10 14 G a Stuart Ave. A 14 61
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 442 s 447
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
107 A 444
v
e
66 6 . 111 89 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 96 11 94 64 Larkwood Dr. 32 3 17 571 6 389 74 17 71 87 Mobek S t. 62 25 58 111 205 340
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 7 Existing (2014) - PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 3. Project Traffic
This section defines the traffic that would be generated by the proposed Project in a three-step process including trip generation, trip distribution and trip assignment.
A. Project Trip Generation
The proposed Project would construct a self-storage building with 77,142 square feet in floor area. Vehicular access to the project site will be provided via two driveways on Garvey Avenue.
Trip generation calculations for the proposed Project land use were based on rates established within Trip Generation, 9th Edition. To be conservative, the Project trip generation calculation was conducted on the building square footage is summarized in Table 5.
The Project would generate a total of 193 daily vehicle trips, with 11 trips (six inbound and five outbound) occurring during the a.m. peak hour, and 20 trips (10 inbound and 10 outbound) occurring during the p.m. peak hour.
Alternative project trip generation calculations were conducted for rentable square footage and the number of storage units, but the trip generation for the building square footage resulted in more project trips and therefore was used in the traffic analysis.
B. Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Trip distribution is the process of assigning the directions from which traffic will access a project site. Trip distribution is dependent upon the land use characteristics of the project, the local roadway network, and the general locations of other land uses to which project trips would originate or terminate. Based on assumptions defined within the scoping document provided to the City, a trip distribution pattern was applied to the Project trips.
Figure 8 illustrates the inbound trip distribution and Figure 9 illustrates the outbound trip distribution percentages that were applied to Project traffic.
Based on the trip generation and distribution assumptions described above, Project traffic was assigned to the roadway system based on the site driveway location and the roadways that would likely be used to access the regional highway system.
The peak-hour Project trip assignment is illustrated on Figure 10 (a.m. peak) and Figure 11 (p.m. peak).
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 16 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Cumulative Base (Year 2021) Conditions
Table 5 – Project Trip Generation
Weekday
ITE Average AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Code Intensity Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Trip Generation Rates Mini-Warehouse 151 1.000 k.s.f. 2.50 55% 45% 0.14 50% 50% 0.26 (Self-Storage) Proposed Project Mini-Warehouse 151 77.142 k.s.f. 193 6 5 11 10 10 20 (Self-Storage) Source: ITE, 9th Edition, unless otherwise noted. k.s.f. = thousand square feet
Weekday
ITE Average AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Code Intensity Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Trip Generation Rates Mini-Warehouse 151 1 R.A. 1.65 52% 48% 0.11 53% 47% 0.19 (Self-Storage) Proposed Project Mini-Warehouse 151 58.884 k.s.f. 97 3 3 6 6 5 11 (Self-Storage) Source: ITE, 9th Edition, unless otherwise noted. RA= Rentable Area
Weekday
ITE Average AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Code Intensity Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Trip Generation Rates Mini-Warehouse 151 1 units 0.25 50% 50% 0.02 48% 52% 0.02 (Self-Storage) Proposed Project Mini-Warehouse 151 558 units 140 6 5 11 5 6 11 (Self-Storage) Source: ITE, 9th Edition, unless otherwise noted. units = number of storage units
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 17 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 15%
0% 0% 0% 0% 1 0% 1 0% Workman Ave. 0% 4 0% 5% 10% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0% 0% Shamwood St. 0% 0%
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 0% ia 0%
A La 35% 0% v 0% 0%
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 0% 0% ke en 0% 10% La
4 . A 2 e 5 0% 10% v v 0% 0% A e
. 3 . 0% 0% e 0% 0% ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 30% 0% G a Stuart Ave. A 0% 0%
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 0% s 20%
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
0% A 0%
v
e
0% 0% . 0% 0% Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 15% 0% 0% 0% Larkwood Dr. 0% 3 0% 0% 6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Mobek S t. 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 20%
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 8 Project Trip Distribution - Inbound 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0% 15% 1 0% 1 0% Workman Ave. 0% 4 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
5% 10% 0% 0% Shamwood St. 20% 0%
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 0% ia 20%
A La 0% 0% v 0% 10%
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 35% 0% ke en 0% 0% La
4 . A 2 e 5 10% 0% v v 0% 0% A e
. 3 . 30% 0% e 0% 0% ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 0% 0% G a Stuart Ave. A 0% 0%
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 0% s 0%
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
10% A 20%
v
e
15% 0% . 0% 0% Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 0% 0% 0% 0% Larkwood Dr. 0% 3 0% 0% 6 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Mobek S t. 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 9 Project Trip Distribution - Outbound 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 Workman Ave. 0 4 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 0 Shamwood St. 1 0
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 0 ia 1
A La 2 0 v 0 1
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 2 0 ke en 0 1 La
4 . A 2 e 5 0 1 v v 0 0 A e
. 3 . 2 0 e 0 0 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 2 0 G a Stuart Ave. A 0 0
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 0 s 1
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
1 A 1
v
e
1 0 . 0 0 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 1 0 0 0 Larkwood Dr. 0 3 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 Mobek S t. 0 0 0 0 1 1
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 10 Project Trip Assignment - AM Peak Hour 2 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 Workman Ave. 0 4 0 1 1 0 0
1 1 0 0 Shamwood St. 2 0
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 0 ia 2
A La 4 0 v 0 1
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 4 0 ke en 0 1 La
4 . A 2 e 5 1 1 v v 0 0 A e
. 3 . 3 0 e 0 0 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 3 0 G a Stuart Ave. A 0 0
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 0 s 2
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
1 A 2
v
e
2 0 . 0 0 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 2 0 0 0 Larkwood Dr. 0 3 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 Mobek S t. 0 0 0 0 1 2
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 11 Project Trip Assignment - PM Peak Hour 4. Existing (2014) with-Project Conditions
This section documents existing traffic conditions at the study intersections with the addition of Project- generated traffic. Traffic volumes for these conditions were derived by adding Project trips to the existing traffic volumes.
Table 6 summarizes the resulting V/C and LOS values at the study intersections for the existing with- Project conditions.
Table 6 – Intersection Level of Service – Existing (2014) with-Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak Study Intersections V/C or V/C or LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 0.550 A 0.738 C 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue 0.492 A 0.638 B 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive 0.226 A 0.344 A 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 0.602 B 0.849 D 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue 0.379 A 0.357 A 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue 0.642 B 0.647 B
All of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service of C or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive intersection, which would continue to operate at LOS D during the p.m. peak hour.
The existing with-Project traffic volumes for the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour are illustrated on Figures 12 and 13, respectively.
The existing with-Project traffic analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix D of this report.
The determination of significant traffic impacts created by Project traffic is discussed in Section 8 of this report.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 22 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 429 1117 64 105 214 140
49 36 76 47 1 169 1 196 Workman Ave. 25 4 21 60 60 16 27
48 72 29 30 Shamwood St. 477 1298
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 432 ia 420
A La 88 9 v 13 19
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 88 20 ke en 16 30 La
4 . A 2 e 5 20 77 v v 35 29 A e
. 3 . 5 7 e 36 110 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 10 15 G a Stuart Ave. A 9 85
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 430 s 438
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
103 A 359
v
e
34 2 . 87 127 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 14 2 28 67 Larkwood Dr. 10 3 10 508 6 642 22 4 50 76 Mobek S t. 33 14 109 140 91 375
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 12 Existing with Project - AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 607 1095 31 138 537 239
48 71 550 226 1 347 1 162 Workman Ave. 169 4 104 62 98 183 112
36 117 130 93 Shamwood St. 539 1189
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 560 ia 557
A La 122 30 v 12 30
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 225 11 ke en 8 29 La
4 . A 2 e 5 114 51 v v 24 26 A e
. 3 . 20 11 e 18 63 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 13 14 G a Stuart Ave. A 14 61
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 442 s 449
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
108 A 446
v
e
68 6 . 111 89 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 98 11 94 64 Larkwood Dr. 32 3 17 571 6 389 74 17 71 87 Mobek S t. 62 25 58 111 206 342
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 13 Existing with Project - PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 5. Cumulative Base (Year 2021) Conditions
This section provides an analysis of the cumulative base conditions in the study area with ambient growth and cumulative project trips, but without traffic from the Project. The year 2021 was selected for analysis based on the anticipated 2016 opening date of the proposed Project plus an additional five years after the Project is completed, which is consistent with the City’s traffic study guidelines. The applied ambient growth factor and calculation of trips generated by cumulative projects are discussed below. A. Ambient Growth
The future period forecast included an ambient growth rate to account for both regional population and employment growth outside of the study area. An annual growth rate of 1% was used for this purpose. Thus, a growth factor of 1.07 was applied to existing traffic counts to define the future 2021 cumulative base conditions. B. Cumulative Projects
Cumulative projects were researched within the City limits due to the Project location and adjacent land uses. KOA contacted planning staff at the City of West Covina to define a list of planned/pending area projects. These seven projects were considered to potentially contribute measurable traffic volumes to the study area during the future analysis period.
Figure 14 illustrates the locations of the included projects. Trip generation calculations were based on the project land use intensities and trip generation rates defined by Trip Generation (9th Edition). Table 7 summarizes the trip generation of the included area projects. This traffic was added to the study intersections using a distribution pattern based on the hierarchy of the local street system.
Table 7 – Trip Generation of Cumulative Projects Map Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Location Land Use Intensity Units ID Total Total In Out Total In Out Retail 20.000 k.s.f. 854 19 12 7 74 36 38 1 301 S. Glendora Ave Apartment 450 d.u. 2,993 230 46 184 279 181 98 2 512 S. Valinda Ave Single Family Residential 19 d.u. 181 14 4 10 19 12 7 Retail 5.160 k.s.f. 220 5 3 2 19 9 10 3 4101 & 4111 S. Nogales St Townhouse/Condominium 33 d.u. 219 17 3 14 33 21 12 4141 Nogales St / 2649 4 Medical, Office, Retail * 23.588 k.s.f. 694 35 19 16 53 27 26 Valley Blvd 5 1030 S. Glendora Ave Retail 2.000 k.s.f. 85 2 1 1 7 4 3 6 1611 W. San Bernardino Rd Townhouse/Condominium 135 d.u. 784 59 10 49 70 47 23 7 520 S. Lark Ellen Ave Single Family Residential 45 d.u. 428 34 9 25 45 28 17 Total 6,460 415 108 307 600 365 235 d.u. = dwelling units, k.s.f. = 1,000 square feet of floor area Project list provided by the City of West Covina, dated April 29, 2013. Trip Generation Rates Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) "Trip Generation - 9th Edition". * Trip generation totals from "Traffic Impact Analysis – 2649 E. Valley Boulevard, West Covina", produced by KOA Corporation on May 15, 2013, was used for this project.
Table 7 indicates that the area projects are expected to generate approximately 6,460 daily weekday trips, of which 415 trips (108 inbound and 307 outbound) would occur during the a.m. peak hour and 600 trips (365 inbound and 235 outbound) would occur during the p.m. peak hour. The assignment for area project trips is illustrated on Figure 15 (a.m. peak) and Figure 16 (p.m. peak). Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 25 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 N No Scale
Figure 14
.
e
v
A
y
e
v
r
a G 3,4
Azusa Ave. Locations of Cumulative Projects . . ve A St St. rt od na o . ua w rdi St ve m a A Ma h Holly Oak Dr. S on er . e m . a St Av C d n o a o
km Garvey Ave. S. kw or ar W L 7 6 5 2
1 Lark Ellen Ave.
k
e
e
r
C
ut
n
l
a W Mobek St. Stuart Ave.
.
y
w
k 10 P
.
e. k
v . A e r Ave
e D dy r
ce
C d an
B o
rvi
. o
. e t
v 3 u w N A Se
n k
. l r
e a a
v a
L
r W
A o
Charlinda St.
d
y n
e
e l
v G West Covina Self-Storage Project
r
.
a r
D 1
G 2
s
e
k
a Valinda Ave. L
4
. e
v
A
t
n e c n i
. V ve A ia rn o if 6 l a C LEGEND 5 Study Intersection Project Site Area Project # # 1 8 0 0 0 29
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Workman Ave. 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 Shamwood St. 3 105
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 1 ia 2
A La 0 0 v 0 0
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 1 0 ke en 0 0 La
4 . A 2 e 5 0 0 v v 0 0 A e
. 3 . 1 1 e 0 1 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 3 3 G a Stuart Ave. A 0 2
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 2 s 7
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
0 A 1
v
e
0 0 . 0 7 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 0 0 0 3 Larkwood Dr. 0 3 0 12 6 4 0 0 0 0 Mobek S t. 0 0 0 0 1 0
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 15 Cumulative Projects Trip Assignment - AM Peak Hour 3 13 0 0 0 109
0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Workman Ave. 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 Shamwood St. 2 80
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 2 ia 8
A La 1 0 v 0 0
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 1 0 ke en 0 0 La
4 . A 2 e 5 0 0 v v 0 0 A e
. 3 . 3 3 e 0 2 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 2 2 G a Stuart Ave. A 0 1
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 1 s 5
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
1 A 1
v
e
0 0 . 0 5 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 0 0 0 8 Larkwood Dr. 0 3 0 8 6 13 0 0 0 0 Mobek S t. 0 0 0 0 1 1
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 16 Cumulative Projects Trip Assignment - PM Peak Hour Existing with-Project Conditions
C. Cumulative Base (Year 2021) Conditions Level of Service Analysis
To analyze future conditions without the proposed Project, intersection turn volumes with ambient growth and trips generated by area projects were processed with the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method for the signalized study intersections.
Table 8 summarizes the a.m. and p.m. peak hour results of this analysis. Bold text within the table indicates the study intersections that would operate at LOS E or F under this scenario.
Table 8 – Intersection Level of Service Cumulative Base (2021) Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak Study Intersections V/C or V/C or LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 0.582 A 0.782 C 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue 0.520 A 0.674 B 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive 0.233 A 0.359 A 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 0.680 B 0.964 E 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue 0.401 A 0.378 A 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue 0.685 B 0.690 B
All of the study intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service values of C or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive intersection, which would worsen to LOS E during the p.m. peak hour.
The peak-hour study intersection turn movement volumes for this scenario are provided on Figure 17 (a.m. peak) and Figure 18 (p.m. peak). The scenario analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix E of this report.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 29 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 460 1206 69 113 229 178
53 39 81 49 1 181 1 210 Workman Ave. 27 4 23 64 63 17 29
51 76 31 32 Shamwood St. 513 1497
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 464 ia 451
A La 92 10 v 14 19
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 93 21 ke en 17 31 La
4 . A 2 e 5 21 81 v v 38 31 A e
. 3 . 4 9 e 39 119 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 12 19 G a Stuart Ave. A 10 93
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 463 s 476
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
109 A 385
v
e
35 2 . 93 143 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 14 2 30 75 Larkwood Dr. 11 3 11 557 6 692 24 4 54 81 Mobek S t. 35 15 117 150 97 401
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 17 Cumulative Base (2021) Conditions - AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 652 1187 33 148 576 363
51 76 590 240 1 372 1 174 Workman Ave. 181 4 111 65 104 196 120
38 124 139 100 Shamwood St. 578 1355
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 602 ia 603
A La 128 32 v 13 31
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 238 12 ke en 9 30 La
4 . A 2 e 5 121 54 v v 26 28 A e
. 3 . 21 15 e 19 70 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 13 17 G a Stuart Ave. A 15 66
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 475 s 484
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
116 A 477
v
e
71 6 . 119 100 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 103 12 101 77 Larkwood Dr. 34 3 18 620 6 430 79 18 76 93 Mobek S t. 66 27 62 119 221 366
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 18 Cumulative Base (2021) Conditions - PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 6. Cumulative Base (Year 2021) with-Project Conditions
This section documents future traffic conditions at the study intersections with the addition of Project- generated traffic. Traffic volumes for these conditions were derived by adding Project trips to the Cumulative Base (Year 2021) without-Project scenario volumes.
Table 9 summarizes the results of the level of service analysis for this scenario. Intersections that would operate at unacceptable levels of service, LOS E or F, are indicated by bold text within this table.
Table 9 – Intersection Level of Service Cumulative (2021) with-Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak Study Intersections V/C or V/C or LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 0.584 A 0.785 C 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue 0.522 A 0.678 B 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive 0.235 A 0.362 A 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 0.681 B 0.965 E 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue 0.402 A 0.379 A 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue 0.686 B 0.691 B
All of the study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service of LOS C or better during the analyzed peak hours, except for the except for the Vincent Avenue and Lakes Drive- Plaza Drive intersection, which would continue to operate at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour.
The resulting traffic volumes are illustrated on Figure 19 (a.m. peak hour) and Figure 20 (p.m. peak hour). The level of service worksheets are provided in Appendix F of this report.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 32 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 461 1206 69 113 229 179
53 39 81 50 1 181 1 210 Workman Ave. 27 4 23 64 64 17 29
51 77 31 32 Shamwood St. 514 1497
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 464 ia 452
A La 95 10 v 14 20
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 95 21 ke en 17 32 La
4 . A 2 e 5 21 82 v v 38 31 A e
. 3 . 5 9 e 39 119 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 13 19 G a Stuart Ave. A 10 93
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 463 s 477
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
110 A 386
v
e
36 2 . 93 143 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 15 2 30 75 Larkwood Dr. 11 3 11 557 6 692 24 4 54 81 Mobek S t. 35 15 117 150 98 403
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 19 Cumulative (2021) with Project Conditions - AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 654 1187 33 148 576 364
51 76 590 242 1 372 1 174 Workman Ave. 181 4 111 66 105 196 120
39 125 139 100 Shamwood St. 580 1355
Mardina St. Garvey Ave. N. 10 Garvey Ave. S. e. Av C y a 2 ve li ar fo G rn 602 ia 605
A La 132 32 v 13 32
e
r
k . r. D E
l
s l 241 12 ke en 9 31 La
4 . A 2 e 5 122 55 v v 26 28 A e
. 3 . 24 15 e 19 70 ra v o A Stuart Ave. d y n d le n 5 16 17 G a Stuart Ave. A 15 66
B z Holly O ak Dr. u 475 s 486
a
A
v
e
.
. W e aln v u t C A re t ek n Pkwy. e V
c
a
n i l lnut Creek i Wa
n V
d
a
117 A 479
v
e
73 6 . 119 100 Service Ave. LarkwoodSt. 105 12 101 77 Larkwood Dr. 34 3 18 620 6 430 79 18 76 93 Mobek S t. 66 27 62 119 222 368
Charlinda S t. 6 Cameron Ave.
LEGEND
Project Site N
# Study Intersection
XX Intersection Volumes
No Scale
West Covina Self-Storage Project Figure 20 Cumulative (2021) with Project Conditions - PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes 7. CMP Analysis
This section demonstrates conformance of this traffic study to impact analysis procedures mandated by the County of Los Angeles Congestion Management Program (CMP), regarding impacts of new developments on regional travel routes.
A. Congestion Management Program
The CMP was created statewide because of Proposition 111 and was implemented locally by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). The CMP for Los Angeles County requires that the traffic impact of individual development projects of potentially regional significance be analyzed.
A specific system of arterial roadways plus all freeways comprises the CMP system. Per CMP Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, a traffic impact analysis is conducted where:
x At CMP arterial monitoring intersections, including freeway on-ramps or off-ramps, where the proposed project will add 50 or more vehicle trips during either morning or afternoon weekday peak hours.
x At CMP mainline freeway-monitoring locations, where the project will add 150 or more trips, in either direction, during the either the morning or afternoon weekday peak hours.
Impacts to CMP Arterial
The nearest CMP arterial monitoring intersections to the Project site are at:
• CMP #157 - Azusa Avenue and Amar Road (2.7 miles from Project site) • CMP #158 - Azusa Avenue and Cameron Avenue (0.9 miles from Project site) • CMP #159 - Azusa Avenue and Workman Avenue (0.6 miles from Project site)
Based on the trip generation and distribution of the project, it is not expected that 50 or more new project trips per hour would be added at these CMP intersections. Therefore, no further analysis of potential CMP impacts is required.
Impacts to CMP Freeway
The nearest CMP mainline freeway-monitoring location to the Project site is on the Interstate 10 freeway, east of Puente Avenue. This location is approximately three miles from the Project site. The proposed Project is expected to add less than 150 new trips per hour to any freeway segments. Therefore, no further analysis of CMP freeway monitoring stations is required.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 35 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 8. Summary and Conclusions
A. Methodology for Study Intersection Impacts
Traffic impacts occur if a proposed development will result in significant changes in traffic conditions at a study location. A significant impact is typically identified if project-related traffic will cause LOS to deteriorate beyond a threshold limit specified by the reviewing agency. Impacts can also be significant if an intersection is already operating below the acceptable level of service and project traffic will cause a further decline in operations beyond the threshold.
The City of West Covina has established a specific threshold for project-related increases in the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) value, similar to a volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c), at signalized intersections. This threshold is provided below:
Significant Project Traffic Impact Threshold Level of Project-Related Increase Service Volume/Capacity Ratio in ICU Value D to F 0.800 or greater Equal to or greater than 0.02
B. Determination of Significant Impacts – Existing (2014) with-Project Conditions
Table 10 provides a summary of the Project impacts under existing conditions. Traffic impacts created by the proposed Project were determined by comparing the existing scenario conditions to the existing with-Project scenario conditions.
The proposed Project would not cause significant traffic impacts at the any of the study intersections during the a.m. or p.m. peak hour under existing with-Project conditions. Mitigation measures are not recommended for the proposed Project.
C. Determination of Significant Impacts – Cumulative (2021) with-Project Conditions
Table 11 provides a comparison of the a.m. and p.m. peak-hour cumulative base conditions and cumulative with-Project scenarios. Traffic impacts created by the Project were calculated by subtracting the values in the “Cumulative (2021) Base” column from the values in the “Cumulative (2021) with Project” column. The determinations of significant impacts for the study intersections are provided within the two columns at the right side of the table.
The proposed Project would not cause significant traffic impacts at the any of the study intersections during a.m. or p.m. peak hour under Cumulative (2021) with-Project conditions. Mitigation measures are not recommended for the proposed Project.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 36 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Summary and Conclusions
Table 10 – Determination of Existing with-Project Impacts
Existing (2014) Existing (2014) + Change in Peak Conditions Project V/C or Sig Study Intersections Hour V/C or V/C or Delay Impact? LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue AM 0.549 A 0.550 A 0.001 No PM 0.736 C 0.738 C 0.002 No 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue AM 0.489 A 0.492 A 0.003 No PM 0.632 B 0.638 B 0.006 No 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive AM 0.224 A 0.226 A 0.002 No PM 0.341 A 0.344 A 0.003 No 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive AM 0.601 B 0.602 B 0.001 No PM 0.847 D 0.849 D 0.002 No 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue AM 0.378 A 0.379 A 0.001 No PM 0.356 A 0.357 A 0.001 No 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue AM 0.642 B 0.642 B 0.000 No PM 0.646 B 0.647 B 0.001 No
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 37 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Project Traffic Impacts
Table 11 – Determination of Cumulative with-Project Impacts
Cumulative (2021) Cumulative (2021) Change in Peak Base with Project V/C or Sig Study Intersections Hour V/C or V/C or Delay Impact? LOS LOS Delay (sec.) Delay (sec.) (sec.) 1 S Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue AM 0.582 A 0.584 A 0.002 No PM 0.782 C 0.785 C 0.003 No 2 S Lark Ellen Avenue / E Garvey Avenue AM 0.520 A 0.522 A 0.002 No PM 0.674 B 0.678 B 0.004 No 3 S Glendora Avenue / Lakes Drive AM 0.233 A 0.235 A 0.002 No PM 0.359 A 0.362 A 0.003 No 4 Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive AM 0.680 B 0.681 B 0.001 No PM 0.964 E 0.965 E 0.001 No 5 S Lark Ellen Ave / Stuart Avenue AM 0.401 A 0.402 A 0.001 No PM 0.378 A 0.379 A 0.001 No 6 S Lark Ellen Ave / Cameron Avenue AM 0.685 B 0.686 B 0.001 No PM 0.690 B 0.691 B 0.001 No
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 38 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Summary and Conclusions
Mitigation Measure
Based on the level of service analysis conducted for the six study intersections, the addition of Project- related trips to the surrounding traffic network would not significantly impact the study intersections based on the City established impacts threshold. Therefore, mitigation measures have not been recommended.
Responsible Agency
The City of West Covina has full ownership of and maintenance responsibility for all of the study intersections. Based on the Project scope and the lack of identified Project significant traffic impacts, mitigation measure review and approval by the City would not be necessary.
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Page 39 Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 APPENDIX A Study Scoping Document
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 SCOPING FOR TRAFFIC STUDY South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage Project April 22, 2014
This scoping document acknowledges City of West Covina guidelines and policies that pertain to traffic impact analysis for the following project.
Project Description
A self-storage project has been proposed by the applicant DFI Properties, LLC, for development at the northwest corner of South Lark Ellen Avenue and Garvey Avenue within the City of West Covina. The proposed project would construct a 4-story self-storage building with 77,142 square feet in floor area.
The proposed project would provide 12 parking spaces and three spaces for loading. Attachment A provides the proposed project site plan.
Trip Generation and Parking Demand
The trip generation of the project will be calculated using rates defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) document Trip Generation (9th edition). The ITE-based analysis will be based on building square feet.
A trip generation analysis table for the project is provided by Table 1. The project would generate 193 daily weekday trips, 11 a.m. peak-hour trips, and 20 p.m. peak hour trips.
TABLE 1 – ESTIMATED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Weekday
ITE Average AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Code Intensity Weekday In Out Total In Out Total Trip Generation Rates Mini-Warehouse 151 1 G.F.A. 2.50 55% 45% 0.14 50% 50% 0.26 (Self-Storage) Proposed Project Mini-Warehouse 151 77.142 k.s.f. 193 6 5 11 10 10 20 (Self-Storage) Source: ITE, 9th Edition, unless otherwise noted. GFA = Gross Floor Area
Site Access Review
The proposed site access driveway intersection with Garvey Avenue will be reviewed to determine potential sight distance issues, inbound and outbound queuing and traffic flow conflicts, and general operations with peak-period traffic. This analysis will be conducted in a qualitative manner.
Scoping For Traffic and Parking Study Page 1 South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage JB41045 April 22, 2014 SCOPING FOR TRAFFIC STUDY South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage Project April 22, 2014
Data Collection
Manual peak-hour turning movement counts will be collected on a weekday during the weekday a.m. peak period (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and weekday p.m. peak period (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) at these six study intersections:
1. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Workman Avenue 2. South Lark Ellen Avenue / South Garvey Avenue 3. Lakes Drive / Glendora Avenue 4. Vincent Avenue / Lakes Drive-Plaza Drive 5. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Stuart Avenue 6. South Lark Ellen Avenue / Cameron Avenue
These locations are illustrated in Attachment A.
Weekday 24-hour machine counts for roadway segment analysis will not be conducted for this study.
Project Analysis Year: 2016 Annual Ambient Growth Rate: 1%
Area Projects
Area projects trip generation will be created from project information compiled from Planning staff at the City of West Covina.
Level of Service and Impacts
The traffic impact analysis will follow applicable guidelines and policies of the City of West Covina, including the analysis of project impacts at level of service (LOS) values of D, E, or F. Congestion Management Program (CMP) arterial monitoring stations will also be analyzed to determine any potential impacts of the project.
One future scenario, cumulative with project conditions, will be analyzed for project impacts. The scenario will consider the project opening year of 2016 plus five years bringing the cumulative base year 2021.
Contact Information
Traffic Consultant: Applicant: Name KOA Corporation DFI Properties, LLC Address 1100 Corporate Center Dr., Suite 201 4120 Douglas Bl., Suite 306-521 Monterey Park, CA 91754-7642 Granite Bay, CA 95746
Contact: Bruce Chow Steve Anderson, Project Manager (323) 260-4703 (760) 772-3627 [email protected]
Scoping For Traffic and Parking Study Page 2 South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage JB41045 April 22, 2014 SCOPING FOR TRAFFIC STUDY South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage Project April 22, 2014
ATTACHMENT A PROJECT SITE PLAN
Scoping For Traffic and Parking Study Attachments South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage JB41045 April 22, 2014 SCOPING FOR TRAFFIC STUDY South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage Project April 22, 2014
ATTACHMENT B - STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
Scoping For Traffic and Parking Study Attachments South Lark Ellen Avenue & Garvey Avenue, West Covina – Self-Storage JB41045 April 22, 2014 APPENDIX B Traffic Count Data
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014
Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-001 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 AM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Workman Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
7:00 AM 10 77 9 19 58 5 3 21 8 4 45 7 266 7:15 AM 17 90 20 26 99 16 8 24 12 8 47 5 372 7:30 AM 15 123 20 33 142 18 13 52 19 10 51 3 499 7:45 AM 16 148 27 26 102 14 14 48 13 19 51 13 491 8:00 AM 10 117 18 23 88 11 9 31 7 18 48 13 393 8:15 AM 7 88 6 23 96 21 13 38 21 12 46 7 378 8:30 AM 9 84 11 14 79 14 3 20 8 12 39 4 297 8:45 AM 2 89 13 20 66 10 7 23 8 8 26 7 279
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 86 816 124 184 730 109 70 257 96 91 353 59 2975 APPROACH %'s : 8.38% 79.53% 12.09% 17.99% 71.36% 10.65% 16.55% 60.76% 22.70% 18.09% 70.18% 11.73% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 730 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 1761
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.779 0.773 0.827 0.877 0.882
CONTROL : Signalized Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-001 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 PM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Workman Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
4:00 PM 15 125 22 24 107 7 13 70 13 19 44 19 478 4:15 PM 10 106 21 17 112 12 8 62 10 16 34 11 419 4:30 PM 7 128 19 26 138 10 9 73 30 26 31 13 510 4:45 PM 9 114 30 36 158 5 16 83 16 18 37 13 535 5:00 PM 11 136 25 35 143 8 10 84 13 18 41 23 547 5:15 PM 9 151 29 33 144 10 16 98 20 36 44 21 611 5:30 PM 6 136 32 34 160 8 6 82 12 25 40 14 555 5:45 PM 4 122 26 23 130 10 17 71 12 21 35 20 491
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 71 1018 204 228 1092 70 95 623 126 179 306 134 4146 APPROACH %'s : 5.49% 78.73% 15.78% 16.40% 78.56% 5.04% 11.26% 73.82% 14.93% 28.92% 49.43% 21.65% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 445 PM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 2248
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.910 0.958 0.851 0.817 0.920
CONTROL : Signalized
Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-002 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 AM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave South Garvey Ave South Garvey Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 2 0 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 1 1 0
7:00 AM 5 82 0 2 75 15 14 1 0 0 7 4 205 7:15 AM 0 94 3 3 98 20 17 3 0 0 10 5 253 7:30 AM 2 122 5 3 140 18 25 6 0 0 28 5 354 7:45 AM 1 140 5 3 105 23 20 1 2 4 20 5 329 8:00 AM 2 85 1 2 94 18 18 8 0 1 11 6 246 8:15 AM 3 83 4 1 93 27 23 5 1 2 17 4 263 8:30 AM 0 79 3 2 67 29 21 6 3 2 13 2 227 8:45 AM 3 84 2 1 59 34 15 3 1 2 15 2 221
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 16 769 23 17 731 184 153 33 7 11 121 33 2098 APPROACH %'s : 1.98% 95.17% 2.85% 1.82% 78.43% 19.74% 79.27% 17.10% 3.63% 6.67% 73.33% 20.00% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 730 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 1192
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.776 0.818 0.879 0.780 0.842
CONTROL : Signalized Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-002 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 PM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave South Garvey Ave South Garvey Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 2 0 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 0 1 1 0
4:00 PM 1 111 4 4 103 29 43 22 4 2 11 3 337 4:15 PM 1 96 1 7 114 18 33 19 4 1 10 6 310 4:30 PM 4 103 3 7 135 26 40 24 4 1 17 2 366 4:45 PM 0 105 2 5 139 27 44 21 3 2 11 4 363 5:00 PM 2 113 1 9 136 31 53 21 4 5 9 4 388 5:15 PM 2 118 5 8 153 34 55 35 5 1 17 2 435 5:30 PM 3 108 6 7 150 19 62 29 5 1 12 3 405 5:45 PM 3 103 2 6 121 34 51 28 3 4 12 2 369
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 16 857 24 53 1051 218 381 199 32 17 99 26 2973 APPROACH %'s : 1.78% 95.54% 2.68% 4.01% 79.50% 16.49% 62.25% 32.52% 5.23% 11.97% 69.72% 18.31% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 500 PM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 1597
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.932 0.908 0.914 0.900 0.918
CONTROL : Signalized
Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-004 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 AM NS/EW Streets: Vincent Ave Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1.5 0.5
7:00 AM 6 227 2 24 228 37 14 4 4 9 2 14 571 7:15 AM 4 301 5 34 269 47 15 1 3 1 4 11 695 7:30 AM 7 363 6 25 318 51 11 3 0 4 6 10 804 7:45 AM 10 371 12 44 271 57 21 6 4 5 7 10 818 8:00 AM 6 281 8 40 263 43 22 7 3 8 6 12 699 8:15 AM 6 283 4 30 265 63 22 9 9 10 2 14 717 8:30 AM 13 285 11 37 271 53 27 5 8 1 4 18 733 8:45 AM 16 240 13 58 208 70 33 8 10 7 9 15 687
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 68 2351 61 292 2093 421 165 43 41 45 40 104 5724 APPROACH %'s : 2.74% 94.80% 2.46% 10.41% 74.59% 15.00% 66.27% 17.27% 16.47% 23.81% 21.16% 55.03% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 730 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 3038
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.863 0.933 0.731 0.904 0.928
CONTROL : Signalized Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-004 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 PM NS/EW Streets: Vincent Ave Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 2 3 0 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 1.5 0.5
4:00 PM 29 288 19 53 235 111 130 34 37 10 15 26 987 4:15 PM 37 269 20 41 216 119 110 31 36 27 19 44 969 4:30 PM 25 258 17 53 266 117 121 24 51 26 22 57 1037 4:45 PM 19 278 16 56 247 142 129 41 50 30 25 52 1085 5:00 PM 32 288 22 65 252 134 155 34 50 20 21 60 1133 5:15 PM 34 315 26 66 267 122 121 40 42 28 26 52 1139 5:30 PM 32 296 23 51 302 143 123 49 48 28 35 54 1184 5:45 PM 32 290 22 55 274 138 151 46 43 36 22 58 1167
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 240 2282 165 440 2059 1026 1040 299 357 205 185 403 8701 APPROACH %'s : 8.93% 84.93% 6.14% 12.48% 58.41% 29.11% 61.32% 17.63% 21.05% 25.85% 23.33% 50.82% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 500 PM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 4623
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.941 0.942 0.940 0.940 0.976
CONTROL : Signalized
Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-005 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 AM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Stuart Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
7:00 AM 2 63 8 1 70 3 2 2 2 16 6 9 184 7:15 AM 2 93 15 7 92 2 4 11 8 22 8 10 274 7:30 AM 0 112 20 4 128 3 6 12 14 40 12 8 359 7:45 AM 4 141 37 3 104 5 2 9 10 32 6 8 361 8:00 AM 3 91 13 4 95 3 4 3 4 16 3 3 242 8:15 AM 1 74 5 3 89 1 2 5 6 13 7 9 215 8:30 AM 0 73 10 3 61 5 2 6 3 6 3 11 183 8:45 AM 0 76 12 3 49 1 2 3 2 5 9 6 168
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 12 723 120 28 688 23 24 51 49 150 54 64 1986 APPROACH %'s : 1.40% 84.56% 14.04% 3.79% 93.10% 3.11% 19.35% 41.13% 39.52% 55.97% 20.15% 23.88% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 715 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 1236
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.729 0.833 0.680 0.700 0.856
CONTROL : Signalized Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-005 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 PM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Stuart Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
4:00 PM 4 105 13 4 101 6 3 5 3 9 5 6 264 4:15 PM 3 70 13 6 105 2 6 4 2 10 4 5 230 4:30 PM 4 108 15 7 124 2 3 9 4 11 6 4 297 4:45 PM 4 107 17 6 140 2 3 8 3 17 6 5 318 5:00 PM 2 109 14 14 123 5 0 7 2 16 8 9 309 5:15 PM 5 120 13 6 152 2 0 6 7 17 7 9 344 5:30 PM 3 111 17 3 140 3 5 3 6 13 5 5 314 5:45 PM 5 98 5 4 123 6 2 4 6 13 7 3 276
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 30 828 107 50 1008 28 22 46 33 106 48 46 2352 APPROACH %'s : 3.11% 85.80% 11.09% 4.60% 92.82% 2.58% 21.78% 45.54% 32.67% 53.00% 24.00% 23.00% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 445 PM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 1285
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.946 0.931 0.893 0.886 0.934
CONTROL : Signalized
Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-006 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 AM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Cameron Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
7:00 AM 10 46 22 9 37 15 2 60 3 16 102 14 336 7:15 AM 22 67 44 27 79 11 8 103 10 11 137 9 528 7:30 AM 29 101 45 54 104 25 8 197 22 19 196 17 817 7:45 AM 35 107 26 28 98 31 7 130 6 35 201 32 736 8:00 AM 23 99 25 18 77 20 5 78 12 11 108 9 485 8:15 AM 12 63 24 8 74 19 8 61 5 11 96 13 394 8:30 AM 12 54 13 10 70 7 10 41 8 11 92 7 335 8:45 AM 13 64 25 6 40 10 7 58 0 6 77 12 318
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 156 601 224 160 579 138 55 728 66 120 1009 113 3949 APPROACH %'s : 15.90% 61.26% 22.83% 18.24% 66.02% 15.74% 6.48% 85.75% 7.77% 9.66% 81.24% 9.10% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 715 AM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 2566
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.890 0.781 0.645 0.732 0.785
CONTROL : Signalized Intersection Turning Movement Prepared by: National Data & Surveying Services Project ID: 14-5263-006 Day: Thursday
City: West Covina Date: 5/1/2014 PM NS/EW Streets: South Lark Ellen Ave South Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Cameron Ave NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL LANES: 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 2 0
4:00 PM 14 76 15 23 88 14 23 120 13 24 90 23 523 4:15 PM 9 71 17 18 77 22 16 121 8 13 77 14 463 4:30 PM 10 85 23 10 106 30 18 128 18 19 78 19 544 4:45 PM 9 85 23 19 107 33 16 118 10 18 79 19 536 5:00 PM 7 85 30 23 97 24 24 146 23 22 104 18 603 5:15 PM 12 88 29 15 126 36 24 146 16 27 107 16 642 5:30 PM 16 85 21 25 113 29 22 144 14 19 92 16 596 5:45 PM 23 82 31 26 108 22 24 135 18 19 86 14 588
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL TOTAL VOLUMES : 100 657 189 159 822 210 167 1058 120 161 713 139 4495 APPROACH %'s : 10.57% 69.45% 19.98% 13.35% 69.02% 17.63% 12.42% 78.66% 8.92% 15.89% 70.38% 13.72% nb a nb d sb a sb d eb a eb d wb a nb d PEAK HR START TIME : 500 PM TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL : 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 2429
PEAK HR FACTOR : 0.936 0.910 0.953 0.900 0.946
CONTROL : Signalized APPENDIX C Study Intersection Analysis Worksheets – Existing (2014) Conditions
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 4-1 Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 5-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.549 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.489 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 36 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 33 Level Of Service: A ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Base Vol: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Initial Bse: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 PHF Volume: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Reduced Vol: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 FinalVolume: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.74 0.26 0.18 0.61 0.22 0.20 0.67 0.12 Lanes: 0.04 1.90 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.13 1.00 0.79 0.21 Final Sat.: 1600 2785 415 1600 2784 416 282 973 345 324 1078 198 Final Sat.: 57 3038 106 1600 1600 1600 1600 1391 209 1600 1267 333 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.18 0.18 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.27 0.05 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.06 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 6-1 Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.224 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.601 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 23 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 40 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Base Vol: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Initial Bse: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 PHF Volume: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Reduced Vol: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 FinalVolume: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 172 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.74 0.24 0.57 0.43 1.00 0.25 0.63 0.13 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 23 1191 385 904 696 1600 400 1000 200 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1003 2197 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.41 0.02 0.05 0.23 0.13 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.11 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 8-1 Existing AM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:36 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.378 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.642 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 44 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Base Vol: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Initial Bse: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 PHF Volume: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Reduced Vol: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 FinalVolume: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.03 1.65 0.32 0.08 1.86 0.06 0.31 0.69 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 1.55 1.00 0.52 1.48 1.00 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.81 0.19 Final Sat.: 54 2634 512 128 2980 92 502 1098 1600 1266 334 1600 Final Sat.: 722 2478 1600 838 2362 1600 1600 2913 287 1600 2898 302 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.15 0.15 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 4-1 Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 5-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.736 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.632 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 55 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 43 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Base Vol: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Initial Bse: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 PHF Volume: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Reduced Vol: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 FinalVolume: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.90 0.10 0.11 0.76 0.13 0.29 0.49 0.22 Lanes: 0.04 1.90 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.13 1.00 0.82 0.18 Final Sat.: 1600 2632 568 1600 3044 156 168 1218 214 470 785 344 Final Sat.: 69 3035 96 1600 1600 1600 1600 1391 209 1600 1311 289 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.21 0.21 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.35 0.07 0.14 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.04 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 6-1 Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.341 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.847 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 26 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 79 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Base Vol: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Initial Bse: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 PHF Volume: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Reduced Vol: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 FinalVolume: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 231 44 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.60 0.37 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.38 0.38 0.24 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 54 956 590 1200 400 1600 604 604 391 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1015 2185 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.13 0.02 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.37 0.06 0.08 0.23 0.34 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.10 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.14 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 8-1 Existing PM Tue May 13, 2014 12:21:45 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing Conditions Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.356 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.646 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 44 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Base Vol: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Initial Bse: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 PHF Volume: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Reduced Vol: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 FinalVolume: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.05 1.71 0.23 0.10 1.86 0.04 0.25 0.75 1.00 0.71 0.29 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 1.71 1.00 0.33 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 1.72 0.28 Final Sat.: 86 2740 374 156 2980 64 400 1200 1600 1133 467 1600 Final Sat.: 466 2734 1600 534 2666 1600 1600 2846 354 1600 2748 452 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.14 0.14 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK APPENDIX D Study Intersection Analysis Worksheets – Existing (2014) with-Project Conditions
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 6-1 Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.550 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.492 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 36 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 33 Level Of Service: A ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Base Vol: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Initial Bse: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Added Vol: 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 48 477 72 105 429 64 49 169 60 60 196 36 Initial Fut: 10 430 15 9 432 88 88 20 5 7 77 20 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 477 72 105 429 64 49 169 60 60 196 36 PHF Volume: 10 430 15 9 432 88 88 20 5 7 77 20 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 477 72 105 429 64 49 169 60 60 196 36 Reduced Vol: 10 430 15 9 432 88 88 20 5 7 77 20 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 477 72 105 429 64 49 169 60 60 196 36 FinalVolume: 10 430 15 9 432 88 88 20 5 7 77 20 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.74 0.26 0.18 0.61 0.22 0.21 0.67 0.12 Lanes: 0.04 1.89 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.79 0.21 Final Sat.: 1600 2780 420 1600 2785 415 282 973 345 329 1074 197 Final Sat.: 70 3024 105 1600 1600 1600 1600 1280 320 1600 1270 330 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.15 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.18 0.18 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.27 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.06 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 8-1 Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.226 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.602 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 23 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 40 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Base Vol: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Initial Bse: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 33 91 14 2 103 34 14 10 22 4 10 2 Initial Fut: 29 1298 30 140 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 47 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 33 91 14 2 103 34 14 10 22 4 10 2 PHF Volume: 29 1298 30 140 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 47 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 33 91 14 2 103 34 14 10 22 4 10 2 Reduced Vol: 29 1298 30 140 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 47 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 33 91 14 2 103 34 14 10 22 4 10 2 FinalVolume: 29 1298 30 140 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 47 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 172 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.74 0.24 0.58 0.42 1.00 0.25 0.63 0.13 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 23 1186 391 933 667 1600 400 1000 200 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.38 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 988 2212 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.41 0.02 0.05 0.23 0.13 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.11 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 10-1 Ex+Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 13:14:58 Page 11-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.379 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.642 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 44 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Base Vol: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Initial Bse: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Added Vol: 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 9 438 85 19 420 13 16 35 36 110 29 30 Initial Fut: 109 375 140 127 359 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 9 438 85 19 420 13 16 35 36 110 29 30 PHF Volume: 109 375 140 127 359 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 9 438 85 19 420 13 16 35 36 110 29 30 Reduced Vol: 109 375 140 127 359 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 9 438 85 19 420 13 16 35 36 110 29 30 FinalVolume: 109 375 140 127 359 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.03 1.65 0.32 0.08 1.86 0.06 0.31 0.69 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 1.55 1.00 0.52 1.48 1.00 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.81 0.19 Final Sat.: 54 2635 511 135 2973 92 502 1098 1600 1266 334 1600 Final Sat.: 721 2479 1600 836 2364 1600 1600 2913 287 1600 2898 302 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.17 0.17 0.01 0.14 0.14 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.15 0.15 0.09 0.15 0.15 0.05 0.02 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 6-1 Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.738 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.638 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 55 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 43 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Base Vol: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Initial Bse: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Added Vol: 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 Added Vol: 3 0 0 0 0 4 4 1 3 0 1 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 36 539 117 138 607 31 48 347 62 98 162 71 Initial Fut: 13 442 14 30 560 122 225 114 20 11 51 11 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 36 539 117 138 607 31 48 347 62 98 162 71 PHF Volume: 13 442 14 30 560 122 225 114 20 11 51 11 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 36 539 117 138 607 31 48 347 62 98 162 71 Reduced Vol: 13 442 14 30 560 122 225 114 20 11 51 11 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 36 539 117 138 607 31 48 347 62 98 162 71 FinalVolume: 13 442 14 30 560 122 225 114 20 11 51 11 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.90 0.10 0.11 0.76 0.14 0.30 0.49 0.21 Lanes: 0.06 1.88 0.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.15 1.00 0.82 0.18 Final Sat.: 1600 2629 571 1600 3045 155 168 1215 217 474 783 343 Final Sat.: 89 3016 96 1600 1600 1600 1600 1361 239 1600 1316 284 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.21 0.20 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.06 0.21 0.21 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.02 0.35 0.08 0.14 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.04 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 8-1 Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.344 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.849 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 26 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 80 Level Of Service: D ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Base Vol: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Initial Bse: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 62 206 25 6 108 68 98 32 74 17 17 11 Initial Fut: 130 1189 93 239 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 226 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 62 206 25 6 108 68 98 32 74 17 17 11 PHF Volume: 130 1189 93 239 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 226 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 62 206 25 6 108 68 98 32 74 17 17 11 Reduced Vol: 130 1189 93 239 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 226 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 62 206 25 6 108 68 98 32 74 17 17 11 FinalVolume: 130 1189 93 239 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 226 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 231 44 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.59 0.37 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.38 0.38 0.24 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 53 949 598 1206 394 1600 604 604 391 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1008 2192 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.13 0.02 0.00 0.11 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.37 0.06 0.08 0.23 0.34 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.07 0.10 0.10 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.14 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 10-1 Ex+Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 13:15:15 Page 11-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Existing + Project Conditions Existing + Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.357 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.647 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 44 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Base Vol: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Initial Bse: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Added Vol: 0 2 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Added Vol: 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 14 449 61 30 557 12 8 24 18 63 26 29 Initial Fut: 58 342 111 89 446 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 14 449 61 30 557 12 8 24 18 63 26 29 PHF Volume: 58 342 111 89 446 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 14 449 61 30 557 12 8 24 18 63 26 29 Reduced Vol: 58 342 111 89 446 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 14 449 61 30 557 12 8 24 18 63 26 29 FinalVolume: 58 342 111 89 446 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.05 1.71 0.23 0.10 1.86 0.04 0.25 0.75 1.00 0.71 0.29 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 1.71 1.00 0.33 1.67 1.00 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 1.72 0.28 Final Sat.: 85 2742 373 160 2976 64 400 1200 1600 1133 467 1600 Final Sat.: 464 2736 1600 532 2668 1600 1600 2846 354 1600 2748 452 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.06 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.14 0.14 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK APPENDIX E Study Intersection Analysis Worksheets – Cumulative Base (2021) without-Project Conditions
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 6-1 Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.582 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.520 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 39 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service: A ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Base Vol: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 51 510 76 113 459 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 Initial Bse: 9 461 16 10 463 92 92 21 3 8 81 21 Added Vol: 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 3 2 3 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 51 513 76 113 460 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 Initial Fut: 12 463 19 10 464 92 93 21 4 9 81 21 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 51 513 76 113 460 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 PHF Volume: 12 463 19 10 464 92 93 21 4 9 81 21 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 51 513 76 113 460 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 Reduced Vol: 12 463 19 10 464 92 93 21 4 9 81 21 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 51 513 76 113 460 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 FinalVolume: 12 463 19 10 464 92 93 21 4 9 81 21 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.74 0.26 0.18 0.61 0.22 0.20 0.67 0.12 Lanes: 0.05 1.88 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.16 1.00 0.79 0.21 Final Sat.: 1600 2787 413 1600 2785 415 282 973 345 324 1078 198 Final Sat.: 75 3001 124 1600 1600 1600 1600 1337 263 1600 1267 333 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.19 0.19 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.29 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.06 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 8-1 Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.233 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.680 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 23 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Base Vol: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 35 96 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 Initial Bse: 31 1392 32 149 1198 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 105 0 29 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 35 97 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 Initial Fut: 31 1497 32 178 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 35 97 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 PHF Volume: 31 1497 32 178 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 35 97 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 Reduced Vol: 31 1497 32 178 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 35 97 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 FinalVolume: 31 1497 32 178 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 184 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.74 0.24 0.57 0.43 1.00 0.25 0.63 0.13 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 23 1191 385 904 696 1600 400 1000 200 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1003 2197 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.47 0.02 0.06 0.25 0.14 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.12 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 10-1 Fut Area Proj AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:05:30 Page 11-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.401 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.685 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Base Vol: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 10 469 91 19 449 14 17 38 39 118 31 31 Initial Bse: 117 401 150 136 384 93 30 545 54 81 688 72 Added Vol: 0 7 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 7 1 0 0 12 0 0 4 3 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 10 476 93 19 451 14 17 38 39 119 31 31 Initial Fut: 117 401 150 143 385 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 10 476 93 19 451 14 17 38 39 119 31 31 PHF Volume: 117 401 150 143 385 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 10 476 93 19 451 14 17 38 39 119 31 31 Reduced Vol: 117 401 150 143 385 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 10 476 93 19 451 14 17 38 39 119 31 31 FinalVolume: 117 401 150 143 385 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.03 1.64 0.32 0.08 1.86 0.06 0.31 0.69 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 1.55 1.00 0.54 1.46 1.00 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.80 0.20 Final Sat.: 53 2631 515 127 2980 92 502 1098 1600 1268 332 1600 Final Sat.: 722 2478 1600 868 2332 1600 1600 2919 281 1600 2888 312 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.18 0.18 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.24 0.24 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 6-1 Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 7-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.782 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.674 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 63 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 47 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Base Vol: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 38 576 124 148 649 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 Initial Bse: 11 474 15 32 600 127 237 121 18 12 54 12 Added Vol: 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 2 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 3 3 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 38 578 124 148 652 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 Initial Fut: 13 475 17 32 602 128 238 121 21 15 54 12 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 38 578 124 148 652 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 PHF Volume: 13 475 17 32 602 128 238 121 21 15 54 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 38 578 124 148 652 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 Reduced Vol: 13 475 17 32 602 128 238 121 21 15 54 12 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 38 578 124 148 652 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 FinalVolume: 13 475 17 32 602 128 238 121 21 15 54 12 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.65 0.35 1.00 1.90 0.10 0.11 0.76 0.13 0.29 0.49 0.22 Lanes: 0.05 1.88 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.15 1.00 0.82 0.18 Final Sat.: 1600 2633 567 1600 3045 155 168 1218 214 470 785 344 Final Sat.: 81 3011 108 1600 1600 1600 1600 1361 239 1600 1311 289 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.31 0.31 0.06 0.22 0.22 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.38 0.08 0.15 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 8-1 Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 9-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.359 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.964 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 147 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Base Vol: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 66 220 27 6 115 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 Initial Bse: 139 1275 100 254 1174 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 Added Vol: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 80 0 109 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 66 221 27 6 116 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 Initial Fut: 139 1355 100 363 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 66 221 27 6 116 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 PHF Volume: 139 1355 100 363 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 66 221 27 6 116 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 Reduced Vol: 139 1355 100 363 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 66 221 27 6 116 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 FinalVolume: 139 1355 100 363 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 248 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.60 0.37 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.38 0.38 0.24 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 53 960 587 1200 400 1600 604 604 391 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1015 2185 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.14 0.02 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.06 0.09 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.42 0.06 0.13 0.25 0.36 0.20 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.11 0.11 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.16 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 10-1 Fut Area Proj PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:04 Page 11-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Pre-Project Conditions Future Pre-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.378 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.690 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Base Vol: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 15 479 65 31 595 13 9 26 19 68 28 30 Initial Bse: 62 365 119 95 476 119 101 612 76 93 417 69 Added Vol: 0 5 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 Added Vol: 0 1 0 5 1 0 0 8 0 0 13 8 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 15 484 66 31 603 13 9 26 19 70 28 30 Initial Fut: 62 366 119 100 477 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 15 484 66 31 603 13 9 26 19 70 28 30 PHF Volume: 62 366 119 100 477 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 15 484 66 31 603 13 9 26 19 70 28 30 Reduced Vol: 62 366 119 100 477 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 15 484 66 31 603 13 9 26 19 70 28 30 FinalVolume: 62 366 119 100 477 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.05 1.71 0.23 0.10 1.86 0.04 0.25 0.75 1.00 0.71 0.29 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 1.71 1.00 0.35 1.65 1.00 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 1.70 0.30 Final Sat.: 85 2739 376 154 2983 64 400 1200 1600 1142 458 1600 Final Sat.: 465 2735 1600 556 2644 1600 1600 2850 350 1600 2716 484 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.18 0.18 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.16 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK APPENDIX F Study Intersection Analysis Worksheets – Cumulative Base (2021) with-Project Conditions
Prepared for DFI Properties, LLC Appendices Traffic Impact Study – West Covina Self-Storage Project, Covina JB41045 June 6, 2014 Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 7-1 Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 8-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.584 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.522 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 39 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 48 476 71 105 428 64 49 169 60 59 196 36 Base Vol: 8 430 15 9 432 86 86 20 3 7 76 20 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 51 510 76 113 459 69 53 181 64 63 210 39 Initial Bse: 9 461 16 10 463 92 92 21 3 8 81 21 Added Vol: 0 4 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Added Vol: 4 2 3 0 1 3 3 0 2 1 1 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 51 514 77 113 461 69 53 181 64 64 210 39 Initial Fut: 13 463 19 10 464 95 95 21 5 9 82 21 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 51 514 77 113 461 69 53 181 64 64 210 39 PHF Volume: 13 463 19 10 464 95 95 21 5 9 82 21 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 51 514 77 113 461 69 53 181 64 64 210 39 Reduced Vol: 13 463 19 10 464 95 95 21 5 9 82 21 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 51 514 77 113 461 69 53 181 64 64 210 39 FinalVolume: 13 463 19 10 464 95 95 21 5 9 82 21 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.74 0.26 1.00 1.74 0.26 0.18 0.61 0.22 0.21 0.67 0.12 Lanes: 0.05 1.87 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.79 0.21 Final Sat.: 1600 2783 417 1600 2785 415 282 973 345 328 1074 197 Final Sat.: 81 2995 123 1600 1600 1600 1600 1287 313 1600 1270 330 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.20 0.20 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.29 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.06 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 9-1 Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 10-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.235 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.681 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 23 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 33 90 14 2 102 33 13 10 22 4 10 2 Base Vol: 29 1298 30 139 1117 214 76 25 16 27 21 46 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 35 96 15 2 109 35 14 11 24 4 11 2 Initial Bse: 31 1392 32 149 1198 229 81 27 17 29 23 49 Added Vol: 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 105 0 30 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 35 98 15 2 110 36 15 11 24 4 11 2 Initial Fut: 31 1497 32 179 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 50 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 35 98 15 2 110 36 15 11 24 4 11 2 PHF Volume: 31 1497 32 179 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 50 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 35 98 15 2 110 36 15 11 24 4 11 2 Reduced Vol: 31 1497 32 179 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 50 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 35 98 15 2 110 36 15 11 24 4 11 2 FinalVolume: 31 1497 32 179 1206 229 81 27 17 29 23 50 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 184 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 0.74 0.24 0.58 0.42 1.00 0.25 0.63 0.13 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 23 1186 391 931 669 1600 400 1000 200 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.38 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 989 2211 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.47 0.02 0.06 0.25 0.14 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.12 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 11-1 Fut Post Project AM Tue May 20, 2014 12:06:21 Page 12-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.402 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.686 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 48 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 9 437 85 18 419 13 16 35 36 110 29 29 Base Vol: 109 374 140 127 358 87 28 508 50 76 642 67 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 10 469 91 19 449 14 17 38 39 118 31 31 Initial Bse: 117 401 150 136 384 93 30 545 54 81 688 72 Added Vol: 0 8 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Added Vol: 0 2 0 7 2 0 0 12 0 0 4 3 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 10 477 93 20 452 14 17 38 39 119 31 32 Initial Fut: 117 403 150 143 386 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 10 477 93 20 452 14 17 38 39 119 31 32 PHF Volume: 117 403 150 143 386 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 10 477 93 20 452 14 17 38 39 119 31 32 Reduced Vol: 117 403 150 143 386 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 10 477 93 20 452 14 17 38 39 119 31 32 FinalVolume: 117 403 150 143 386 93 30 557 54 81 692 75 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.03 1.65 0.32 0.08 1.86 0.06 0.31 0.69 1.00 0.79 0.21 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 1.55 1.00 0.54 1.46 1.00 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.80 0.20 Final Sat.: 53 2632 514 134 2975 92 502 1098 1600 1268 332 1600 Final Sat.: 719 2481 1600 866 2334 1600 1600 2919 281 1600 2888 312 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.18 0.18 0.01 0.15 0.15 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.07 0.09 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.24 0.24 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 7-1 Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 8-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 S Lark Ellen Ave & Workman Ave Intersection #2 S Lark Ellen Ave & E Garvey Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.785 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.678 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 63 Level Of Service: C Optimal Cycle: 47 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Workman Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave E Garvey Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 35 537 116 138 605 31 48 347 61 97 162 71 Base Vol: 10 442 14 30 560 118 221 113 17 11 50 11 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 38 576 124 148 649 33 51 372 65 104 174 76 Initial Bse: 11 474 15 32 600 127 237 121 18 12 54 12 Added Vol: 1 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 Added Vol: 5 1 2 0 2 5 4 1 6 3 1 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 39 580 125 148 654 33 51 372 66 105 174 76 Initial Fut: 16 475 17 32 602 132 241 122 24 15 55 12 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 39 580 125 148 654 33 51 372 66 105 174 76 PHF Volume: 16 475 17 32 602 132 241 122 24 15 55 12 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 39 580 125 148 654 33 51 372 66 105 174 76 Reduced Vol: 16 475 17 32 602 132 241 122 24 15 55 12 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 39 580 125 148 654 33 51 372 66 105 174 76 FinalVolume: 16 475 17 32 602 132 241 122 24 15 55 12 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.90 0.10 0.11 0.76 0.14 0.30 0.49 0.21 Lanes: 0.06 1.87 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.83 0.17 1.00 0.82 0.18 Final Sat.: 1600 2631 569 1600 3045 155 168 1215 217 473 783 343 Final Sat.: 99 2994 107 1600 1600 1600 1600 1335 265 1600 1316 284 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.31 0.31 0.07 0.22 0.22 Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.38 0.08 0.15 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.04 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 9-1 Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 10-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 S Glendora Ave & Lakes Dr Intersection #4 Vincent Ave & Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.362 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.965 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 148 Level Of Service: E ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Glendora Ave Lakes Dr Street Name: Vincent Ave Lakes Dr-Plaza Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Ovl Include Ovl Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 Lanes: 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 62 205 25 6 107 66 96 32 74 17 17 11 Base Vol: 130 1189 93 237 1095 537 550 169 183 112 104 224 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 66 220 27 6 115 71 103 34 79 18 18 12 Initial Bse: 139 1275 100 254 1174 576 590 181 196 120 111 240 Added Vol: 0 2 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 80 0 110 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 66 222 27 6 117 73 105 34 79 18 18 12 Initial Fut: 139 1355 100 364 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 242 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 66 222 27 6 117 73 105 34 79 18 18 12 PHF Volume: 139 1355 100 364 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 242 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 66 222 27 6 117 73 105 34 79 18 18 12 Reduced Vol: 139 1355 100 364 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 242 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 66 222 27 6 117 73 105 34 79 18 18 12 FinalVolume: 139 1355 100 364 1187 576 590 181 196 120 111 242 ------|------||------||------||------| OvlAdjVol: 248 0 Saturation Flow Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 0.60 0.37 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.38 0.38 0.24 Adjustment: 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1600 1600 1600 53 953 594 1206 394 1600 604 604 391 Lanes: 2.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.63 1.37 ------|------||------||------||------| Final Sat.: 2880 3200 1600 2880 4800 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 1009 2191 Capacity Analysis Module: ------|------||------||------||------| Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.14 0.02 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.09 0.05 0.01 0.03 0.03 Capacity Analysis Module: Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.42 0.06 0.13 0.25 0.36 0.20 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.11 0.11 ******************************************************************************** OvlAdjV/S: 0.16 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 11-1 Fut Post Project PM Tue May 20, 2014 12:07:30 Page 12-1 ------West Covina Self-Storage Project West Covina Self-Storage Project Future Post-Project Conditions Future Post-Project Conditions PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ------Level Of Service Computation Report Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 S Lark Ellen Ave & Stuart Ave Intersection #6 S Lark Ellen Ave & Cameron Ave ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.379 Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.691 Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Optimal Cycle: 49 Level Of Service: B ******************************************************************************** ******************************************************************************** Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Stuart Ave Street Name: S Lark Ellen Ave Cameron Ave Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Control: Split Phase Split Phase Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Volume Module: Volume Module: Base Vol: 14 447 61 29 555 12 8 24 18 63 26 28 Base Vol: 58 340 111 89 444 111 94 571 71 87 389 64 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Growth Adj: 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 Initial Bse: 15 479 65 31 595 13 9 26 19 68 28 30 Initial Bse: 62 365 119 95 476 119 101 612 76 93 417 69 Added Vol: 0 7 1 1 10 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 Added Vol: 0 3 0 5 3 0 0 8 0 0 13 8 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 15 486 66 32 605 13 9 26 19 70 28 31 Initial Fut: 62 368 119 100 479 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 15 486 66 32 605 13 9 26 19 70 28 31 PHF Volume: 62 368 119 100 479 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 15 486 66 32 605 13 9 26 19 70 28 31 Reduced Vol: 62 368 119 100 479 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 15 486 66 32 605 13 9 26 19 70 28 31 FinalVolume: 62 368 119 100 479 119 101 620 76 93 430 77 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Saturation Flow Module: Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Sat/Lane: 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.05 1.71 0.23 0.10 1.86 0.04 0.25 0.75 1.00 0.71 0.29 1.00 Lanes: 0.29 1.71 1.00 0.35 1.65 1.00 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 1.70 0.30 Final Sat.: 85 2741 374 158 2979 63 400 1200 1600 1142 458 1600 Final Sat.: 463 2737 1600 555 2645 1600 1600 2850 350 1600 2716 484 ------|------||------||------||------| ------|------||------||------||------| Capacity Analysis Module: Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.18 0.18 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.02 Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.07 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.06 0.16 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** ******************************************************************************** ********************************************************************************
Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KOA CORP, MONTEREY PK