K 3: LADOT Memorandum of Understanding

Transcription

1 K 3: LADOT Memorandum of Understanding

2

3

4 Fehr & Peers 2/10/2014 TABLE 1-1 PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT OPTION 1 (RESIDENTIAL) - TRIP GENERATION Land Use Size Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation ITE Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Code Rate Rate In Out Rate In Out Trips In Out Total In Out Total Residential Units High-Rise Residential [b] 731 du 222/ % 81% % 38% 3, Net External Vehicle Trips 3, Sit-Down Restaurant High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant 5.0 ksf % 45% % 40% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -10% -10% -20% (64) (3) (2) (5) (6) (4) (10) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (86) (4) (3) (7) (4) (2) (6) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -20% [e] (97) (4) (4) (8) (4) (3) (7) Net External Vehicle Trips Community Serving Retail Shopping Center 9.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] 20% 20% 20% (77) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (46) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] (131) (2) (1) (3) (5) (6) (11) Net External Vehicle Trips Palladium Retail Shopping Center 10.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] 20% 20% 20% (85) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (51) (1) 0 (1) (2) (3) (5) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] (146) (2) (2) (4) (6) (7) (13) Net External Vehicle Trips TOTAL DRIVEWAY TRIPS 4, EXTERNAL PROJECT VEHICLE TRIPS 3, Notes: a. Source for trip generation rates: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), b. For flexibility, the trip generation analysis uses the most conservative (highest) rates for high-rise apartments versus high-rise condominiums: ITE code 222 (high-rise apartment) for daily trips and ITE code 232 (high-rise condominium) for peak hour trips. Since the high-rise residences in the ITE database are generally in urban areas with transit service, no additional internal trip credit nor transit credit was taken to provide a conservative estimate. c. Proposed project is located within 1/4-mile of Metro Red Line Station; Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (page 10). d. Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. This percentage is informed by the Multi-Use Trip Generation Calculation methodology described in Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, e. Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (Attachment I). f. Since ITE does not include daily trip generation rate for a Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window, for the purpose of this analysis, Daily trip generation rate for a Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive- Through Window were used.

5 Fehr & Peers 2/10/2014 TABLE 1-2 PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT OPTION 2 (RESIDENTIAL/HOTEL) - TRIP GENERATION Land Use Size Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation ITE Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Code Rate Rate In Out Rate In Out Trips In Out Total In Out Total Residential Units High-Rise Residential [b] 598 du 222/ % 81% % 38% 2, Net External Vehicle Trips 2, Sit-Down Restaurant High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant 5.0 ksf % 45% % 40% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -10% -10% -20% (64) (3) (2) (5) (6) (4) (10) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (86) (4) (3) (7) (4) (2) (6) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -20% [e] (97) (4) (4) (8) (4) (3) (7) Net External Vehicle Trips Community Serving Retail Shopping Center 9.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (77) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (46) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] (131) (2) (1) (3) (5) (6) (11) Net External Vehicle Trips Palladium Retail Shopping Center 10.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (85) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (51) (1) 0 (1) (2) (3) (5) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] (146) (2) (2) (4) (6) (7) (13) Net External Vehicle Trips Hotel 250 rooms % 41% % 49% 2, Less: Transit credit -15% [c] (306) (12) (8) (20) (12) (11) (23) Total Driveway Trips 1, TOTAL DRIVEWAY TRIPS 5, EXTERNAL PROJECT VEHICLE TRIPS 4, Notes: a. Source for trip generation rates: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 2012 b. For flexibility, the trip generation analysis uses the most conservative (highest) rates for high-rise apartments versus high-rise condominiums: ITE code 222 (high-rise apartment) for daily trips and ITE code 232 (high-rise condominium) for peak hour trips. Since the high-rise residences in the ITE database are generally in urban areas with transit service, no additional internal trip credit nor transit credit was taken to provide a conservative estimate. c. Proposed project is located within 1/4-mile of Metro Red Line Station; Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (page 10). d. Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. This percentage is informed by the Multi-Use Trip Generation Calculation methodology described in Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, e. Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (Attachment I). f. Since ITE does not include daily trip generation rate for a Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window, for the purpose of this analysis, Daily trip generation rate for a Coffee/Donut Shop with Drive-Through Window were used.

6 Canyon Dr Franklin Av 24 Wilcox Av Cahuenga Blvd 3 Yucca St Ivar Av Vine St 8 Argyle Av 14 Vis Del Mar Av 17 Carlos Av Carlos Av Hollywood Blvd 101 Yucca St Canyon Dr 36 Van Ness Av Taft Av Cosmo St Carlton Wy 1 Cole Pl Morningside Ct Leland Wy De Longpre Av Afton Pl Project Site El Centro Av Selma Av Gower St Selma Av Sunset Blvd Labaig Av Gordon St Gordon St Tamarind Av Bronson Av 34 Fernwood Av Van Ness Av v 11 Fountain Av Lodi Pl Beachwood Dr La Mirada Av Lexington Av Cole Av Banner Av 12 Santa Monica Blvd # Study Intersections Eleanor Av Study Segments Project Site N Not to Scale N:\Jobs\Active\2500s\ SM Blvd Traffic Study\Graphics\GIS\MXD PROJECT SITE AND STUDY INTERSECTIONS FIGURE 1

7 5% 15% Canyon Dr Grace Av 5% Wilcox Av 2 Cahuenga Blvd Ivar Av 3 Yucca St Vine St 7 8 Argyle Av Vis Del Mar Av 17 Carlos Av Carlos Av Hollywood Blvd Franklin Av Yucca St Canyon Dr 36 Van Ness Av Taft Av 5% 5% Gramercy Pl Hudson Av Cosmo St Carlton Wy Carlton Wy 8% Hudson Av 2% 1 Cole Pl Morningside Ct Leland Wy De Longpre Av Afton Pl Fountain Av Project Site El Centro Av Selma Av Gower St Selma Av Sunset Blvd Labaig Av Gordon St Gordon St Tamarind Av Bronson Av 34 Fernwood Av Van Ness Av Wilton Pl 20% Harold Wy 7% Lexington Av Lodi Pl Beachwood Dr La Mirada Av Lexington A 5% Cole Av 4% 12 Banner Av Santa Monica Blvd % Virginia Av 3% Hudson Av 5% Eleanor Av 5% 4% # Freeway Distribution Local Distribution Sierr Study Intersections Willoughby Av Lillian Wy Barton Av Study Segments Project Site Barton Av Ro N Not to Scale N:\Jobs\Active\2500s\ SM Blvd Traffic Study\Graphics\GIS\MXD REGIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION (RESIDENTIAL/HOTEL) FIGURE 2

8 TABLE 3 LIST OF STUDY INTERSECTIONS AND STREET SEGMENTS Study Intersections 1. Wilcox Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 2. Cahuenga Boulevard & Franklin Avenue 3. Cahuenga Boulevard & Hollywood Boulevard 4. Cahuenga Boulevard & Selma Avenue 5. Cahuenga Boulevard & Sunset Boulevard 6. Ivar Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 7. Vine Street & US-101 Southbound Off-Ramp/Franklin Avenue 8. Vine Street & Hollywood Boulevard 9. Vine Street & Selma Avenue 10. Vine Street & Sunset Boulevard 11. Vine Street & Fountain Avenue 12. Vine Street & Santa Monica Boulevard 13. Argyle Avenue & US-101 Northbound On-Ramp 14. Argyle Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard 15. Argyle Avenue & Selma Avenue 16. Argyle Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 17. El Centro Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard [1] 18. El Centro Avenue & Selma Avenue [1] 19. El Centro Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 20. El Centro Avenue & De Longpre Avenue [2] 21. El Centro Avenue & Fountain Avenue 22. El Centro Avenue & Santa Monica Boulevard 23. Gower Street & Franklin Avenue 24. Gower Street & US-101 Northbound Off-Ramp [2] 25. Gower Street & US-101 Southbound Off-Ramp/Yucca Street [2] 26. Gower Street & Hollywood Boulevard 27. Gower Street & Selma Avenue [2] 28. Gower Street & Sunset Boulevard 29. Gower Street & Fountain Avenue 30. Gower Street & Santa Monica Boulevard 31. Gordon Street& Sunset Boulevard 32. Bronson Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard 33. Bronson Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 34. US-101 Southbound On/Off-Ramps & Hollywood Boulevard 35. US-101 Northbound On/Off-Ramps & Hollywood Boulevard 36. Van Ness Avenue & Sunset Boulevard 37. US-101 Southbound On-Ramp & Sunset Boulevard [2] Notes: [1] Intersection is currently un-signalized but a traffic signal has been proposed at the location. Under existing conditions, the intersection will be analyzed using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for stop-controlled intersections. [2] Intersection is currently un-signalized and will be evaluated to determine the need for a traffic signal or other traffic control device.

9 Street Segments 1. El Centro Avenue, south of Leland Way 2. Selma Avenue, east of Gower Street 3. La Baig Avenue, North of Sunset Boulevard 4. Harold Way, east of Gower Street

10 TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES FOR RELATED PROJECTS ID PROJECT NAME LAND USE PROJECT LOCATION TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR NET DAILY 1 Hollywood/Garfield Mixed Use 108 dwelling units & 9.937ksf retail 5555 Hollywood Bl Mixed-Use 248 apts & ksf retail 1610 N Highland Av ,805 3 Highland Ave Indigo Hotel Project 100 room business hotel 1841 N Highland Av Capitol Records Mixed-Use Project [1] Millennium Hollywood Mixed-Use; 492 residential units, 200 hotel rooms, ksf 1740 N Vine St ,922 office, ksf retail, 39.1 ksf food & beverage, ksf fitness center 5 Mixed-use 437 apartments & ksf retail 5651 Santa Monica Bl ,734 6 Paramount Studios ksf office, ksf retail, & 971 ksf other use 5555 W Melrose Av 925 1,033 9,830 7 Apartments 90 apartments 1411 N Highland Av Apartment Project 118 apartments 1824 N Highland Av BLVD 6200 Mixed-Use [2] 952 apartments & 190 ksf retail 6200 Hollywood Bl , Sunset & Gordon Mixed-use 8.5 ksf restaurant, 5 ksf retail, 40 ksf office & Sunset Bl condominiums , Selma & Vine Mixed-Use 306 apartments & 68 ksf retail 1540 Vine St , Sunset Bronson Studios ksf Office/Studio Expansion 5800 W Sunset Bl , Argyle Hotel Project 225 hotel rooms 1800 Argyle Av , Restaurant ksf restaurant 6757 Hollywood Bl , Seward St Office Project 130,000 GSF Office 956 N Seward St , Hotel & Restaurant Project 80 room hotel & ksf restaurants 6381 W Hollywood Blvd , Emerson College Project (Student 224 Student Housing Units with 16 Faculty/Staff 1460 N Gordon St Housing) & 6.4 ksf retail N/A ksf office and KSF studio with 18 Television Center (TVC Expansion) expansion of gym & dance studio and new 6300 W Romaine St 0 37 N/A parking structure 19 Hollywood Center Studios Office ksf office & ksf storage 6601 W Romaine St Selma Community Housing 66 affordable apartments 1603 N Cherokee Ave Hudson Building ksf restaurants & ksf offices 6523 W Hollywood Bl The Lexington [3] 7876 apartments, 4 ksf restaurant, 5.5 ksf coffee 6677 Santa Monica Blvd shop/juice bar & 12.7 ksf retail , Hanover Gower Mixed-Use 151 apartments & 6.2 ksf retail 6100 Hollywood Blvd , Yucca St Condos Replace ksf office bldg with ksf commercial & 85 condominiums 6230 Yucca St Mixed-use (68 assisted-living apts w/ ret. 68 apartments & ksf retail & comm. spcs) 5245 Santa Monica Bl Office [4] 240 ksf office 959 Seward St , Archstone Hollywood Mixed-Use Project 374 condominiums & 15 ksf retail 6911 Santa Monica Blvd , High Line West 278 apartments & 12.5 ksf retail 5550 Hollywood Bl , Office Project 85 ksf office 6516 Selma Ave Restaurant/Club 11.4 ksf quality restaurant, 6.1 ksf special events, 6608 Hollywood Bl 9.4 ksf bar/lounge & 3 ksf office ,292 Notes: * denotes no change or negligible change. Trip generation estimates were provided by LADOT staff (including daily trips and total net new peak hour trips). Trip Generation reported was provided in the Millennium Hollywood Project DEIR (October 2012) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Blvd 6200 Project DEIR (April 2006) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Lexington Project DEIR (2008/recirculated July 2013) Trip Generation reported was provided in the 959 Seward Project DEIR (April 2008) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Archstone Hollywood Project DEIR (September 2008) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] N/A Not Available Trip Generation reported was provided in the La Brea Gateway Project DEIR (May 2008) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Target at Sunset & Western DEIR (January 2012) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Columbia Square Mixed-Use Traffic Analysis Validation & Update Trip Generation estimations developed from Enviromental Assessment Form

11 TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES FOR RELATED PROJECTS ID PROJECT NAME LAND USE PROJECT LOCATION TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR NET DAILY 31 Selma Hotel 85 room hotel & ksf restaurant/club 6417 Selma Av , Selma & Vine Office Building ksf office including ksf commercial 1601 Vine St , La Brea Gateway [6] 33.5 ksf supermarket & 179 apartments 915 N La Brea Av , Hollywood Production Center 21 apartments & 36 condos 1149 Gower St Drug Store (Walgreens) replace ksf Fast Food w/ Drive Thru with ksf Pharmacy/Drug Store 6766 Santa Monica Bl Target Retail Shopping Center Project [7] Demolish existing buildings; construct ksf Target & ksf shopping center 5520 Sunset Bl , Highland Center Mixed-Use Project 496 condos, 300 room hotel, ksf office, 45.4 ksf retail 1600 Highland Ave , Lanewood Condos 43 apartments 7045 Lanewood Ave Pantages Theatre Office 214 ksf office 6225 Hollywood Bl , Mixed Use - Office/Retail ksf office, 12 ksf retail 936 La Brea Ave Residential 100 apartments 712 Wilcox Ave replace existing commercial & auto repair with Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Science 44 ksf museum & ksf storage 1313 Vine St Hotel 118 room hotel 1133 Vine St apartments, ksf office, 23.5 ksf high 44 Columbia Square Mixed-Use [8] turnover restaurant, 2 ksf fast food restaurant, 6121 Sunset Bl , ksf retail, 15 ksf health club 45 Expedited CPC Tutoring Facility 927 Highland Ave Apartments 29 condos, 196 apartments 1718 Las Palmas Ave , Gas Station 10 fuel pump gas station 5420 Sunset Bl , Restaurant & Multi-Purpose Entertainment ksf drinking place and.745 ksf restaurant 6506 Hollywood Blvd , Condos & retail 96 condos and 3.35 ksf retail 5663 Melrose Ave Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum ksf tourist attraction and ksf retail 6931 Hollywood Blvd Hotel 50 room hotel 6600 Sunset Bl Gramercy Place Private School 350 student private middle/high school 1717 Gramercy Place Hollywood Freeway Central Park 1-mile "cap" park over US 101 US-101 Freeway Restaurant and Deli 4.7 ksf restaurant and 1 ksf deli 5500 Hollywood Bl Starbucks.8 ksf coffee shop with drive-thru 859 Highland Ave Office/Retail Project ksf office and 24.2 retail 1546 Argyle Ave Sunset + Wilcox 225 room hotel 1541 Wilcox Ave , Hyatt House Hotel & Retail 195 room hotel and 26 ksf commerical 6611 Hollywood Bl , Mixed Use 52 residential units and 4.5 ksf commerical 1350 Wester Ave Sunset/Vine Mixed-Use 200 residential units and 4.7 ksf commerical 6230 Sunset Bl , Mixed-Use 274 ksf office and 26 ksf retail 5901 Sunset Bl , Mixed-Use [9] 220 apartments, 60 ksf retail, and 220 ksf office 1341 Vine St ,718 TOTAL 9,005 12, ,153 Notes: * denotes no change or negligible change. Trip generation estimates were provided by LADOT staff (including daily trips and total net new peak hour trips). Trip Generation reported was provided in the Millennium Hollywood Project DEIR (October 2012) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Blvd 6200 Project DEIR (April 2006) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Lexington Project DEIR (2008/recirculated July 2013) Trip Generation reported was provided in the 959 Seward Project DEIR (April 2008) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] N/A Not Available Trip Generation reported was provided in the Archstone Hollywood Project DEIR (September 2008) Trip Generation reported was provided in the La Brea Gateway Project DEIR (May 2008) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Target at Sunset & Western DEIR (January 2012) Trip Generation reported was provided in the Columbia Square Mixed-Use Traffic Analysis Validation & Update Trip Generation estimations developed from Enviromental Assessment Form

12 Canyon Dr Related Detroit St Detroit St La Brea Av Sycamore Av Orange Dr 33 Sycamore Av Franklin Av Orange Dr Lanewood Av 40 Mansfield Av Orchid Av Hillcrest Rd Hawthorn Av Leland Wy Citrus Av Highland Av Citrus Av Citrus Av McCadden Pl Yucca St McCadden Pl 14 Las Palmas Av Las Palmas Av Cherokee Av Cherokee Av June St Romaine St Barton Av Whitley Av McCadden Pl June St Seward St Cherokee Av Cassil Pl 51 Leland Wy Hudson Av Grace Av Hudson Av Fountain Av Hudson Av Lexington Av Wilcox Av Cole Pl Cole Av Cahuenga Blvd Willoughby Av Waring Av Yucca St Cosmo St Ivar Av Morningside Ct Lillian Wy Vine St Argyle Av Leland Wy De Longpre Av Afton Pl El Centro Av Banner Av Eleanor Av Gregory Av Camerford Av Melrose Av Vis Del Mar Av Selma Av Barton Av Carlos Av Fountain Av Lodi Pl Gower St Franklin Av Carlos Av Hollywood Blvd Selma Av Beachwood Dr Labaig Av Carlton Wy Gordon St Gordon St Windsor Blvd Tamarind Av Yucca St Bronson Av Canyon Dr Van Ness Av Project Site Sunset Blvd Fernwood Av La Mirada Av Santa Monica Blvd 6 Marathon St 12 Van Ness Av Ridgewood Pl Taft Av Wilton Pl Raleigh St 53 Gramercy Pl Carlton Wy Harold Wy Lexington Av Virginia Av Garfield Pl Sierra Vista Av Barton Av Romaine St Lemon Grove Av Gramercy Pl Saint Andrews Pl 1 Saint Andrews Pl Western Av Monroe St Manhattan Pl Russell Av Serrano Av Fountain Av Loma Linda Av Hobart Blvd La Mirada Av Lexington Av Oxford Av Serrano Av Hobart Blvd # Harvard Blvd Virginia Av 25 Harvard Blvd Kingsley Dr Kingsley Dr Project Project Site N Not to Scale \\fpla1\data\jobs\active\2500s\ Hollywood Palladium\Graphics\GIS\MXD LOCATION OF RELATED PROJECTS FIGURE 3

13 ATTACHMENT A

14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROJECT LOCATION Figure 1 shows the location of the project site within the sub-region. The site is located at 6201 West Sunset Boulevard; and occupies part of the city block bounded by Sunset Boulevard on the south, Selma Avenue on the north, El Centro Avenue on the east, and Argyle Avenue on the west. The project site encompasses approximately 3.6 acres, and is currently occupied by the Palladium building in the southeast quadrant of the block and existing surface parking lots in the southwest and northeast quadrants. The existing buildings in the northwest portion of this block are not a part of the Project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project would protect and enhance the historic Palladium while replacing the existing surface parking lots with construction of two new buildings that are consistent with the Project Site s current zoning and Community Plan s Land Use designations on the northeast and southwest portions of the Project site. To provide flexibility for changing market forces, the Applicant is requesting review of two development options for the Project s two new buildings, which would be up to 28 stories and approximately 350 in height. Under Option 1, Residential Option, the two buildings would contain up to 730 residential units. Under Option 2, Residential/Hotel Option, the two buildings would contain up to 598 residential units, and in the southwest building fronting Argyle Avenue, up to 250 hotel rooms. Both options would include lobby space as well as approximately 22,000 square feet of amenities, with the hotel having banquet/meeting facilities and hotel-serving retail uses. In addition to an existing 10,000 square feet of ancillary retail in the Palladium, both options would include up to 14,000 sq. ft. of new retail and/or restaurant space in a low-rise building component at the Sunset Boulevard/Argyle Avenue intersection and on the ground floor of the northeast building facing N. El Centro Avenue. The project would provide recreational and open space facilities on the Project Site, including up to 16,000 square feet of publicly accessible, landscaped outdoor space in street level courtyards and pedestrian walkways. Other facilities for residents and hotel guests would include gym and spa facilities, an outdoor pool terrace, landscaped roof-top terraces; and private balconies. Approximately 1,900 spaces would be provided in a subterranean structure as well as abovegrade structured parking along the northern edge of the Project Site. The project would also include up to approximately 820 bicycle stalls to serve Project residents and Site visitors. The Project would also study the potential to close the segment of N. El Centro Avenue between Sunset Boulevard and the Palladium s existing loading dock during non-peak hour traffic periods, on a part time or permanent basis, to create a gathering space for public activities.

15 ATTACHMENT B

16 JUSTIFICATION FOR USE OF ITE MID-RISE/HIGH-RISE APARTMENT AND HIGH-RISE CONDOMINIUM TRIP GENERATION RATES FOR TRAFFIC STUDIES IN LOS ANGELES Institute of Transportation Engineers Residential Trip Rates Trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE s) trip generation manual 1 for standard apartments (ITE code 220) and standard condominiums (ITE code 230) are typically used to estimate trips for residential projects in Los Angeles. These rates were developed based on studies at sites throughout the United States and Canada. ITE defines apartment and condominium as follows: Apartments (ITE code 220) Apartments are rental dwelling units that are located within the same building with at least three other dwelling units, for example quadraplexes and all types of apartment buildings. The studies included in this land use did not identify whether the apartments were low-rise, mid-rise, or high-rise. Residential condominium/townhouse (ITE code 230) Residential condominium/townhouses are defined as ownership units that have at least one other owned unit within the same building structure. Both condominiums and townhouses are included in this land use. The studies in this land use did not identify whether condominium/townhouses were low-rise or high-rise. ITE also provides rates for mid-rise apartments (ITE code 223), high-rise apartments (ITE code 222), and high-rise condominiums (ITE code 232). ITE defines these types of units as follows: Mid-rise apartments (ITE code 223) Mid-rise apartments (rental dwelling units) are units located in rental buildings that have more than three levels (floors) and less than ten levels (floors). High-rise apartments (ITE code 222) High-rise apartments (rental dwelling units) are units located in rental buildings that have more than ten levels (floors) and most likely have one or more elevators. High-rise condominiums (ITE code 232) High-rise residential condominiums/townhouses are units located in buildings that have three or more levels (floors). Both condominiums and townhouses are included in this land use. The ITE trip generation rates per unit for the mid-rise and high-rise residential uses are lower than the respective ITE rates for the standard apartments and condominiums, as seen below: Vehicle Trip Rate per Unit ITE Code AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Standard Apartment Mid-Rise Apartment High-Rise Apartment Standard Condominium High-Rise Condominium Trip Generation, an ITE Informational Report, 9 th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers,

17 This is likely due to the nature of areas in which mid-rise and high-rise residential complexes are typically located (e.g., urban settings with amenities within walking distance, some amount of transit service, etc.). Also, trip rates can be lower due to economies of scale (e.g., there may be less building employees per unit in a larger complex than a smaller one, service vehicles only need to travel to one building to service a number of units, etc.). Empirical Studies at Residential Projects in Los Angeles Empirical trip generation studies have been conducted by Fehr & Peers and others at various mid-rise apartment and high-rise condominium projects in Los Angeles. Table 1 presents data from studies conducted at three mid-rise apartments (the Medici at 725 Bixel Street, Skyline Terrace at 930 Figueroa Terrace, and Palazzo East at Park La Brea) and four high-rise condominium buildings (2160/2170 Century Park East, the Remington at Wilshire Boulevard, the Wilshire Regent at Wilshire Boulevard, and Blair House at Wilshire Boulevard) in Los Angeles. With one exception, these projects are not located within walking distance of a rail transit station (the Medici being the exception), although all are located within walking distance of a Metro Rapid bus line. As shown on Table 1, the average observed trip rates for the three mid-rise apartment locations in Los Angeles are 56% and 66% lower than the standard apartment rates from ITE and 25% and 46% lower than the mid-rise apartment trip rates from ITE in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The average observed trip rates for the four high-rise condominium locations are 42% lower than the standard condominium rates from ITE and 24% and 21% lower than the mid-rise apartment trip rates from ITE in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Caltrans Urban Infill Empirical Study Caltrans conducted a study of trip generation rates for various land uses in urban infill locations throughout the State of California. 2 Table 2 presents data from the study at mid-rise apartments in Berkeley, Santa Monica and Pasadena, high-rise apartments in San Francisco, and high-rise condominiums in San Diego. The Caltrans study required that projects selected for study be within 1/3 mile of an existing or future rail transit station, within 1/3 mile of the intersection of at least two major bus routes, or within 1,200 feet of a bus rapid transit corridor. As shown on Table 2, the average observed trip rates in the Caltrans study for the mid-rise apartment locations are 57% and 55% lower than the standard apartment rates from ITE and 27% and 28% lower than the mid-rise apartment trip rates from ITE in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The observed trip rates for the high-rise apartments in San Francisco were 80% to 90% less than the ITE high-rise apartment rates. The average observed trip rates for the high-rise condominium locations are 43% and 48% lower than the standard condominium rates from ITE and 26% and 29% lower than the high-rise condominium trip rates from ITE in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Conclusion The empirical studies conducted at residential projects in Los Angeles and the empirical studies conducted as part of the Caltrans urban infill trip generation study each indicate that actual average trip 2 Trip Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California, Phase 2: Data Collection, Final Report, California Department of Transportation, Headquarters Divisions of Transportation Planning and Research & Innovation, June

18 generation rates for mid-rise and high-rise residential projects are lower than both the ITE standard residential trip rates and the ITE mid-rise and high-rise residential trip rates. The ITE trip generation manual encourages that local studies be done to establish local rates, and recommends that any such studies survey at least three sites. Since the local surveys meet this test, the empirically-derived rates based on the local data could potentially be used as a substitute for ITE rates, meaning that trip rates even lower than ITE mid-rise and high-rise rates would be technically justifiable. Short of that, however, both the Los Angeles and California data at the very least support the use of the ITE mid-rise and high-rise residential rates for mid-rise and high-rise projects in urbanized areas of Los Angeles instead of the ITE standard residential rates. Transit Credit Since the Los Angeles and California survey sites were all located near high quality transit, an additional transit credit should generally not be taken when the lower mid- or high-rise rates are used. An exception could be in the case of a development located above or adjacent to a Metro Rail, Metrolink or Orange Line station since, in these cases, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) traffic study guidelines 3 permit a greater level of transit credit (25% instead of 15%) as compared to developments within a 1/4 mile walking distance of a transit station or a rapid bus stop (and since all of the survey sites in Los Angeles were within walking distance of rapid bus or transit station but none were above or adjacent to a station). In this instance, a 10% transit credit applied to the mid- or high-rise rates would be appropriate, subject to approval by LADOT. 3 Traffic Study Guidelines and Procedures, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, June

19 Fehr & Peers 10/3/2013 Table 1 Comparison of Observed Los Angeles Mid-Rise and High-Rise Residential Trip Generation to ITE Trip Generation Rates Name Land Use Location # of Dwelling Units AM Peak Hour Observed Trip Rate per DU PM Peak Hour Observed Trip Rate per DU Mid-Rise Apartment [a] Empirical Studies The Medici, 725 Bixel Street [b] Mid-Rise Apartment Center City West Skyline Terrace, 930 Figueroa Terrace [b] Mid-Rise Apartment Downtown Adjacent Palazzo East at Park La Brea [b] Mid-Rise Apartment Mid-Wilshire Mid-Rise Apartment Average Mid-Rise Apartment Weighted Average ITE Trip Rates [c] Apartment (ITE Code 220) Empirical Compared to ITE Apartment -56% -66% Mid-Rise Apartment (ITE Code 223) Empirical Compared to ITE Mid-Rise Apartment -25% -46% High-Rise Condominium [d] Empirical Studies [e] 2160/2170 Century Park East [e] High-Rise Condominium West Los Angeles Remington, Wilshire [e] High-Rise Condominium West Los Angeles Wilshire Regent, Wilshire [f] High-Rise Condominium West Los Angeles Blair House, Wilshire [f] High-Rise Condominium West Los Angeles High-Rise Condominium Average High-Rise Condominium Weighted Average ITE Trip Rates [c] Condominium (ITE Code 230) Empirical Compared to ITE Condo -42% -42% High-Rise Condominium (ITE Code 232) Empirical Compared to ITE High-Rise Condo -24% -21% Notes: a. Mid-rise apartment defined by ITE as apartments in rental buildings that have between three and ten floors. b. Source: Application of ITE Mid-Rise Apartment Trip Rates, Fehr & Peers/Kaku Associates, c. Source: Trip Generation, An ITE Informational Report, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, d. High-rise residential condominium defined by ITE as ownership units in buildings that have three or more floors. e. Source: Empirical studies conducted in 2005 by Fehr & Peers/Kaku Associates. f. Source: Empirical studies conducted in 2005 by Overland Traffic Consultants.

20 Fehr & Peers 10/3/2013 Land Use [b] Table 2 Comparison of California Urban Infill Trip Generation Studies to ITE Trip Generation Rates [a] Location Observed Trip Rate per DU [a] AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Comparison to ITE Comparison to ITE Mid- Comparison to ITE Standard Rate or High-Rise Rate Observed Standard Rate Difference Differ- Trip Rate Differ- ITE Trip Rate [c] ITE Trip Rate [c] ence per DU [a] ITE Trip Rate [c] ence ITE Trip Rate [c] Comparison to ITE Midor High-Rise Rate Residential Land Use Mid-Rise Apartments Berkeley ITE % 0.30 ITE % ITE % 0.39 ITE % Mid-Rise Apartments Santa Monica ITE % 0.30 ITE % ITE % 0.39 ITE % Mid-Rise Apartments Pasadena ITE % 0.30 ITE % ITE % 0.39 ITE % Weighted Average Mid-Rise Apartments ITE % 0.30 ITE % ITE % 0.39 ITE % High-Rise Apartments San Francisco ITE % 0.30 ITE % ITE % 0.35 ITE % Weighted Average High-Rise Condos San Diego ITE % 0.34 ITE % ITE % 0.38 ITE % Weighted Average All Residential Sites Difference Notes: a. Data from Trip Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California, Phase 2: Data Collection, Final Report, Caltrans Headquarters Divisions of Transportation Planning and Research & Innovation, June 2009 b. Mid-rise apartment defined by ITE as apartments in rental buildings that have between three and ten floors. High-rise apartment defined by ITE as apartments in rental buildings that have more than ten floors. High-rise residential condominium defined by ITE as ownership units in buildings that have three or more floors. c. Source: Trip Generation, An ITE Informational Report, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, California Urban Infill Site Selection Criteria: 1. Transit Proximity: Must be within 1/3 mile of existing or future rail transit station, within 1/3 mile of intersection of at least 2 major bus routes, or within 1,200 feet of a BRT corridor, with maximum headways of 15 minutes for at least 5 hours per day. 2. Vacant Developable Land: Must be within an urban infill area with no more than 10% Vacant Developable Land. 3. Density: If residential land uses comprise at least 60% of developed land, densities will be at least 10 DU per gross acre.

21 ATTACHMENT C

22 FREEWAY SCREENING FOR PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SCREENING CRITERIA DESCRIBED IN SECTION 3 OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND CALTRANS DISTRICT 7 ON FREEWAY IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES, OCTOBER 2013 INTRODUCTION Section 3.1 of the Agreement Between City of Los Angeles and Caltrans District 7 On Freeway Impact Analysis Procedures dated October 2013 specifies the following: City will require Project applicants to work with Caltrans and prepare a Freeway Impact Analysis, utilizing Caltrans' "Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies" ("TIS Guide"), for land use proposals that meet any of the following criteria: The project's peak hour trips would result in a 1-percent or more increase to the freeway mainline capacity of a freeway segment operating at level-of-service (LOS) E or F (based on an assumed capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane); or The project's peak hour trips would result in a 2-percent or more increase to the freeway mainline capacity of a freeway segment operating at LOS D (based on an assumed capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane); or The project's peak hour trips would result in a 1-percent or more increase to the capacity of a freeway off-ramp operating at LOS E or F (based on an assumed ramp capacity of 1,500 vehicles per hour per lane); or The project's peak hour trips would result in a 2-percent or more increase to the capacity of a freeway off-ramp operating at LOS D (based on an assumed ramp capacity of 1,500 vehicles per hour per lane). The purpose of this analysis is to apply the above screening criteria to determine whether a Freeway Impact Analysis would be required for the Palladium Residences project. The methodologies used to conduct the screening analysis for the project, and the results of the screening, are described below. INITIAL STEPS Project trip generation estimates were prepared in accordance with the latest version of LADOT s Traffic Study Policies and Procedures as part of preparing the standard LADOT Traffic Study Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the project. The project trip generation estimates as accepted by LADOT are shown in Tables 1 and 2 for the two project options. Since Option 2 (residential and hotel) generates the higher number of trips, it was used for the screening analysis. A trip distribution pattern was developed for the project as part of preparing the LADOT Traffic Study MOU for the project. A select zone analysis was conducted using the City of Los Angeles travel demand model to assist in the development of the distribution pattern. Based on the select zone analysis, we determined that 20% of project trips may utilize the US 101 freeway to/from the south and 15% may utilize the US 101 freeway to/from the north (see Figure 1). The most direct routes for project traffic to access the freeway system is via the Sunset Boulevard and Hollywood Boulevard interchanges for travel to/from the south and via the Vine Street/Argyle Avenue and Gower Street interchanges for travel to/from the north. Based on this distribution, two freeway mainline segments (US 101 south of Sunset Boulevard and US 101 north of Vine Street/Argyle 4/15/2014, Page 1

23 Avenue) and four freeway off-ramps (US 101 southbound off to Vine Street, US 101 southbound off to Gower Street, US 101 northbound off to Hollywood Boulevard, and US 101 northbound off to Sunset Boulevard) were determined to be the most likely elements of the freeway system to be utilized by project traffic and were selected for screening. FREEWAY MAINLINE SEGMENT SCREENING The freeway mainline segment screening analysis is shown on Table 3. Mainline volume and speed data were obtained from PeMS for the two freeway mainline segments for the AM and PM peak periods for Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays between September 17 and 26, 2013, and the data was averaged across the days. Because volumes can become suppressed and volume-based measures can therefore break down under congested conditions, the existing freeway mainline segment LOS was estimated in two ways, based on volume and based on speed: o o For volume-based, the number of mainline lanes (not including auxiliary lanes) was identified and segment capacity was determined using a capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl). The existing hourly volume was divided by the capacity to determine volume/capacity (V/C) ratio. The existing LOS was then determined as follows: V/C Ratio LOS <0.60 A B C D E >1.00 F For speed-based, the existing LOS was determined as follows: Speed LOS >50 mph A/B/C mph D <35 mph E/F The worst-case LOS (V/C-based versus speed-based) was then used to determine the appropriate screening threshold: o Threshold = >2% of segment capacity if worst-case LOS is D o Threshold = >1% of segment capacity if worst-case LOS is E or F The project-added trips to each freeway mainline segment were compared to the appropriate threshold. As shown on Table 3, the screening analysis determined that the screening threshold criteria would not be triggered at either of the two freeway mainline segments. Furthermore, since the project traffic did not trigger the screening thresholds at the mainline segments most likely to be used by project traffic, there is no need to look at segments further away. Therefore, a Freeway Impact Analysis is not required. 4/15/2014, Page 2

24 FREEWAY RAMP SCREENING The freeway ramp screening analysis is shown on Table 4. Turning movement count data was obtained for the AM and PM peak periods for the freeway offramp termini intersections. Existing LOS was estimated using the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) operational methodology when the ramp termini intersection is signalized and the HCM stop-controlled methodology when the ramp termini intersection is stop-controlled, considering existing turning movement volumes, lane configurations, and the type of traffic control at the end of the ramp. The HCM worksheets attached to this document present the LOS calculations. From the HCM intersection analysis, the existing average vehicular delay and LOS was determined for the off-ramp approaches to the termini intersections. For each ramp, the LOS for the off-ramp approach was used to determine the appropriate screening threshold: o Threshold = >2% of assumed ramp capacity if approach LOS is D o Threshold = >1% of assumed ramp capacity if approach LOS is E or F Where the assumed ramp capacity = 1,500 vphpl multiplied by the number of approach lanes on the ramp approach to the intersection. In other words, the threshold is 30 vphpl at LOS D and 15 vphpl at LOS E or F, multiplied by the number of lanes on the ramp approach to the intersection. The project-added trips to each off-ramp were compared to the appropriate threshold. As shown on Table 4, the screening analysis determined that the screening threshold criteria would not be triggered at any of the four freeway ramps. Furthermore, since the project traffic did not trigger the screening thresholds at the ramps most likely to be used by project traffic, there is no need to look at ramps further away. Therefore, a Freeway Impact Analysis is not required. 4/15/2014, Page 3

25 5% 15% Canyon Dr Grace Av 5% Wilcox Av 2 Cahuenga Blvd Ivar Av 3 Yucca St Vine St 7 8 Argyle Av Vis Del Mar Av 17 Carlos Av Carlos Av Hollywood Blvd Franklin Av Yucca St Canyon Dr 36 Van Ness Av Taft Av 5% 5% Gramercy Pl Hudson Av Cosmo St Carlton Wy Carlton Wy 8% Hudson Av 2% 1 Cole Pl Morningside Ct Leland Wy De Longpre Av Afton Pl Fountain Av Project Site El Centro Av Selma Av Gower St Selma Av Sunset Blvd Labaig Av Gordon St Gordon St Tamarind Av Bronson Av 34 Fernwood Av Van Ness Av Wilton Pl 20% Harold Wy 7% Lexington Av Lodi Pl Beachwood Dr La Mirada Av Lexington A 5% Cole Av 4% 12 Banner Av Santa Monica Blvd % Virginia Av 3% Hudson Av 5% Eleanor Av 5% 4% # Freeway Distribution Local Distribution Sierr Study Intersections Willoughby Av Lillian Wy Barton Av Study Segments Project Site Barton Av Ro N Not to Scale N:\Jobs\Active\2500s\ SM Blvd Traffic Study\Graphics\GIS\MXD REGIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION (RESIDENTIAL/HOTEL) FIGURE 1

26 Fehr & Peers 4/15/2014 TABLE 1 PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT OPTION 1 (RESIDENTIAL ONLY) - TRIP GENERATION Land Use Size Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation ITE Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Code Rate Rate In Out Rate In Out Trips In Out Total In Out Total Residential Units High-Rise Residential [b] 731 du 222/ % 81% % 38% 3, Net External Vehicle Trips 3, Sit-Down Restaurant High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant 5.0 ksf % 45% % 40% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -10% -10% -20% (64) (3) (2) (5) (6) (4) (10) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (86) (4) (3) (7) (4) (2) (6) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -20% [e] -20% -20% -20% (97) (4) (4) (8) (4) (3) (7) Net External Vehicle Trips Community Serving Retail Shopping Center 9.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (77) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (46) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] -50% -50% -50% (131) (2) (1) (3) (5) (6) (11) Net External Vehicle Trips Palladium Retail Shopping Center 10.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (85) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (51) (1) 0 (1) (2) (3) (5) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] -50% -50% -50% (146) (2) (2) (4) (6) (7) (13) Net External Vehicle Trips TOTAL DRIVEWAY TRIPS [f] 4, EXTERNAL PROJECT VEHICLE TRIPS 3, TOTAL TRIP GENERATION BEFORE CREDITS 4, Net Combined Trip Reduction Credit (Internal, Transit & Pass-By) -17% -10% -18% Notes: a. Source for trip generation rates: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), b. For flexibility, the trip generation analysis uses the most conservative (highest) rates for high-rise apartments versus high-rise condominiums: ITE code 222 (high-rise apartment) for daily trips and ITE code 232 (high-rise condominium) for peak hour trips. Since the high-rise residences in the ITE database are generally in urban areas with transit service, no additional internal trip credit nor transit credit was taken to provide a conservative estimate. c. Proposed project is located within 1/4-mile of Metro Red Line Station; Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (page 10). d. Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. This percentage is informed by the Multi-Use Trip Generation Calculation methodology described in Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, e. Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (Attachment I). f. Total driveway trips include pass-by trips. These trips were only used for the purpose of conducting level of service analysis at proposed project driveways.

27 Fehr & Peers 4/15/2014 TABLE 2 PALLADIUM RESIDENCES PROJECT OPTION 2 (RESIDENTIAL AND HOTEL) - TRIP GENERATION Land Use Size Trip Generation Rates [a] Estimated Trip Generation ITE Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips Code Rate Rate In Out Rate In Out Trips In Out Total In Out Total Residential Units High-Rise Residential [b] 598 du 222/ % 81% % 38% 2, Net External Vehicle Trips 2, Sit-Down Restaurant High-Turnover (Sit Down) Restaurant 5.0 ksf % 45% % 40% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -10% -10% -20% (64) (3) (2) (5) (6) (4) (10) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (86) (4) (3) (7) (4) (2) (6) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -20% [e] -20% -20% -20% (97) (4) (4) (8) (4) (3) (7) Net External Vehicle Trips Community Serving Retail Shopping Center 9.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (77) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (46) (1) 0 (1) (2) (2) (4) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] -50% -50% -50% (131) (2) (1) (3) (5) (6) (11) Net External Vehicle Trips Palladium Retail Shopping Center 10.0 ksf % 38% % 52% Less: Internal Trips credit [d] -20% -20% -20% (85) (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (7) Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (51) (1) 0 (1) (2) (3) (5) Total Driveway Trips Less: Pass-By Trips -50% [e] -50% -50% -50% (146) (2) (2) (4) (6) (7) (13) Net External Vehicle Trips Hotel 250 rooms % 41% % 49% 2, Less: Transit credit -15% [c] -15% -15% -15% (306) (12) (8) (20) (12) (11) (23) Total Driveway Trips 1, TOTAL DRIVEWAY TRIPS [f] 5, EXTERNAL PROJECT VEHICLE TRIPS 4, TOTAL TRIP GENERATION BEFORE TRIP CREDITS 6, Net Combined Trip Reduction Credit (Internal, Transit & Pass-By) -18% -13% -19% Notes: a. Source for trip generation rates: Trip Generation, 9th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), 2012 b. For flexibility, the trip generation analysis uses the most conservative (highest) rates for high-rise apartments versus high-rise condominiums: ITE code 222 (high-rise apartment) for daily trips and ITE code 232 (high-rise condominium) for peak hour trips. Since the high-rise residences in the ITE database are generally in urban areas with transit service, no additional internal trip credit nor transit credit was taken to provide a conservative estimate. c. Proposed project is located within 1/4-mile of Metro Red Line Station; Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (page 10). d. Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. This percentage is informed by the Multi-Use Trip Generation Calculation methodology described in Chapter 7 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, e. Source: Traffic Study Policies and Procedures, LADOT, revised June 2013 (Attachment I). f. Total driveway trips include pass-by trips. These trips were only used for the purpose of conducting level of service analysis at proposed project driveways.