HomeMy WebLinkAboutAera Traffic Impact AnalysisTRAFFIr IMPArT A_NAT�SIS AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA This Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared under the supervision of Leslie E. Card, P.E. Signed LSD September 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................ INTRODUCTION -OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND THE REGIONALCONTEXT..........................................................................................:..... METHODOLOGY...............................................:......................................................... EXISTINGSETTING....................................................:............................................... 2025 CONDITIONS....................................................................................................... PROJECT TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND ASSIGNMENT ................ IMPACTANALYSIS, I I I I I . 11 1 1 11 so . . p 0 a 0 a a p & p I I . . I I I I I I I I . . I & a & . m a p m v F & a a m a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LONG-RANGE (2025) GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS. I I I I I I I . I I I I I I . a a p . v . v . . a A I 12 .............. 23 .............. 39 51 .............. 60 86 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ANALYSIS........................................................... 103 FREEWAYRAMP ANALYSIS...........................................................................................:........... ] 07 SIGNALWARRANT ANALYSIS................................................................................................... 109 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS.....................................:................................ 115 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS/MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................. 118 MITIGATIONPHASING ANALYSIS............................................................................................. 137 APPENDICES A: TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPE OF WORK B: SCAG RTP CORRESPONDENCE C: STUDY AREA CORRESPONDENCE D: EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNT DATA E: LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS F: TWO-LANE ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS G: TRAFFIC MODEL FORECAST METHODOLOGY H: CMP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT 1: MITIGATION CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS P:\CRU830\2007\Tramc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc rs09/24/07n FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure ES-1: Regional Employment Centers. I I I I I I . I I I I I I I MOF M a 0 a a 0 a a a M a 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . a a 0 D a 0 M M F 0 1 a I a a a a I a a a a . a . a Figure ES-2: Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program....................:............................................ES-4 Figure1: Regional Location......................................................................................... ......... a............... 2 Figure2: Project Site Plans.................................................................................................................... 4 Figure3: Project Design Features.......................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program............................................................................ 7 Figure 5a: Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvements, 9 Figure 5b: Pomona Valley ITS project............................................................................................... 10 Figure6: Study Area......................................................................... ................................................ a., 14 Figure 7: Proposed Project TAZ Zones and Land Use Summary. I I I I I I I I I I I I . . d I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 0 . . I I I I 1 15 Figure 8: TAZ Zones and Land Use Summary Road Connected Alternative ..................................... 17 Figure 9: Existing Number of Lanes on Roadway and Freeway Segments ......................................... 24 Figure 10: Los Angeles County Highway Plan....................................................0...........a.................. 25 Figure 11: Existing Transit Service......................................................................................0.............. 28 Figure 12: Existing Daily Traffic Volumes..........................................................................6.............. 31 Figure 13: Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes................................................................................. 32 Figure 14: Existing Intersection Geometries.............................................................................mamma..... 35 Figure 15: Year 2025 No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................................................ 40 Figure 1 6 : Cumulative Projects Peak Hour Traffic Volumes..............:.................A..........................a.0 45 Figure 17: Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................................ 47 Figure 18: Regional Trip Distribution................................................................................................. 55 Figure 19: Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes..................................:...A......................I..... 56 Figure 20: Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................. 58 Figure 21: Existing Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.,,.,..,..,... ............... 61 Figure 22: Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................... 63 Figure 23: Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .......................................... 69 Figure 24: Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes... 71 Figure 25: Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ...................... 78 Figure 26: Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.... 81 Figure 27: General Plan Land Use Assumptions.,,,'..,.""., ... 1.11 ".."11111110.1111 87 Figure 28: Year 2025 No Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes ..................................................... 89 Figure 29: Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes. I I P I I I I ........................... 92 Figure 30: Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Average Daily Traffic Volumes ....4............ 94 Figure 31: General Plan Average Daily Traffic Volumes................................................................... 98 Figure 32a: Year 2025 No Project Intersection Volumes and Peak -Hour Traffic Signal Warrant..., 110 Figure 32b: Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Intersection Volumes and Peak -Hour Traffic SignalWarrant........................................................................................................................... 111 Figure 32c: Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Volumes and Traffic SignalWarrant, I I I . . I I I I I I . . I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 4 1 . . I I I I I I I . A I I I I I . . I I I I I . I I I I I I I . . I I I I I I I . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . 112 Figure 33: VMT Alternative Site Location........................................................................................ 116 Figure 34: Year 2013 Proposed Project TAZ Zones and Land Use Summary..,..., 138 139 Figure 35: Year 2019 Proposed Project TAZ Zones and Land Use Summary .................................. P:\CRU830\300TTmffic Sludy\LA Sludy_Seplember 2007.doc n09/24/07» TABLES Table ES -A: Los Angeles County Mitigation Summary ...... Table ES-B: Orange County Mitigation Summary ..... .......... ........................... ........................ ......... ES-8 Table A: Existing (2007) Intersection Level of Service Summary, ... ........:..... Table B: Year 2025 No Project Intersection Level of Service Summary .......................................... Table C: Cumulative Projects Trip Generation..".. .........................................................:.................. Table D: Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Intersection Level of Service Summary ...................... Table E: Project Trip Generation .................................. :.............. :..................................................... Table F: Existing and Existing Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service Summary....... Table G: Existing and Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service Summary...:....................................................:.......................................:....................... ............ . Table H: Existing and Existing Plus Project Freeway Ramp Intersection HCM Analysis Summary.............................. ......... ..:.............................. ............. ................................................ Table 1: 2025 and 2025 Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service Summary..................... Table J: 2025 and 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service Summary..................................................................................................................................... 74 Table K: 2025 and 2025 Plus Project Freeway Ramp Intersection HCM Analysis Summary:........... 76 Table L: Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Intersection Levelof Service Summary .......................................................................................................... 80 Table M: Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service Summary .............................................................I........................ 83 Table N: Two -Lane Roadway Segment Traffic Volumes and Peak Hour Link Summary .................. 85 Table O: Trip Generation for General Plan Land Use Assumptions................................................... 88 Table P: Year 2025 and Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Daily Roadway Traffic Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity Ratios Summary, . I I I 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 . . . . . . I I I I . P . . & . & a a 0 * * V V q . . . . . d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Table Q: Year 2025 and Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Peak -Hour Link Traffic Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity Ratios Summary ........................................ .:............................ 0........... 96 Table R: 2025 and 2025 Plus Proposed Project General Plan Daily Roadway Traffic.Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity Ratios Summary.................................................................................. 99 Table S: Year 2025 and Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project General Plan Peak Hour Link Traffic Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity Ratios Summary ............................................................ Table T: Year 2025 Freeway Mainline Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity . .2 .4 .0 .2 . 6 Cv Ratios... Table U: Year 2025 Freeway Ramp Peak Hour Traffic Volumes And Volume -To -Capacity Ratios ......... :.................. ................................................................................................... Table V: Signal Warrant Analysis Summary and Fair Share Estimates .................................. Table W: Total Vehicle Miles of Travel Summary ................................................................. TableX: Mitigation Summary.......................:.............................:........................................... Table Y: Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service and Mitigation Summary....................................................................................................0.................... Table Z: Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service and MitigationSummary....................................................................................................... Table AA: Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service and MitigationSummary ..........................................................................A............................ 68 73 102 .117 .124 .126 .127 .128 P:\CRU630\200TTra0ic StudylLA Study_September 2007.doc «09/24/OT� tit Table AB: Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service and Mitigation Summary',,'.,'... ... 116samledop ............ 0 ......... ......... 129 Table AC: 2013 Project Trip Generation (Total Units =1,200)........................................................ 140 Table AD: 2019 Project Trip Generation (Total Units = 2,400)........................................................ 141 Table AE: Year 2013 with 1,200 Dwelling Units, Los Angeles County Mitigation Summary......... 143 Table AF: Year 2019 with 2,400 Dwelling Units Los Angeles County Mitigation Summary.......... 145 Table AG: Los Angeles County Mitigation Phasing for AMPC Off -Site Intersection Impacts........ 147 P:\CRUS30\2007\Traaic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc n09R4/Ob> IV I.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. _ - P A I IC IMPACTANALYSIS S YYrRMARR 3009 P: AMAST ER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, I.OSANCRLRS COUNTY. CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Creating New Housing Opportunities in Areas in Close Proximity to Major Employment Centers The Aera Master Planned Community (AMPC) is a primarily residential project (3,600 dwelling units and 300,000 square feet [sf] of commercial uses) proposed in an area of Los Angeles and Orange Counties that exhibits a relatively high job -to -housing ratio. The Aera project is consistent with population and housing projections contained in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP 2004). In effect, the Aera development is an infill type of project almost completely surrounded by urban development and dedicated open space, with the urban communities of Brea to the south and Rowland Heights/Industry/Diamond Bar to the north. These characteristics will lessen the relative traffic impacts by creating housing opportunities in a jobs -rich area compared to similar residential developments in an outlying area. This attribute is illustrated in an aerial photograph (Figure ES-1) showing the Proposed Project location in the context of areawide nonresidential employment concentrations. The employment centers are most intense in the communities of Industry (with a recently approved 4.8 million sf industrial/office/ commercial project near the interchange of State Route 60 [SR-60]/State Route 57 [SR-571) and Brea. These geographic land use relationships are introduced prior to a discussion of technical traffic study impacts because at best, it is difficult to replicate in the technical studies, and in many cases the traffic impact methodology does not provide for consideration that an existing longer -distance commute trip might be replaced and eliminated with a shorter trip from this project. However, an analysis of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is provided within the traffic study for purposes of disclosing the VMT of the project compared to an alternative project location and in order to examine the project's consistency with SCAG's regional VMT goals. The project's contribution to reducing the length of home -to -work trips, as vividly illustrated in Figure ES-1, provide the regional traffic and air quality context within which the technical studies should be viewed. Overview of the Transportation Mitigation Program Within the context of the positive net traffic benefits of concentrating new housing opportunities near major employment centers noted above, the project is committed to an extensive package of off -site traffic improvements, providing capacity improvements, and has advocated a comprehensive approach to make enhancements to an existing circulation system. That system is severely constrained in many areas due to narrow rights -of -way and limited building setbacks and experiences freeway -diverted traffic during peak hours. A mitigation program has been developed to address project impacts on affected circulation systems with the following features. 1. Enhance the operation and capacity of the congested corridors adjacent to the project site 2. Improve the intersections significantly impacted by the project 3. Advance the technologies capable of improving traffic flow at surrounding intersections' 4. Pay the project's fair -share contribution toward future improvements P:\CRU830\200TTm�c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc u09/24/07» ES-1 IF I IF IF l IF t \ ` r LL 00 IF If IMF if - _ _ - r IL -C6751 IF M. __IF - r--'IF Industry IfF i'. DiamondiBar For IF If IF RowlandlHeiglits, _ _ ,. IF LaflabraiHeights F jWhittier /�OIL I IF I \ ! 710 IFj 71 —IF OF \ LajHabra - - �. Brea if - —� M�� .6 - 15 IF aIr FIF '1k Ulf - - ei' Fullerton ' r— IF (91 IF IF = - FF IF, IF IF IF I FF IF j IF 1� I T40i. _ — 55 For/Fil e�a,:K •,ao> neon MAyTaa ,•�.���,�„ During the initial planning stages of the project, it was evident that transportation capacity and/or freeway access improvements would be necessary in the Brea Canyon Road/SR-57 corridor. The alternatives were either (1) complete one or both of the two partial interchanges (Tonner Canyon Road or Brea Canyon Road) with a full complement of on/off ramps, or (2) improve Brea Canyon Road between Tonner Canyon Road and the SR-57 ramps to and from the north, a distance of 1.7 miles. A cooperative process was initiated with Caltrans to identify the feasibility of adding a full interchange at either of the existing half interchanges on Brea Canyon Road. Meetings were conducted over several months with Caltrans staff from both District 7 (Los Angeles County) and District 12 (Orange County), since each interchange was in a separate Caltrans district. Full standard design criteria were applied to each location that demonstrated the potential for significant unavoidable adverse impacts to sensitive biological an wetland environments. Various geometric design alternatives at the interchanges were evaluated. ased on this evaluation, a viable design that provided adequate capacity, satisfied Caltrans design standards, and resulted in manageable envtronmgnt 1 impact cool not be developed. s a resu , it was conclude that while the cost is estimated at several million dollars, the widening of Brea Canyon Roa rom two to four lanes was the appropriate transportation improvement to provide the required capacity for project traffic to gain access to the freeway system. In addition, this improvement will upgrade the geometric design (including curve radii) to current County standards, thereby enhancing the overall safety of this facility. The widening of Brea Canyon Road from the intersection of Tonner Canyon Road northerly for a distance of 1.7 miles to the northbound SR-57 on -ramp is the centerpiece of the AMPC traffic mitigation program. This multi -million -dollar improvement provides an immediate significant capacity improvement in the SR-57 corridor, which experiences_congestion regularly during peak hours. This improvement will be constructed with the first units taking access on Brea Canyon Road. This improvement to Brea Canyon Road is significant because the capacity being added is well beyond the demand created by the project, thus resulting in available capacity to regional traffic in the Route 57 corridor. The capacity being added (i.e., one lane in each direction) accommodates in excess of 3,000 vehicles per hour compared to a project demand of slightly over 1,100 vehicles per hour. Based on this, approximately one third of the added capacity will be utilized by the project. The residual capacity will relieve the existing congested conditions that regularly occur during the peak hours and will provide ample capacity on this roadway for the extended future. Figure ES-2 illustrates this Proposed Project design feature. Associated with this Brea Canyon Road improvement are intersection enhancements at project entries to provide ample peak -hour capacity. In both Los Angeles and Orange Counties, potentially affected intersections are addressed through alternative measures, including (1) specific physical improvements within existing right -of way; (2) the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) either in combination with or in lieu of physical improvements; and (3) fair -share funding of intersection improvements involving multiple parties and funding sources. A strong emphasis is placed on the application of ITS improvements at strategic locations either in lieu of or in addition to physical capacity improvements to achieve mitigation objectives. Accordingly, the mitigation program for each intersection will include a mitigation altemative that identifies operational -type improvements to alleviate the project's impact at affected locations. These operational improvements are based on the advanced technologies of ITS. P:\CRU830\2007\TraFlic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc n0924/07» ES-3 - - _ -.� - .___ ., I t ;{ � �i � i �, � 3 ,�.�py Try a� � � �{ . '� � °� 1.'= Acc Jec[ �L�_ 1�y��j • fly .}y y� ass* -4 �'�i;'ao vw, i ��" � , � % � +w•n� .Z h.ssE a �.A1"-. �' tlbtW 1 � � �. },�. � .. . a s•�r V � I .shy.. "'r� � ��^ � �9.. ° - �' �SEGMENT� ss�� t`*t� ,:;,� ;,,� � ''K*Cr'a�C ?,�,,�rx�3;�'F• g� ",t *�.. � * +�Q - s ,h "'1{i �; ^' ,,�. --- - - . .. ^ - 0� e 1 � _ '- i a "' S � � - _ r �' R 57 �+ ' .; ,i¢ ** 5�-57 NII Oa -Ramp . � �,�' t s � � � ^ � � ` . �tw '±= -. a.. ' �. .ACce�•��'S:,4rR�tz. ��k .. .,.,��� ..��d?Z'"',r � -:�a.� S�tG��i%�. � - SEGMENT• LSA KEY MAP -- � _—� FIGURE ES-2 NOTE: SEGMENT �- Tonner Canyon Road to SR-57 Southboand On -Ramp *Reduced Road Alternative would require two left turn SEGMENT �- SR-57 Southbound On -Ramp to AMPC Project Driveway lanes and a shared left/right turn lane out of the project access. SEGMENT �- AMPC Project Driveway to SR-57 Northbound On -Ramp ** Westbound vehicles entering SR-57 NB on -ramp must yield to eastbound vehicles entering SR-57 NB on -ramp. Aera Master Planned Community Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program P:\CRU830WumCAD\Bren Canyon Rood Segmwis.dwg nSSOCIArex, 1Nc. rR nrrn: 1Mrn s S P.P'I'CM11OR 2007 AP.RA MAS'1'RR PLANNED C I'1'Y CITY OF DIAMOND OAR, LOS ANCOI.eS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ITS consists of programs and projects that use technology to improve the mobility and operational efficiency of freeways and local streets. For example, the advantages of computer -controlled traffic signals are substantial and include automatic adjustment of signal timing plans to reflect changing traffic conditions, identification of unusual traffic conditions caused by incidents, the ability to implement special-purpose short-term signal timing changes in response to incidents, and the ability to quickly identify signal equipment malfunctions. Other components of ITS technology include: Installation of Closed -Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras System detection to collect real-time volume and speed data Real-time traffic signal coordination Changeable message signs • Trailblazer signs to direct motorists to major traffic generators (e.g., freeway) erected at key decision points • A Web -based advanced traveler information system Varying local conditions make it difficult to quantify the improvement in travel time and delay achieved through ITS. However, evaluation studies conducted throughout Southern California have identified significant improvements in travel time and delay. As such, this approach is recommended for several reasons: • Many study area intersections exceed level of service thresholds without project traffic in existing or future conditions. • Many deficient locations have very limited or nonexistent opportunities for physical capacity improvements. Los Angeles County has an adopted program of ITS improvements in Pomona Valley without sufficient funding. Affected Orange County cities have initiated ITS programs and requested Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) grant funding, which requires local matching funds. • OCTA has included in the recently approved Measure M extension funding program a significant emphasis on signal coordination/ITS improvements with the objective of capacity and travel time benefits. Coordination with Local Jurisdictions In Los Angeles County, a comprehensive Congested Corridor Study was completed in February 2003. This study addressed several of the key roadways and intersections in the vicinity of the project including Colima Road, Brea Canyon. Road, Fullerton Road, and Brea Canyon Cutoff/Fairway Drive. This study focused on a long-range perspective and developed specific recommendations for both physical capacity improvements as well as ITS applications where the opportunity for physical improvements was limited. The recommendations for Aera project mitigation measures, where required, have been developed consistent with the Congested Corridor Study recommendations. P:\CRU830\2007\Tmlric Study\LA Swdy_September 2007.doc n09/24/07n E$-5 OCIA"1'Y.S. IN(.. S I.I I I.MNEN YIIU] OC �tc1` ' t'I l: I C' AN AI.V51� TEN Y CICMM NNI'I'V V� :IAI.I E{JNNIA Meetings were conducted iamond Bar study methodology an .proposed mitigation measures ayerl � � �-��ns within the In the City of Brea, there was a lengthy coordination effort with multiple meetings with technical staff to reach consistency with their Genera] Plan Update (2003) traffic analysis and mitigation plan (Nexus Program). Long-range traffic conditions, without the Aera project, were consistent with Brews adopted General Plan Alternative. In Brea's adoption of the General Plan and EIR, it identified � I �.D a list of 13 deficient intersections for which a commitment was made that mitigation measures would be provided to meet City LOS criteria.(LOS D) in the next Nexus Program update. As of this date, the � Nexus Program has not been updated and the mitigation measures for the deficient intersections has �J� of been identified. Not surprisingly, the Aera project traffic impacts many of those same deficient "J � intersections. Since the �ity's General Plan commitment is not yet identified, the Aera project proposes to partner with the City -and, where applicable, commit to contribute a fair share of the q� � overall mitigation package (Brea Genera] Plan plus Aera project) for each intersection impacted. This `��fair -share contribution would be identified when the City initiates and completes the Nexus Program update described in its adopted General Plan Update EIR. In the City of La Habra, a program of "planned improvements" has been established by the City for several key intersections. Similar to the Brea proposal, it is also proposed to partner with the City of La Habra and contribute a fair share towards those planned improvements. The City of La Habra has also recently initiated a program of ITS improvements along Harbor Boulevard. The City has submitted a competitive funding application to OCTA and received tentative approval of its request. The Aera project could provide, as an alternative to a fair share of physical improvements, an appropriate share of the necessary matching funds to implement this ITS improvement. Tables ES -A and ES-B summarize the overall traffic impact analysis for both Diamond Bar/Los Angeles and Orange Counties, respectively, and identify impacted intersections and mitigation measures where applicable. P:\CRU830\2007\7tan"ic Study\LA Study September 2007.doc ¢09/24/OTI ES-6 Table ES -A -Diamond Bar/Los Angeles County Mitigation Summary Intersection Year 2025 Baselines Year 2025 Plus Proposed Projectr Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternatives - - Proposed Project Mitigation Road Connected Alternative Mitigation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Haur PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Los Angeles Countyr I Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp IND 0.83 D 0.60 A 0.86 D 0.62 • B 0.86 D 0.63 B - 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND 0.68 B 0.76 C 0.70 B 0.77 C 0.72 C 0.79 C 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road � LAC 1.04 F 1.07 F �--F:07� F 3,11 F"'� 1.09 - F �� 1.13 `�' � F - 2nd EBL and EBR, or ITS ' Add 2nd WBL, WBR, or ITS ' 4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.07 F 1.13 F LOS F 1.20-'.. F '� 1 12 ' F 1 i 9 - P � ' Restripe for 2nd SBL Restripe for 3rd SBT and 2nd SBL 6 6 Nogales StreeNPathfinder Road - Azusa Avenur/Colima Road (CMP) LAC LAC 1.25 0.89 F D 1.16 1.29 F F .;3 1:33 0.90 F� l D 1.22- 1 3l' F F 1,29 '' 0.90 'F D ]39 131 r ''Add - F =, WBR Add NBR Overlap s, or ITSs'] Add WBR Add NBR Overlap s, or ITSs'] 7 Harbor Bou]evarrUFullerton Road (N)r LAC 1.06 F 0.92 E 1.07 F 0 94 - E - 1 12 � F 1 02 Add EBR Restripe to add 3rd NBT and 3rd SBT 8 Nogales StreeUSA-60 WB Ramps LAC 0.68 B 0.66 B 0.70 B 0.68 B 0.70 B 0.68 B 9 10 Nogales StreeUSA-60 EB Ramps Nogales SueeVColima Roads LAC LAC 0.52 0.93 A E 0.67 LOS B F 0.54 , ;. (00 A E": 0.70 � 1.134" � B F _� - ». � 0.54 1.00 A E � 0.70 '- 1,09 - B ;- F ' ;: Add 2nd NBL and 3rd NBT s Add 2nd NBL and 3rd NBT s, or ITSs'] Il Major lnterna!/ntersection Added by Project DB* -- -- -- --- 0.47 A 0.48 A 0.69 A 0.77 C 12 Fairway DrivdSR-60 WB Remps IND 0.86 D 1.03 F 0.86 D ].04 F 0.86 D ].04 F 13 Fairway DrivdSR-60 EB Ramps IND 0.77 C 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.72 C 0.78 C 0.72 C 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Co]ima Road LAC 0.90 D 0.82 D ' -.1:02 �. F � ]-.02 F- 0.96: E 0.9b, `- E .-�- 2nd NBL, EBR with Overlap 2nd NBL, 2nd SBL 16 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Roads LAC 0.93 E 1.02 F - 1.08 F--- 1 31. F 0.97 . E _ � 1.1 B j F Add 2nd SBTs' 2nd NBT, NHR Overlap, and EBR with Overlap Add 2nd SB'Ps and 2nd NBT 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevarda DB 0.57 A 0:64 A 0.61 A 0.70 B 0.59 A 0.64 B 17 SR-67 NB Remps/Diamond Bar Boulevazd DB 0.66 A 0.80 C 0.81 D (03 F �: 0.69 B -: 0 94 ,,. Add 2nd NBL � Add 2nd NBL ]g Brea Canyon Road/Diemond Bar Boulevards DB 0.82 D 0.99 E -0;98 E, 108- � F 0.90 D :-. 106 ��..D ;Add 2nd WBL°and 2nd NBT Add 2nd NBT 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road3'1 DB* 0.58 A 0.76 C 0.64 B 0.87 D 0.66 A 0 83 20 SR-67 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road3 �DB* 0.88 D 0.98 E -- i:19 F : 1 84 � F L03 _-:� a' �: 1.6I ', F �- Add 2nd SBR with Overlap and E-W Split Phase Add 2nd SBR with Overlap and E-W Split Phase 63 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.89 D 1.02 F 0.89 D 1.03 F 0.89 D 1.03 F 54 SR-67 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DH 0.90 D 0.69 B 0.90 D 0.69 B 0.90 D 0.69 B 58 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S)s•4's LAC 27.7 sec C 20.6 sec C 40.4 sec D 44.3 sec D 27.7 sec C 37.9 sec D 59 Brea Canyon Roati/Project Access3'4 DH* --- --- 0.75 C 0.79 C 0.64 B 0.72 C 60 Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road DB 1.16 F 1.17 F 1.16 F 1.17 F 1.16 F I.17 F 61 Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathfinder Road DB 0.75 C 0.54 A 0.75 C 0.66 A 0,76 C 0.65 A 62 Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfnder Road DB ].08 F 0.95 E 1.08 F 0.96 E ].08 F 0.96 E ❑ = Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) 0 (Shade) =Significant Impact based on criteria below. INTERSECTIONS Pre -Project Project v/c Increase LOS v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.8] to 0.90 0.02 or more E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 ar more Source: LSA Associates, Inc. In an incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry) a significant impact occurs when the project causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU far an intersection already operating at LOS E or F. At these intersections, baseline is de[emrined by 2025 plus cumulative projects. - � Baseline and impacts in Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry ere determined by fhe 2026 Cumulative condition. Notes: 'Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 percent yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left sum lanes). CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection ' Existing unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2025 conditions. LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections ° knprovemrnts to intersections included within pr jets design for "plus project" conditions. LAC - County ofi.os Angeles - 'CCS (Congested Corridors Smdy) knprovements in 2006 IND-Cityofindustry °CCS (Congested Cortidors Smdy)Improvements in 2021 DH - City of Diamond Har 'ITS =Intelligent Transportation System. Implementation allows Cor credit of 0.070 to ICU value. intersection within proposed annexation by City ofDiamond Bar s Industry Business Crnter impacted intersection. This line reports seconds of delay analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. P:1CRU830t200TTe61ee�Mitiga[ion SummaryxlsLLA(9k5/200]) Table ES-B -Orange County Mitigation Summary - Year 2025 (No Project) Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Proposed Project Mitigation to LOS D (LOS E for CMP) Road Connected Alternative Mitigation to LOS D (LOS E for CMP) Intersection � AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Aour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Aour PM Peak Aour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1CU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigadou � Fair Share Percent' � ]CU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigadon Fair Share Percent' Orange County � - 2] Brea Canyon Rmd/SR-57 SH On -Ramp'- ORG 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.54 A 0.72 C 0.54 A 0.71 C 22 Brea Boulevard/Iomer Canyon Road � ORG 0.73 C 0.80 C 0.90 D 0.75 C 0.79 C 0.72 C 23 SR-57 NB OtiRamp/Tonner Can}ron Road ORG 0.11 A 0.15 A 0.13 A 0.34 A 0.13 A 0.33 A 24 Harbor Boulevard/Whittier Boulevard 1.30 F 1.06 F 1.24 F 0.98 E 1.25 F 1.01 F 25 Harbor Boulevard/J.a Habra Boulevard LH 0.91 E 1.12 F 0.91 E 71�` g,')j i 0.90 D '� .1i13 F ��' 0.85 D Ltity ofla Habra Planned Improvements° 6.0% 0.84 D >a Habra Planned Improvements° 4.4 26 Harbor Houlevard/IaMben Road 13d/Fll 0.82 D 1.02 F 0.64 D 1.02 F 0.84 D 1.02 F 27 Harbor Boulevard/imperial Highway (Ctvff) 0.81 D 0.89 D 0.72 C 0.85 D 0.76 C 0.86 D 28 Palm StreeVLa Habra Boulevmd LHBREA 0.80 C 0.95 E 0.80 C ;Oe4a,`=: =a"+"-� � 0.79 C 0.94 E 0.83 D Add 2nd NBT 33.3% 29 Palm StrceNlamben Road 0.96 E 0.86 D 0.96 E � p.89- D 0.96 E 0.89 D 30 Palm StrceUlmperial Highway FU 0.80 C 0.86 D 0.78 C 0.88 D 0.78 C 0.88 D 31 Puente SheeVCentral Avenue BREA 0.63 B 0.68 B 0.65 B 0.75 C 0.64 B 0.70 B 32 Puente Strcet/Lamben Road BREA 0.62 H O.b7 B 0.68 H 0.67 H 0.67 B 0.67 B - 33 Puente Strcet/Impedal Highway' FULB 0.83 D 0.98 E _ 0.86 D � A.09' 'F � 0.86 D � �1:09:� �:: Brea Nexus Fce Progrem 7.5% Bres Nexus Fee Program 7.6% 34 Berry StreeVCentml Avenue BREA 0.55 A 0.67 B 0.67 B 0.90 D 0.66 H 0.86 D 35 Herry StreeVlamben Road BREA 0.65 B 0.68 B 0.73 C 0.81 D 0.72 C 0.81 D 36 Berry SueeVlmperial Highway � BREA 0.81 D 0.92 E 0.82 D 0 94 E -: 0.82 D � 0.94 E: Brea Nexus Fee Progrem 1.7% Hrea Nexus Fee Progam 1.8 37 Brea HIvdlCentral Ave -State College Blvd �•' BREA 0.88 D 0.96 E `.1.13 F- 1.16 "F 1.95 •, F 1.12 F --- Brea Nexus Fce Program 56.9% Brea Nexus Fce Program 61.8% 3g Brea Boulevard/famben Road a BREA 0.89 D 0.87 D � 0.93 E 0.93 E 0,93 - E . �0.93 B;::�,. Brea Nexus Fee Program or ]TSs 17.6% Brea Nexus Fee Program or ITSs 17,q% 39 qp Brea Boulevard/Birch Strcet a Brea Boulevaid/Imperial Highway' B B p.62 I.09 B F 0.93 0.96 E E 0.63 ,�1:16 � B F, - 0.94 0.94 E F 0.63 1.16 ' B _�: F- 0.94 0.95 E E Brea Nexus Fee Program 18.3% Brea Nezus Fee Program 18.1 °/a q] 42 State College Boulevard/famben ]toad' Stale College Houlevard/Biroh Street' HREA BREA 0.82 0.53 D A I.OS 0.66 F B 0.83 0.51 D A I.OS 0.65 F B 0.83 0.51 D A 1.06 0.65 F B q3 State College Boulevard/Imperial Highway (CMP) BREA LW F ].17 F '11.U6 '"F -:- i,18, ;E 1.06 - F 118�„ F Brea Nexus Fee Program tl.b% Brea Nexus Fce Program 11.6% qq SR-57 NB Ramps/Lambert Road a BREA 0.91 E 0.84 D 0.90 D 0.80 C p.90 D 0.80 C - 45 SR-57 SB RampsOsmben Road BREA 0.87 D 0.66 D O.B7 D 0.85 D 0.87 D 0.85 D - 46 SR-67 NB Ramps/Imperial I-Eghway (CMP) FUI/BREA 0.77 C 0.96 E 0.78 C 0.98 E 0.78 C 0.98 E 47 SR-57 SB Ramps/Imperial }lighway (CMP) HREA 1.00 E 1.07 - F 0.99 E -_� 1.09 ' �. F ; � 0.99 E 0.93 E Add 3rd SBL 7.6% 0.93 E Add 3rd SBL 7.7 48 Associated Road/Iambert Road B 0.90 D 0.80 C 0.69 D 0.63 D 0.89 D 0.83 D - 49 Associated Road (N)/Birch Street - B 0.63 B 0.73 C 0.64 B p.77 C 0.64 B 0.77 C 50 Associated Road (S)/Birch Street BREA 0.48 A 0.66 A 0.48 A 0.60 A 0.48 � A 0.60 A 51 Associated Road/lmperial Highway FUf/BREA 0.76 C 0.88 D 0.81 D ` . 0.81 D 0.81 D 0.90 D Add WBR 26.6% 0.61 D 0.90 D Add WBR 26.7% 52 Kraemer BoulevardQamben Road a's BREA 0.84 D 0.84 D 0.82 D 0.85� D 0.82 D 0.86 D 55 Kraemer BoulevarMmperial Highway''s B 0.78 C 1.10 F 0.78 C 1.09 F 0.78 C 1.09 F 56 Valepcia AvenuelCarbon Canyon Road ORGBREA 0.74 C 0.67 A 0.72 C 0.56 A 0.72 C 0.56 A 57 Valencia Avenudlmpedal Highway (CMP) BREA 0.78 C 0.81 D 0.79 C 0.82 D 0.79 C 0.82 D Notes: CMP - Cmgestion Mamgemrnt Program intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP ivtersec[iovs ❑ Level of Service exceeds IAS D (IAS E for CMP) ©' (Shade) = Significeot Impact (i.e., increase m 0.01 ICU ifIAS &F) OAG Comry of Ormge HREA City of Brea pUI, Ciry ofFullertov , LH Ciry of]a Habn Source:lSA Associates, Ina � Orange Comry ICU Methodology (1,700 VPHPL, 5 percent yellow cleamvice cycle, IS percent increase in capacity forright [ran Ime). ' ]mpmvemmts to ivtersectims ivcluded ss project desigv feaNre - � Futme Defirirncy iv Ciry ofBrea General Plan - - ° City of La Habra Piamed hvprovevwv[ s Toner Hills Planed Commmiry Fav Share Mitigadan a HS = ]ntelligrnt Trmspona[iov System. Implemenmtion allows for credit of0.050 to ICU valve. ' Fav Share %Respmsibiliry Brea=P Jec[TmffirMew Traffic la Habra =Development TmffirJCapacity of Mpmvevun[ For ivmrseclions where Here is an existing deficiency, Ne fav share formula = P ject Tmffic/fotal Traffic P:1C0.ng]maoOnTabinVAaigatwo aummuya6�9n5n0aJt SA A''VS. INC. 5 EPTEMEER RI APPIC IMIACT AN AI.YSIS AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY UM DIAMOND BAR. LOSANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION —OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND THE REGIONAL CONTEXT The following traffic analysis has been prepared to identify the short-term and long-range impacts of the AMPC development, located on the border of Los Angeles and Orange Counties between Harbor Boulevard to the west and State Route 57 (SR-57) to the east. The traffic study has been prepared in support of the project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and will address the environmental effects associated with the implementation of a General Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Specific Plan, and reorganization of territorial jurisdictions for the AMPC project. The City of Diamond Bar will be the Lead Agency for this project. The project boundary encompasses unincorporated areas of both counties (approximately 90 percent within Los Angeles County and 10 percent within Orange County). Most of the project area located within Los Angeles County will be annexed by the City of Diamond Bar. Due to the different traffic study requirements, including level of service calculation parameters, performance criteria, and forecasting procedures for Los Angeles and Orange Counties and the City of Diamond Bar, the AMPC Traffic Impact Analysis is divided into two stand-alone reports: one for City of Diamond Bar/Los Angeles County.and one for Orange County. LSA has prepared this traffic impact analysis consistent with the City of Diamond Bar Guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Reports, the Los Angeles County Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines, the Los Angeles Congestion Management Program, and applicable provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A copy of the traffic study scope of work, approved by both counties in 2002, and documentation of subsequent revisions are provided in Appendix A. Project Description The AMPC is located on the border of Los Angeles and Orange Counties. The project is bounded by the unincorporated residential community of Rowland Heights in Los Angeles County to the north, Harbor Boulevard and the City of La Habra Heights to the west, the City of Brea in Orange County to the south, and SR-57 to the east. A portion of the project site is located east of SR-57 and south of the City of Diamond Bar. The regional project location is shown in Figure I. The majority of the 2,935-acre project site is located within unincorporated Los Angeles County (approximately 2,614 acres) with the remaining portion (approximately 321 acres) located within unincorporated Orange County. Approximately 1,940 acres in unincorporated Los Angeles County will be annexed to the City of Diamond Bar as part of the project. The traffic study for the AMPC project analyzes two project alternatives, equally, to identify impacts and mitigation measures based on implementation of either scenario. These two project conditions include the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. The key difference to these - - conditions is the circulation system internal to the AMPC project. A detailed description of each project alternative is provided below. Proposed Project The AMPC proposes a maximum of 3,600 dwelling units (DU), 300,000 sf of commercial/ retail use, a school, a sports park, and a golf course to be constructed by 2025. The following presents a breakdown of the project land uses by County: P:\CRU830@OOTTretic Study\LA Study_Seplember 2007.doc R09/24/07» LSA MI3£5 SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc rlvuxr i Aera Master Planned Community Project Regional Location 7:\CRU830\G\LA Caunry-6-OSVtegional.cdr I.SA ASSOC.IAT F.S. INC. 'I'RAYFI(: IMPACT ANALYSIS l BPI.EMBEN 2007 AERAMASTER Y NCOMMUNITY CITY D DIAMOND BAR. I. ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIACA City of Diamond Bar (1,940 acres). • 2,209 single-family DU • 591 multifamily DU • 200,000 sf of commercial/retail use • School (approximately 700 students in the Rowland Unified School District) • 40-acre Sports Park County of Los Angeles (674 acres). • 199 single-family DU • 18-hole golf course with access via the internal east -west roadway (i.e., no access via Berry Street) County. of Orange (321 acres). • 57 single-family DU • 187 multifamily DU • 357 Senior Housing DU • 100,000 sf commercial/retail use Access to the Proposed Project will be provided via a connection to Harbor Boulevard to the west, three connections to Brea Canyon Road to the east, and a connection to Berry Street to the south in the City of Brea; serving only a small portion (approximately 181 units) of the project site. The access to the west onto Harbor Boulevard would only serve approximately 75 DU. The remainder of the site would access.Brea Canyon Road. A small portion of the project site is also located east of SR-57. This portion of the site contains approximately 76 units and would access Brea_ Canyon Road via a future south leg of the SR-57 northbound on -ramp. Road Connected Alternative An alternative circulation system is also evaluated as part of this report. With this alternative circulation system, an east -west roadway connection would be provided through the project site (between Harbor Boulevard and Brea Canyon Road). This would be a private roadway with no public "cut -through" traffic. Due to this network change, some of the dwelling units are shifted from east to west in the Road Connected Alternative. However, the total number of dwelling units (i.e., 3,600 units) remains the same for each project scenario. The site plans for the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative are shown in Figure 2. P:\CRU830\200TTmlfic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc (<09/24/07» Aera Master Planned Community - without Internal Road Connected "Proposed Project" Aerra Master Planned Community -with Internal Road Connected "Road Connected Alternative" Goowl - Project Boundary N ® - Open Space Q - Residential - SnT mrF Aem Fnernv rt�uxn � Aera Master Planned Community Project Site Plans 1:\C2U830\G\LA County-6-O5\GVSire Plans.<dr (9/4/07) I INC. TRAPPIC IMPAGI ANALYSIS S CPTP.MBPNSou] AREA MASTER PLANNED coMMuNITY CITY OF DIAMOND . LOS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Traffic Mitigation Measures Included as "Project Design Features" Several major circulation system improvements are incorporated into the two project alternatives as Project Design Features (PDF) intended to mitigate project -generated traffic impacts and to provide subregional circulation enhancements. Figure 3 illustrates the capacity and operational improvements included as part of the PDFs for the AMPC project. One of the major project design features directed toward enhancing the congested corridors adjacent to the project site is the proposed widening of Brea Canyon Road. The comprehensive Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program will widen this facility to provide two travel lanes in each direction along the project frontage, from the project access point located south of the SR-57 southbound off -ramp in Los Angeles County to the Brea Canyon Road/Tonner Canyon Road intersection in Orange County. This improvement is consistent - with the buildout of both the Los Angeles County Highway Plan and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The roadway widening will improve the design speed and safety of this facility. During the initial planning stages of the project, it was evident that transportation capacity and/or freeway access improvements would be necessary in the Brea Canyon Road/SR-57 corridor. The alternatives were either: (1) complete one or both of the two partial interchanges with a full complement of on/off ramps, or (2) improve Brea Canyon Road between Tonner Canyon Road and the SR-57 ramps, a distance of 1.7 miles. A cooperative process was initiated with Caltrans to identify the feasibility of adding a full interchange at either of the existing half interchanges on Brea Canyon Road. Meetings were conducted over several months with Caltrans staff from both District.7 (Los Angeles County) and District 12 (Orange County), since each interchange was in a separate district. Full standard design criteria was applied to each location, which demonstrated the potential for significant unavoidable adverse impacts to sensitive biological and wetland environments. Various geometric design alternatives at the interchanges were evaluated. Based on this evaluation, a viable design that provided adequate capacity, satisfied Caltrans design standards, and resulted in manageable environmental impacts could not be developed. As a result, it was concluded that while the cost is estimated at several million dollars, the widening of Brea Canyon Road from two to four lanes was the appropriate transportation improvement to provide the required capacity for project traffic to gain access to the freeway system. In addition, this improvement will upgrade the geometric design (including curve radii) to current County standards, thereby enhancing the overall safety of this facility. . The AMPC project will also provide three lanes in each direction on Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp. The purpose of this improvement is to ensure that the intersections at the project driveways as well as the access points to the freeway operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS) with implementation of the project. This improvement does not require physical widening, as adequate width is provided under the SR-57 freeway. As a result of this improvement program, Brea Canyon Road will include three freeway ramp interchanges and three project driveways and will achieve improved operation. The improvements of the Brea Canyon Road Enhancements Program are conceptually illustrated in Figure 4. P:\CRU83012007\TraFlic Study\[A Study_September 2007.doc R09/24/07B �v G� a � � d a, Ca v o w Q t� t KX IV -0 Woo no d"I r i•-- ------ - f,� r+ �� 1 �77or KAI I oftilgaz :a 71 1..�� >> IWO Fib - - Gnu ��S - 'J '°�4''" `„' _ • - - - ' f t ?- fm�4od '� yV IL ?� r r f oq E1 - Sa fi ° SIRs1s8 [a3"; �� ^ A �i VA SE"llow on rpr GMENT® y,� C P nl�.. - h e� a r ' i c �v 3 c es a ,fit .fig • W` y...-_ _. - .yes-.E'+� s* .D'^ anor' tlin— y �y ol Wil.Ink3 . :rty--� ''+ `-.�'$yP 7 17 6040 •Prai' +Q r.`4 ,kYY• ;fl" . A�sa't' .: A* z r :.' 7}3 o-oY � a a .a .� tot, IIA, ? �to y - .� . ,.a 0 1. or Dolor R �,fi R. i�. i �¢ ,,.Ii t Y �., rn�`5M 10 ✓F '-1 or t GMENTO2 S f"+2<yy.�,aN c��,^ x ._-, v `,*, "`,is _ . *, , -�,,, -► Nt �� _iFPiS791+t?.k f rY" �.: �' T_ 4( �_ +� ,y- �F T* t-'e tin?.'tl ''fit+': d• {� -1.�4,-r-- ,.{•-.['F�;•-4 'b t.t-+%z.' .G tiir...3 in Joloo- - Y i Ham: ..i. 1, Loill on '— ' ^. SR_57 �. a'. 01 JF1 loon, low 4�f .\ �._IV - to Ion Iloilo no I E �o v i .] ,! , t* K tt - .. - AiVIFC PrUjec- t n"on 14Cam, l� AccessC .�c y a S. _ SEGMENT* s on, oL n now LSA FIGURE 4 P:\CRU830\AutoCAD\Brea Canyon Road Segmenta.dwg LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 'I'RAPPIC IMPACTANALYSIS 5 EPIEMBER YRR] AF.RA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANCE.LES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Intersection turn lanes will be added at project driveways to accommodate project traffic and to meet the City and County's LOS standards. Further, the project will install traffic signals at the intersections that provide project access on Brea Canyon Road, The Road Connected Alternative would provide east -west circulation through the project site so that traffic can enter/exit the site via Brea Canyon Road or Harbor Boulevard. These access points are for project traffic only. Through (non -project) traffic on the internal street system has been prohibited as part of this analysis in the event that access control gates are provided for the residential uses. In addition, the access driveway onto Harbor Boulevard will be designed so that project traffic entering and/or exiting the project via Fullerton Road -South is prohibited. Mitigation to achieve standard LOS at roadways and intersections for this project alternative is identified later in this traffic study. Regional Circulation System Improvements In addition to the specific PDF improvements proposed to be implemented as part of the project, several regional transportation projects are either planned for or are currently being implemented by Caltrans and/or the County of Los Angeles. These improvements, as illustrated in Figure 5a, will provide significant benefit to the regional circulation system as well as the roadway system within close proximity to the AMPC. These projects include: SR-60/57 Interchange: HOV direct connector lanes (northbound SR-57 to eastbound SR-60 and westbound SR-60 to southbound SR-57) were recently completed. In addition, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is in the process of preparing a feasibility study to identify long-term improvements at this interchange. Funding for the study is identified in the 2006 Regional Transportation Program (RTIP). SR-60 HOV Lanes: HOV lanes (one lane in each direction) will be added to SR-60 between the I-605 freeway and Brea Canyon Road. Funding through fiscal year 2009/20010 is identified in the Final Adopted 2006 RTIP. Pomona Valley ITS: The County of Los Angeles is currently implementing a systemwide study for this type of technology within the area surrounding the project. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) are programs and projects that use technology to improve the mobility and operational efficiency of freeways and local streets. The Pomona Valley ITS project will accomplish the following objectives: (1) ease congestion and improve mobility by optimizing traffic management on arterials and freeways; (2) enhance SR-60 mainline freeway capacity by better coordinating freeway traffic with parallel arterials; (3) improve agency efficiency by coordinating management of operations and maintenance efforts among and between agencies; and (4) increase agency staff productivity by providing low -maintenance, high -quality communications and computational tools to assist in daily management and coordination activities. Figure 5b illustrates the Pomona Valley ITS Program. SR-60/Lemon Ave. Interchange: The 2006 RTIP identifies funding through fiscal year 2008/2009 to complete a diamond interchange at this location in cooperation with Caltrans, the City of Diamond Bar, and the City of Industry. Federal funding for this intersection ($13.5 million) has been secured through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). P:\CRU830\200TTraflic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc rs09/24/07D i ,�i F"i!\,��' _ (:�<�^•�� '`Y�,>�:.(/f �l Yx `'t ��f'�`� 1J .,1}�. ji ar l_ yIf If L�'sz�r'I SR-60 HOV Lanes r.''` .Yy 4111�1� — 1 JI YIt Under Construction N ;j �..F IfAlameda Corridor -East Nooales Grade Senaratiol Congested Corridors Study LSD T 0 2500 5000 rE® - SOURCE: LA County (Congested Corridor Study), Caltrans District 7, City of Industry, MTA, RTIP I:\CRU830kG\LA County-6-05\0\LA County-RTLcdr (914/07) Fullerton Road/Colima Road Intersection Improvements It fif rkIF �r �.% SR-60/Lemon Avenue Interchange SR-57/SR-601nterchange Improvement Feasibility Study Congested Corridors Study - H /-- II — SR-57 Truck Climbing Lane FIGURE 5A Aera Master Planned Community Los Angeles County Regional Transportation Improvements LEGEND • tACOUNTYATMS • DIAMOND BAR ATMS • CLAREMONTATMS • LA VERNE ATMS • POMONA ATMS • SAM DIMAS ATMS O CALTRANSATMS • FUTUREATMS �• CCTV(Project Funded) + CCTV (Agency Funded) • CCTV (Existing) * LCC PROPOSED FIBER INTERCONNECT EXISTING FIBER INTERCONNECT PROPOSED TWISTED WIRE PAIR INTERCONNECT EXISTING TWISTED WIRE PAIR INTERCONNECT ^/ EXISTING CONDUIT d aooa e000 FEET _ S /\ FIGURE 5a Aera Master Planned Community Pomona Valley Intelligent Transportation System NAI'VIC I 'ACT ANALYSIS I.SA ASSOCIA'r LS, ]NO- AI:RA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY SEI"rEMPER 2001 CITY OF DIAMOND RAKo LOS ANGELES COUN1Y, CALIFORNIA Fullerton Road/Colima Road Intersection Improvement: Approximately $1 million has been approved in federal authorization for the design and construction of roadway improvements to enhance intersection mobility at the Fullerton Road/Colima Road intersection. Improvements to increase traffic volume and reduce congestion include adding additional turning lanes, updating traffic signals, and building safer crosswalks and sidewalks. The funding request was sponsored by Representative Gary Miller of California's Congressional District 42. Improvements at this intersection are listed on the 2006 RTIP. Construction is scheduled to be completed after fiscal year 2009. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Intersection Improvement: Improvements to this intersection identified in the RTIP include adding a second southbound left -turn lane and a southbound through lane, and the northbound right lane will become a free right turn. Colima Road Improvement: The 2006 RTIP includes plans to increase Colima Road to six lanes between East Halliburton Road and the city limits of the City of Diamond Bar. Alameda Corridor East (Nogales Grade Separations): The project will provide a grade separation between the two railroad tracks that cross Nogales Street between Valley Boulevard and SR-60. Congested Corridors Study: The purpose of the Los Angeles County Supervisorial District 4 Congested Corridors Study (February 2003), prepared by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, was to document existing and future LOS and recommend improvements throughout a heavily traveled portion of the County to meet the County's LOS objectives. Physical improvements have been identified along several roadway segments and intersections within close proximity to AMPC. These improvements include added turn lanes at intersections along Fullerton Road, Colima Road, Fairway Drive, and Brea Canyon Cutoff, as well as widening Brea Canyon Road in the City of Diamond Bar to four lanes. In addition, the Congested Corridors Study recommended the use of ITS as a feasible means to reduce congestion and meet acceptable operating standards within this physically constrained corridor. ITS technologies are used at 12 intersections along Colima Road to improve the circulation system on this constrained corridor. P:\CRU830\200TTmnic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» 1 1 RAPPIC IMPACTANAI.YS'IS I_SA ASSOCIATES, INC. AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY S EPTEMBER RSR) CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. EOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA METHODOLOGY The traffic impact analysis has been prepared in accordance with the City of Diamond Bar's Guidelines for the Preparation of a Traffic Impact Analysis Report (July 2005) and the County of Los Angeles (County) Public Works Department Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines (January 1, 1997). The following conditions have been analyzed in this report: a. Existing (2007) traffic b. 2025 No Project. Existing traffic plus ambient growth (approximately 0.82 percent per year) to the year the project will be completed (i,e,, 2025). This scenario is the baseline condition to be used for determining impacts to County of Los Angeles intersections, c. 2025 Cumulative No Project. Traffic in (b) plus the cumulative traffic of other known developments (i.e., traffic generated from approved/pending projects within the study area). This scenario is the baseline condition to be used for determining impacts to City of Diamond Bar and City of Industry intersections. d. Traffic in (a) plus Proposed Project traffic e. Traffic in (b) plus Proposed Project traffic. This scenario will be used to determine project impacts for County of Los Angeles intersections. f. Traffic in (c) plus Proposed Project traffic. This scenario will be used to determine project impacts for City of Diamond Bar and City of Industry intersections. Although it is not feasible that the project could be completely developed within the timeframe of the existing condition, to satisfy CEQA requirements, an analysis of impacts from implementation of the full project in an existing setting has been included (scenario d, as described above). This analysis is provided for disclosure purposes only, and no mitigation measures will be developed for the existing plus project condition, The impacts of the project will be determined by comparing the "with project" scenarios (e and f, above) to the "without project" scenarios (b and c, above). The City of Diamond Bar requires that project impacts and mitigation measures be determined by comparing scenario "f' with scenario "c," while the County of Los Angeles requires direct project impacts to be determined by comparing scenario "e" with scenario "b." Cumulative impacts for intersections within the County of Los Angeles will be determined by comparing scenario ."c" with scenario'T." A long-range (2025) analysis is also required to address the proposed General Plan Amendment on the Aera property. The purpose of the long-range analysis is to determine, given a change in land use, whether the highway system as depicted on the Los Angeles County Highway Plan (Highway Plan) is adequate in 2025 conditions. The long-range analysis will identify whether the Proposed Project will cause an arterial highway to exceed its planned roadway capacity. The long-range analysis will evaluate roadway segments for "with" and "without" project scenarios based on the following two alternatives: 1. Existing conditions of the site (i.e., existing vacant land use vs. proposed AMPC project land use) 2. General Plan conditions (i.e., current General Plan land use vs. proposed AMPC General Plan land use) P:\CRU830\2007tTmnic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc R09/24/07» 12 TRAFFIC IMPACTANALYSIS I.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY SEPTEMBER 2007 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS-ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The daily link (average daily traffic [ADT]) analysis will be prepared for each roadway segment on the Highway Plan within the study area in Los Angeles County. Daily capacities and future geometrics will be referenced from the City of Diamond Bar and County's General Plan. This requirement and methodology was discussed with Barry Witler, County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (Transportation Planning), on October 17, 2002. Study Area Determination The study area for the traffic analysis was determined based on criteria outlined in the County's TIA report guidelines, the CMP for Los Angeles County, and discussions with City of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County staff. The following criteria were considered in the development of the study area: Arterial highways, freeways, and intersections generally within aone-mile radius of the project site (Source: County of Los Angeles TIA Report Guidelines) All CMP arterial monitoring intersections, including monitored freeway on- or off -ramp intersections, where the Proposed Project will add 50 or more trips during either the a.m. or p.m. weekday peak hours (of adjacent street traffic) (Source: 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County) Mainline freeway monitoring locations where the project will add 150 or more trips in either direction during either the a.m. or p.m. weekday peak hours (Source: 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County) Per the direction of the County of Los Angeles Public Works Department, Traffic and Lighting Division, LSA submitted a letter to the cities within Los Angeles County surrounding the project site, including the Cities of Industry, La Habra Heights, and Diamond Bar as well as California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 7, as an opportunity for each agency to review the preliminary study area. The letters were submitted to each agency on April 1, 2002. LSA received responses from the Cities of Industry, La Habra Heights, and Whittier as well as Caltrans District 7 and the Rowland Heights Community Coordinating Council. Copies of this correspondence along with LSA's response are provided in endix Four additional intersections were added to the study area in response to input from the's'emgencies. As a result of this collaborative process, 27 intersections, 22 roadway segments, and 3 freeway monitoring segments were selected for inclusion in the traffic analysis within the County. The study area intersections, roadways, and freeway segments are illustrated in Figure 6. Intersection, Roadway, and Freeway Analysis Methodology The project is divided into six planning areas (five in Los Angeles County and one in Orange County), which, for purposes of the traffic study, have been further divided into 11 traffic analysis zones (TAZs). The purpose of dividing the planning areas into TAZs is to ensure that the trip generation and distribution of each individual land use is more accurately represented in the traffic modeling. The proposed land uses by TAZ for the Proposed Project are illustrated in Figure 7. The Proposed Project would result in' a maximum of 75 DU accessing Harbor Boulevard and would reduce the number of vehicle trips that would utilize the Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road corridor. P:\CRU830\2007tTraaic Study\fA Study_September 2007.doc a09R4/07» � S ovtno ;I A y i - I'ALLEYI3LVD \ Industry / to I> ndustry �— __ 72 1 r 8 \ --J 3 ,/ \ Diamond 2 9 \ Bar 10 COLIMA RD 3 i e 14 a Counry of Las Ange es 7 � BREA / CARDON EAST RD FU oN t� La 20 19 Habra 59 Heights PROJECT SITE', BREA County Of 11 CANYON Los Angeles 04 ROAD fsl4If, Is I Ar sI If Ni 't 3 .. v u i - •Ri Y t G. 1'•. . __of 0 — -C / !_[tort+r,i rung= .... i.,. se7 If � "wG5 tl_!�� �s �,�,�3;_nOri (•y YC';:.FtJ;) If 4 ,. _5:....d.. III :.a I if if fs fl !�li.fiASV t 1„.I . -.� a.�a ..�.. _..._. J Stis 9 �iptC Fir. 4 I. is ., t x i Piece n -o L S A LEGEND • 52 -Study Area Intersection ® - Location Internal Road Connection as Part of Road Connected Alternative N - Freeway Monitoring Station per LA CMP O- Arterial Monitoring Station per LA CMP SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. I:\CRU830\G\LA County-6-05\Study Area-1 (9/4/07) Aera Master Planned Community Study Area -Los Angeles County 0 F. x 0 R N U Q tC V r .� CaC� 7.c6w 7 w w n w� o v °'C]oCa'coC1Ca p a�oQ c N rn o rn r o r x�� r �O N V M .• Vt r FIO©©086000eeA O �D o ow ro�c�Ww o G��v�ov�i�do r o 0 A�r�noowo �1 x QA7fl NOHNtlH TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SA ASSOCIATES, INC. AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY SEPTEMBER 1007 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The land uses by TAZ for the Road Connected Alternative are shown in Figure 8. As shown in the figures, the Road Connected Alternative contains the same land uses as the Proposed Project; however, the east -west roadway would be connected and more single-family residences would be concentrated on the west side of the project, thereby adding more project trips to Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road. It should be noted that SCAG adopted the RTP in April 2004. This long-range document provides the model for future growth in the region, including employment, housing, and population. Based on review of the TAZ that includes the AMPC project site, a growth of 3,263 DU between 2000 and 2030 is projected by the SCAG 2004 RTP. Based on the physical nature and dedicated open space of this TAZ and the lack of sizable undeveloped parcels not committed to open space, the vast majority of these units would be allocated to the Aera property. A letter to SCAG (dated February 9, 2004) that describes the socioeconomic land use within the project area and a memorandum (dated August 20, 2004) that summarizes the final RTP allocations are provided in Appendix C. Intersection LOS Methodology. The Traffix (Version 7.8) computer software was utilized to determine the LOS at signalized study area intersections based on the ICU methodology. Is hould be noted that four of the study area intersections analyzed are unsignalized. Pthe direction er of the County of Los Angeles staff, these intersections have been analyzed using the ICU methodology, which assumes signalization of the intersections. A signal warrant analysis has been prepared for each unsignalized study area intersection, and they are provided later in this report. Consistent with City of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County requirements, the ICU methodology compares the volume -to -capacity (v/c) ratios of conflicting turn movements at an intersection, sums these critical conflicting v/c ratios for each intersection approach, and determines the overall ICU. A saturation flow rate of 1,600 vehicles per hour (vph) and a clearance interval of 10 percent has been used in the intersection ICU calculations consistent with City and County guidelines. The resulting v/c is expressed in terms of LDS, where LOS A represents free -flow activity and LOS F represents overcapacity operation. LOS is a qualitative assessment of the quantitative effects of such factors as traffic volume, roadway geometries, speed, delay, and maneuverability on roadway and intersection operations. LOS criteria for signalized intersections using the ICU methodology are presented on the next page. LOS Descriation A No approach phase is fully utilized by traffic, and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Typically, the approach appears quite open, turns are made easily, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation. B This service level represents stable operation, where an occasional approach phase is fully utilized, and a substantial number are nearing full use. Many drivers begin to feel restricted within platoons of vehicles. C This level still represents stable operating conditions. Occasionally, drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication, and backups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted, but not objectionably so. P:\CRU830\2007\Tmff1c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» - 16 \ k / � {\� tu z[ � \ � � � \ ) / wE \ )\»)} ( ` /oe■oeoe■oeOf � � � � % TRAFFIC I ANALYSIS A ASSOCIATES. INC. AREA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY IEP'rEMBER 1007 CI'IY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA D This level encompasses a zone of increasing restriction approaching instability at the intersection. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial during short peaks within the peak period; however, enough cycles with lower demand occur to permit periodic clearance of developing queues, thus preventing excessive backups. E Capacity occurs at the upper end of this service level. It represents the most vehicles that any particular intersection approach can accommodate. Full utilization of every signal cycle is attained no matter how great the demand. F This level describes forced flow operations at low speeds, where volumes exceed capacity. These conditions usually result from queues of vehicles backing up from a restriction downstream. Speeds are reduced substantially, and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time due to the congestion. In the extreme case, speed can drop to zero. The relationship between LOS and the ICU value (i.e., v/c ratio) is as follows: LOS Intersection Ca aci Utilization A < 0.60 B 0:61-0,70 C 0,71-0.80 D 0.81-0,90 E 0.91-1.00 F > 1.00 As stated above, the ICU method was used to identify the LOS at each study area intersection. It should be noted, however, that an operational analysis was conducted at the project access driveway onto Harbor Boulevard (at Old Fullerton Road — South). The Highway Capacity Manual methodology for signalized and unsignalized intersections was used to identify the operational LOS for the no project, Proposed Project, and Road Connected Alternative. The level of service approach for this intersection was discussed with Los Angeles County Public Works staff prior to the analysis. In addition, an HCM analysis is provided for all freeway ramp intersections, consistent with Caltrans methodology. The relationship between LOS and delay (i.e., seconds per vehicle) is as follows: Level of Service Unsignalized Intersection Average Dela per Vehicle secW Signalized Intersection Vehicle sec. A < 10B >10and<1520C > 15 and < 25< 35D > 25 and < 35< 55E > 35 and < 50< 80F >50 Roadway LOS Methodology. The County of Los Angeles guidelines require that two-lane roadways be analyzed if they are used for access to the project. Consistent with the guidelines, an analysis of P:\CRU830@007\Tm(fic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» 18 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ASSOCIATES. INC. AERA MASTER P COMMUNITY S EPI'F.MBFN RSYI Ci'IY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA two-lane roadways has been prepared for the 2025 conditions using the HCM methodology for two- lane highways (HCM Chapter 20). The following two-lane roadway provides access to the project: • Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and south of Diamond Bar Boulevard ]t should be noted that Brea Canyon Road, between the SR-57 souhbound off -ramp and Tonner Canyon Road was not included in this analysis, as the project will improve this roadway segment to provide for four lanes as part of the Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program. The HCM directional two-lane roadway analysis estimates traffic performance measures and LOS for one direction at a time. LOS is defined in terms of both percent time -spent -following and average travel speed. The following table reflects the maximum values of percent time -spent -following and average travel speed for two-lane highways. LOS Snt-Following Percent Tit5-5 Average Travel Speed (mi/hr A > 55 B > 50-55 C > 45-50 D > 40-45 E > 80 < 40 The percent time -spent -following is estimated from the demand flow rate, the apposing flow rate, and an adjustment factor for the percentage of no -passing zones in the analysis direction. The average travel speed is estimated from the Free Flow Speed (FFS), the demand flow rate, the opposing flow rate, and an adjustment factor for the percentage of no -passing zones in the analysis direction. As described in the HCM (Chapter 20), based on a roadway capacity of 1,700 passenger -cars per hour, LOS F equates to percent time -spent following at nearly 100 percent and speeds highly variable and difficult to estimate. To assist the City and County in analyzing the proposed General Plan amendment, daily roadway link v/c ratios were evaluated to assess the long-range operating conditions within the study area in the General Plan build out horizon (2025). The daily roadway analysis was conducted for the build out year (2025) only. Capacities for study area roadways were determined by referencing the facility types in the City's Traffic Study Guidelines and the County's Highway Plan. Arterials within the City' were analyzed using the City's capacities, while the County arterials were analyzed using the County's roadway capacities. The daily capacity was compared to the forecast demand to assess the v/c ratio for each roadway segment. The theoretical daily capacities for roadway segments within the study area are presented below. P:\CRU830\2007\TtBRc Study\LA S[udy_September2007.doc R09/24/07n 19 FIC � ANALYSIS .$A ASSOCIATES. INC. „ MASTER EANCCI.eS PLANNED CT OMMuNIY PLANNED SE.P'I'F:MDBR 21107 CITY O DIAMOND BAN. 1.03 COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Ramp Type Capacity VP One Lane (no meter) 1,500 Two Lanes (with meter) 1,500 Two Lanes (no meter — narrows to one lane prior to freeway) 21250 Off. Ram One Lane 1,800 Two Lanes 3,200 SigniTicance Criteria The City of Diamond Bar and the County of Los Angeles use different criteria for determining significant impacts to intersections. The City's criteria will be used to determine significant impacts at intersections within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry. It should be noted that Industry has adopted the same significance criteria as the City of Diamond Bar, The County's criteria will be used to assess the remaining intersections in unincorporated areas. The City considers LOS D to be the maximum acceptable Inc at an intersection. At CMP intersections, LOS E is the maximum acceptable LOS. A project would cause a significant impact if the project causes the LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F. or if the project adds 0.02 to the ICU for an intersection already operating at LOS E or F. It should be noted that this criteria is consistent with City of Industry methods and has been applied to intersections within that City as well. As identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines for intersections in Los Angeles County, an impact to a County intersection is considered significant if the project -related increase in the We ratio equals or exceeds the thresholds shown below. Intersections Pre ro6ect Project V/C Increase LOS V/C C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more The County's guidelines state that the project is deemed to have a significant impact on two-lane roadways when it adds 4 percent to LOS C, 2 percent to LOS D, and 1 percent to LOS E/F based on the LOS of the pre -project. This significance criterion is based on the percentage increase in passenger car per hour by the project. As stated above, the two-lane roadway analysis has been conducted based on the HCM methodology. LOS is defined in terms of both percent time -spent - following and average travel speed, not capacity. However, for purposes of the significant impact threshold for the two-lane roadways in this analysis, peak -hour traffic volume will be the measure of effectiveness used to define an impact. Should the project add 1 percent of peak -hour traffic volume to LOS E or LOS F conditions on a two-lane roadway, this would represent a significant impact. P:\CRU830�2007\Traaic Smdy\LA Study_September 2007.doc tt09/24/07» � t - a - oc S 3 a 3 a �l a s"€x HP�) I.. {1. > � v � o 3 v JE i1 C E r ' C3 a an a x 4 o Q w C .J W C 0 Q 0 U 0 C C a x C o 0 0 w" a. C7 C w old Jto J - NI� ASSOCIATES. INC. 'TRAFFIC IMI'AC"IANALYSIS S I:P'IEMeER Rohl AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Nogales Street. Nogales Street is a north -south roadway that provides access between Pathfinder Road in Rowland Heights and the Cities of Walnut and West Covina to the north. Nogales Street is a four -lane roadway south of Colima Road and a six -lane roadway north of Colima Road. Nogales Street is classified as a Major Highway on the Highway Plan. Access to SR-60 is provided via Nogales Street, Pathfinder Road. Pathfinder Road is a four -lane east -west roadway that connects Fullerton Road on the west to Diamond Bar Boulevard on the east. Pathfinder Road is located north of the site and is classified as a Secondary Highway on the Highway Plan. Access to SR-57 is provided via Pathfinder Road, Colima Road. Colima Road is an east -west roadway located north of Pathfinder Road and south of SR-60. Currently, this road provides four lanes between Azusa and Fullerton Road, six lanes between Fullerton Road and Brea Canyon Cutoff, and four lanes.east of Brea Canyon Cutoff. Colima Road provides regional access between the City of Diamond Bar to the east and the City of Whittier to the west. Colima Road is classified as a Major Highway on the Highway Plan, State Route 57 (SR-57). SR-57 is a north -south route that provides regional access from San Gabriel Valley to Orange County. SR-57 is located east of the project site. The facility is a 10-lane freeway with HOV lanes to SR-60. State Route 60 (SR-60). SR-60 is an east -west route that provides regional access from East Los Angeles to the San Bernardino County Line. SR-60 is located north of the project site. The facility is an eight -lane freeway. It should be noted that a Caltrans project is currently under construction that will add an HOV lane in each direction on SR-60 between I-605 and SR-57. Existing Transit Service Transit service is provided within the project study area by the OCTA, Foothill Transit (FT), and Metro. There are two rail stations within close proximity to the project site. The Industry Metrolink Station is located north of the project site off of Brea Canyon Road and Currier Drive (approximately five miles from the project site). This station serves the Metrolink Riverside Line, which provides service from Downtown Riverside to Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles. The Fullerton Transportation Center is located south of the project site off of South Harbor Boulevard and East Santa Fe Avenue (approximately seven miles from the project site). This station serves the Metrolink Orange County Line (which provides service from Oceanside to Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles), the Metrolink 91 line (which provides service between San Bernardino and Los Angeles Union Station), and the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner Line, which provides service between San Diego and Paso Robles. In December 2009, the Orange County Line will undergo a service expansion and will operate every 30 minutes from the morning commute period to 10:00 p.m. between Fullerton and Mission Viejo. P:\CRU830@OOTTmRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc IA924/07u 26 I,SA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACTANALYSIS S P.PTEMBGR ERBJ AERA MASTER PANNED COMMUNITY CITY I' DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA The routes and times of each bus transit service provided below were verified as of February 2007. The existing transit lines in the vicinity of the project are illustrated in Figure.l 1. The Metrolink stations within close proximity to the project site are also illustrated on the figure. OCTA provides service within close proximity to the project site via the routes described below. • Route 20. Route 20 originates at the intersection of Lemon and Main in the City of Yorba Linda and ends at the intersection of Imperial and Idaho in the City of La Habra. The bus operates between 5:49 a.m. and 8:05 p.m:, Monday through Friday. No service is provided on weekends or holidays. • Route 29. Route 29 originates at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and First in the City of Huntington Beach and ends at the intersection of Birch and State College in the City of Brea. The bus operates between 4:00 a.m. and 12:36 a.m., Monday through Friday; between 4:08 a.m. and 12:33 a.m. on Saturdays; and between 5:00 a.m: and 11:48 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. • Route 43. Route 43 originates at the intersection of Beach and La Habra in the City of La Habra and ends at the intersection of 19th and Newport in the City of Costa Mesa. The bus operates between 3:52 a.m. and 11:56 p.m., Monday through Friday; between 4:47 a.m. and 11:48 p.m. on Saturdays; and between 4:33 a.m. and 11:48 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Night service is also provided and operates between 12:00 a.m. and 4:38 a.m., Monday through Sunday, including holidays. • Route 47. Route 47 originates at the intersection of Balboa and 23rd in the City of Newport Beach and ends at the Brea Mall. The bus operates between 4:06 a.m. and 11;14 p.m, Monday through Friday; between 4:48 a.m. and 10:54 p.m. on Saturdays; and between 4:46 a.m. and, 10:52 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Route 53. Route 53 originates at the intersection of West Yale Loop and Alton in the City of Irvine and ends at the Brea Mall. The bus operates between 4:02 a.m. and 12:30 a.m., Monday through Friday; between 5:51 a.m. and 10:22 p.m. on Saturdays; and between 5:35 a.m. and 10:10 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. • Route 57. Route 57 originates at the Newport Beach Transportation Center and ends at the Brea Mall. The bus operates between 3:56 a.m. and 12:08 a.m., Monday through Friday; between 4:30 a.m. and 11:59 p.m. on Saturdays; and between 4:21 a.m. and 11:59 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Night service is also provided and operates between 12:00 a.m. and 4:47 a.m., Monday through Sunday, including holidays. • Route 59. Route 59 originates at the University Center in the City of Irvine and ends at the Brea Mall. The bus operates between 4:36 a.m. and 11:34 p.m., Monday through Friday; between 6:54 a.m. and 11:32 p.m. on Saturdays; and between 8:47 a.m. and 10:27 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. • Route 147. Route 147 originates at the intersection of Kraemer and Birch in the City of Brea and ends at the Santa Ana Mainplace Mall. The bus operates between 5:50 a.m. and 6:49 p.m., Monday through Friday. No service is provided on weekends and holidays. P:\CRU830@OOTTrairic Study\!A Study_September 2007.doc «0924/07n - 27 LECI:NU sl'uor.aaEA /�/ Pao,pcc-rRoul.oAav 7 ROU-fE CONTINUES h1E"rROI_INK STATION POOTHILLTRANSIT ROUTES � ROUTE-1J8 QQQQ�QQQQ ROUTE-185 #Yi�t#!##�yr ROUTE-280 in3� ROU"CE-281 � ROU-1'E-285 •i••iiisi ROUTE-289 120 UTE - h82 � ROU"rE-M193 OCTA TRANSIT ROUTES ����.AO ROU"fE-20 ........., 120UTE�29 ��®m®®® ROUTE-M13 --��._, ROUTE -,f7 i ROUTE 53 i , i ROUTE � 57 ROUTE-59 ® ROUTE- IM17 ttttttttt 120U"rE-213 � ROU"fE - 757 M eTao TRANSIT ROUTE ROUTE 6Rh BUS ROUTE NEXUS POINTS NGXUS POINT POR SUS ROUTES; 178. 185, 280, 281, 285.289. h82&h93 ONEXUS POINT I'OR 6U5 ROU"CES; 20. 29. M17, 53. 57. 59. Ih7.213.757, 758. nxo M...o 68M1 FEET (APPROx.) L S A FIGURE 11 Aera Master Planned Community Existing Transit Routes cl2usan)ou n c„���,m-r,-n,�s��.����nP� �•n, rormm� I.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. I RAPIC IMPA NALYSIs S r.P'IEMaER YnA E] MASTERPI.ANNEO COMMUNITY ) CI TY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOSANGELES COUNEY, CALIFORNIA • Route 213. Route 213 originates at the intersection of State College and Lambert in the City of Brea and ends at the intersection of Innovation and California in the City of Irvine. The bus operates between 5:22 a.m. and 6:38 p.m., Monday through Friday. No service is provided on weekends and holidays. • Route 757. Route 757 originates at the Fairplex Park -and -Ride facility in the City of Pomona and ends at the Santa Ana Transit Terminal. The bus operates between 5:45 a.m. and 6:57 p.m., Monday through Friday. No service is provided on weekends or holidays. • Route 758. Route 758 originates at the Chino Transit Center and ends at the Irvine Transit Center. The bus operates between 5:31 a.m. and 7:24 p.m., Monday through Friday. No service is provided on the weekends or holidays. In addition to these routes, by the project opening date OCTA plans to operate a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) line on Harbor Boulevard in close proximity to the project site. The OCTA Program Implementation Schedule identifies that a pilot program will begin in December 2008 with full program implementation beginning in December 2009. The programmed portion of the line will operate between Fullerton and Costa Mesa. The SCAG 2004 Regional Transportation Plan states that this line is planned to operate between Brea and Newport Beach. An extension of BRT to Brea would bring it within three miles of the project site. Foothill Transit provides service within close proximity to the project site via the numerous routes described below. • Route 178. Route ] 78 originates at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights and ends at the El Monte Station. The bus operates between 5:02 a.m. and 10:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 5:00 a.m. and 8:24 p.m. on weekends and holidays. • Route 185. Route 185 originates at the intersection of Azusa Avenue and Ninth Avenue in the City of Azusa and ends at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights. The bus operates between 5:00 a.m. and 10:25 p.m. Monday through Friday and between 6:00 a.m. and 8:17 p.m. on weekends and holidays. • Route 280. Route 280 originates at the intersection of Sierra Madre Avenue and San Gabriel Avenue in the City of Azusa and ends at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights. The bus operates between 4:55 a.m. and 12:50 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 6:25 a.m. and 10:45 p.m. on weekends and holidays. • Route 281. Route 281 originates at the intersection of Grand Avenue and Route 66 in the City of Glendora and ends at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights. The bus operates between 4:30 a.m. and 10:02 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 6:11 a.m. and 7:45 p.m. on weekends and holidays. Route 285. Route 285 originates at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights and ends at the intersection of Beach Boulevard and La Habra Boulevard in the City of La Habra. The bus operates between 4:52 a.m. and 12:39 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 6:52 a.m. and 12:39 a.m. on weekends and holidays. • Route 289. Route 289 originates at Puente Hills Mall in the City of Rowland Heights and ends at the intersection of Temple and South Campus in the City of Pomona. The bus operates between P:\CRU830\200TTranic Study\LA Swdy_Septembef1007.doc a09/24/Oh1 29 INC.. 'I RAP] IC IN] •AC'I' ANALYSIS SEPTEMBERI 2007 AKRA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 5:35 a.m. and 9:17 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between 6:20 a.m. and 7:02 p.m. on weekends and holidays. • Route 482. Route 482 originates at the intersection of Holt Avenue and Indian Hill Boulevard in the City of Pomona and ends at the intersection of Grand Avenue and 15th Street in Downtown Los Angeles. The bus operates between 3:39 a.m. and 12:44 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between 5:45 a.m. and 12:07 a.m. on weekends and holidays. • Raute 493. Route 493 originates.at the intersection of Rio Rancho Road and the 71 Expressway in the City of Pomona and ends at the intersection of Hope Street and 9th Street in Downtown Los Angeles. The bus operates between 4:41 a.m. and 8:29 p.m., Monday through Friday. No service is provided on weekends and holidays. The Los Angeles Metro provides service within close proximity to the project site via Route 684 described below. • Route 684. Route 684 originates at Brea Mall in the City of Brea and ends at the Pomona Regional Transit Center. The bus operates between 6:26 a.m. and 8:21 p.m., Monday through Friday and between 5:45 a.m. and 7:29 p.m, on weekends and holidays. Data Collection Peak -hour turn volumes for tl7e study area intersections were collected by National Data and Surveying Services, an independent car count company, in January 2007. Daily traffic volumes for the study roadway segments were referenced from the following sources: National Data and Surveying Services in January and April 2007, the City of Diamond Bar 2001 daily traffic counts, Los Angeles County Department of Public Works in December 2001, and Traffic Data Services Inc. in September 2001. Daily traffic volumes for the study area freeway segments were referenced from the Caltrans 2006 Traffic Volumes Web site (http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/2006all.htm), The.existing traffic count data are provided in Appendix D Existing LOS The existing daily traffic volumes on study area roadway and freeway segments are illustrated in Figure 12. These volumes are provided.for information only. A detailed analysis of roadway segments and freeway links within the study area is provided later in this report. Existing peak -hour traffic volumes at study area intersections are shown in Figure 13. Existing LOS were calculated for the study area intersections based on the data collected above. Four of the study area intersections are unsignalized (Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road. (north); SR-57 southbound ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard; SR-57 northbound on-ramp/Brea Canyon Road; and SR-57 southbound off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road). Existing LOS at these unsignalized intersections are P:\CRU830t2007\TmIHc Study\IA Study September 2007.doc «09/24/07» -3Q LEGEND XX.X -Average Daily Traffic(I,000s) ®- Freeway LinkADT(I,000s) N Aera Master Planned Community Existing Daily Traffic Volumes SOURCE: Southland Car Counters I:\CRU830\G\LA County-6-05\Ex ADT.cdr (9/4107) LEGEND _ izev_� `o. : rnduarry • 52 - Study Area lnmrsecuo 0 Coun a for Angeles D' and Bar n�20 Habra - PRwECT sa SITE sREA Coumlyo 11 CANYON [o=Angr, ry.04 - ROAD 22 m m o f 2651245 N y o f 270 / 231 w m t 10/66 ' r- 1137/1029 = t Z701298 a s- 887/618 4 4 C 9123 J 4 �. C 131/197 1 4 r 71412 .� L 4 *1 5/8 121 / 162 J h 1 r' 9111559 J h ? r' 4311121 J 1 r 491 /1048 -> 11 /21 -+ 505/1038 -' 9112 Z ` 54415M -4 $ 1671179 -4 m "' SR-fi0 WB OB-Ra 2 Fullerton RoadMSR-60 EB OB-Ranq 3 Fullerton RoadrColima Road 4 Fullerton Road(Palhfinder Road 5 Nogales StreeWalhlinder Road m t 4291250 m t 6521647 t 540/354 w m 768/850 O1 .- 75B/977 — J 1 4 C 134/197 J 4 C 1311267 .� 4 J 4 C 200/306 `6 4 393/3B1 J h T r" 88/87 J h T 373/276 J T r' 58.5/522 J T r' T 179 /369 Z 6 -1rn o -4 /898 61211069 + N � 19/18 � _ � 131361166 /15fi Z 60155 Z iy fi Azusa AvenuelC0lima Road 7 Rarea BoulevanVFulledon Road (N 8 N ales Streel/SR-60 WB Rams 9 N ales Slreet/SR-60 EB Ram 10 ales Street/Colima Road ro iz ,L 464/322 _ m t 315/114 e t 147/81 v o 2/2 N w � n , f B5fi/789 r 2 o a- 6311408 QD J 4 C 235 / 231 J 4 J 4 4 C 1371224 J 4 4 C 155125 «i q 486/176 J T 2671154 J h T r 80/195 J "1 4 r" 2641184 Z N 463/B23 EZ c2 2541616 93144 -1 — 355/325 Z GO m co c6on 12 Fahwa Ddve/SR-60WB Ramps 113 Faunas Ddve/SR-60EB Rams 14 Brea Can mCutcfVCotima Road 15 Brea Ca on CuloWPathfinder Road FIGURE BA LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hoar Volume Aero Master Planned Community Existing Peak our Traffic Volumes Source: Southland Car Counters P:\CRU830V007\Fi9ures\V0lume Graphics\Augmt Vol Graphics (vertical)\Existing TA LAS (m9/2007) PC P FYI IM A C'1' A ISIS A ASSOCIATES. INC. AERA MAST LRPLANNED COMMUNIly SEPTEMBER PSIII CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA 58. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road — South 60. Brea Canyon Road—North/Pathfiinder Road 62. Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road 2025 Cumulative No Project Traffic Volumes and LOS To comply with City of Diamond Bar requirements, project impacts for City of Diamond Bar and City of Industry intersections are identified within the cumulative condition. Project impacts and mitigation measures for intersections located within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry will be determined using the 2025 Cumulative No Project as the baseline condition. The 2025 Cumulative No Project condition is determined by adding the traffic from approved and pending projects within the study area to the 2025 No Project condition. A list of approved and pending projects was requested from the following agencies: Los Angeles County Public Works Traffic and Lighting Division Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning City of Diamond Bar City of Brea • City of La Habra City of La Habra Heights City of Industry County of Orange The Department of Regional Planning provided a list of cumulative projects dated February 20, 2007. Traffic studies and/or project descriptions of projects within the cities was provided by each respective city. Cumulative projects within the City of Diamond Bar, County of Los Angeles, City of Industry, City of Brea, City of La Habra, and County of Orange were included in the cumulative condition. The project description and trip generation for each cumulative project is shown in Table C. Cumulative project trips at study area intersections are illustrated in Figure 16. Traffic volumes from the cumulative projects were taken directly from their respective traffic impact analyses or generated using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation. Cumulative project trips were then added to the 2025 traffic volumes at the study area intersections. 2025 Cumulative No Project peak -hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 17. As indicated in Table C, cumulative traffic increases will result primarily from employment center and retail/commercial uses rather than from residential units, with a substantial increase in employment square footage in close proximity to the Proposed Project. It should be noted that the Cumulative condition provides a very conservative estimate of future traffic volumes. As discussed previously, the 2025 condition was forecast by applying a 14.76 percent growth factor to existing traffic counts. This growth rate was referenced from the 2004 Congestion P:\CR0830�2007\Tmflic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc «09/24/07» 43 LEGEND GLc'YauY_o ` a< 7ndni+rI• / • sz. - Scudy Area Intersection 12 \. Diamond If 2 e Bar 6 — 10 COGNA Rn 3 i Y 19 & county o// for Ange%rAr / BRVON / CARD l._. 20 La 18 Hergha PROJECT sa SITE aREA cn,.nrya 11 CANYON la. Angelr �04 ROAD Q~j9 ��.. �.. 21 22 '�' m m t 55/23 m " e- 522/1029 t 118148 m re = r' a- 506/Zfi5 t 1/1 to 4 4 C 442/198 r 7191006 .Ij 4 4 IF554/119 �- 743/182 .i 4 7531179 271 / 294 + 26 / 14 J h t r' 111 / 163 J h 1 r' 240138 J 33B 11733 + 509/442 Z 315/367 -r 187/800 -r m 100/1708 -r 255/69 Z m to 16 SR-57 SB Ra lammd Bar BNd 17 SRI57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Blvd 18 Brea Canyon RdrDiamand Bar Blvd 19 SR-571SIBOn-Ra rea Can nlioad 20 SR-57SBOH-RanpHrea Ca nRwd co PI. t 445 / 385 v a- 1436/ 1051 toi`- t 8451741 .- 1169 /885 J 1 4 !- 117/79 .d 4 1 fill /414 104/90 J T r' 782/847 + - 717 J h 1 1 219/330 J 924/993 -r 'Cr 220/336 Z 59/53 Z � 404/461 + Ir- on C0 ID to 53 SR-57 NB On-Ra athfinder Rod 54 SR-57 SO ON-RamptPathfinder Road SO Harbor BoulevardrFullenon Road (S) 159 Future Intersection 1 60 Brea Canyon Read INI/Pamfinder Read t 14/8 m 2 t 5/14 1000/370 �- 11/7 J 1 4 .{-31/27 J 1 4 C8/1 57143 J h T f' 603 / 666 J"h T r' 149/605 -r 6120 -' 3111108 Z d. re Ce tj ` 1931127 Z ;n 61 Brea Canyon Road(Syeathfinder Road 62 Diamond Bar Boulavard/Pathfinder Road FIGURE 13m LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Scuree: Southland Car Counters PACRU830\2007\17igurss\Volume Grdphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)tEzisting LA 2.zls (8/29/2007) TRAFFIC IMPAC'P ANALYSIS LSA AS$OCIATES, F INC. A MASTER PLANNED C NI'PY S EP'I'EMBER2007 CITY O DIAMOND PAR. I.OS ANGELES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA presented using the HCM and ICU methods. However, for purposes of the impact analysis, all intersection LOS were calculated using the ICU methodology (as if the intersections were signalized). A peak -hour traffic signal warrant analysis was prepared for these four intersections and is provided later in this report. The existing intersection geometrics are shown in Figure 14. These geometrics were verified in the field. The worksheets for the existing LOS are provided in Appendix E. (To assist the reader of this document, all level of service worksheets are provided in one appendix, organized by intersection.) Table A shows the existing LOS at the study area intersections. As this table indicates, the following intersections exceed the threshold for acceptable LOS under existing conditions: 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road -North ]0. Nogales Street/Colima Road P:\CRU830\200'ATtamc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc e09/24/07n 34 0 LEGEND • 52 - Srudy Area ln�crsccuo� 1 0 cS �g,o Lor Anne rx I ao En � 20 � 19 La 59 Habra PROJECT HeiBh�a SrrE - eoun BREA Los Anne/e 11 CANYON Q ROAD O as 21 - 33 1 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Ofl-Ramp 2 Fulledon RoadISR-60 EB 3 Fulledon RoadlColima Road i s I hTTr► s 5 Nogales StreeUPathfinder Road 6 Azusa AvenuelColima Road (CMP) 4 Fullerton RoadlPathfinder Road FIGURE 14a L S A Aera Master Planned Community Existing Intersection Geometries (County of Los Angeles) Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Geometdcs\Existing Lane Geometries - LA ].xis 8/29/2007 Table B - Year 2025 No Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Intersection Year 2025 No Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour JNo.Name City ICU LOS. ICU LOS Los Angeles County I Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp IND 0,83 D 0.59 A 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND 0,68 B 0:75 C 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road LAC 1.04 F- 1.07 F -4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.07 F 1.13 F 5 Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road - LAC 1.28. F - 1.16 F 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (CRT) LAC � �0.89 D 1.29 F 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (NY LAC 1.06 F 0,92 E 8 9 Nogales Stmet/SR-60 WB Ramps Nogales Stmet/SR-60 EB Ramps LAC LAC 0.68 0.52 B A 0.65 0.67 B B . 10 Nogales Street/Colima Road LAC 0.93 E 1.05 F 11 Intemallntersection - DB* - --- -- --- 12 Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps IND 0,85 D - 1.02 F 13 Fairway Drivc/SR-60 EB Ramps IND 0,75 C 0.68 B 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road LAC 0.90 D 0.82 D 15 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road LAC 0,93 E 1.02 F 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard' DB 0.56 A 0.53 A I T SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.55 A 0.79 C 18 Brea Canyon Road/Diamond BarBoulevard DB 0,81 D 0.97 E 19 SR-57 NB On-RampBma Canyon Road 9 DB* 0,54 A 0.71 C 20 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road z DB* 0,85 D 0,92 E -33 SR-57 NB On- Ramp/Pathftnder Road DB 0,84 D 0,97 E 54 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.86 D 0,65 B 58 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road(S)2 LAC 0,99 E 0,89 D 59 Brea Canyon Road/Project Access 2 DB* -- -- - --- 60 Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road DB 1.06 F 1.06 F 61 Brea Canyon Road(S)/Pathfinder Road DB 0.74 C 0.52 A 62 Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road DB 1.06 F 0.91 E Notes: r Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 percent ye8ow clearance cycle, 2,860 VPH for dual left tum lanes). 'Existing unsigualized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2025 conditions. CMP - Congestion Management Program Intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC - County of Los Angeles IND - City of Industry DB -City of Diamond Bar - Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diamond Bar = Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) Source: ISAAssociates, Inc. P:\CAU830VOOTTables\WitM1out Roads20251N IA_Sum_woRDWYConnw_3 0].xlst20256ase (for 71A)(d/29r200]) > — LEGEND cceypc o \ m rntlnnry •w - Smcly Arcs Inrersectio 1.is'�\. 0 Angel and 0i8ar Hahn Height PROJECT SITE REA 4 it CANYON Q ROAD JQ _.. - i1 .... 11 F off I - hhT� 1 Fullerton RoadISR-60 WB Off -Ramp ' 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp. 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road L TT� Jk z 4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road 5 Nogales StreeVPatMinder Road 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) L S A ...��..., .zn Aera Master Plnnned Community Existing Intersection Geometrics (County of Los Angeles) iource: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Geometrics\Existing lane Geometrics - IA l.xls 8/29/2007 L S A F 4j F +j tttr► r 1 ttI(+ F *)tt 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N) 8 Nogales Street/SR-60 WB Ramps 9 Nogales Street/SR-60 EB Ramps +M hTTr+ 10 Nogales Street/Colima Road 11 Future Internal Intersection 12 Fairway Ddve/SR-60 WB Ramps F 4) YY _ TT hTTr� hT� 13 Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road r r � 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard 17 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard 18 Brea Canyon,Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard FIGURE 14a Aera Master Planned Community Existing Intersection Geometrics (County of Los Angeles) LSA Associates. Inc. P:\CRU830@007\Figures\Geometrics\F,xisting Lane Geometrics - LA 2.xls 8Y292007_ +4 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road 20 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Bma Canyon Road 53 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road +j flit} t Z 54 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road 56 Harbor Boulevard -Fullerton Road/Project Driveway 59 Brea Canyon Road/Project Access +J44 *A �. zWir 60 Brea Canyon Road (NyPathfinder Road 61 Brea Canyon Road (SyPathfinder Road 62 Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road LSA Source: LSA Associates, Inc. FIGURE 14c Aera Master Planned Community Existing Intersection Geometrics (County of Los Angeles) P:\CRU830\200TFigures\Geometrics\Ezisting lane Geometrics - Iel 3.xls 8l29/2007 Table A -Existing (Z00� Level of Service Summary (Los Angeles County) Existing Intersection - AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU or 1CU or No. Name City Delayt LOS Delayt LOS LosAngeJes Counryz 1 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp IND 0.72 C 0.52 A 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND 0.59 A 0.66 B 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road LAC 0.91 E 0.92 E 4 .Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 0.90 D 0.99 E 5 Noga]es Street/Pathfinder Road � LAC 1.13 F 1.02 F 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) LAC 0.75 C 1.10 F 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road -North 3 LAC >50/0.94 FB 20/0.82 F/D 8 Nogales StreeUSR-60 WB Ramps LAC - 0.60 A 0.58 A 9 Noga]es StreeUSR-60 EB Ramps LAC 0.45 A 0.60 A ]0 Nogales StreeUColima Road LAC 0.81 D 0.93 E 11 Intemallntersection DB* -- --- -- -- 12 Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps IND 0.75 C 0.90 D 13 Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps � IND 0.65 B 0.61 B 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road LAC 0.79 C 0.72 C 15 Brea Canyon Cu[off/Pathfinder Road LAC 0.82� D 0.90 D 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard; DB 11.7/0.50 F/A 10.8/0.48 F/A 17 SR-57 NB Rarnps/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.50 A 0.71 C 18 Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.72 C 0.86 D 19 SR-57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Road 3 DB* 2.4/0.48 B/A 0.2/0.63 A/B 20 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road; DB* 31.3/0.76 F/C 1.3/0.82 B/D 53 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.75 C 0.86 D 54 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.76 C 0.58 A 58 Harbor Boulevard -Fullerton Road/Project Driveway 3 LAC 189.7/0.88 � F/D 28.3/0.79 D/C 59 Brea Canyon Road/Project Access a DB* - --- --- --- 60 Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road DB 0.90 D 0.90 D 61 Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathfinder Road DB 0.62 B 0.43 A 62 Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road DB 0.90 D 0.77 C Notes: � Delay for unsignalized intersections expressed in average seconds of delay per vehicle. s Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 percent yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left Nm lanes). � Intersection is unsignalized in existing condition. Both HCM (delay) and ICU value are shown. CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC - County of Los Angeles IND -Ciry of Industry DB - Ciry of Diamond Har r* �Intersection within proposed annexation by Ciry of Diamond Bar I.� =Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU630\2007\7'ables\Wi[hoa� Raad\Exi9in6-PmJ_ LA_ICU_Sum_woRDWY_3_07.xlsVixining(8292007) I.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. RAFF'IC IMPACT AN AI.YSIS SEPTEMBER 2007 ABRA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES COIfNTY, CALIFORNIA 2025 CONDITIONS As required by the Los Angeles County Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, an analysis corresponding to the year that the project will be completed has been. prepared. The project is expected to be completed by 2025. As stated in the methodology discussion, proj ect impacts will be determined according to the methodology of each jurisdiction. Project impacts and mitigation measures for intersections located within the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles will be determined using 2025 No Project as the baseline condition, while impacts and mitigation measures for intersections located within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry will be determined using the 2025 Cumulative No Project Alternative as the baseline condition. 2025 Circulation System For purposes of this future baseline condition, the geometries at the study area intersections are consistent with the existing condition (as previously illustrated in Figure 14). No cumulative improvements have been identified for the 2025 intersection analysis. 2025 No Project Traffic Volumes and LOS To forecast the 2025 No Project traffic volumes, a growth rate was applied to the existing traffic counts. The ambient growth rate for the 18-year period between the existing counts (2007) and 2025 was determined to be 14.76 percent, based on Exhibit B-1 (General Traffic Volume Growth Factors) in the 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County. This equates to approximately 0.82 percent growth per year. The 2025 peak -hour traffic volumes at study area intersections are shown in Figure 15. It should be noted that no cumulative projects are included in the development of the 2025 No Project traffic volumes, as per County guidelines. The 2025 No Project LOS are shown in Table B. The LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix E. The following intersections are forecast to exceed LOS D (or LOS E at CMP intersections) in 2025: 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4. Fullerton Road/PathfinderRoad 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road —North ]0. Nogales Street/Colima Road 12. Fairway Drive/SR-60 westbound ramps 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard 20, SR-57 southbound off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road 53, SR-57 NB on-ramp/Pathfinder Road P:\CRU6300007\Tralnc Study\LA Study_Sep[ember 2007.doc IA9/24/07» - 39 _ z LEGEND VALLny n��m rne.+rr, I I 47:� • 52 - Study Area In+erseedon _ :\ Cj (ns Angeles Diamand Bar r / ARIA CANYON RD �._. [Aar RD flw�c0A 20 La 19 Habra 59 HerghD PROJECT SITEMA 11 CANYON re+Ange%r 00 ROAD 21• - 22 AA M- m t 304/281 w t 310/265 N `m IM1181 = R t 310/342 a iI 1018/709 t 6241234 2 t 11/76 aar F J 4 4 r 150/226 4 4 C 1420/473 J b 4 F 6/9 675/387 b 499/275 4 J f 10/26 1391186 J 1 r `I t F' t r' 5511642 J `1 1 r' q 580/1191 + 2 563/1203 -' ra 63 13/24 + m 10114 Z m 624/608 -1-1 a La192/205 m j ^ 03 a _...._......... ....ae..0 o___ a odIannnPnndRP-An FROa.Pamn 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4 Fulledon Road/Pathrinder Road 5 Nogales SlreeWathlinder Road w t 748 /742 m "a N$ m ly �- 870/1121 f ^ t 620/406 < .+ a)<- 8811975 l975 J b t 1501306 J d J b C 23D/351 J 1 J b 4 b- 1541226 6711599 J 1 r" 781100 P u b 4. r' 4281317 J t r' 4511437 J `1 1 r' 702/1227 -+ N a9 22/21 Z n - 205/423 -1 N 627/1031 -r om 69/63 Z ca n 156/179 -1 ^ 3 m S m 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7 Harbor BoulevardlFullerton Road (NI 8 N ales Street/SR-60 WB Ramps 9 Nogales Stmet/SR-6) EB Ramps 10 Nogales Slreel/Colima Road ko UP CR 982/905 a- 2/2 .- J l r 270/265 J 558/202 4 J J b 306/177 4 J 1" 157/257 J 4 4 178/29 '1 4 t '1 t r' 92/224 J `I t r' Ca 303/211 -1 �. 6311944 + 2911707to -. M M 107/50 Z -1 N to co4071373 M to co ve/SR-60 DriM WB Ramps 13 Famya Ddve/SR-60 EB Rams 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon Cutoffath6nder Road L S A i'1VV1Cr, 1JA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Year 2o25 No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\20071Figures\Volume Graphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\2025 LA Lxls (M92007) LEGEND • 52 - Study Area Intersection ` � 1 0 Amer Ina Anne es 0 ndustry aamand ear 7 CANYON at La 20 Habra 19 59 HerRnn PROJECT SITE I p4 11 CANYON �p 9 21 22 24 GO Nr n m N p e t 63/26 599/1181 t 135153 ;z c- 5B11304 C 507/2V a- 825/695 «l 4 4 C 6361137 •- 853/209 .r 4 a- 864/205 311/337 -s 30116 J h T r' 127/187 J h T r' 275/44'J 388/1989 -s 584/607 -3 361/421 -a 215/918 'a ea 115/1960 + \ 293/79 -1 m 16 SR57 SB RampsGamml l Bar BNd 17 SR-57 NB Ram 'amond Bar BNd 18 Brea Can on RdrDiamond Bar Blvd 19 Sfl57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Road 20 SR-57 SB Off-Rampl9rea Carryon Road t 5111442 t- 1648/1206 \ m t 970/B50 r- 1342/1016 C 134/91 1 4 J 4 a- 7011475 119/103 J T r 897/972 -� 8/8 J *1T T 'El'/ 379 J 1060/1140 -. 7 262/386 -1 68161 7 m 464/529 -. t 1fi/9 \ �- 1148/425 .J 4 4 C 36/31 65149 J `a T r• 171/786 -t m 357/124 Z n 61 Brea Carryon Road IS1mat6finaer P t 6/16 a, 13/B ,i 1 4 C 9/1 692/764 J h T r 7/23 " 221/146 -1 amend Bar BoulevanUPathfin Future L S A rllsVlcr 1JB Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Year 2o25 No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Fi9ures\Volume Gmphics\August Vol Graphics (votical)\2025 LA 2.xls (829/2007) Table C -Cumulative Projects Trip Generation AM Peak Hour PM Peak Aour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Aour PM Peak Aour Pro'ecUl.and Use Size Units Pro'ecNl,and Use Size Units Pr°'ecULand Use Size Uo(ts In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total In Out Total Trip Rates nner Hills Planned Community (County afOrange/City ofBrea) ° Hmg Wa Plaza Shopping Center (Rowland Heigbts) rs Single Family Residential DU 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.64 0.37 1.01 Residential Condominium TSF 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.35 0.17 0.52 Park 15 AC 1 1 3 3 3 6 Restaumnt 4 TSF 20 19 39 27 18 45 Shopping Center TSF rI'E Regression Fquationz Single Family Residential 795 DU 191 517 708 604 350 954 Retail Center 14 TSF - ]6 22 38 General Office TSF 1.36 0.19 1.55 0.25 ].24 1.49 Total Total 20 19 39 43 40 83 192 518 710 607 353 960 Medical Office TSF 1.96 0.52 2.48 ].00 2.72 3.72 Business Park TSF 1.20 023 1.43 030 0.99 1.29 Light Industrial TSF 0.81 0.11 0.92 0.12 0.86 0.98 a Aabra Cumulative Projects' 2,304 1,520 3,824 2,915 2,285 5,200 Tentative Tract 49411 (Rowland Heights) is Apartnent DU 0.10 0.41 0.51 0.40 0.22 0.62 Church - TSF 0.39 0.33 0.72 0.34 0.32 0.66 Single Family Residential 55 DU i 1 30 41 35 20 55 High -Turnover Restaurant TSF 5.99 5.53 11.52 6.66 426 10.92 1035 1R Banning Way (City oiDiamond Bar) r0 Nursing Home Beds 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.07 0.15 0.22 Park AC 0.0] 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.06 Banning Plaza Shopping Cenler 51 TSF 118 80 198 226 241 467 18253 Colima Raad (Rowland Heights) Shopping Center 17 TSF 1I 7 18 31 33 64 Canyon Crest TenteRve Tract Map 15956 (City ofBrea) South Point West Residential (City of Diamond Bar) u Toml Cumulative Pro'ects Tri Generation 8,436 4,733 13,169 8,813 10,561 19,374 Single Family Residential 167 DU 31 94 125 106 62 169 Park 2 AC 1 1 2 I 1 2 Single Family Residendal 99 7om1 DU 20 59 79 67 39 106 ores: � Trip Rates ref raced from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (l7'E) Trip Generurion Manual, 7[h E 21 60 81 68 40 108 Mercury Insurance (City ofBrea)s ITE Fitted Curve Equation:AM. Peak Hour, Ln(Trips)=0.60*Ln(Leasable Area)+2.29 P.M. Peak Hour, Ln(Trips) = 0.66*In(Leasable Area)+3.40 OtSce Building 47 7SF 63 9 72 12 58 69 Diamond Bar Village (City of Diamond Bar) rr J Tnffic Impact Study far Mercury Insurance at 23i S. Beny Street, Austin Foust, August 10, 2006. Calvary Chapel Expansion 50 TSF 19 17 36 18 15 33 ° Traffic Impact Smdy for 18 Floresfa Planned Communiry,Austirt-Foust, December 2006. s Draft Tnffic hnpact Smdy for Olen Pointe Brea, Austin -Foust, March 2007. La Floresta Planned Community (City aiBrea) ° Bookstore and Coffee Shop 12 TSF 8 6 14 13 l8 31 s Tmtfic Lnpact Smdy for Burke South Puente Business Park, Austin -Foust, Febmary26, 2007. Condominium 202 DU -3 57 54 49 17 66 ' Tnffic bnpact Smdy for Guthrie/famben Industrial Park, Austin -Foust, August 24, 2006. Office 45 TSF 61 8 70 l l 56 67 Office 50 TSF 89 8 97 16 107 123 s 7onner Hills Traffic Impact Awlysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., Febmary 15, 2002. Commercial 150 TSF 122 78 200 393 425 818 Retail 14 TSF 9 7 16 13 16 29 s (.Emulative Projects from Traffic Impact SNdy for Sohn Icing Homes, IGmlry-Horn and Associates, Nove Single Family Residential 1,302 DU 244 732 977 828 487 1315 Restaurant A 6 TSF 24 23 47 22 14 36 10 ]035 12 Banning Way Revised Analysis, Coco Tnffic Planners Inc, October 25, 2005. Total 427 B19 1246 1233 968 2200 Home Improvement Store 125 iSF 84 71 155 77 66 163 r� Tnffic Lnpact Smdy t South Point West Residnniai, llnscott, Law &Greenspan Engineers, February 27 Total 230. 189 419 208 273 481 " Tnffic Impact Smdy for Diamond Bar Village, linscott law &Greenspan Engineers, April 23, 2004. ra Tnffic Impact Smdy for Country Hills Town Center Ezpamsion Project, Linscott, Law &Greenspan Engirt Lambert Medical Cenmr (City of Brea) 1° Tnffic Impact SNdy for Industry Business Center, ISnscott, Law &Greenspan Engineers, Mazch 8, 2004. Country Hills Town Center (City of Diamond Bar) a is TnfSe Impact Smdy for Fiing Wa Plaza Shopping eenfey Tnffic Safety Engineers, September 2000. Medical Office Building 20 TSF 39 10 50 20 54 74 is Draft Environmental Impact Report, Tentative Tract 49411, Ultrasyslems Environmental Incorporated, No Proposed Project Trip Generation Existing Trip Generation 215 I25 102 93 317 218 317 218 428 265 745 483 TSF-Thousand Square Feet 90 9 99 99 ]63 262 Target (City of Brea) Net New Trips DU -Dwelling Unit AC -Acres Commercial 357 TSF 205 131 336 695 753 1449 Industry Business Center (City otlndustry)1° Olen Pointe Apartment Building (City of Brea)' Corporate OtSce ],314 TSF 1,264 172 1,436 241 1,171 1,412 Commercial Center 245 TSF 196 124 320 439 475 914 Apartments 260 DU 27 ]06 133 ]OS 56 161 Auto Dealership 561 7SF 769 285 1,054 600 901 1,501 Regional Rerail 462 General Office 285 7SF TSF 186 321 119 44 305 365 593 -58 642 281 1,235 339 Burke Puente Business Park (City ofBree)s Business Park 1,252 TSF 1,277 244 1,52] 315 1,057 ],372 Industrial Park 633 TSF 447 98 545 116 438 554 4,460 1,086 5,546 2,362 4,965 7,327 Business Park 54 iSF 65 12 77 16 53 70 Total Guthrie/Lambert Industrial Park (City of Brea) � 18900 Colima Road (La Puente) light Industrial 125 TSF 101 14 116 IS 107 122 Adult Day Care Facility 240 Beds 20 20 41 17 35 53 dition (2003). mbar 2006. 2007. ;ers, ]uly 25, 2005. vember 2000. P:MAUBJOt200TTnfic SNdylCumu6rir<_°ip6e,S.xls5heml(8/!9/!00'!) — — VALLEY DLM l rndusnr LEGEND — 52 - Study Area Inrereecuon10 DO 1 -_ —.Jr 6 . �. �13 - ✓ \ \ Diamond i f2 8 •\ Bar .� 6 COLIMA RD O 19 9 � 60 53. 61 6 coun9'o/ O O,A•fiV}OM O Los AnBeresAF PATZ,,,,D 15 5 Eqp 17 .18 7 /BREA CANYON / RD I.—. 20 La � 18 va ghobra PROJECT 59 SrTE BREA counryu Aaarl. 04 11 CANYON ROA 0,9 22 m L 3/6UD 1 4 .` 3l5 t 8/34 J 4 4 fF 3112 2/ 1 4 r' q 2/2 -4 T �/� �' '1 r' 54/41 -e UP 1 Fulledon RoaN5R60 WB 014Ram 2 Wlledon RoadSR-60EBOR-Ramp 3 Fullerton Road'Colima Road 4 Fullerton Roac/Palhfinder Road 5 Nogales StreetrPathfinder Road � r T_ 0/3 a- 26186 t 10/37 ,J 1 1/2 J:-013 1 1 ti 5/8 5/9 Z T r 10/26 J el T r 20130 -r T T 55171 -s 4/10 Z'D . tZI 6 Azusa AvenuelColima Road 7 Harbor BoulevarclFullermn Road N) 8 N ales StreeUSR-60 WB Rams 9 N ales Streel)SR-60 EB Rams 10 NpgalesSIreetfColima Road T_ 22/30 .- 29/88 m IL 514 ,J S- 6113 .� 1 4 C- 12/12 321120 h T 48150 J T 1/2 J T r' 92/76 —r `1 T 5/12 -1 55/72 + 17/11 Z 418 -1 11 Future Intersection 12 FairwayDdve/SR.60 WB Ram 13 FairwayDnve/SR60 EB Rams 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon Cutoll/Palhfinder Road FIGURE 16A LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Cumulative Projects Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Assomares, nu. PACRU830\2007\Figures\Vo1ume Graphics\August Vol Graphics Vert ical)\Cumulative I.A I.xls (8/29/2007) Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aero Master Planned Community Cumulative Projects Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\GRU830\2007\Figures\Volume GrnphicsWugust Vol Graphics (vertical)\Cumulative LA 2.xls (8/29/2007) V LLE. BLVD l A hutu ay LPGPND �- ._.�� • 52 ' - Study Area lnterseeuon ..� ti 121\�. C u np / [na AnRe ea D' and Bar 7 / - CARD NaYON EPSr Rn 1 w� / - � % 20 19 Habra PROJECT 5s Sf[EI1REA co..nryn p4 11 CAO ON Las AnRr es 21 22 m e N t 301287 N t 11/76 `o a- 1329/1262 — $ t 310/342 l 4 .0 10/26 o 4 4 .0 1531231 1 4 .0 1428/607 499/275 J t r' 1391186 J `l 4 r' 4 ra 13 / 24 -t m 623/1256 -a m N '< 626/610 -1 e 1921205 -4 m m t 311 /266 10341T77 .� 4 4 �C 9/21 552/643 J '1 4 ra 617/1244 10/14 Z to N t 748/745 m - n m N t 492/287 Un .- 880/1158 00 N w t 620/406 c t- 907/1061- ,7 4 150/309 4 E1 1 4C 235/359 .T 4 .7 1 4 ` 155 /228 671 /599 J T fa 78I100 J `1 T 4 r' 428/317 J 4 r' 461 /463 J °1 4 r' 722/1257 -+ 22/21 Z m 2101432 N 0 6B2/1102 -• co ` ` 160/189 "1 m 69/63 4 6 Azusa Avenue/Cdima Road 7 Harbor BoulwardrFulledon Road (NJ . 8 Nogales StreetfSR-60WBRamE 9 Nogales SuReUSR-60 EB Ramps 10 NpitalesSireeUCdima Road t532/370 ,� an3 e t 2/2 � ,J 1 ,C 276/278 � 1 606/252 308/223 m $ m t 383/181 .� 1 4 r 1691269 3071179 .S +1 T r' 588/1078 + 111GO 150 '1 e t 174197 d 1 4 C 178 / 29 92/224 J '1 4 r' 383/783 424/394 -1 rn 15 Brea Canyon CuWWathfinder Road CTOTTDV 17. Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume _ Aera Master Planned Community Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Fi9ures\V0lume Gmphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\2025 Cumulative LA Lxls (8/29/2007) LEGEND • 52 - Study Arta Intersection r.- cnnnn tos Angem 0 dus�ry o;n naa ao. 20 La 15 X bra, PROJECT ght StTE.:.. BREA cnuntyo// 7oi Anxe(u 11 CANYON D4 ROAD 9 —_ --' J '--- - 21 604/1200 507 / 227 t 79190 293/79 Z N w f f t 512/466 .- 1382/11i 119/103 T 1127/1230 vlUD �- 1159/4B7 1 4 C 36/31 65/49 -1 2151822 + ; 378 / 178 Z m 1740/1325 J 1 4 r 134/91 49/71M7 � 267/449 Z t 18 f m �- 1 9/1 7271790 -1 e1 T r' 7123 + 230/156 -1EN sj 1 8/8 J h T 68I61 Z m " It 1052/916 7111521_ 307 /423 ? 499/555 -� 61 Bra Ga n Hoao la emnmei rvae w. vv' ..••---�------� -- - FIGURE 17>a LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. PACRU830\2007\Figms\Volume Gnphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\2025 Cumulative LA 2.xls (8292007) - a AYYIC IMPACT AN AI.V 515 ATLAS, INC. AY.HA MAS 1'E0. I'.AN NFC C S¢YI FMB NI RYF9 CI'I'y O DIAMOND a AN CPI. Etl COUNTY. CALIIFO0.NIIA Management Program (CMP) for Los Angeles County, which provides growth rates for geographical areas much larger than the AMPC study area. With the exception of the AMPC site, much of the study area is built out, and therefore future development would be minimal. Furthermore, the cumulative condition includes an extensive list of approved and pending projects. In many cases, the projects would replace existing land use, or would be consistent with the General Plan and would therefore result in double -counting of vehicle trips, as some of the cumulative projects would be accounted for in the CMP growth rates. The 2025 Cumulative No Project LOS are shown in Table D. The LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix E. The following intersections are forecast to exceed LOS D (or LOS E at CMP intersections) in the 2025 Cumulative No Project condition: 3.' Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4: Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road —North 10. Nogales Street/Colima Road 12. Fairway Drive/SR-60 westbound ramps 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevazd 20. SR-57 southbound off-rampBrea Canyon Road 53. SR-57 northbound on-ramp/Pathfinder Road 58. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road —South 60. Brea Canyon Road — North/Pathfinder Road 62. Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road P:\CRU830\2007\Traffic Study\LA Study_September2007.doc IA924/07u - 49 Table D -Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Year 2025 Cumulative No Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour InterseMiou City 1CU LOS ICU LOS No. Name Los Angeles County t � 1 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp IND 0.83 D 0.60 A - 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND 0.68 B 0-76 C 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road LAC 1.05 F 1.09 F 4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.07 F Ll4 F 3 Nogales StreeUPathfinder Road LAC 1.29 F 1.18 F 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) LAC- 0.89 D 1.30 F Harbor Boulevazd/Fullerton Road (N)z LAC 1.07 F 0.93 E 7 8 Nogales StreeUSR-60 WB Ramps LAC 0.68 B 0.66 H 9 Nogales StreeUSR-60 EB Ramps LAC 0.52 A 0.68 H 10 Nogales.StreeUColima Road - LAC 0.94 E 1.09 F 11 Internal Intersection DB* - - --- --- 12 Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps IND 0.86 D 1.03 F 13 Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps IND 0.77 C 0.71 C 14 Brea Canyon CWtoff/Colima Road LAC 0.92 E 0.86 D 15 Brea Canyon Ctirtoff/Pathfinder Road LAC 0.96 E 1.05 F SH Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard' DB 0.57 A . 0.54 A 16 17 SR-57 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.56 A - 0.80 C 18 Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.82 D 0.99 E ) 9 SR-57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Road 2 DB* 0.58 A 0.75 C 20 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road' DB* 0.88 D 0.98 E 53 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfmder Road DB 0.89 D 1.02 F 54 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.90 D 0.69 B 5g Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S)2 LAC 1.00 E 0.90 D 69 Brea Canyon Road/Project Access 2 DB* - -- � - "-- 60 Brea Canyon Road (N)/Psthfinder Road DB 1.16 F 1.17 F 61 Brea Canyon Road (S�Pathfinder Road DB 0.75 C 0.54 A 62 Diamond Bar Boulevmd/Pathfinder Road DB LOS F 0.95 E Notes: t Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 percent yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH far dual left turn lanes). 2 Existing unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2026 conditions. CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC - County of Los Angeles IND-City oflndustry DB -City of Diamond Bar Intersection within proposed annexation by Ciry of Diamond Baz =Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E Tor CMP) Source: ISA Associates, Ivc. P:\CRU830\200TTablu\widwut Road�2025ICU_IA_Sum_woRDWYCo�mect_3_07.x1s\20'_5 (Cum)(B29/2007) r unrrl r. IMrnc'rn nl.rxls A ASS OOI A'rC S, INC. AENA MAS'1'P.N I' .ANNk:O COMMIT NI'I'Y S 1'.Pl'EM Bt:N Ro111 CITY OM DIAMOND BAN. I. AN CY.L e3 C N'I'V. CAI.IMO NNIA PROJECT TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND ASSIGNMENT Trip Generation Vehicle trips for the Proposed Project were generated using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 7th Edition, with the exception of the proposed sports park. To determine appropriate trip rates for the sports park, the traffic studies of four similar sports parks were reviewed. The four studies were prepared for the Brea Sports Park, the Tonner Hills Planned Community, the East Orange General Plan Amendment, and the Long Beach Sports Park. The sports park trip generation in these four traffic studies was based on surveys of similar sites and review of proposed sports park operations. Based on the similarity of size and potential use, the trip rates from the Brea and Long Beach sports parks were averaged to determined the trip rate for the AMPC sports park. The trip rates and resulting trip generation foi each TAZ (as illustrated in Figure 7, above) are shown in Table E. As shown in the table, the project is forecast to generate approximately 46,680 daily, 2,646 a.m. peak -hour, and 4,316 p.m. peak -hour project trips. It should be noted that the total trip generation for the Proposed Project compared to the Road Connected Alternative is the same. The total number of dwelling units (DU) for either scenario remains 3,600 DU. In TAZ 10 on the west side of the property, the project proposes 75 DU, while the Road Connected Alternative project proposes 222 DU. The 147 DU added in TAZ ] 0 have been removed from TAZ 6 in the Road Connected Alternative analysis. The total net trip generation, shown in the table, accounts for internal trip capture between the commercial and residential land uses. To determine an appropriate rate of internal.trip capture, LSA consulted with county staff from Los Angeles and Orange Counties. A 10 percent reduction in trips generated by the commercial use was determined to be reasonable. Since an internal trip to the commercial use would be made from a resident on site, it is also necessary to reduce the total residential trip generation by the same number of trips reduced from the commercial trip generation. The commercial trip reduction was distributed to each residential TAZ, proportionate to the amount of residential land use in each TAZ. It should be noted that this trip generation presents a conservative estimate of trips, since a reduction in trip generation based on pass -by trips was not included in the commercial trip generation estimate. Furthermore, the commercial retail area has been planned and sized such that it will provide products and services oriented toward residents of the AMPC project, which would suggest a higher internal trip capture than used in this analysis. In addition, a 75 percent reduction in a.m..peak-hour trips was made to the school to account for the fact that the school will primarily serve Los Angeles County residents within the project site. The school trip reduction was not applied to the residential land use because it is expected that most parents would drop their children at the school in the morning and then travel to their workplace outside of the project boundaries or return home. As a result, these trips would not impact the external street system. It should be noted that an internal trip reduction for the proposed sports park was not included in the analysis. The interaction between the dwelling units on site and the sports park would certainly occur; however, to present a conservative estimate, this internal capture was not applied to the trip generation. P:\CRU830@OOTTre�c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc (A9/24/07» 51 Table E -Project Trip Generation (Total Units = 3,600 DU) Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Size Units ADT In Out Total In Out Total Trip Rotes Single Family Residential DU � 9.67 0.19 0.56 0.76 0.65 0.36 1.01 School Students 1.29 0.23 0.19 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 Commercial TSF ITE Regression Equation Multi -Family Residential DU 5.86 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.36 0.18 0.54 Senior Housing -Attached DU 3.48 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.11 Golf Course Holes 35.74 ].76 0.47 2.22 ].21 1.53 2.74 S or[s PazkZ AC 61.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.42 3.41 9.83 Trip Generation TAZ1 Single Family Residential 76 � DU Trip Generation 727 14 43 57 49 28 77 TAZ2 Single Family Residential 609 DU Trip Generation 6,828 114 343 457 394 221 615 Net Trip Generation; 5,432 110 337 447 328 ]64 492 School 700 SNdenis 903 ]62 132 294 0 0 0 Trip Generation Internal Trip Captures 75.0% -677 -121 -99 -221 0 0 0 Net Trip Generation 226 40 33 74 0 0 0 Sports Park _ Trip Generation 40.00 AC 2,462 0 0 0 257 136 393 TAZ3 Commercial 200.00 TSF 10,656 145 93 237 475 514 989 Trip Generation Internal Trip Capture° ]0.0% -1,066 -14 -9 -24 -07 -61 -99 9,591 130 83 213 427 463 890 Net Trip Generation TAZ4 Single Family Residential 409 DU Trip Generation 3,914 77 230 307 264 149 413 Net Trip Generation; 3,648 � 74 226 300 220 110 330 Multi -Family Residential 142 DU Trip Generation 832 11 52 62 51 25 77 Net Trip Generation' 776 10 51 61 43 19 62 TAZ 5-A Senior Housing -Attached 367 DU Trip Generation � 1,242 14 14 29 25 14 39 Multi -Family Residential 187. - DU 68 82 68 33 ]Ol Trip Generation 1,096 14 Net Trip Generation; 1,021 14 67 81 56 25 81 TAZ 5-B Commercial ]00.00 - T8F 6,791 95 61 157 300 326 626 Trip Generation Internal Trip Capture° 10.0% 86 Net Trip Generation 5172 56 141 270 293 663 TAZ6 Single Family Residential 731 DU Trip Generation 6,996 137 411 548 473 266 738 Net Trip Generation; 6,521 132 404 537 394 197� 69] Multi -Family Residential � 449 - DU 2,631 34 164 ]98 162 80 242 Trip Generation Net Trip Generation 2,452 32 � 161 194 135 59 195 P:\CAU830\2007\Tripgen.xls\Trip Grn perTAZ - I.A(8292007) �,.a.,oe,�,r>.�n�:. TAZ7 Single Family Residential 237 DU 133 178 153 86 239 Trip Generation 2,268 44 Net Trip Generation 2,ll4 43 131 174 128 64 191 TAZS Golf Course 18.00 Roles 32 8 40 22 28 49 Trip Generation 643 TAZ 9A (Berry) Single Family Residential 124 DU 93 80 45 126 Trip Generation 1,187 23 70 TAZ 9B (Berry) Single Family Residential 57 DU 21 58 Trip Generation 545 11 32 43 37 TAZ 10 Single Family Residential 222 DU - 167 144 8] 224 Trip Generation 2,125 42 125 Net Trip Generations 1,980 40 123 163 120 60 179 . Total Net Trip Generation 46,680 807 1,840 2,646 2,591 1,725 4,316 Notes: t InstiNte of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation , 7th Edition, 2003. Commemia] trips calculated using the ITE regression equation for Shopping Centers. z Sports park trip rate based on trip rates from the Brea and Long Beach Sports Pazk traffic sNdies. } Net Trip Generation for Residential includes adjustment for internal trips to Commercial use. a Internal Trip CapNre based on discussion with County of Orange and County of Los Angeles. s Internal Trip CapNre based on conservative interaction of uses on site. TSF Thousand Square Feet DU Dwelling Unit AC Acres P:\CRU830\2007\Tripgea.a�s\Trip Gen per TAZ- LA(8292W7) 'RAPPIC I I'AC'IANALYSIS .SA ASSOCIATES. INC. AKKA MASER PLANNED C I'I'Y SEPTEMBER 2007 - CI'rY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOT.S ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Trip Distribution and Assignment To develop trip distribution patterns for the Proposed Project, several sources of trip distribution were consulted. Regional distribution percentages from the Los Angeles County CMP were reviewed. The 2025 Regional Statistical Area (RSA) data in the CMP that encompasses the project site is bounded by the Angeles National Forest to the north, SR-57 freeway to the east, Los Angeles/Orange County line to the south, and 1-605 freeway to the west. This zone identified approximately 86 percent trip distribution (sum of both work and nonwork trips) to Los Angeles County (14 percent to Orange County) for residential uses and 93 percent trip distribution (sum of both work and nonwork trips) to Los Angeles County (7 percent into Orange County) for nonresidential uses. The Los Angeles County CMP methodology, however, distributes traffic primarily throughout Los Angeles County regardless of the location of the project site. The existing urbanization is generally farther to the north within the RSA. Therefore, the trip distribution is oriented more toward Los Angeles than Orange County. lanned The regional an use database within the OCTAM 3.1 traffic model for the Aera Master P Community project was also reviewed for trip distribution purposes. The OCTAM model was consulted because it is consistent with the SCAG land use database, as there is no regional traffic model in Los Angeles County that covers the project area. The data from the Orange County traffic model indicated that approximately 57 percent of project traffic will travel to and from Los Angeles County, and 43 percent will travel to and from Orange County. The different trip distribution sources identified above were reviewed in comparison to the location of regional employment centers (as shown in Figure ES-1). Based on this, the OCTAM distribution patterns were considered the most reasonable given the proximity of this project to retail and employment opportunities in Orange County. The regional trip distribution, based on the project traffic modeling' procedures, is illustrated in Figure 18 and reflects a regional distribution of 57 percent to Los Angeles County and 43 percent to Orange County. To determine the project trips at each intersection, the vehicle trips generated by the project were assigned to the study area using the regional trip distribution percentages. The project trips for the Proposed Project and Road Connected Alternative are shown in Figures 19 and 20. It should be noted that project traffic enteringlexiting the site via Harbor Boulevard was not assigned onto Fullerton Road -South. The project trips were then added to the existing, 2025 No Project, and 2025 Cumulative No Project baseline traffic volumes and LOS were conducted to determine the impact of the project on study area intersections. P:\CRU830\2007\TraRc Swdy\LA Study_Seprember 2007.doc tt09/24/07» 54 L S A LEGEND -Trip Distribution Percentage (D -Trip Capture Within This Vicinity N %/ - Trip Distribution Percentage Without/With PxxiYY Internal Roadway Connection Aera Master Planned Community Regional Trip Distribution SOURCE: OC7AM:1, 1 I:\CAU830\G\LA County-6-05Viegional Distribution.cdr (9/4/07) rndunry LEGEND 52 - Study Area lnteraecuon t3 [sung o for Ange es ommo�d sar / AN ON / RD enar RD 41 °` / N Y La xobra PROJECT 59 Helghu .. SITE even cn,.nyoo// (nr.tngeler 11 CANYON p4 ROAD 0a9 21 22 L 30/29 a rm t 81/73 1 4 r 11/34 J •- J 1' 4 S Olt 1 r' 10/9 Ol4 -7 861203 -� kl fd1�' 5 L 108/95 1 - 1/4IN �t r' �- 3111340 .L- 227/214 ' 217-1' m Brea Canyon CutaftPathfinder Road FIGURE 19A LSA Legend Aern Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Sounce: LSA Associates, Inc. - PACRU830\2007\Figum\Volume Graphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\Proj LA I.As (8/29/2007) LSA .......�-.___ Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume .Hera Master Planned Community Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Volume GmphicsWugust Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\proj LA 2.xls (8/292007) vnury srvo Indanry LEGEND t♦ w - Srudy Arealnrersecuon 12\�. (3 Ans e Diamond Bar aBEnS / Aau cnm nu ors 20 La � 19 Habra PROJECTght s9 SITE eaaayaI 11 ste>:a CAO ON l�A nRelr ep4 gg 9 22 n 11114 m t 3/12 ! ft- 7114 ' 1 4 r 5111 30/84 Z n m fil .- 409I288 2811145 94/163 Z e lure Intersection 12 a t 107/95 ,� J b •- 16127 1l1 J t 17126 -� 227/213 � 45/59 13112 -z e r n Cu1dVPalhfinder goad FT(`_T TRF 20e lSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Volume Gmphics\August Vol GmPhics (vertical)\With Road\Road LA 1.xls (8/29/2007) LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Aera Master Planned Community Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:\CRU830\2007\Fi9ures\Volume Graphics4lugus[ Vol Gaphics (vertical)\With RoadVtoad LA 2.zls (8/29/2007) NAYI•IC IMPACT AN ALYSIy I.SA AyyOCI A'1'Ey. INC. AY.NA MASTER Y .ANNEO C MMUNI'I'V y EI•'I'EMSEN R00] CITV OE UTAM ONO »AI2, I.Oy ANCEI.Ey COUNTY. CAI.IIONNIA IMPACT ANALYSIS Existing Plus Proposed Project Conditions To demonstrate the effect that the project would have on the study area intersections in the existing condition, an existing Plus Proposed Project LOS analysis was prepared. Although it is infeasible to develop the project in this timeframe, one Superior Court determined that CEQA requires that this analysis be conducted to disclose the project's potential impacts in an existing setting. Since this analysis represents a hypothetical condition that could not occur for a large project (complete buildout within a few months), this analysis is for disclosure purposes only, no mitigation measures have been identified for project impacts in the existing Plus Proposed Project scenario. Mitigation measures are identified for the year 2025 conditions. The peak -hour traffic volumes at study area intersections in the Existing plus Proposed Project and Existing plus Road Connected Alternative are illustrated in Figures 21 and 22, respectively. The existing and existing Plus_ Proposed Project LOS for the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative are compared in Tables F and G, respectively. The LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix E. As shown in the tables, the project would significantly impact the following intersections in both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative conditions.t 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 10. Nogales StreeUColima Road 12. Fairway Drive/SR-60 westbound Ramps 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road I5. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard 20. SR-57 souhbound off-rampBrea Canyon Road One intersection would be impacted with the Proposed Project only: 17. SR-57 northbound ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard One additional intersection would be impacted in the Road Connected Alternative only: 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road -North t The asterisks note the intersections that are deficient in the 2025 baseline [No Project] condition. P:\CRU830@007\TreRc Study\I,A S[udy_September 2007.doc (A9/24/07» 60 ndwto LEGEND • s - Study Area Intersection G Caenry o! a "' H e 7oranar as I PJub Npl1p 16 �Oo` 17 7 BREA CANYON / RO I._. EAer Ro lot` i � 20 La / 19 Habrax PROJECT SIrE AREA caanryo 11 CANYON o Angel p4 RoAD.' -r — 21 tAi 22 2 ,s .. ea CM tM IL 295/274 to w om o t-2701231 m t 10/66 " m i8 •- 12G51iD92 t 3511371 Ur w a- 1039/772 h t 6271278 ^ `� 4 f- 590/348 4 4 4- 9123 .� d 4 r 1311199 J 4 i" 12481446 .� 1-T 7- 5/8 T f 435/240 J T f 121/166 J h T r' to T.r+ 490/SBB J' `l T UD 11121 +ve 536/1130 -+ m F o m 577/1251 -rae 5471171 / 191 -1_ _ _ 9112 -1 to Nt 1 Fullenen RoadfSR.60 WB 08-Ram 2 Fulledon Rmd6R-60 EB 08-Pam 3 Fulledan Roar/Cdima Road 4 Fullerton RoadlPalhfinder fled 5 Nogales Street/PalhfinderRosd N < N FJ w t 535/345 t 652/647 8661945 t 540 /354 m m n •- m m F 803/1014 b 2W/3a8 4 .J 4 4 C 1351201 ,� 4 ,� 131/267 b 373/276 J T r' 393/381 1 h? r 68/87 J *1 T 179/369 Z m 585/522 J ea T r T 591/1035 -s ImVO 631/1125 +03 19/18 Z 136/156 -1 n 60/55 Z elC6 No ales StreetlSR-60 WB Ram 9 No ales SbeeVSR-60 EB Ram 10 Nogales Slreel/Colima Road 6 Azusa Avenuolima Road 7 Harbor BoulevarNFullenon Road N100 m o t 4641323 m N t 315/114 n N o t 147/81 N e •- 2/2 n m m= '- 8561789 te m Ue a- 9421748 a- 32164 137/224 d b 4 4- 332/239 4- 338/175 .1 4 C 235/231 267/154 J 41 T r 80/195 J h T f 4B6./ 176 J T 59/39 + `� N h T 463/823 + 395/1127 + $ 254 / 184 -7 N Nr 80/53 Z m `a m 194/351 -1 N 387/332 Z m 11 Future Intersection f 12 Fainva Ddve/SR-60 WB Ram 13 Fainva Ddve/SR-60 EB Ram 14 Brea Carryon Cutoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon CuloWathfinder Road FIGURE 21A L S A Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Existing Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Fi9uoes\Vo1u1ae Geapldcs\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\Existing Plus Proj LA l.xls (8/29@007) 53 LEGEND • 52 - Scucly Area Intersection 3 Coanry lax AnBe es Diamond Bar 1 9 19 RE 7 / eBRu sr.se aso* / � 20 In I 19 Habra aisinsPROJECT 59 Habra SrtECe"BREA Angeles rr CANYON p4 ROAD �9 -- 21 22 Ce L 55/23 L 1/1 _ L 118/46 m e m •- 506/265 1058/1565 e- 8641686 0' 6 217 y 4 .t- 442 / 198 E- 985 / 891 J ! 4 5581196 /644 �, .-i 1 r' 39317217 32117 P u b r' 111/163 1 h 1 f 431/791 - 187/BOO -� 375/2037 -t ` 637/829 Z 370/493 -1 � a� 12/42 Z au rl � m .an 20 m ` �- 143fi/1051 `v L 70/34 8451741 L 445/385 V a `A" f `� J 1 J 4 s- 611/414 t- 1169/907 J 4 4 r 1171101 4F 53126 723/7W J h. t 219/330 J 104/90 J t r' 782/847 -� 7/7 J h 1 r' ea 404/461in + 924 / 993 2201336 Z 59 / 53 -1 F CO189 / 285 -1qLn GO 11 11/7 /7 CO CO .- t0001392 tO GO 8t1r' 1 4 31/27 57/43 J r' 603/678 J h an Z 6/2 o ` 149169'7 y m -UP o� 193/120 -10 311/108 4 w < FIGURE 21s L5A Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 466 AM / PM Peak Hour -Volume Existing Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Volume GrnphicsWugus[ Vol Grnphios (vertical)\Without Road\Existing Plus Proj LA 2.xls (8Y292007) LEGEND 6 - Smdy Area Intersection r: r sense ge r Murry CANYON RD qh3r Rp qR i —• I--• a�p9 La � 20 /8 Habra PROJECT sv SITE. BREA 11 CANYON Lo+A Relx 04 ROAD 0 9 21 22 m m w t 2701231 m t 2651245 o+ o r 914/697 t 606 /267 n �' t 10166 R ra n �-- 1148/1043 t 273/310 1 C 591 /34l 1 4 C 9/23 d 4 t, C 13B/211 1 4 C 128BI552 .j 1 4 C 5/8 q 435I240 J 4 r' 1211162 J `a t r' t r' 5 1105 -, h t r' 11/21 -s m 511/1055 -s 9/12 -15721611 -1 Z $ 197 / 263 -1 m n to F r o n m � � t 536/345 m t-652 /647 m in t 540/354 m$ n a- 7841877 $03/1015 ^' E1 1 C 200/306 .� 1 1 4 C 1341197 .J 4 C 131/267 «3 1 3731276 J 1 r' 394/382 J F1 1 r' 6B/87 J "1 t 179/369 -4 m 5851522 J t r' t 563/924 -. 632/1126 -.Or) UD 19118 Z 1361166 -1 , ri 00 n Ca 60l55 Z n 4zusa AvenuerColima Road 7 Harbor BoulevarNFullenon Road (N 8 Nogales Street/SB-60 WB Ram 9 No ales StreeUSR-fi0 EB Ram s 10 N ales SlreeUCdima Road ae CM Uri e;i ,L/ A °'464322 GO La t 315/114 - t 147/81 .- 2/2 `" e m = a- 856/789 n o a- 858/621 «- 409/288 "' a d 4 4 C 1371224 «1 1 4 C 200184 C 2811145 .I 1 C 2351231 `� 1 4fi/76 t 267 / 154 J "� t f80/ 195 P *1 b r' 881445 t _ 4631823 -Sly 94/163 -1264/184 -4 an m 169/233 Z 3581331 Z an M DO ari Future Inlereectien o 12 Fainva DdvelSR-fi0 WB Ram 13 Feim Drive/SR-60 EB Ram 14 Brea Ca m Culoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Carrion CaloWathfinder Road FIGURE 22a LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Vo1ume GraphicsWugust Vol Graphics (vertical)\With Road\Existing Plus Road LA I.xls (8129/2007) manna LEGEND 52 _ Study Area Intersection C Hahra HeighO .J d 4 442/198 3281457 - 5B1/653 Z t 445/3B5 1041 W J T r 924/993 + t 14/8 IB `� .- 1000/370 .j 4 4 31 31/27 57/43 J h T r' 149/685 + " �:: E 311/1o8 Z Cwnryo Lae Ange rx nmmoad aar / CANYON / RD 20 /9 PROJECT 59 WE Counrya awn Lox AM 11 CANYON : ROAD _— 21. 22 f t 118146 a- B44 /711 29/1fi J h T r' 369/528 -s m w f .- 1436/1051 ,j d 4 .1- 117/79 782/847 + 220/336 Z 54 SB-576B OB-aampvamnnc o � n t 5114 1117 603/666 J '1 T r 6/20 o 193/127 -1 `W' t 55/23 6061265 t 55B/130 111/163 J'1 T r' 187IBM + m 3081230 -1 m m m ^ t 413/308 ,N. d 4 C 225/165 7/7 ? m T r' 59/53 Z a, ` t 1/1 .- Bez/3s9 216 659/460 J m T r 237/1833 v _ 2/43 Z w r 440/413 133/221 C m n t B46/741 ,j 4 611/414 219/330 J 404/461 FIGURE 22B LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes �uroe: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Volume Gmphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\With Road\Existing Plus Road LA 2.xls (8292007) Table F-Existing and Existing Plus Project Level of Service Summary (LA County) - Existing Existing Plus Project Change in ICU AM Peak PM Peak Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Aour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Hpur Hour No. Name City ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU iCU 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B Los Angeles County Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB OfT--Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB OfL-Ramp Fullerton Road/Colima Road ' fldlerton Road/Pathfinder Road Nogales StreeNPethfindm Road Azusa AvenudColima Road (CMP) Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road �r Nogales Street/SR-60 WB Ramps Nogales 8treedSR-60 EB Ramps Nogales StreedColima Road Internal Intersection Fairway lhiveSR-60 WBRamps Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road Brea Canyon CutofUPathfinder Road SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard' IND R4D LAC LAC LAC IAC LAC IAC LAC LAC DB• AID AID LAC LAC 0.72 0.59 . 0.91 0.90 1.13 0.75 0.94 0.60 0.46 0.81 - 0.75 0.65 0.79 0.82 C A E D F C E A A � D - C B C D 0.62 0.66 0.92 0.99 1.02 1d0 0.82 0.58 0.60 0.93 - D.90 0.61 0.72 0.90 A H E E F F D A A E -- D� B C D 0.75 0 61 ��_094 0 91 ; 1.18 0.76 0.95 0.63 0 47 �-.--087� 0.47 0.76 0.66 ::: D.92 -�. 0 98 C B 'E ��-`�49T E F C E B A D-: A C B E E 0.56 0 68 '::1 07 '_. 108 ., 3,12. ,. � 0.83 11.61 0 63 �� 091 0 48 �091 0 62 �. 093 1.20 A B - 8-.. E,;. P �� ..� .._F:,: D B B ,_$',s+ A ?E�-': B E,;: F %. 0.030 0.017 0.027 0.006 0.066 0.014 0.008 0.024 0.024 0.067 - 0.004 O 022 0.159 0.042 0.256 0.159 0.086 0.331 0.000 0.000 0.032 -177.7 sec - A.ODO 0.000 0.000 0.028 0.015 0.043 0.077 0.061 0.018 0.010 0.030 A.031 0.057 -- 0.012 9 10 I1 12 13 14 IS 0 207 0296 0.175 0.229 0.122 �0.128 0.858 0.007 0.000 0.077 -15.3 sec - 0.000 0.004 0.007 DB DB DB DB• DB• DB DB LAC LAC DB• DB DB DB 0.50 0.50 0.72 0.48 0.76 0.75. 0.76 0.88 189.7 sec - 0.90 0.62 0.90 A A C A C C C D F - D B D 0.47 - 0.71 0.86 0.63 0.82 0.86 0.58 0.79 28.3 sec - 0.90 0.43 0.77 A C D B D D A C D - D A C 0.54 0.75 0.88 0 57 '-109 0.75 0 76 �-:R•91 12.0 sec 0.70 0.90 0.62 0.90 A C D A F-: C C E `, B B D B D 0.65 - 0 93 �: 0,98. 0 76 1,67 0.87 0 58 � 087 13.0 sec 0.73 0.90 0.44 0.78 B E'.' E,'�. C Fd,- D A PJ" B C D A C 16 17 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard IB Brea Canyon Roed/Diamond Har Boulevard SR-57 NB On-Rampd3rea Canyon Roads SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road' � SR-57 NB On-RampO'athfinder Road SR-57 SB OfGRamp/Pathfinder Road Harbor Blvd -Fullerton Rd/Projed Ddvewa}j 19 20 63 54 58 58 69 LOS based on HCMseconds oJdelayr Brea Canyon Road/Pr ject Access) Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road 60 61 Brea Canyon Road (8)/Pathfinder Road Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road 62 Nmes: =Level otService exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) ❑ 0 (Shade)=5i ificmt Lnpact based on criteria below. -CMP-Congestion Mavagemev[Progmminterswtiov LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC -County of Los Angeles LA COUNTY INTERSECTIONS Pre-Pro'ec[ Project v/c Increase IpS �v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 ar mare IND-City of Industry D D.gl m0.90 0.02 or more DH-City afDiamovd Bar E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 m mme to m ivwryora[ed area (Cities of Diamond Har and Industry) a. significmt impact wcurs when the Project causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E w F, m adds 0.02 tv the ICU for an ' intersection already operating at LOS E or F. Los Angeles Cowry ICU Methodology (1,600 yPHPL, 10 percent Yellow cleamoce cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left turn Imes). rSigvalvallon of ivlemection vwessary to apply sigvf t impact criteria. J Improvemrnts to intersections included within projw[ design for "plus projwP conditions. Intersection within proposed mvexation by Ciry of Diamond Bar Svuve:ISA Associates, Inc. P:\CRt1BJPt00TTabla\Wi\boui Rod�Fxuiing-pml_u IN Swn_waRDWY ] O'/x4\Exuriox+Pmjm(Sn9n00'/) Table G -Existing and Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative Level ofService Summary (LA County) Existing Plus Road Connectetl Exisfing Alternative Change in lCU ' - AM Peak PM Peak Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Hom Hour No. Name Ciry ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 H Los Angeles Counryr Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 F9 Ofi Ramp Fullerton Rvad/Colima Raad Fullerton Road/PaHsnder Road Nogales Street/PaWf der Road Azvsa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) Harbor Boulevard/Fullenon Road (N�' Nogales StreeVSR-60 WB Ramps Nogales StreeUSR-60 EB Ramps Nogales StreeUColima Road Inkmallmersectlon Fauway lhivdSR 6D WB Ramps Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Aanrps Brea Canyoo Culoff/Colima Road Brea Canyon Cntoff/PaNfinder Road SR-67 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevardr SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamo� Bar Boulevard BiD IND LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC DB IND MD LAC IAC 0.72 0.69 0.91 0.90 1.13 0.76 0.94 0.60 0.46 0.81 - 0.76 0.65 0.79 0.82 C A E D F C E B A D - C H C D 0.62 0.66 0.92 0.99 1.02 1.10 0.82 0.68 0.60 0.93 - - 0.90 0.61 0.72 0.90 A H E E F F D A A E - D B C D 0.76 0.63 " 0,95 -' 0,96 7,14 ''. 0.76 1 00 -.:: 0.63 0.47 0.H8 0.59 0.76 0.66 C B E" � E F C E B A D A C B 0.66 0.70 1,00 1.06 : 1.05 .� i l2 :. 0 92 -'- 0.61 0.63 0 95 �.. 077, ' .0.91;_- 0.62 A B F +: F %: P--_ F _ E : B B E, �� C E;': B 0.033 0.043 0.092 0.066 0.012 0.014 0.066 0.023 0.024 0.068 - 0.004 0.009 0.070 0.049 0.029 0.033 0.079 0.064 0.032 D.D1H 0.101 0.030 0.031 0.021 - 0.013 0.008 0.140 0.164 9 10 ' 11 12 13 14 16 16 ]7 0.62 0.63 0.79 0.49 ,.0.43 -.�. 0.75 0.76 0.76 27.2 sec 0.59 0.90 0.62 0.9D A B C A i $ C C C C A D B D 0.58 0.65 `r:0;92 �.- 0.72 i;44'+.' 0.88 0.58 0.83 37.9 sec 0.66 0.90 0.44 0.78 A D =-:8�= C .P::. D A D D B D A C 0.018 0.131 0.076 0.003 0.366 0.000 0.000 -0.097 -162.6 sec - 0.000 O.00D 0.000 0.100 0.140 0.064 0.067 0.626 0.016 0.000 0.037 9.6 sec - 0.000 0.004 0.007 DB DH DB DB D8 DH DB LAC LAC DB DB DB DB 0.50 ' 0.50 0.72 0.48 0.76 0.75 0.76 0.88 ]89.7 sec -- 0.9D 0.62 � 0.90 A A C A C C C D F - D B D 0.48 � 0.71 0.66 0.63 0.82 0.86 0.58 0.79 28.3 sec -- 0.90 0.43 0.77 A C D B D D A C D - D A C 18 19 20 53 64 58 Brea Carryon Road/Diamond Har Boulevard SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Roadr SR-67 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road' SR-67 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road SA-57 SB Ofi Ramp/Pathfinder Road Harbor Blvd-Fullekan Rd/P ject Driveways 6g 69 60 LOS based on XCMsemnds afdelaya Brea Carryon Road/P jec[Accesss Bree Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Raad Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathf der Road Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road 61 62 Notes: ❑ =Level ofServia exceeds LOB D.(LOS E frr CIv1P) ❑p (Shade)=Significant Lvpact bused on criteria below. LA COUNTY INTERSECTIONS Prc-P jecl Protect v/c Increase LOB v/c C 0.]I 10 0.80 0.04 ormore D 0.81100.90 0.02 or more E/F 0.91 ormore 0.01 ormore k av kcorpomkd area (Cities of Diamond Har and Industry) a sigoificanl impact occurs wheo the project causes LOB to deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for ao in[emeclion abeady operating at LOB E or F. CMP-Covges[ivv Management Progem lmersxtiov LOS E acceptable for CMP intersedioas LAC - Counry afLas Angeles MD-Ciry oflvdustry DH-City ofDkmovd Bar - Los Angeles CouvrylCU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 peroem yellow clearevice cyck, 2,880 VPH for dual IeR rum Imes) '-Sigoalization ofivtersection necessary to apply significant impact mitma. r bvprovemevis to ivtersediovs included within project dui®r for'plvs projecC' conditions. �lotersectiov within propoud amexatiov by City afDiamondBar Bomce:ISA Associates, kc. P:1CRt18)Wc0]\Tobla\wish Povd\E*isiing-pmj_U ICU_5� RnwYComm 1 0].tldEusingt Prajmfn29/Sam) NAPMIC IMI•AC'1' ANAI.Y314 I.SA A IATE3, INC. A MAS I'ER YI.AN Nh:U C MMIINI'I'Y S t. P'1'EM RPP R011] CITY UP UTAM ONU B I.US ANCItLE3 COII N'I'Y. C IY00.NIA In addition, an analysis of the freeway ramp intersections within the study area was prepared for the Existing, Existing plus Proposed Project, and Existing plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios. The LOS (based on the HCM method) at the freeway ramp intersections for these three conditions are shown in Table H. As shown in Table H, the following two freeway ramp intersections operate at LOS F in the existing condition: 16. SR-57 SB ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard 20. SR-57 SB off-rampBrea Canyon Road In the Existing plus Proposed Project condition, project design features will be added to the intersection of SR-57 SB off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road (No. 20), resulting in satisfactory LOS at the intersection. The remaining two intersections will continue to operate at LOS F in the Existing plus Proposed Project and Existing plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios. In the Existing plus Proposed Project scenario, one intersection would deteriorate from satisfactory LOS to unsatisfactory LOS: 17. SR-57 NB ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard With the Road Connected Alternative, no intersections would worsen from satisfactory LOS to unsatisfactory LOS. 2025 Plus Proposed Project Conditions Per County of Los Angeles requirements, the 2025 Plus Proposed Project scenario will be used to determine project impacts to intersections located within the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles. Project impacts to Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry intersections will be determined later in this report using 2025 Cumulative traffic volumes. Project traffic was added to the 2025 No Project traffic volumes to establish the 2025 Plus Proposed Project condition. The peak -hour traffic volumes at study area intersections in the 2025 plus Proposed Project and 2025 plus Road Connected Altemative are illustrated in Figures 23 and 24, respectively. The 2025 No Project and 2025 Plus Proposed Project LOS for the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative conditions are compared in Tables I and J, respectively. This comparison is used to determine project impacts requiring mitigation for intersections within thejurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles. Intersections within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry are shown for informational purposes only. The 2025 Plus Proposed Project LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix E. As shown in the tables, the Proposed Project would significantly impact the following intersections within the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles.t Mitigation measures to offset the project impact at each impacted intersection are discussed later in this report. 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road The asterisks note the intersections that are deficient in the 2025 baseline [No Project] condition. P:\CRU830\2007\Trafiic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09Y14/Ohl - b / �W =oAnumPQm wG Uptv Q Ud x CC d p a O V 00 C� N M a O O cV ^ vi N m Q '+ 6 p3 �i a Y OUwwmwmwm U ww¢ m .5 d W y ao Q N 'pOWUWalfad W ww U d vw p� a a� d 'O N o PW A m Y p.l W w m U Q and w �OUa�wmal a D R m D O oo N oo O m P O p Q u WPC d V UW �OWVWQCad x d Np 'L a > y Pa W FG W W WQ W �OUWa'lda7 PW Q Q NOMINEE b o x G 0 b azv ��NviQq W b U Uwo � p p O C O N N pp ryryN�� ryryN�� PI [�A 3 W p�p77 3 W 3 W p z Z p Z P4 P� P4 P4 r_ L K LEGEND 5 - Sru<ly Arcs lmeraeeuon C Coanry lox AnBe n F'] ndsxrry• Diamond Bar RRD CP / D shay 4� 20 La 19 Habra PROJECT HeI8h0 SITE ,.,�ry BREA Coo/ 1.1 CAN ON 7oa Angela p4 ROAD 1 m N t 3341310 m m N t 3911416 e 1373/1244 N t 11 /76 `" O1 t 707/308 m r 150/228 1 4 C 1431150' L 4 s7 10126 .� 1 4 t 677/39B 1 1391190 J h T 7 499/276 J r4 T 611/1283 -� 13124 -a m m . -4 1961217 -4 6271618 n 4 e 3 Fullerton RoadCdima Road 1 4 Fulledm RoadRathtinder Ra WR ON -Rama 2 Fullerton RoadSR-60 EB Off -Ramp N t 310/265 1170/863 619 561 / 651 J "1 T f 649/1406 -. \ 0114 -4 < m N t 748/742 m N t 6201406 979/1070 t 915/1158 .l b .� 230/351 ,J 1 J L 4 t 1551230 ,i L f- 150/306 d L T r, 1281317 J T r' 4511437 J `� T r' 6711599 J T r' 78/100 J T 205/423 Z m 672/1168 -x 721/1283 + 22121 -1 166/179 -1 69/63 -1 53 Azusa AvenuelColima Road 7 Hater Boulevard'Fulknan Road N) 8 Naeales StreeUSR-60 WB Ram 9 ales StreetlSR-60 EB Rams 10 Nogales StreeUCol!me Road n o m t361/131 t169/93 t 6321371 r 982 /905 e- 1035/80B a- 32164 212 N c N .� 33B/175 .0 ! t 270/265 d 1 .I L 4 r 157/257 d L 4 C 405/243 «� q 558 / 202 J T 391177 J 'i T r' 92 / 224 J h T r' 59139 -a h r' 5311944 -x w 43211218 m 303/211 -4 �, 80153 -4 m 208/357 -4 e 409/380 -4 m Future lntersec8on 12 Faiwa Drive/SR-60WBRam 13 Fairwa DfwR1SR-60EBRam 14 BmaGanyaDGuWWCoI1maRwd 115 Brea Canon CuloWathfinder Road FIGURE 23A LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Figures\Volume GlaphicsVAugmt Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\2025 Plus Proj LA I.xls (829/2007) ndusru LEGEND r - Study Amalnmrsecrion fi Counp tot Angeeles DiamoM Bur 7 CANYON RO Nabra PROJECT 59 He/ghu -^ 113511717 J b 4 t 507/227 433/764 - 712/894 Z t 511 /442 .- 1342/10 1191103 J.I T r 1060/1T40 t 16/8 .- 11481447 J 4 4 6 36/31 65/49 -T T r' 171/798 -+ 3S7/124 I t 16/8 .- 11481447 J 4 4 6 36/31 65/49 -T T r' 171/798 -+ 3S7/124 I CAN ` ` ' f 1648/1206 J 4 4 .F 134/113 897/972 -s 2521386 7 rn < t 6/16 m 1318 J 692/776 J 7/23 w " 2211146 -1 N t 70134 J b 4 1 63126 8/8 -T h T r' 68/61 'i 1 v t 1/1 .- 8741713 217 898 / 650 J h T r /2289 - 390 12/42 -1 m m 723 /706 19B/285 m t 9701060 701/475 2511379' J 464/529 + FIGURE 23s LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2 02 5 Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Fi9ures\Volume Graphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\2025 Plus Pmj LA 2.xls (8/29/2007) LEGEND 52 - Smdy Amalnrersecdon 0 Habra HeiBhn f n Anry ge ea InduNrp Otamond Bar /_ r CAR 20 19 — PROJECT SITE aRsA Cozy 99 CANYON a,Aaarlr ROAD 21'. E- 22 " o t 304 /281 v< c w w t 310/265 m t 11176 ' ' �- 1316/1195 m $ t 313 /354 m i3 N .- 1045/788 `� 4 4 1- 10/26 4 4 4- 1571240 1 4 t 14711613 .1 1 4 6 fi/9 4991275 J T r 139/186 J `1 T r t r 555I644 J "t T r' 13124 -. 586 / 1208 + m 62011260 -e 652/689 -1N 222/289 Z 10/14 -1 m< 8 m � omea,., v„ldmaihlindar Road 5 Nooales StreeWathfinder Rea o 53 n n n m t 599/382 m t 748/742 m � t 820/406 < m .rrg F 897/1002 916/1159 "' 1 .� 1 4 1- 1541226 eJ 1 r 230/351 «I 4 150/306 '� 1 T r. 4281317 J t r• 452 /438 J h T r' 6711599 J t r 78 / 100 J h T - 644/1057 722/1284 -� 22121 Z m m 205/423 Z m 156/179 Z m 69163 -1 _ ._.._., e.....,,,sirN�mPannd 7 Har6or BoulevarNFulledan Road N 8 N ales Stme9SR-60WB Ram 9 Nogales Street/SR-60 EB Ram 10 Regales Slreef/Calima Roadzq .- 409/288 ' .� 2B11145 881445 + h r' 41163 -4 N S� t 532 / 370 m2!p-212 2701265 d 558/202 3031211 t 3611131 t 169 / 93 FIGURE 24e LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. - P:\CRU830\2007\Fi911ras\V0lume Gmphics\August Vol Gmphics (vertical)\With Road\2025 Plus Road LA ].xis (829/2007) mdaxen. LEGEND b _ Study Area lnreraectiOn G COYnry Lax Angeles En3r nab o / La 77abea PROJECT Nwghtx SITE AR O tt CANYON 04 ROAD � 9 __. ..� 21 22 Diamond Bar LLLfffrrr D Ir/ �xangrlx NF ill 63126 139121307 135153 8104 /1B87D11450 rfiC 216 r glB 4CF 6404 4J 1 4 C 507/227 *1 T r1m 127/187 J 68/500 252/2085 56/71B -1 415/562 m 3461240 12/43 Z 4....nmB.,Blvd 19 SR-67 NB OwRaffrOw 0 ;n a°1i <- 1648/1208 n L 41313M $ �+ m L 970/850 t 511/442 4J La a- 701/475 r 1342/1016 .7 1 4 r 134/91 d J b r 225/155 440/413 J h 4 251/379 J - 897/972 -r 8/e J h t r' 464/529 -x 119/103 J t r 68161 Z 133/221 Z N 1060/1140 -x 25213B6 Z 6 � � t 6/16 t18/9 m =2 13/8 4- 1148/425 1 4 C 911 47 36131 .� `7 t 921764 J *1 t r 65/49 J r' 7/23 - t2 1711786 -> n 221/146 Z 357/124 Z FIGURE 24H LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 1231456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\FiguD%\Volume GraphicAltugust Vol Graphics (vertical)\With Road\2025 Plus Road LA 2.xls (829/2007) Table I -Year 2025 and Year 2025 Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Notes; ❑ =Level of8ervice a<ceeds IAS D (IAB E for CMP) p (Shade) a Significant Impact based m cdtedd below. LA COl1NTY MTERSECPIONS Pre -Pro act Pmlecly/c LOS v/c lnmeaze C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 m mme D 0.81 m0.90 0.02 or mom Fh 0.91 nrmore 0.01 or more N m incomomted area (Cities ofDiamond Har and Industry) a sigrdficanl impact occws wbm Ne project causes IAS te deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 m Ne ICU for m interuction already operating at IAS E ar F. CMP -Congestion Mmagement Program Intersection IAS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC - County oCLos Mgeles IIJD-City oflndustry DB - Ciry ofDiamand Bar sLos Mgeles County ICU McNodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 perunt yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left nun lanes). r Existing msigoelized intttsecfievs malped as signalized N 2025 condisions. J Lnprovementsmintttscelions included witldnp jecl design for "plus project"conditions. � Industry Business Crater impacted intersection. -mmruminn widdn proposed amexadm by ciryofniarvona ear Source: LSA Associates, inc P.KRUBJe'300TTabIoJWiawut aoaA m51CU IA_S� xnanWYCwmw_J m.xasa0i51rm TIA)r.+isvl Tablel(B2Y2aat1 Table'J-Year 2025 and Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service Summary ear us o nnec e Year 2025 No Project Alternative Change in ICU AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peek Hour PM Peak Hour Hour Hour Intersection City ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1CU ICU No. Name Los Angeles County J A 0.8fi D - 0.62 B 0.032 0.030 1 Fullerton Road/SRfiO wB Off -Ramp IND 0.83 D 0.69 0 72 C 0.79 C 0.043 0.034 2 Fullerton Roed/SR-60 EB OH-Rensp IND 0.68 B 0,75 C 1.t3.- P � 0.043 0.065 3 Fullerton Roed/Colima Road LAC 1.09 F 1.07 P �-%L09 - .'F 0.057 0.064 4 Fullerton Raed/Patbfutdw Road LAC 1.07 F 1.13 F 1.12 ' , -F E 119 -. 1.19 F F � 0.012 0.032 5 Nogales StreeVPathfindw Road IAC 1.28 F 1.16 F 129 : 0.014 0.018 AvenudColima Road (CMP) IAC 0.89 D 129 F 0 90 D 1 33 F b Azusa F 0.92 E a' 1,12-, -P 102..- F". 0.056 0.100 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (lY) LAC ].06 � 0 68 R 0.024 0.030 8 Nogales StreeVSRfiO NB Ramps Nogales StreeVSR-60 EB Ramps LAC LAC 0.68 0.52 B A 0.65 B 0.67 B 0.70 0.54 B A p 70 1.09 R F -': 0.023 0.068 0.030 0.037 9 Nogales StreeVColima Road � IAC 0.93 E 1.05 P r ,; C - - ]p II Major lnternallnterseclion Added by Project DBe - - - 059 A� 077 F 0.004 0.012 12 Fauwey pdve/SR-60 NB Ramps IND 0.85 D 1.02 F 0.85 D C 1.03 0 69 H 0.008 0.008 13 Fairway Driv /SR-60 EB Ramps MD 0.75 C 0.6g B 0 75 09� B 095 ': ' E 0.067 0.14I Brea Canyon CutofFYColium Roed LAC 0.90 D 0.82 D 19 Brea Canyon Cutoif/PathfinderRoad LAC 0.93 E 1.02 F � � 097'� �E 1.18 " P � ' 0.045 0.164 15 SB Ramps/Diamon d Bar Boulevard' DB 0.56 A 0.63 A 0.58 A 0 63 B E 0.018 O.I32 0.100 0.138 1fi SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard - DH 0.55 A 0.79 C O.b9 B 04J;"- 17 SR-57 Brea Canyon Road/Diemosul Ber Boulevard° DH � 0.81 D 0.97 E O.B9 D 103� F, 0.079 0.0fi3 lg SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Bme Canyon Roed] DB* 0.54 A 0.77 C 054 A 0.60 C 0.006 0.086 19 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Raad'- DBE 0.g5 D 0.92 E � 1.01 �� -�F I:55' F 0.154 0.626 0.006 ip SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pads Jdw Roed DH O.g4 D 0.97 E 0.84 D p.98 E 8 0.000 O.OIq 0.000 53 SR-57 SB O&Ramp/patbf der Road DB 0.86 D 0.65 B 0.86 D 0.65 54 SR-57 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Roed (S)'r I,AC 0.99 E 0.89 D O.Bfi D 'U.91; H � -0.132 0.022 58 LOS frayed on HCMseronds ojdelay r'J LAC 27.7 sec C 20.6 sec C 27.7 aec C 37.9 sec D 0 sec 17.3 sec. 58 - 0.64 B 0.71 C - - 59 Brea Canyon RoadO'rojwt Access'' DHs - -- - F 1.06 F - 0.000 0.000 60 Bree Canyon Aoad (Ff)/Pathfindw Road DB 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.06 074 C 0.62 A 0.000 0.004 61 Bcee Canyod Road (S)/Path£mder Roed DB 0.74 C 0.52 A F 0.92 E 0.000 0.007 Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfindw Road DB I.Ob F 0.91 E 1.06 62 Notes: ❑ =bevel of8ervice exceeds LOS D (LOS S frCMP) p (Shade)=Significant knpact based ov criteria below. LA COUN7Y IN]'ERSECIIONS PmPro'eG P Jecty/c LOB v/c 7ncreaze C 0.71 to 0,80 0.04 or more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more fh 0.91wmore 0.01 or more N an incorpvmmd area (Cities ofDiarnvnd Baz and Industry) a sig�tificant impact occurs when the pr jeer causes LOS to detenomte m LOB E or F, or adds 0.02 tv 0e ICU fm an intwsection already opemang al LOB E w F. Ck4P - Congestion Mmegemevr Program intersection LOS E accepuble For CMP intersecdom LAC - County of Los Angeles BVD-City oflnduslry DB-City of Diamond Bar �I.os Angeles County ICU Melhadology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 percentyellow clearance cycle, 2,680 VPH for dual left [um lanes). '-Existing unsignelized intersections aoalyud as signalved in 2025 conditions. s Wprovemenls to intersections included wi0dn p jec[ design for "plus p jeer" conditions. °Indusn Business Center imparted intersection. -Intmsectivv within proposed armexation by City of Diamond Bar Baurcc LSA Associate:, Inc PiC0.nala10anTeblolWithaoxa]m5 n'U_U aum_RnWYCwmm_a 0°.a1NW5 (Nrc TIA7 ravel TaalcJlBnanOm) NAYYIC IMPACT' AN AI.VSIS ASSOCI A'r F.S. INC. ACRA MASI'1'R Y.AN NRO COM MN NI'rV LSA '1(M 6E0. Y00] CITY ON NIAM ONO B S AN GYI. RS CONNTV. CALII.O0.NIA 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road -North ] 0. Nogales Street/Colima Road 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road 58. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S) As part of the project design features, the AMPC project will install a traffic signal at the project access onto Harbor Boulevard (intersection No. 58). The ICU method was used to calculate the LOS at this location, with the objective of achieving I;OS D at the project entrance. To achieve LOS D in the Proposed Project condition using the ICU methodology, three lanes in each direction on Harbor Boulevard would be necessary to obtain LOS D at this intersection. Due to right -of --way constraints on the southwest corner of the intersection (i.e., church property), the addition of two lanes (one northbound and one southbound) on Harbor Boulevard may not be feasible. Per discussions with the County of Los Angeles Public Works staff, an HCM operational analysis was conducted at this location. The HCM signalized analysis was based on existing traffic volumes and peak -hour factors, an annual growth rate (0.82 percent per year), planned lane widths, and level terrain. These represent the parameters of the HCM calculation. As a result of this operational analysis, it was determined that six lanes on Harbor Boulevard would not be required. As shown in Table I, the operational analysis demonstrates that the intersection would operate at LOS D during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with four lanes on Harbor Boulevard. Therefore, the project design feature will include signalization of the intersection while maintaining the existing four -lane cross-section on Harbor Boulevard. When the project is analyzed in the Road Connected Alternative, the same intersections listed above are impacted (though with somewhat differing degrees of impact). An HCM operational analysis was also prepared for the project access onto Hazbor Boulevard under the Road Connected Alternative. With this alternative, an additional 147 DU will be located on the west side of the site, and would therefore take access from Harbor Boulevard. As a result, LOS D cannot be achieved at this location with only four lanes on Harbor Boulevard (as is currently constructed). Therefore, the project design feature under the Road Connected Alternative includes signalization of the intersection as well as widening Harbor Boulevard to construct three lanes in each direction at the project entrance. Table J shows the ICU and HCM at the project access onto Harbor Boulevazd, assuming asix-lane cross-section. In addition, an analysis ofthe freeway ramp intersections within the study area was prepared for the 2025, 2025 plus Proposed Project, and 2025 plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios. The LOS (based on the HCM method) at the freeway ramp intersections for these three conditions are shown. in Table K. As shown in Table K, the following three freeway ramp intersections operate at LOS E or F in the 2025 No Project condition: P:\CRU8300007\Tm�c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc x09/24/07u 75 x p H �0 ;Omc)Pamwmww u¢ cad Cq a d x d d Pk i7 0 D U m P7 P7 Pa w W U d Pl W P+ m a d Q O N U dUd u �O[AUWmwPPww d x o v W� T O r O M ^ y N A r N A N 0 Pk v q RJ P7 P7 Pa pq W W U ¢ Pa W 7 � O NW d N N� L� b 7 �O O v? •� N b N 5 `QI Pa V h M^ M N Q M y 0 O m U w d W W w V d W U 0.l a m M 01 7 vt c0 N W O Wi N O O U Pa PQ P7 Pa Pa w ¢ Pa w W M el W N `� N 5 ^y O I M O A d Q N O O O O O O P4 'd N :Q o o O N gv UNN U �w�i YnAAbv O- p N W G C 45 m ro m ❑ �« 'i P:P4 O P: W pPp]]" W 3 W m papqq pUp�� Z pPp77' z m 3 3 2 P4 P4 P4 P4 9 u 1-SA ASSOC1A'I-ES, INC. S F.P'I'EMBI:R 2007 12, SR-60 WB ramps/Fairway Drive 16, SR-57 SB ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard 20, SR-57 SB off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road TRAFFIC IMPACT ANnl.rsls AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY C Y OF DIAMOND BAR, 1.09 ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA In the 2025 plus Proposed Project condition, project design features will be added to the intersection of SR-57 SB off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road (No. 20), resulting in satisfactory LOS at the intersection. The remaining three intersections will continue to operate at LOS E or F in both the 2025 plus Proposed Project and 2025 plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios. In the 2025 plus Proposed Project and 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios, one intersection (SR-57 NB ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard) would deteriorate from satisfactory LOS in the No Project condition to unsatisfactory LOS. 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Conditions Per City of Diamond Bar requirements, the 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project scenario will be used to determine project impacts to intersections located within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry. This analysis also identifies cumulative impacts at study area intersections in Los Angeles County. Project traffic was added to the 2025 Cumulative No Project traffic volumes to establish the• 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project condition. The 2025 Cumulative plus Proposed Project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 25. Table L shows the 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project LOS at study area intersections. The 2025 Cumulative plus Road Connected Alternative traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 26. Table M presents the 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative LOS at study area intersections. The LOS worksheets for the cumulative condition are provided in Appendix E. As shown in the tables, the project would significantly impact the following intersections in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project:t 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road 6, Azusa Avenue/Colima Road * 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road North 10, Nogales Street/Colima Road *2 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road t The asterisks note the intersections that are deficient in the 2025 baseline [No Project] condition. 2 Ibid. P:\CRU830\2007\Trenic Study\LA Study September 2007.doc «09124/07» 77 LEGEND LLEv BLW l Industry • 52 - Study Area Interaccdan A- 0 fo e Ang / es -� a / to 7 % eBR 'RD Eh / 20 La 19 Habrur PROJECT 59 Heights sr7E cnl.,rya/ eaen Loa Angeles 11 CRRNY�ON p4 • l 22 an 0) Quo Cps W �, mt337/316 Cs 1397/1325. 00 n t 3911415 t 11176 N anat• t 707/308 d 4 1-153/233 y 4 r 1439/54 4 4 ,F 10/26 4I 41 1 r .L- 679/399 139/190 J T r 499/275 J t r t O1 654/13Q -' m 13124 -+ m m 629/620 -1N 116/217 -1Cs CQ n $ r m n ��wt311/266 .- 1186/931 1 4 r 9121 562/652 J 703/1447 -s 10/14 -1 an w - t 74B 1745 `F. 005112 n e� .- B25/1195 m 1 t 6201406 .- 0051115fi y 41 4 .F 2351359 .� 4 d 4 4 t 1661232 4l y .� 150/309 78/100 J h T T r 428/317 J T r 4611463 J 41 T r 671/599 J T r 2101432 Z mer) 727/1239 -.to cm to 741/1313 -a m 22121 Z S _ , 1601189 CO Ge 69I63 -1 � � - m Azusa AvenudColima Road 7 Harbor Boulevard�Fulledon Road N 8 Nogales StreetlSR-60 WB Ram 9 No les StreeVSR-60EB Ram 10 Nogales StreeUColima Road t 5321371 L 383/161 m Z t-174197 4- 32/84 '- 2/221 QD N < N t 10111993 F `4 m F 1067/928 ff- 338/175 .7 y r 276127B sJ l 41 y 4 ,F 169/289 .0 1 4 r 405 /243 59/39 -a h r 41 T 606/252 J 1 307/179 J 41 T r 92/224 J `1 T r eM 80153 -1m COF 3081223 -1 ion 506 / 1016 -a < a 524/1294 -a m 212/365 -1 426/391 Z n `3 m as .n � Future Intersection T 12 Nway Ddvr/SR-60 WB Ramps 13 Falimy Ddve/SR-60 EB Ramps 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon CutolUPathfinder Road 77TOTTDF DCi. LSA Legend -123 / 456 - -AM / PM Peak Hour Volume . � Aerri Master Planned Community Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. PACRU830\2007\Figures\Volume Gmphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\Without Road\2025 + C + Pmj LA I.XIS (8/29/2007) LEGEND • 52 - study Area Ilueneetion C coanry a Lox Ange e$ Indunra DiamuM Bar 7 / CABNYON �. RD. 1.—. La / 19 Habra PROJECT 59 20 Heights SITE BREA 11 CANYON LoiA Relei O ROAD 9 21 22 e 't 79/9D t 2112 ` �_ t 735/53 t- 586/323 r 1042/823 r `u ` an f 1140 / 1736 f `� r 2 /y ,J to a- 1069/787 .l b 4 s 5071227 •- 1D96/999 .� 1 4 640/214 931/678 J '1 t r 1347/3059 -r 4501775 -. 35 / 19 J h T r 127 / 187 J `1 t r" 2321929ep 437/2405 + 712/B94 -b 494/856 -+ P.' v w g 7 m Cam 40B/5D3 7 12142 m ra 18 Brea Canyon Rd'Diamond Bar Blvd 19 MR NB On ROMB(ra Canyon Road 20 SR-57 SB Otl-Ran#Brea Canyon Road 16 SR-57 BB Ram slDiamond Bar BWd 17 SR-57 NB Riamond Bar Blvd .- 1740/1325 t 70/34 N m t 1052/915 t 512/466 m �^ e ,J U a- 7111521 .- 13B2/1124 *J b 4 t 1341113 J 4 4 C 53126 b BIB J h T rx 723/706 -T `1 T 307/423 J 119/103 J t r 949/1047 -v 68161 Z m 199/285 -1 N 4991555 -i 112711230 + `a m 267 / 449 -4 53 SR-57 NB On -Ram alhfinder Road 54 SR-57 SB off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road 58 Harbor BoulevardfFullertm Road S) 159 Future Intersection 60 But Canyon Road (N)fPaNfnder Road t 16/9 m m t 6115 .- 1159/509 — t- 13/8 36/31 «1 1 4 s- 9/1 66/49 J h T r' 727/802 J '1 t r' 215/B34 -i 7/23 -r 378117EI 7 m _ 23D/156 Z ao 61 Brea Ca on Road(SaPaNfiMer Road 62 Diamond Bar BoulevaWPalhfinder Road - FIGURE 25B LSA Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\20071Figures\Volume Grap}tics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)Without Road\2025 + C + Pmj LA 2.xls (8/292007) Table L -Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary Year 2025 Cumulative Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Plus Project Change in ICU AM Peak PM Peak Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Hour Haur Na. Name City ICU LOS ICU �LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU ] 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 )p 11 LosAngefes Counryr Fullerton Ruad/SR-6D WB Ofi--Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp Fulleron Road/Colima Road Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Roed Nogales StreeUPathfinder Road Azusa AvenudColima Road (CMP) Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (I�z Nogales StreeUSR-60 WB Ramps Nogales StrceUSR-60 EH Ramps Nogales StrcetlColima Road ° Mlar fnrerwltn:ersecnpn Added try Project Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps Fairway DriveBR-60 EB Ramps Brea Canyon Cumti7Colima Rcad Brea Canyon CutottiPathfinder Road° SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Har Boulevard' SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Baz Boulevard° SR-57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Roadz1 SR-57 SB Oti=RampBrea Canyon Road'- SR-57 NH On-Ramp/Pathfindm Road SR-67 SB Oti RamprPathfindm Road Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S);] LOS based on HCMseconds ofdelayz' Brea�Canyon Road/Projcet Access'-'' Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathfinder Road � Diamond Bar Boulevard/PathfinderRood IND IND LAC IAC LAC LAC LAC LAC -LAC IAC DB• - ]ND IND LAC 0.83 0.68 1.05 ].07 1.29 0.89 1.07 0.68 0.52 0.94 - 0.86 0.77 0.92 D H F F F D P B A E - D C E 0.60 0.76 1.09 Ll4 1.18 1.30 0.93 0.66 0.68 1.09 - 1.03 0.71 0.86 A C F F F F E � B H F - F � C D 0.86 0.70 -1.06 1.08 1.34 0.91 ].7/ 0.71 0.54 0.47 0.86 0.78 1.03 D B �: P F :�F D F B A A D C �".'H 0.62 0.77 1.33, ].22 �� 1, 24 7 32 0.94' 0.69 0.71 36 0.48 � 1.04 0.72 lA6"P B C ' F �: "F ' ..F . F ' H�- R B 4. R2: .A 0.030 0.017 0.028 0.009 0.066 0.014 0.009 0.023 0.024 0.068 0.028 0.015 0.038 0.076 0.06] 0.017 0.013 0.030 0.030 0.067 F C ;- E'� . 0.004 0.008 0.111 0.012 0.008 0.169 12 13 14 )6 16 17 jg 19 2p 63 54 5g 58 69 60 LAC DB DB DB DB• DB' DB DB LAC LAC DB• DB 0.96 D.57 0.66 0:82 0.58 0.88 0.89 0.90 1.00 28.]sec - ].16 -E A A D A D D D E C - F - ].OS 0.54 0.80 0.99 0.75 0.98 1.02 0.69 0.90 21.5 sec - . 1.17 F A C E C E F � B D C - F 1.13 0.61 0.81 0.98 0.64 �7.19 - 0.89 0.90 1:03. 42.0 sec 0.75 1.16 ,'F A D '..E B K: F D D F � D C F 134� 0 70 1.03 1.08 ' 0.87 1.84 '. 1.03 0.69 097 :�'�&.�:; 45.9 sec 0.79 1.17 -. P.. B '-' P:-. �. F; D F-r; F B D C F 0.t80 0.038 0.266 0.168 0.060 0.313 0.000 0.000 0.034 13.9 sec - 0.000 0.296 0.168 0232 0.088 0.120 0.858 0.007 0.000 0.077 24.4'sec - 0.000 �DB DB 0.76 1.08 C F 0.54 0.96 A E 0.75 1.08 C F 0.55 0.96 A E 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.007 61 62 Notea: ❑ =Level afServi« exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) 0 (Shade)=Si®ificavtlmPact based weriteda below. LA COUNTY INTERSECTIONS Pre-Pro'x[ Projec[v/c Ivcaase LOS v/c C 0.71 m 0.80 0.04 m more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02mmme FJF 0.91 m more 0.01 or more Iv av incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Har and Industry) e sigoificavt impact occurs when We proj«[ causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F, ar adds 0.02 m Ne ICU for av inters«lion already opuativg at LOS E orF. CMP - Covgestiw Management Program lnters«tiov LOS E acceptable for CMP ivmrs«lions LAC -Cowry of Los Avgeles P]D -City of Industry DB -City of Dinmmd Bar ILos Avgelu Comty ICU Methodology (I,600 VPHPL, 10 percevt yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left tum laves). ' Existing msi�alized inters«tiros avelyzed as signalized m 2025 cmditiovs. 'Improvements [o ivmrxcliovs included within project design for "plus proj«t" conditions. °Industry Hus ss Cevt« impacted intersection. �mrersection within proposed amexation by City otDiamovd Bar Source: LSA Ass«fates, Nc. P:1CRU8]n30aTTable\Wi�hom Road12a351CU Ln_Sum_woROWYCoti,m l m.xaV.a29 (L1m+)16292m]) LEGEND 5z - Srudyfven Inreraccuon 1 0 Counp' of Lnx Anne es lndunry Diamond Bar 7 CANYON RD La � 19 Heights braPROJECT 59 20 SITE BRHA ijAgeles 11 CAN ON p4 ROAD a9 Oti /MW�.. 21 22 Os CD 10 t 3W/287 a L vs L311 /266 msts? N t 11176 n ` e- 1340/127fi e $ t 313/3m m a e- 1061/856 m - 686/297 a) w b 4 ,L 1479/647 J b 4 .F 9/21 b 4-6801395 1 4 F 10/26 e1 b 4 �F 160/245 t r' 566/645 J '1 7 f q - 4991275 J t r' 13911136 J c1 t f 674 / 1301w as -r as 13124 + 629/1273 + m ^ `fir' 10/14 Z O1 Lo Lo as 654/691 -4 n w 2221269 -1 M "' ask as , c, unri „a,adroathfinder Road 5 Nocales S1reeVPalhlinder Roa m � n < w m L 599/382 n t 7481745 m ^ m L 620/406 0 m e •- 923/10BB `� e- 925/1196 b 235/359 .4 d � b 4 C 155/228 b . .F 150/309 4 T r. 4281317 J t f 4621464 P u b r" 6711599 J T r' 70/100 J E T 210/432 Z mCos 699/1128 N m 74211314 -r 22/21 -1 Z C � 160/189 -1 69/63 -1 NID ko m 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road 7 Harba BoulevardNFulle on Road N 8 les SImeUSR-60 WB Ram 9 ales StreeUSR-60 EB Ram 10 N ales Street/Colima Road 00 at as 3s) Vs t 532/370 L 383/161 m t 174/97 m o .- 2/2 n Cs 'a 1011 /993 a o' a- 983/801 .- 4091288 `V ,� 4 L. C 1691269 e1 b 4 .F 223188 .F 2811145 *j b r 276 / 278 '� b 3W / 179 J h T r' 92 / 224 J e1 T r' 18B/445 + c) r' h t W262 J 4 485/1085 -r as 30B/223 -4 58611016 -+ e $ 941163 -1 e 177/247 -4 4271390 -1 r pi as as Cs 11 Fultiminterseclion 12 Famot Ddve/SR-60 WB RamIxs 1 13 Faim DdvWSR-60 EB Ramps 14 Brea Can on Cuto6/Colima Road 15 Brea Canyon CulofllPathfinder Road FIGURE 26A L S A Legend Aera Master Planned Community 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes urce: LSA Associates, Inc. PACRU830\2007\Figums\Vo1ume Graphics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\With Road\2025 + C+Road IA Lxls (8292007) LEGEND 52 - Study Amalmereeerion C cownv r�,..ans<f, ASr /(O F�xa'p�9 NT % La l 7iWghu PROJECT S1TE - - BUA 0p4 11 CANYON Ro �yJ / 21 �,...�.. , 22 B75/1469 .- 4 .C' 5071227 385/511 -a 65fi/718 Z t 512/46fi .- 13B21111 119/103 JI t 1127I1230 n t 16/9 \ .- 1159/487 ,,j 1 L, S36131 65/49 J '1 t r' 215/822 -a 378/178 -1 n me�,rry OiomnM Bar / oxen CANYON R� 20 --- 19 cm.nryo Lox AnRefa' t 79190 t 2/12 �- 5B6/323 �- 9BO1497 t 135153 .- 955/827 .� 4 4 C 6401W C 2/6 187 J 727 / 494 -T h T r" `1 127/ 33118 J t r m 299/2201 -> 432/593 232/929 + _ p 12/43 Z m 346/240 Z N N ca � w ` ` R m t 1052/915 1740/1325 t 413/308 N .- d 4 �- A11521 134/91 4 4 r 225/155 .1 1 ,� 4 L� .1' ,j 8/8 J 4401413 P u b 3071423 J h T ra - 49/1047 -a Z 499/555 -a 267/449 Z 68/61 Z\ 133/221 n CAD m .. . .. _.___.,...,� �__o__. rer co F,uimlNomw4inn 60 firm Camron Road (WaNfirderF t 6/16 m CC- 13/8 ,r 4 L. S 9/1 727/790 J h t r 7123 m 230/156 Z f D1 tlrm carryon noeo rupramnixc, m,o. FIGURE s LSA Legend 123 / 456 AM / PM Peak Hour Volume Aera Master Planned Community Year 2o25 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRIJ830\2007\Figures\VolumeGmPhics\August Vol Graphics (vertical)\With Road\2025 + C+ Road LA 2.xls (8/29/2007) Table M -Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service Summary Year 2025 Cumulative Road Connected No Project Alternative Change in 1CU Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Haur AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City 1CU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS� ICU LAS ICU ICU 1 2 3 4 5 6 y 8 9 ]p 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ]g 19 20 53 54 5g 5g 59 60 61 62 Los Angeles Coantyr Fullerton RoaNSR-60 WB Off -]tamp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB OfiRamp Fullenon Road/Colima Road Fullenon Road/Pethfinder Road Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road Azusa AvenueJColima Road (CMP) Harbor Boulevard/Fullmon Road (N)r Nogales Street/SR-60 WB Ramps Nogales Sveet/SR-60 EH Ramps Nogales Slrcet/Colima Road° Major interwllnrersection Added by Project Fairway Drive/SR-bO WB Ramps Fairway DrivdSR-bO EB Ramps Brea Canyon Cutotf/Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road' SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard' SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard° SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road's SR-57 SB Oft Ramp/Brea Canyon Road' SR-57 F1B On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road SR-57 8B Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road Harbor Boulevard/Fullenon Road (S)r'' L0.S based on HCMreconds ofdeloyr'r Brea Canyon Road/Pr jest Accessr'r Brea Canyon Road (L�/Pathfinder Road Brea Canyon Road (SNPathfinder ]toad Diamond BarBwlevard/Pathfinder Road 114D IND LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC LAC DB* IND IND LAC LAC �DB DB DH DH* DB* DB DH LAC LAC DB* DB DB DB O.g3 0.68 1.05 � 1.07 1.29 0.69 1.07 0.68 0.52 0.94 - 0.86 0.77 0.92 0.9i 0.57 0.56 0.82 0.56 0.88 0.89 0.90 � 1.00 28.1 sec - 1.16 0.75 1.Og D B F F F D F B A E - D C E � E A A D A D D D E ' C - F C F 0.60 0.76 1.09 1.14- 1.18 1.30 0.93 0.66 0.68 1.09 - 1.03 0.71 0.86 1.05 0.54 0.80 0.99 0.75 0.98 - 1.02 0.69 � 0.90 21.5 sec - 1.17 0.54 0.95 A C F F F � F E B B F - F C D F A D E C E F B D C - F A E 0.86 0.72 1.09' 1.13 ,1 30 091 ll2 0.71 0.54 t.00 0.59 O.B6 0.78 0 98 �,1.00 0.59 0.69 0.90 0.56 7.03 0.89 0.90 0.86 27.8 sec 0.64 1.16 0.75 1.08 D C P '. � F F E. P:. C A �Fi" A D C , E-- F. A B D A . F - D D D C B F C F 0.63 0.79 1.16 1.20 t.21 L32 L03 0.69 a.71 I,12 0.77 1.04 0.72 0.9H 1.21 0.64 ; � 0.94. � 1.06 0.83 1.6t 1.03 0.69. 092 43.0 sec 0.72 1.17 0.55 0,96 B C E; ` F:. "b';: �"p. , �F�.'--.' B C �F .'': C F C 1;.: � ;FL: 13 -, ,E - F:;- D >_� -" F B `$�� D C F A E 0.032 0.043 0.044 0.05H 0.012 0.014 0.056 0.023 0.023 0.068 - 0.004 0.009 0.059 0.052 0.018 0.132 0.080 -0.024 0.151 0.000 0.000 -0.132 -0.3 sec - 0:000 0.000 0.000 0.029 0.033 0.071 0.064 0.032 0.017 0.10] 0.030 0.030 0.031 - 0.012 0.008 0.122 0.164 0.100 0.138 0.064 0.079 0.626 0.007 0.000 0.021 21.5 sec - 0.000 0.003 0.007 Noes: ❑ =Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) ❑ (Shade)=Sigvificantlmpact basedmmitefia below. LA COUNTY INTERSECTIONS Pre-Pro'ec[ P jeet vk lvcrease LOS v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or mare D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 m more E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more In av incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry) a sigvi6can[ impact oc when the project causes LOS to dererioram to LOS E�or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for av intersection akeady operating a[ LOS E m F. CMP - Congestion Management Program Intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC -County of Los Angeles WD -Ciry of lndustry DB - Ciry ofDiamond Bar ILos Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, 10 pemen[ yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual Ie0 [iuv laves). '-Existing msignalized intersec[ioas malyud as signalized in 2026 conditions. s Improvements to intersectieos included within prajeG design far "plus pr ject" conditions. °Industry Business Center impacted ivtersectlon. Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diemwd Bar Source: LSAAssaeieles, 7ve. PICRIIBa0rra0ATelle:\\VirM1 Road12m51CU I.A_SuA RnwYCovnat_8 O4.a1sP1035 (Llun)(m9na0r) ' RAYYI L• I 'r AN AI.YSIS I.SA A830 CI A'I'E3, INC. � A MAS!I'1'.R YI.ANNIiU C .-� SEP'1'EMaER Yoa) y OY U ONO BAR.. I.OS AN CCI.ES COUN'I'V, CAI.IRF''O RNIA 17. SR-57 northbound ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard 20. SR-57 southbound off-rampBrett Canyon Road When the project. is analyzed in the Road Connected Alternative, the same intersections listed above are impacted. Mitigation for the cumulative condition is described later in this report. Two -Lane Roadway Segment Analysis As stated in the County's Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines, the projects impact on two-lane roadways should be analyzed if those two-lane roadways are used for access. As such, atwo-lane roadway analysis has been conducted on Brea Canyon Road (between SR-57 northbound on ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard) per the County's guidelines. The analysis has been conducted using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS+), which is consistent with the HCM methodology (Chapter 20) for directional two-lane highway segments. The reported LOS represents the woise of the two directions. The analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix F. The 2025 traffic volumes for thetwo-lane analysis were determined based on the approach/departure volumes at the intersections on either end of the roadway segment. Table N shows the 2025 No Project LOS for the two-lane roadway segments per the HCM methodology. As this table indicates, Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS F in the a.m. and p.m. peak hour. The existing traffic volumes and LOS are provided for informational purposes only. As the table indicates, the deficiencies along Brea Canyon Road projected in 2025 also operate at unacceptable LOS in the existing condition. With the implementation of the project in 2025, Brea Canyon Road is forecast to continue to operate at LOS F. The addition of project traffic will increase the total volume by greater than 1 percent; therefore this presents a significant impact. Mitigation to offset this deficiency is discussed later in this report. It should be noted that the Congested Corridors Study for Los Angeles County Supervisorial District 4 stated that Brea Canyon Road from the County line to Diamond Bar Boulevard has existing and forecast traffic volumes that are typical of four -lane roadways. The County Highway Plan depicts this roadway as a four -lane road. In addition, the City of Diamond Bar General Plan Circulation Element depicts this roadway as a Secondary (four -lane) arterial. However, the City of Diamond Bar has no plans to add through lanes on this facility in the near future. P:\CRU830\2007\Tra�c Study\LA Study_September 2007.dac IN9/24/07» - � K4 U ::, ' :pP4. O w w ii a afig F E o 0 0 0 v v A v v a A A A A n e gym° W N N r < y Z - a ;Y 9 a e010 �pa v v v v E v v v v F .E A e ;AA. m m - z 0 �Z 9 w c z + x° 4 e p a m N a N s � � N F W � v G. ° E a + e d y N a` z .5 A 0 m �a �m o W x�r 0 d U E w � m d s F o a �a rS N d z a - o 0 m �x c d V E h ti m g g � M1 a _c SA ASSOCI • IN F'C. S FPT.MBER YBBf "RAPFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS A MASTER PI.ANNEO C . ..e .MORES COUNTY. CALIFORNIA LONG-RANGE (2025) GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS hin long-range uesst to increase the intensity on the project sAngeles sexisting due t he General P site compared to the recounty of Los Angeles nt 9 General Plan. The long-range analysis will evaluate roadway segments only for with and without project scenarios based on the following two alternatives: 1. Existing conditions of the site (i.e., existing vacant land use vs. Proposed Project land use, assuming existing arterial capacity values) 2 Generassuming Plan conditions (i.e'5 current General arterial capacity values) an land use vs. Proposed Project land use, eral t (Parsons Daily traffic volumes were forecasted e County b OCTAM 3.1 a traffic modeling model. Thisnmodel, administered by Brinckerhoff) using the orange tY OCTA, is consistent with SCAG's regional traffic model. The circulation system analyzed fort e Appendix G. For purposes of 2025 condition in the traffic model is based on a committed network. The methodology uspdt by Parsons Brinckerhoffto forecastGeneral Plan was viewed to de ermine he I ndraffic volumes is provided in puse entitled on the this analysis, the County' land Heights Community Plan, a total of approximately project site. Based on review of the Row 12465 Plan devsignatuon be laddit on, based on the City of.Diamond Balowed on the project site in Los Angeles rGeneral Plan, a total of 65 DU General would be allowed on he portion of the project site east of SRmm ercial use would be Review of the County of Orange allowed on the General Plan shows that up to 2,787 DU and 218,000 sf of comm project site within Orange County. Figure 27 presents the General Plan land use divided into the project TAZS proportionate to the proposed units per TAZ. Table O presents the trip generation associated with the General Plan land use. -RNProject Daily TrafTic Volumes and LOS (Existing Circulation Long ange (2025) o System) in The long-range 2025 (no project) daily traffic volumes on study area Project)roadways a roadway LOSt(v c rratio). Figure 28. Table P presents a summary of the long-range 2025 (N The existing v/c is provided for comparative purposes only. As this table indicates, the following roadway segments are forecast to exceed the existing daily capacities (i.e., over 1.00 v/c) without any development on the project site: Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) • Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road • Fullerton Road between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp et between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Stre Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and Colima Road 86 P:\CRU830\2007\Tlatf c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc IA9/24/Ob> � )\e � / © � � � \\ � � � � j} �-� rsnassocu Ps. sxc. Table O -Trip Generation for General Plan Land Use Assumptions Sire Units Total ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Land Use Trip Rofes DU 9.57 _ 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.66 0.36 1.01 Single Family Residential TSF ITE Regression Equation Commemiel Trip Generarion TAZ 1' Single Family Residenfal 65 DU 12 37 49 42 24 66 Tri Genemtion 622 TAZ2 Single Family Residential 236 DU 177 153 86 236 Trip Genemtion 2,258 44 133 TAZ3 Single Family Residential 425 DU 239 318 274 � 154 429 Tri Genemtion 4,064 80 TAZ4 Single Family Residential 192 _ Dll � 36 108 144 124 70 194 Tri Genemtion ],837 TAZ SA Single Family Residential 2,641 DU 25,274 496 1,486 1,981 1,707 960 2,667 Trip Geaemtion 24,147 480 1,476 1,956 1,657 906 2,563 .Net Tri Genemtlonr TAZ SB Cornmemial � 218.00 TSF 11,270 152 97 250 503 544 1,047 Trip Genemtion -50 -54 -105 Internal Trip Captue ] IO.OYa -1,127 - -]5 -10 -25 452 490 942 Net Trip Genemtion 10,143 737 88 225 TAZ6 Single Fanuly Residential 351 DU 197 263 227 128 354 7ri Generation 3,358 66 TAZ7 Single Family Residential 101 DU 76 65 37 102 Trip Genemtion 965 19 57 TAZB Single Family Residential 29 DU 16 21 18 10 29 Trip Genemtion 273 6 TAZ 9A (Berry) Single Family Residential 74 DU 42 55 48 27 75 Trip Genemtion 708 14 TAZ 9B (Berry) Single Family Residential 146 DU 82 109 94 53 147 Tri Genemton 1,395 27 TAZ 10 Single Family Residential 58 DU 33 44 38 21 59 Trip Genemton 566 11 50,326 931 2,506 3437 3,192 2,006 5,197 Total Net Tri Generafion Notes: � Institute ofTmusportadon Engineers, Trip Generation, 71h Edition, 2003. Conmiercial trips calculated using the CCE regression equation for Shopping Centers. e Net Trip Generation for Residential includes adjustment far internal trips to Commemial. Internal Trip Capture based on dicussion with Counry of Los Angeles staff. ° pwelling Units based on City oCDiamond Har General Plan (1 DU per Acre) rsP Thousand Square Feet nu Dwelling Unit Source: Couvry ofLos Angeles General Plan. Orange Cowry Grneral Plan n-.....,.�.. nm Plen IaW Use Assumpdom.xlsW(e129200]) L � " LEGEND Full -Average Daily Traffic (i,000s) ®- Freeway LinkADT(i,000s) N Aera Ener,� Master Planned Community Los Angeles County 2025 No Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes SOURCE: Los Angeles Counry General Plan, AMPC Model I:\CRU830\G\LA Counry5-OS\2025 No Project ADT.cdr (9/4/07) 7S o Yi u _ 9 N S u � � 3 S S �' S x5va w T RAFPIC IMI•AC'r AN ALV Ris I'ES, INC. AI'.RA MASTER PI.ANNI?U COMMUNITY 51'.PTEMBPCR Pllu] CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, I.OB AN CEL P.B COCNI'Y, CALIFORNIA • Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and SR-57 southbound ramps • Diamond Bar Boulevard between SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road • Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevard and SR-57 NB on -ramp It should be noted that of the 12 roadway segments listed above, 9 are currently over capaciTy in the existing condition (with the 2 roadway segments on Harbor Boulevard forecast to exceed its existing capacity in 2025), Long -Range (2025) Plus Proposed Project Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS (Existing Circulation System) The long-range 2025 Plus Proposed Project daily traffic volumes on study area roadways are illustrated in Figure 29. Table P also presents a summary of the long-range 2025 Plus Proposed Project roadway LOS without consideration of any project mitigation or project design features. As this table indicates, the following roadway segments are forecast to exceed the existing daily capacities with implementation of the Proposed Project: Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and SR-57 southbound ramps Diamond Bar Boulevard between SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff Pathfinder Road between SR-57 on -ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevard and SR-57 northbound on -ramp 57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp Brea Canyon Road between SR- P:\CRU830\2007\Tmfiic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc «0924/07» 91 L S A LEGEND XX.X -Average Daily Traffic (i,000s) ® - Freeway Link ADT(1,000s) N SOURCE: AMPC Model I:\CRU630\G\LA County-6-05\2025+Proj ADT.cdr (9/4/07) Aera Master Planned Community Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Average Daily Traffic Volumes A A53OCIA'I'1:3, INC. 9 F. P'1'EM NER 4U3] 'r RAFI•IC IMPACT AN AI.YSIS A Y.NA MAS'1't. 'I.ANNNY) CAI.II PrOR NIIA C ITV OF CIAM ONC B 1.03 ANGCLF Implementation of the Proposed Project will increase the daily v/c ratio by more than 1 percent on all of the roadway_segments listed above compared to the 2025 No Project condition, with the exception of the following four intersections: Harbor Boulevard between Fu]lerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Long -Range (2025) Plus Road Connected Alternative Daily TrafTic Volumes and LOS (Existing Circulation System) The long-range 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative daily traffic volumes on study area roadways are illustrated in Figure 30. Table P includes a summary of the long-range 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative roadway LOS. As this table. indicates, the following roadway segments are forecast to exceed the existing daily capacities with implementation of the Road Connected Alternative without mitigation measures or the project design features: Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Pathfinder Road and Colima Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and SR-57 southbound ramps Diamond Bar Boulevard between SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff Pathfinder Road between SR-57 on -ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevard and SR-57 northbound on -ramp Brea Canyon Road between SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp With the exception of the segment on Nogales Street from Colima Road to the SR-60 EB off -ramp, implementation of the Road Connected Altemative will increase the daily v/c ratio by more than 1 percent on all of the roadway segments listed above, compared to the 2025 No Project condition. P:\CRU830\2007\TretTc Study\LA Smdy_September 2007.doaR0924/07» - 93 County o As Ange es La Habra Heights !a Habra W}4IT'IT[N HUM Is I Industry Brers � ti. o M x p " STATE C coLWGs BLvD L � !\ LEGEND XX.X -Average Daily Traffic(t,000s) ®- Freeway Link ADT(I,000s) N c Armor Mndpl ovtna A GALLEY 11 l Industry Diamond Bar �II T"��i�sJ'F_R :'? M 41•J2: 2T..i � G':mrtty rJCJrangr j/ -----'�- CAR ----- _, Brea > I K BIRCH ST T ASSOC.'tA'IE.t1 U` RD K u Pldcentia z Aera Master Planned Community Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Average Daily Traffic Volumes I:\CRU830\G\LA County-6-05\2025+proj-Internal Circ Alt ADTcdr (9/4/07) r anrrlu I •nc'r n nl.rsls I.SA ASSOCIA'1'aa, INC. q MASI'CR PLAN NCU C MMUNI'I'Y S I.P rLM aL0. YUn� ONU 6A0.. 1.09 A CaI.. Y.9 COUNTY, CAI.IFO0.NIn Long -Range (2025) Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes and LOS (Existing Circulation System) A more detailed peak -hour link analysis was conducted for the roadway segments forecast to exceed its existing capacity for the baseline condition and the roadway segments that are forecast to exceed the capacity and increase the v/c by ]percent or more with implementation of the project. The peak - hour mid -block link volumes were derived based on the 2025 daily roadway volumes. An existing peak hour -to -daily ratio was identified for all study azea roadway segments. This ratio was applied to the future 2025 forecast model data. The directional splits for the future volumes were determined based on the existing directional splits for each roadway segment. A conservative estimate of 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (consistent with the CMP) was used for the peak -hour link analysis. Table Q presents the directional peak -hour link v/c ratios for the 2025 No Project (vacant site) conditions. As this table indicates, all roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the daily capacity in the 2025 No Project condition will operate at acceptable v/c in the peak hours, with the exception of Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road [north] and Fullerton Road [south]) and Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Baz Boulevard and SR-57 northbound on ramp). Table Q also presents the directional peak -hour link v/c ratios for the 2023 Proposed Project conditions. The table indicates that all roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the daily capacity in the 2025 Plus Proposed Project condition will operate at acceptable v/c in the peak hours, with exception of Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road [north] and Fullerton Road [south]) and two segments on Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and between SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp}. All roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the daily capacity in:Yhe 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative condition will operate at acceptable v/c in the peak hours, with the exception of Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road [S] and Fullerton Road [NJ and between Fullerton Road [N] and Pathfinder Road), and Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp and between SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 SB off -ramp). The results of the peak -hour link analysis show that Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road - North and Fullerton Road -South) is forecast to exceed its existing capacity without implementation of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not add significant traffic to this roadway segment, while the Road Connected Alternative will add significant traffic (i.e., greater than 1 percent) to this condition. Additionally, the Road Connected Alternative will add significant traffic to the segment of Harbor Boulevard from Fullerton Road (N) to Pathfinder Road. Recommendations to improve the Road Connected condition are discussed later in this report. Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Bar Boulevard and the SR-57 northbound ramp) is forecast to exceed its existing capacity without implementation of the Proposed Project. Both the Proposed Project and Reduced Road Alternative would add significant traffic (i.e., greater than 1 percent) to this roadway segment. Additionally, the Proposed Project and Road Connected Alternative will add significant traffic to the segment of Brea Canyon Road from the SR-57 northbound on -ramp to the SR-57 southbound off -ramp. Recommendations to improve the Proposed Project and Road Connected condition are discussed later in this report. P:\CRU830\2007\TrafTc Study\LA Smdy_September 2007.doc a09/24/07n YJ Table Q-Year 2025 avd Year 2025 Plus Project Peak Hour Livk Traffic Volumes avd Volume to Capacity Ralios Summary Year 2025 No Pro act Dveellonal VDlumes Roadway Hahor HoWwmd Se mauls Fullmlw Rosd (5)10 FuDedw Rwd MJ FUllmlon Revd MJroPelbyiWm Rwtl Coliw Rwd mPaOWidm Rwd SA-60Eulbwud OR'-RawroGlOm Rwd CoIDm Rwdm PalhBMw Rwtl sR-60 Ea0bamd OH-Ravgm Cdiw Rwd SR-60Easlbmmd Raw mCWiw Rwd CWiw Awdlo PaWBMm Rwd PaWO�WURwdro sR3]SB Rumps SR-5]NodMwW RBntA mBrw Grypn Road Bw Cemw Rwd aM PaNBMm Rwd Azusv Avvacao FWlmw Awtl FWlmw Raed mNopla Straet No%alm Shrtl roBrw Cemm CSaoH FWlmwRwdlDNopla Sbae Nopla stralmBrw Canon CUIDR rw Cammn CuloHro SR-SJ SwrobomA Od RanP BR-5]SwIMwMOHRaap to SR-5]NmlMmod OrtRmlq SR-5]Orvnw aMDiawnd Bar BoWmrd Diamond BarBwlmrd rosR-5]NorObwnd Rave SR-5]Novbbound OmRarry la SR-5]SB OH-Ravp DiaBdd BarBwlevaMmPatlWMu Rwd Ca aWty 3,200 J,200 J,200 J,200 J300 I.200 3,200 I,fi00 J,20D ],200 I200 3,300 J,200 J$W ],2W ],200 3,200 3,200 J,200 1,600 NBOJB 1,600 1,]21 1,14J 1,188 1,1)BI 1,688 9J3 1,062 6R fi00 498 1,19H I,md I,IR 8R R6 ]IS I,201 6Jl � 2]0 pM V OSO 0.41 0.)6 0.J] 035 O.SJ 0.29 0.66 031 0.19 0.16 0]] 0.J2 03] 03J 01J 0.22 D.JI 0.20 0.1] SBIWB J$59 2,882 I,JR I,I93 1,02] 1,215 469 ]4J 898 938 1,595 1'953 I,5 I,J91 1,fi]6 1,123 1,2% 1,)12 1,215 1,242 V/C 1.11 0.% 0.4J O.M 032 0.39 0.13 0.46 028 0.29 O50 OA9 0.56 052 0.J5 0.40 0.53 O.Je O.JB NBBB J,IR 2,4]I 1,])5 I,ZH 1,142 1,52] 841 1,216' 1,1]B I,2I6 2,113 IT]19 1,688 l,]iJ 1398 I,m] I,31O� 8]5 2A3J PM V/C D.99 O.J] 0.43 0.39 036 0.48 .D2fi 0.]B 0.l] O.J9 O.fi6 0.� 0.33 D.54 O.M O.J6 D38 01] 1.52 S 1,511 1,224 I;IR 139J I,J99 1,809 895 9N 802 RS 61] 1,589 1,]19 1,02J B]l 8]5 1,4% Sm 39J /C 0.4i 4]8 O3J 0.42 OS] 036 OSB 025 0.24 0.19 A50 0.54 0.33 03] 0.2> OAS 0.16 0.18 0.0H 0.09 FWlmon Road ople Strad rw Carryov GloH DiawMBarBwlcard Colirta Rwd PatMndc Rwd rw Carryon Road 3,200 1,800 I82 290 0.15 0.1E I,WI 309 0.l3 0.19 2.968 'RS D.]] D.IB 25) I50 Ywr 2025 Plus Proposed Ptojecl Dbeclwvel Volume AM � Cs adty NBBB V/C sBIWB - V/C NBBB V/C SBIWB V/C Roadway Segmevts J,200 1,49] 0.4] 3,J1H I.m 2,96] D.9J 1,11] D.M Harbor Boulward Fu1lmw Rwd(S)ro Fullmon Rwtl MJ J,200 I,R6 0.J8 2,fi]4 0.B4 ;29J O.R I,IM 0.J6 FWlmon Rwd D411DPa0�findm Rwd 0.]4 130] 0.41 1,J05 0.91 1, 11] 433 Fullmw Roed CWiw RwdroPaWBMm Road J,200 J,?00 1,085 1,156 0.36 1,J55 0.42 1,230 0.38 1,599 O.4B SR30 Easlbmvd OH-Ranpm Cvl'uw Road 3,300 1,12J O35 I,OM 0.J3 1,195 036 I,J52 D.42 ople Strcn CWim Aoad to PaWEMc Rwd � J,200 I,fiB2 0.5J 1,2J1 0.38 I,SR 0.48 I,Im 036 SR-64 Easlbawtl Rampto Gliw Rwd JjOD 1,10) 0.J5 55I 0.1] 995 031 999 0.JI rw CenwCuloH SR-60Eazlbowd Rang to Coliw Rwd 1,600 1,0]0 0.fi) ]48 0.4] 1,254 D.]e %1 0.59 Gliw Road mPalbfindc Rwd O31 I,Jl2 0.42 1,]I] 0.55 1,190 OJ] Pa05Mm Awd roSR-SJ SwtMmmtl Aaws J,2(IO - 998 ]02 022 1,09] 0.J4 1,44$ 0.95 906 038 DiamoM BarBwlwaM nqs toBw SRS]NoNAwdRv Gmwn Rwd 1,200 1,8J9 039 ;488 0:]8 R] 0.2J Hw Carryw RmdaM Pa05odcAwd Azma Avmuero FWlomnRwd 3300 3,200 J,200 586 1,21J 1,121 0.18 0.J8 O.15 1,9]0 1,fi% 0.62 0.5J 2.2fi5 1,882 D.]I 0.59 2,OR 1,]40 Ob5 D54 Colima Road Fullwlw Rwd roNOplc Strae J,200 1,251 039 1,913 0.60 1,80.5 056 1,839 0.5] Noplm StrcsroBw Canyon O�mH 031 1,910 0.H0 1,956 0.61 1,166 036 PaNSndm Road FWlmwRwdmNoplrs Strm 3,200 999 1,021 O.J2 Ij]9 0.49 1,96] 0.61 I,RS 0.38 -Nopla StrusloBw Canyw GlaB I,200 0.21 1,J42 0.42 1,12] OJS 90] 0.2s Bw Canyon MORIo SR-5]SwIFbwMOH-Aavp J.20D ]41 1,832 0.5] 1,295 0.40 1,5]] D.48 ' SR-5]SwOibomd O6Ranpm BR-5]NoMbuutl OnRav4 3,200 1,2B3 0.40 549 O.IJ SR-SJ Ommr�p and Diamod BUHwdevaN J,200 '685 021 I,J19 0.41 .'•'128.� 950 J,99] 0.]0 -:-?:i0',:� 9H1 0.30 Brw Carryw Aostl Dummd Bar Boulevard to SR-5]NmtlOwnEAamp I,fiW 413 0.28 2,040 2,12] 0.66 4�9;0 �H.69` SR-5)NovMuuW OORarrpmSR-5]SB Od Rarm 3,200 %] 030 0.2] 1,1 215 D.I3 Diamm�tl BarBwlevard to PalhBMCRwd I,fi00 416 0.% 4J6 Ywr 2025 noav s;onveereu aa..•�••��• D4ectlaval Vulvme AM PM Roadway Herbw Bwlrnrd Se mevn FWlvronRwd(S)roFullvmn Road (NJ FWImwRwd O'0 mPa05Mw Roed - Colkw Rwdm PalbE�WC Colinu Rwd SR-60EazlbwmdRmpro CoOw Rwdlo PaOWMc Rwd SR-60 Easmowd Raw to Caliw Rwd SR-dU EmNowd Ra roCoOw Rwd Glkm RwdlDPVlbfiMm Rwd Pa05Mm AoadroSR-5]SwBdviMR SR-5]NwMbwMRanw to Bra Gm/w Rwd Brw Cartpn Awdaml PaOdmtic Rwd Azusa Avmmem FUllmwRwd Fulkrmn Road lONopla Strut Nople SVW m8w Gv9mnGroH CapaW 3,200 ].20D J,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3jW 1,600 J,200 J,100 ],200 3,200 J,200 � J,211D J,200 ],200 3,L10 3,200 3,200 1,600 J,20D 1,600 J4B/BB 1,]54 1,519 1,259 1,199 1,101 1,699 9B2 1,%] 826 651 SN 1,336 I,Ofi] 1,192 9]] %2 ]41 1,28] 684 4W 89fi 914 VM OSS Q4] 0.J9 0.3] 036 OSJ O31 0.6] 0.26 0.10 O.IJ 039 0.J3 O.I) 030 038 0.2J 0.90 0.31 035 026 026 SBIWB J,900 ],314 1,51] 1,908 1,016 Ij43 492 ]d6 1,10J 1,01] I,J43 2,001 1,618 1,820 1,859 1,J95 1,J42 1,829 1,316 1,859 1,662 439 VlC �-.1.22.: '1,�-- 0.9J 0.44 OJJ 0.39 0.15 0.4] 034 0.J2 0.39 0.6J 0.51 OS] 0.58 O.d9 OA2 0.5] D.41 ":1.16', O.SB NBBeB J.4)) 2,842 1,519 1,266 1,163 1,53] BB3 IjSI I,M] 1,J40 2,RN ;i00 l,]92 1,]IS 1,9m 1,]J] 1,13] 1,292 99B 1,642 4,lJl 1,106 V/C :'1f09<i 0.89 0.4] 0.40 0.% 0.48 D.)B 0.]B 0.45 0.42 O.R O.R 0.56 o.59 � 0.60 0.54 0.J5 0.90 0.30 ;'-2?8 �, �-3]5':: 0.69 SBIWB 1,65fi 1,90B 1,29] 1,608 1,J]4 1,821 8H] 9JB 985 841 6]5 2,Im 1,656 l,]4] I,IJS I,m2 9m I,SJ4 548 4l9 451 214 VIC 0.52 O.K 0.41 0.90 0.9J O.5] 0.28 059 O31 0.26 031 0.66 OR OSS 0.35 0.34 0.28 D.4B 0.1] 0.2] O.Id 0.13 FWlmw Rwtl ppla Saxd Bw Gn'On GmH Dia�mnd HarBOWwmd Colima Awd PalbfirAcr Rwd Brw CanonRwd PollmonRwdroNople strw NOplm Surd loBw Canon CuloH Brw Calryw ONDDb SR-5]SaulbbwM OA-Raw sR-5isal10amd Od RairymSft-5]NoMbamtl Oo-Rarm sR-5]Onnw and Diamond Bn Hwlcvard DianwWBar BoulmNroSR-5]NOMbaud Renq HR-5]NOMbwnd OnRelryroSR-5]SB OH -Rang DianioM Bar Bmalcard to PalM1DMv ROad 'vlc mnsa Mani or AaR naK.ram..ab vrc oei w P:1CRU83D1200TTub1aU-A LiW� Mallsis.xls)Q A ASSOCI A'I'Y.5. INC. SE YT P.MBP.N Y011] C IMPACT ANAI.Y%IS A Y.NA M I.AN NCD C MMUNI'I'V OM DIAMOND bAN, I. ANGFI_II:SPCOU NTV. C ONNIA General Plan Land Use Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS (General Plan Buildout Circulation System) The long-range 2025 General Plan daily traffic volumes on study area roadways are illustrated in Figure 31. Table R presents a summary of the long-range 2025 General Plan roadway LOS (v/c ratio). It should be noted that the capacity values on each roadway for this analysis were based on build out of the County's General Plan (as depicted in Figure 10, above). The land use assumed on the AMPC for the General Plan condition was presented earlier in this report. The existing v/c is provided in the table for comparative purposes only. As this table indicates, the following roadway segments are forecast to exceed their planned capacities based on implementation of the General Plan allocation on the project site: Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Diamond Bar Boulevard between the SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff Pathfinder Road between SR-57 on -ramp and Diamond Baz Boulevadd Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevard and SR-57 northbound on -ramp Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp It should be noted that of the 12 roadway segments listed above, 7 are currently over capacity in the existing condition (with the 2 roadway segments on Harbor Boulevard and 2 on Brea Canyon Road forecast to exceed its General Plan capacity in 2025). Long -Range (2025) Plus Proposed Project Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS (General Plan Buildout Circulation System) Table R also presents a summary of the long-range 2025 Plus Proposed Project roadway LOS assuming the General Plan roadway capacities on the circulation system. As this table indicates, the following roadway segments are forecast to exceed the planned daily capacities with implementation of the Proposed Project: P:\CRU830\200TTraflic Swdy\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» 97 ovma i \ j VALLEY BLVD \ Industry NIndustry ¢ 60 — _.J i \ Diamond > 45.0 21.8 -� Bar o 45.9 z 40.7 i o 31 45.6 COLIMA RD 36.8 i z o 31A 22.D 16.7 c> County, of a Un p 9Nyp� Los Angeles 4e 2 PA7hFYNp O sJ �pkb 20.6 22.3 o"$ O 22.6 3D.7 36.0 BREA / CANYON EAsc 2D >tivL1 ON 52.2 24,3 ---- La 31.5 Habra PR OJECT;: ROJECT SITE County a CANYON Los Angeles s ROAD _y_. .. .. Y Vr Habra Wunrl IER +----` BL\'D Brea T?NNER C: i*1YON RD n CENTRAL, AVE ` ti County e/Orange r y I LdRERT RD CARBON rAV, STATE ` Itren S�S 4 Y Y BLiD < L S !\ LEGEND XX.X -Average Daily Traffic (I,000s) ® - Freeway Link ADT (1,0005) N SOURCE: Los Angeles County General Plan, AMPC Model I:\CRUS30\GVLA C0=ty-6-05\GP-ADTCdr (9/4107) . ,RD li � F Ynrbc Fulirrtcn "` placenries Aera Master Planned Community General Plan Average Daily Traffic Volumes c�wwww a ow wwc�m wwwmw6mUw za a m w w w w w w U U U G w ww a pO w W p w m w w o`. R ° a� m % x o w w w w w U m U O w W w a O w W w w w w 6 w m as iz D ry ^ O h a m N qF ks Q m 6^gyp owgwwawaaawwwwwmamooaaa a N m V n rn i L o s a _ m �o ry m V h S S m E m o o w Ny c a W°a v �0 aN�9 W o ww � %w +°t.N o Y� K Oo°C O KO U �ribi ESN 6=AEw.§ums EwF 13 13 e�c Smy S2 w S S o m a W E p ° ° .. m x° .° o W C ' e�;� m z Aar SP&ha y ey �Z°a°vs x°"moo m Z w wc.Ua.0 wcgam u'. w'zm�m- E a $ m Z U 5 w� 0 'I•a nrNlc IMrnc'I' nN n1.Y51Y ASSOCI A'I'Y.S, INC. ACaA MASTEa PI.ANNaU C MM UNITY Y hY'1'EM NFa PUUP CITY ON UTAMONU a 1.05 AN OfI.eS C N'I'Y. C NIA Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Brea Canyon Cutoff between Pathfinder Road and the SR-57 southbound ramps Diamond Bar Boulevard between the SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff Pathfinder Road between SR-57 on -ramp and Diamond Baz Boulevard Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevazd and SR-57 northbound on -ramp Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp With the exception of the roadway segments on Hazbor Boulevard, Fullerton Road, and Nogales Street, implementation of the Proposed Project will increase the daily v/c ratio by more than 1 percent on all of the roadway segments listed above compared to the 2025 General Plan condition. Long=Range (2025) Plus Road Connected Alternative Daily Traffic Volumes and LOS (General Plan Buildout Circulation System) Table R includes a summary of the long-range 2025 plus Road Connected Alternative roadway LOS. As this table indicates, the following roadway segments aze forecast to exceed the planned daily capacities with implementation of the Proposed Project alternative: Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (south) and Fullerton Road (north) Hazbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road (north) and Pathfinder Road Fullerton Road between Pathfinder Road and Colima Road Fullerton Road between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Nogales Street between Colima Road and the SR-60 eastbound off -ramp Diamond Bar Boulevard between the SR-57 northbound ramps and Brea Canyon Road Diamond Bar Boulevard between Brea Canyon Road and Pathfinder Road Colima Road between Azusa Avenue and Fullerton Road Colima Road between Fullerton Road and Nogales Street Colima Road between Nogales Street and Brea Canyon Cutoff P:\CRU830\2007\TreRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc e09/24/07» - t V V LS YT!'M aL'0.ArF S, ING. Vrlc IMrncT nN nl.rsla A MAa!I'8R YI.ANNEIJ COMMUNITY OY OIAMONU BAR. I.OS AN CEI.Ea O N'I'r, C 1.11'ORNIA Pathfinder Road between SR-57 on -ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard . .Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp Implementation of the Road Connected Alternative would increase the v/c by 1 percent or more on all of the roadway segments listed above when compared to the 2025 General Plan condition. Long -Range (2025) Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes and LOS (General Plan Buildout Circulation System) Table S. presents the directional peak -hour link v/c ratios for the 2025 General Plan and Proposed Project conditions on roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the planned roadway capacity (i.e., over 1.00 v/c). As this table indicates, all roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the daily capacity in the 2025 General Plan condition will operate at acceptable v/c in the peak hours, with the exception of Harbor Boulevazd (between Fullerton Road [north] and Fullerton Road [south]) and two segments on Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Bar Boulevazd and the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp). The table also indicates that all roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the General Plan daily capacity in the 2025 Plus Proposed Project condition will not exceed (by one percent or more) the General Plan 2025 (No Project) peak -hour condition, with exception of Brea Canyon Road (between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and between the. SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp). All roadway segments that were forecast to exceed the daily capacity in the 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative condition will not exceed (by one percent or more) the General Plan 2025 (No Project) condition with the exception of Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road [north] and Fullerton Road [south]). Recommendations to improve these conditions are discussed later in this report. P:\CRU830�200TTratiic StudyU.H Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/ObJ - t V t Table S-Year 2025 avd Year 2025 Plus PrpjecY General Plav Peak Hour Llvk Tral& Volumes avd Volume to Capacity Ratios Summary Year 3025 Cenenl Plav DueCllonal Volume AM PM Roadway Hs�bor BOWevazd Se mevb FWIamnRmd (S)ro FWlerlw Rwd M) FWIalm Rwd(N)to PaIHBiWCRmd Cdim Rwd mPaOA�dc Rwd SR-60 EuWa�M Ranpm Cdivo Rwd Cdim Rwdlo PadSohr Rd SRiO Eutlmmd OR-RangmCdim Awd SR-60 Eu16ouM Aanq to Cdim Amd ColimAmdloPabRMw0.wd Pa0�fintlu Rwtllo SR-5]Swtbbwud Pa SR-5]Sw1F6uuWRanRroBro Cammn Rwd Bm Cenyw Amd and Pa0�fiMerRwtl Azusa Avemelo Fullemn Rmd Fullmw RwdmNOVla Strm NoVlu Strcrlo Bsw Canyon CLroB FWlwron Road roNoVlu strcl NOVIm Strcd roam Caman MOR Bm Gmw NmHb 50.-S]SwlbbomWOHRanp SR-5]Smul�bmmd Ofi Ravp mSR-5]NMbbauW OrvRairy SR-5]OnnrwaMDiammdBaz BwkvaN DiamMBar BwdevaNbSR-5]Narlhbmmd OmR a"P 50.-5]NmtRbmrd OmRanq bSR-5]SouNbvuW DHRa�ry DianmdBarBwlevard to Pa0di�Ww Rwd Ca elty ;300 J,ZIq J,200 J,300 JZ00 3,2M 0.� >. J,2110 J,200 ljaB 3,200 3,200 J,300 J,200 J$00 Jj00 3,200 3,200 3,200 J,200 J,200 NB B 1,26J %J 9Y9 I,193 1,12] 1,496 1�] 550 692 526 1,169 1,095 1,129 J9H a01 63] 1,130 fifiJ 121 9J9 Z68 M O39 B.21 029 0.M 0.J5 44J U.Y! 0.1] 0.20 0.16 0.I] 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.ZT 0.20 0.35 031 0.1J 0.29 0.08 sBM'B J,43a �Z,J55 1,J08 1,4J] 909 980 1 1, 106 1,4J4 1,683 ;0]I 1,45J I,58] 1,920 1,127 1,015 1,536 1,28] ;%8 S,IJS 55] V/C I.m 0.J4 0.41 O.dS 0.38 O.JI 0� 0.I5 0.95 0.5J � Ob5 0.45 OSO 0.94 0.35 033 0.48 OAO 0.9I 1.60 0.1] NB/RB J,254 3,2J5 1,225 1,518 %] 1,919 ��M3 1,3% 99Z ;229 ;IIJ I,TII 1,]99 I,JIJ 1,392 1,02fi 1,350 935 4,66] 4,119 1,196 VIC 1.03 0.'10 OJ8 0.4] O.JO O.H p� OAI 0.15 0.J0 0.66 OSS 0.56 0.54 0.40 O.12. O.J9 039 1.46 1.29 O.IJ BM1VB 1,fi]3 1,148 1,191 1,4]0 1,141 1,9% 1,059 e]9 1,669 651 I,eM I,J4Z 1,]II 8]I 9Z9 910 1,4M 5]4 SM - Jel 263 V/C 033 0.16 0.J] R46 036 0.61 0.J3- 0.% Q52 020 0.59 0.54 � 0.53 0.2] 039 0.38 444 0.1J 0.16 0.13 0.08 ulledm Rwd opim Shoe m CammrNroB Di amMBazBaukvaW Colima Rwd PaU�fiMC Amd rm GmmnAwd Year 2M5 Plus Propwed Projeel Dlreclioval Volume AM PM Roadwa Harbor Bwlevazd Segmevts Fullvlw Amd(S)Iv Fulluron Road OV) Fullcmn Rwd M)b PalbGMw Rwd ColOw Roadb PaNAMer0.aed SR-60 Eulbowd OHRa roColim Rwd Cdim Aaad to PaOAMC Road SR-60EssPoouod Rarryb Colim Rwd SR-60 Eulbomd Aarry la Cdim 0.md Colin Rwd mPadduWc Rwd Pa05ndu Rmdto SR-5]smlbbamd SR-5]SwdPowmtl Ra�wsbBm Camm Rwd Bm CBmon RoadaM Pad�OMcAwtl Azusa Avwmcm FWlvron Rmd FWIalm Rwd mNOVlm Stred NOVIa Strm mBm Ca�rym�CuroH 4Lllolm RwdmNOVles Stret NaVlu $trW bHm Campn NroB Bm Carryon ONOHro SR-SJ SwObwmtl OHRanq SA-5)swlbbmmd OHAsnpbSR-5]NorNbwuW OmRarw SR-5]Oo-n�ry aM DianudBarBwdcvaN D'wnmd Bar BOWwardb SR-5]NmWbmmd OmRup SR-5]Nm0ibwnd Oo-Ra�mbSR-5]SwWbwud OHA DiemoM Bar BoWreW to PaNfiwkrRwd Ca aci J,300 J,2W Jj00 3,200 3,200 ;NIO' �� J,300 J,200 - ;Z00 3,200 J,200 J,200 ],200 Jj00 3,200 3,200 ;200 ;300 J,200 Jj00 NB/EB 1,1J2 ]90 8]0 1,J64 1,121 1,484 915 ]54 6J5 SM 1,183 1,1J6 I,Zis 892 991 690 I,Im fiH5 014 I,OM 2TI VM 0.]] 0.]5 0.2] 0.4J 0.J5 '0.46 ' 039 024 031 Ales 0.J] O3J 438 O.ZB. 031 0.20 O35 0.31 0.13 031 0.09 sBM'B J.182 2,145 1,22H 1,40]. %5 9]2 1101H 1,51] I,SM I,a]9 ;095' 1,559 I,nl 1,586 1,3% 1,05) 1,533 I,Jl9 ;919 5,519 5]5 V/C 0.99 O.bJ 0.]8 0.44 0.28 0.30 035 0.4]- OA] 059 0.65 0.49 0.59 0.50' 0.43 0.33 0.48 0.91 0.91 '-4:]3:: 0.18 NBBB J,030 ;0J6 1,150 1,486 %3 1,408 1,]B 1,]% SlJ 3,988 ;1J8 1,901 1,952 1,9IJ 1,59H 1,048 1,239 950 9,588 9,42] 1,2J9 V/C 0.% 0.61 0.J6 0.46 030 O.H U.4J 0.56 O.I6 0.)H O.bJ 059' 0.61 0.60 0.50 0.]l 039 0.30 1.4] ;a- ��0.J9 SBIWB 1,552 1,0% 1,118 1,440 I,Iw 1,930 I,4B1 1,150 1,]55 J3] 1,906 1,H]0 1,8% 9]2' 1,149 -929 1393 N9 493 409 3]J VIC 0.99 03] 035 0.45 036 0.60 0.41 016 OSS 0.2J O.fi0 - 0.58 058 0.J0 0.J6 019 O.4J 0.1] 0.15 O.IJ' 0.09 FWIamnRwd oVlu Strcd Bm Cairym Cubes Dia mnd BUBwdevaW ColimaRwd PalbfiMCRwd Brw Comm Rwd Year 2035 Road Cavnemea xawrua�.a Dlrec0vnal Volrune AM PM Roadwa Harbar BOWrnrd Se mev]a FWlmw Road(S)lo Nlknw Rmd OV) FWlomn Rwd Or7b PalbfiMw Rwd Calico AmdbPaNBMw Awd SRfiO EUPoouMRangb ColOw Rwd Coima RaedroPa@Ondaz Rwd SR-60 EazIbwM RambColima Rwd SR-60 Eulbomd Aangto CdimaRmd Colkm Awdlo PaNEMar Rwd PaMOMv 0.wdb5R-5]SouNbw�d0.arrP 50.�SC �Po1bowdA�nVs b�B�C�ammnRwd Azusa Avewero FWlalw Rwd' FWIvbnAaad to NOVks Strcd NOVIa Strm loam Gm'm CdoH FUI1vIm Roadm NaVim Stral NOVIa SmemBm Canym MOH Bm Canym CLloHto SR-SJSwWwMOHAarry SR-5]SwBirmvd OB-Rang to SR-5]NwOSpmtl OnRairy SR-5]Omravp aMDiaimMBar BoWevard D'wm�W Bar BwlevardrosR-SJNwthbwoW OmRa�ry SR-5]NaNbmd Oo-Ra�ry b50.-SJ SoWbmmd OHRarrP DiamMBarBwlevaWbPatlSnderRwd Ca Wty ;Z00 J,200 J,Z00 3j00 3,200 J,200 1,Z00 J,200 ;Z00 JSW J,Z00 J,300 3,200 I,200 3,200 ;200 3,200 J,20D J,3M J.200 3,200 NB/EB 1,3]4 1,085 1,010 1,416 1,141 1,4% MJ 9J2 �625 SH 1,201 1,119 I,IM 8fi8 8l6 610 1.10] 681 3]] 8]9 2]6 V/C 0.4] 0.N 0.J3 0.M 0.36 0.4] 0.26 039 0.20 0.1%J 0.I8 0.I5 036 03] 0.2] 0.20 O.JS 0.31 0.12 03] 0.09 SBM'B 3,]29 3,945 1,436 1,456 920 981 80] I,NS 1,2% 1,]4J ;12] IA84 1,fi36 I,Sd3 1,22] I,Ofl 1,519 I,J16 ;660 4,832 SJ3 V/C �1' � 0.92 0.95 0.45 0.29 0.31 0.25 0.l3 0.39 051 0.66 0.46 B.$i 0.48 038 0.JJ 0.4] 0.d1 0.83 ISI 0.18 NB@J1 3,540 2,]96 1,J39 1,542 9J8 1,42Z 889 1,381 1,4HJ ; 09 ;1]I 1,Hi3 1,855 1,863 1,412 1,098 1,2J6 �995 �4,183 3,HJ6 1,229 VIC 7JPa. 0.8] 0.62 0.4H 031 0./4 0.2H OA3 0.9fi 0.J3 Ob8 0.5] 0.58 0.58 0.H O.3J 0.]9 O30 1.J1 13I 038 SBIWB 1,819 1,4J) 1,298 1,499 1,15H 1,%9 1,096 1,90J 95Z 54]u 1,935 i,]M I,J61 %] 1,015 929 1,]89 548 450 J58 2]2 VK 0.5J 0.45 0.41 0.4] O36 0.61 0.H OM 0.J0 0.2� 0.60. 0.56 0.5s 0.J0 0.I2 -039 0.4] 0.1] 0.10 0.11 0.09 Follvtm Rwd oViu Sbee Bm Cammn MoB DiammWBarOwdevaN Colima Rwd Pa05nderRwd Bro Canyon 0.oad B- we n remly 9a1 ar mw.� bmus was vrc orw lag P:ICRU8301200TTab1uV.A LiW<Anatysis.xlsl5 HAYYIC IMYAC'I' AN AI.YSIS LS YTEM EFR ROOF � INC. AERA MASTER YI.ANNEO COMNUNI'rY SF. CITY OY pIAM ONU R LOS AN CI:I. ES COUNTY• CAI.IYO0.NIn CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ANALYSIS According to the 2004 Los Angeles County CMP, the CMP was created for the following purposes: To link local land use decisions with their impacts on regional transportation and air quality To develop a partnership among transportation decision makers on devising appropriate transportation solutions that include all modes of travel This traffic impact analysis has been prepared consistent with the Land Use Analysis Program (Chapter 5) of the Los Angeles County CMP. The Land Use Analysis Program, along with the Guidelines for CMP Transportation Impact Analysis (provided in Appendix B ofthe CMP), sets forth guidelines for preparing a traffic impact analysis. This traffic impact analysis has been prepared consistent with these guidelines, which include standards for establishing a study area and significance criteria to be used in the analysis. The following presents a summary of the traffic impact analysis (including roadway and freeway impacts) and the transit impact analysis consistent with the requirements of Chapter 5 of the Los Angeles County CMP. TrafTc Impact Analysis The CMP requires new development projects to analyze potential impacts on CMP monitoring locations. Based on the 2004 CMP for Los Angeles County, the following arterial monitoring station is located within the Proposed Project area: Azusa Avenue/Colima Road The following freeway monitoring stations are included within the study area: SR-57 south of Pathfinder Road SR-60 east of Nogales Street SR-60 at Brea Canyon Road Per the CMP Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, a traffic impact analysis must be conducted where: The Proposed Project will add 50 or more trips at CMP arterial monitoring intersections during the a.m. and p.m. weekday peak hours The Proposed Project will add 150 or more trips; in either direction, at CMP mainline monitoring locations during the a.m. or p.m. weekday peak hours The proposed AMPC project will add approximately 65 a.m: peak -hour trips and 95 p.m. peak -hour trips to the intersection of Azusa Avenue/Colima Road. Therefore, this intersection has been analyzed based on the CMP criteria. Tables I and J, presented earlier in this report, identify the LOS at this intersection for 2025 Plus Proposed Project and 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative scenarios, respectively. As shown in the tables, this CMP intersection operates at unsatisfactory LOS in the p.m. peak hour during the 2025 baseline condition. The addition of traffic by the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative to these conditions will increase the ICU; however, neither the Proposed P:\CRU830\200TTraf6c S[udy\LA Study_Sep[ember 2007.doc «09YL4/Ohr � � U� LSA ASSOCIA'I'[S, INC. I'0.AFMIC IMI'AC'I' ANALYSIS S t.YI'F.NBeR YSS] A0.RA MASTCR PLANNt:U COM MUNI'1'V I' UTAMONU S LOS AN GE LCS C UNTY, CAI.IPOR NIA Project or the Road Connected Alternative would significantly impact the CMP intersection by 2 percent of the capacity (ICU > 0.020), which is the CMP significance threshold. Therefore, there is not a CMP impact at the intersection of Azusa Avenue/Colima Road with implementation of the Proposed Project or the Road Connected Alternative. It should be noted that mitigation measures have been identified to offset the County's significance criteria for this intersection. Freeway Link Analysis The proposed AMPC project will add greater than 150 peak -hour trips to the three freeway monitoring locations listed above. Therefore, an analysis has been conducted at these locations based on this CMP requirement. This analysis consists of ademand-to-capacity calculation for the study area freeway segments. To satisfy this requirement, apeak-hour analysis of the study area freeway segments was conducted for the long-range 2025 conditions. This condition assumes the existing number of lanes on the freeway system as well as committed/funded improvements. HOV lanes on SR-60 between I-605 and SR-57 are funded improvements and have been included in this analysis. The forecast volumes were determined based on the traffic model developed for the Aera project. The freeway volume on SR-57 south of Pathfinder (in Los Angeles County) was compared to the freeway volume on SR-57 at Tonner Canyon Road (in Orange County) to assess consistency. This comparison was made due to different traffic models used on these freeway segments. The AMPC model was used to forecast the data in Los Angeles County while the Brea Genera] Plan model was used to forecast data in Orange County. As a result, the transition area between the two forecast models was found to be reasonable given the distance and access between these locations. It shou]d be noted that the freeway traffic volumes reported in the City of Brea General Plan are based on an unconstrained condition on the freeway. As a result, the peak -hour volumes identified on SR-57 represent higher traffic volumes than those identified using the OCTAM traffic model (based on a constrained condition on the freeway). It should also be nbted that the SR-60 and SR-57 freeways are congested (LOS E and F) corridors in the long-range 2025 baseline (without project) condition. With the addition of AMPC project traffic loading onto these saturated freeways via Brea Canyon Road and Fullerton Road, regional through traffic on the freeway system will be redistributed to other regional facilities. This redistribution is , reflected in 2025 traffic volume on SR-60 and SR-57 with the addition of the project. The peak -hour lane capacities were identified based on the route concept reports for SR-57 and SR-60. Based on these reports, the multipurpose lanes have a capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour per lane and the HOV lanes have a capacity of 1,650 vehicles per hour per lane. The route concept reports evaluate projected travel demand on each State facility over a 20-year period to determine the appropriate facility type and LOS for each route. The 2025 freeway mainline analysis is presented in Table T. As this table indicates, the Proposed Project is forecast to increase the v/c by more than the 2 percent CMP threshold on two SR-60 eastbound freeway segments. The Road Connected Alternative is not projected to increase the v/c by more than 2 percent on the freeway monitoring locations. P:\CRU830@007\TraRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a0924/Ob> ] 04 � `~ /////# ~ � §� k! §555!! §5555!!k§ / \ \\\\\\\ \ \\\\/} \ ~ � §/$//§§.� / ��_ �; 555555 �> 55l55! (\}/}\ / f)\[§\ ) § ±°EoE°. §�E°E~E® � ///// �� ;~ � �` �} e }m}!;! §; 15!§§at� y�y=�� ;77f/&$ ! ��, o[;,�E { §�o[::e!) § ��� �_���§&!) / \; ); !§NE55 15§§!y /.\\/}\} ) \\k/[\ \§/\}( /} /)\/§) }} !);;! !))!]i §� \ \))\\) k7!)\) ! \� \k } � f / � ) / »( . - - _ ) % ( /! ��jj ) \ \ � k� k / / UCIATCS, ING. l'ft AYPIC IMPACT AN ALYNIN S Y. P'1'CMARR 400I - I AR ANRA MANTRR PLANNED OOM MUNITY CI I V DP D AMOND tl 1.09 ANCELEN COUNTY, CAI.IPOHNIA Transit Analysis To comply with the transit analysis requirement of the Los Angeles County CMP, an estimate of transit trip generation for the project has been prepared. Transit service is provided within the project study area by OCTA, FT, and Metro. The existing transit lines in the vicinity of the project were previously summarized and illustrated in Figure 11. To estimate transit trip generation for the project, the total of daily, a.m., and p.m. peak -hour project trips was multiplied by 1.4 to convert vehicle trips to person trips.[ According to the CMP, transit trips are equal to approximately 3.5 percent of person trips. Based on this methodology, the Proposed Project is forecast to generate approximately 2,287 daily transit trips, 130 a.m. peak -hour transit trips (40 inbound and 90 outbound), and 212 p.ml peak -hour transit trips (127 inbound and 85 outbound). The transit demand created by the Aera Master Planned Community will occur in phases as the project develops over time. The ultimate transit service network can be implemented through Metro, OCTA, and FT as transit demand is realized and funding opportunities exist. Deficiency Plan According to the 2004 Los Angeles County CMP, the reporting of transportation requirements (i.e., credits) is no longer required, and a new form, Local Development Report (LDR), has been adopted. The Metro board approved the 2003 Short -Range Transportation Plan that includes a Nexus Study, which is an alternative to implementing a congestion mitigation fee to help meet the requirements of the CMP Deficiency Plan. An LDR spreadsheet file obtained from the Metro includes a Deficiency Plan Summary Page, New Development Activity Page, New Development Adjustments Page, and an Exempted Development Activity Page. Data are added into the New Development Activity Page for building permits issued for the reporting period. Definitions are printed on the Exempted Development Activity Page for assistance. A Summary Page is then automatically calculated directly from the data of the previous pages. To comply with this requirement, the CMP LDR spreadsheet file for the proposed Aera Master Planned Community isprovided in Appendix H. � 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County, Appendix B, Page B-5. P:\CRU830@007\Treaic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc tt09/24/Oh> 1 �6 RAFFIC IMYAC'1' ANALYSIS I.SA ASS OCIA'I'E S. INC. A MAS'1'I:R PLANNED C MUNI'I'Y SEY'I'EM NItR 1011] � cl YY OY DIAMOND tlAR. I. YOS AN CEI.ER COUNTY, COALIFORNIA FREEWAY RAMP ANALYSIS The purpose of the freeway ramp analysis is to determine if the proposed project will adversely affect the function of the on -ramp and off -ramp roadways within the AMPC study area. For the analysis, the volume of vehicles estimated to use each ramp is compared to the theoretical capacity of each ramp. The freeway ramp analysis is a different analysis than the analysis of freeway ramp intersections that was presented previously, The ramp analysis compares the volume on the freeway ramp to the capacity of the ramp, while the analysis of ramp intersections showed the ICU and the HCM delay values of the ramp intersection with the arterial street. Freeway ramp volumes were derived from a.m. and p.m. peak -hour intersection turn movement data presented earlier in this traffic study. In the circumstances where freeway on -ramps are located between intersections, the volume is derived by subtracting the arriving volume at one intersection from the departing volume of the corresponding intersection. For the SR-60 ramps at Fullerton Road, two on -ramps are located between the adjacent intersections. Ramp volumes at this interchange were calculated by subtracting the arriving volume from the departing volume and assigning a portion of this volume to each ramp based on the predominant direction of the mainline freeway. Table U displays the No Project, Plus Proposed Project, and with Road Connected Alternative scenarios for the Existing and 2025 Cumulative condition on the freeway ramps within the study area in Los Angeles County. As shown in Table U, in the Existing, Existing plus Project, and Existing plus Road Connected Alternative conditions, all of the ramps operate within their capacity (LOS E or better). In the Year 2025 Cumulative No Project scenario, all freeway ramps would operate within their capacity, with the exception of the Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB on -ramp in the p.m. peak hour. In the Yeaz 2025 Cumulative plus Proposed Project and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Altemative conditions, the Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB on -ramp would continue to operate at LOS F. However, -the project would not add 0.02 to the v/c at Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB On -Ramp in any condition, and therefore would not result in a significant impact at this location. P:\CRU830\200TTIaRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc R09R4/OAI � ] �% RUOMTUJNC Table U -Freeway Ramp Peak Hour Volumes and Volume -to -Capacity Ratios Intersection Existing. Existing Flux Proposed Project Existing Plus Road Connected Alternative AMPeak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City, Numberof Lames Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS 'Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Metered unnumbered BOY Los Angelus Countyr 1 FulleMn Aoad/SR60 WE OR -Ram MD 0 1 0 1800 1132 0.63 H 541 030 A 1277 0.68 B 626 0.35 A 1197 0.67 9 bII 0.34 A FuI1erWn Road SoutldSR60 WE On-RampMD 1 0 0 900 179 0.20 A 213 0.24 A 198 0.22 A 271 0.30 A 194 022 A 259 0.29 A Fullerton AOad NmUJSR-60 WE On-Razvp IND 0 0 1500 134 1 0.09 A 2B6 0.19 A 142 0.09 A 295 0.20 A 173 0.12 A 3I5 021 A Fullerton Rot"R60EB Otb-Ram IND 0 1 1 10 IS00 990 0.55 A 791 0.44 A 993 0.55 A 80I 0.45 A 1018 0.57 A 842 0.47 A Fullerton Road SOu[WSR60 EB On -Ramp IFIO 1 0 0 900 213 0.24 A 179 0.20 A 790 0.21 A Ln9 025 A 186 021 A 218 024 A 8 Fullerton Road NorduSR-60 EB On -Ramp Nogales StrocISR-60 WE Off --Ramp IND IAC 1 0 0 1 I 0 logo 1900 I29 740 0.12 0.41 A A 240 660 0.22 0.37 A A 137 .740 0.13 0.41 A A 248 660 023 0.37 A A Ifi7 740 LLIS 0.41 A A 2fi5 660 0.25 0.37 A A Nogales Sueet SouuysiR-so m On -Ramp LAC 7 0 1 1080 206 0.19 A 158 0.15 A 150 0.14 A 361 0.33 A . I50 0.14 A 361 0.33 A Nogales Street NorMR60 WBl)n-Ramp LAC I 0 1 1080 150 0.14 A 361 0,33 A 206 0.19 A 158 0.15- A 206 0.19 A 558 0.15 A 9 Nogales SVectSR-60EBOR-Ramp LAC 0 1 0 1800 552 031 A 645 0.36 A 552 0.31 A M5 0.36 A 552 0.3I A 645 0,36 A Nogales Sueet SouddSR-60 EB On -Ramp LAC 1 0 1 logo 381 035 A 244 0.23 A 381 0.35 A 244 023 A 381 0.35 A 244 0.23 A 12 Nogales Sueet Nank/SRfiO EB On -Ramp Fairway Drive/SR-60 WE Ram LAC MD 1 0 0 1 1 0 1080 1800 390 701 036 039 A A 310 555 0.29 031 A A 390 701 036 039 A A 310 556 029 - 031 A A 390 701 0.36 039 A A 310 555 0.29 0.31 A A Fairway Ddve/SR60 WE lA-Ramp MD 1 0 1 1080 521 0.48 A 876 0.81 D 521 0.48 A 877 0.81 D 521 0.48 A 876 0.81 D 13 Fahway DrivdSR-60 EB Off. Ramp MD 0 1 0 1300 750 0.42 A 360 020 A 750 0.42 A 360 020 A 750 0.42 A 360 0.20 A Fairway Drive South/SR60 EB On -Ram MD 1 0 0 9W 228 0.25 A 342 0.38 A 228 0.25 A 342 0.39 A 228 015 A 342 0.38 A Fairway Drive NoNJSR-60 EB On -Rom MD 1 1 0 1 1 logo 306 0.28 A 220 0.20 A 306 Us A 220 0.20 A 306 028 A 220 0.20 A 53 SA-57 NB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0 1 0 1800 1 419 1 023 A 818 0.45 A 419 013 A 830 0.46 A 419 0.23 A 818 0.45 A SR-57 NB On -Ram albfinder Road DB 1 0 1 1080 554 0.51 A MO 0.56 A 554 0.51 A 600 0.56 A 554 0.51 A 600 0.56 A 54 SR-57S8 Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB--0 1 0 I800 466 0,26 A 358 0.20 A 466 0.76 A 358 0.20 A 466 0.26 A 358 020 A SR-57 SB On-RampPathfinda Road DB 1 0 1 1080 341 0.32 A 416 0.39 A 341 0.32 A 438 0.41 A 341 0.32 A 416 039 A 16 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard SR-57 SB On-Ramp/Diamnnd Bar Boulevard DH DB 0 1 0 0 0 1800 1500 108 952 0.06 0.63 A B 120 645 0.07 0.43 A A 110 logo 0.06 O.T_ A C 137 1032. 0.08 0.69 A B 109 1024 0.06 o.fi8 A B 123 856 0,07 0.57 A A 17 SR-57 NB OfGRamp/Diamavd Bar Boulevard DB 0 7 0 1800 376 0.21 A 1280 0.77 C fi46 0.36 A 1531 0.85 D 5n 0.29 A 1436 0.80 C SR-57 NB Oa-Aamp/Diemmvd BarBoulevard DB 1 0 1 I080 145 0.13 A 68 0,06 A 151 0.14 A 71 0.07 A 148 0.14 A 70 0.06 A 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Bree Canyon Read. DBe 1 0 1 1090 241 022 A 39 0,04 A 881 0.82 D 656 0.61 A 678 0,63 B 473 0.44 A 20 SR-57 SB Of -Ramp/Brea Canyon Road DBe 0 1 0 I800 673 0.37 A 280 0.16 A 972 0.54 A 1198 0.67 B 882 0.49 A 891 0.50 A Intersection Year 2025 Cumulative No Project Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AMPeak Hour PM Peak Hour No. I Name City Numberoflanes Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Metered Unmetcred 8OV Los Angeles County' I Fullerton Road/SR60 WE Oti Ram Fullerton Road SouddSR60 WE On -Ramp MD MD 0 I 1 0 0 0 1800 900 1301 205 0.72 0,23 C A 622 2" 0.35 0.27 A A 1386 224 0.77 0.?5 C A 707 303 0.39 0.34 A A 136fi 220 0.76 01A C A 692 290 038 0.32 A A Fulleaton Road North/SR60 WB On -Ramp MD 2 0 0 1500 154 0.10 A 329 022 A 162 0.11 A 338 0.23 A 190 0.13 A 358 0.24 A 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp MD 0 1 0 1800 1138 0.63 B 909 0.51 A 1141 0.63 B 919 0.51 A 116fi 0.65 8 990 0.55 A Fullerton Road SouddSR-60 EB On -Ramp DO 1 0 0 900 198 0.L A 206 0.23 A 216 034 A 255 028 A 212 024 A 245 0.27 A 8 Fullerton Road North/SR-60 EB On -Ramp Nogales StreedSR60 WE Off Ramp Nogales Street SouWSR60 WE On -Ramp MD LAC LAC 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 I 1080 1600 logo 148 855 172 0.14 0.48 0.16 A A A 2]7 ]65 414 0.26 0.43 0.38 A A A 156 855 172 0.14 0.98 0.16 A A A 285 7fi5 414 026 0.43 0.38 A A A 189 855 172 0.18 0.48 0.16 A A A 302 765 414 0.28 0.43 0.38 A A A Nagalcs Street NMIUx SR60 WE On -Ramp I LAC I 0 1 logo 243 0.23 A 187 O.I7 A 243 023 A 187 0.17 A 243 0.23 - A 187 0.17 A 9 Nogales StrceUSR-fiO EB Off -Ramp LAC 0 I 0r18 fi38 0.35 A 749 0.42 A 638 0.35 A 749 0.42 A 638 0.35 A 79Nogales Street SoutldSR-fi0 EB On -Ram LAC 1 0 I 437 0.40 A 280 0.2fi A 437 0.40 A 280 0.26 - A 477 0.40 A 280 0.26 A Nogales Street NGAWR60 EB On -Ramp LAC 1 0 1 455 0.42 A 362 0.34 A 455 0.42 A 362 0.34 A 455 0.42 A 362 0.34 A 12 Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp MD 0 1 0 810 0.45 A -650 0.36 A $to 0.45 A 651 0.36 A 810 0.45 A 650 0.36 A Fairway Drive/SR60 WE On -Ramp IND 1 0 1 1080 628 0.58 A 1097 1.02 F 628 0.58 A logs 1.02 F 628 058 A 1097 1,02 F 13 Fairway Drive/SR-60EBOfFRamp MD 0 1 0 ]Soo 914 0.51 A 475 0.26 A 114 0.51 A 475 0.26 A 114 0.51 A 475 0.26 A Fairway Drive South/SR-60 EB On -Ramp MD I 0 0 900 262 0.29 A 392 0.44 A 262 0.29 A 392 0.44 A 262 0.29 A 392 0.44 A Fairway Drive NmOVSR-60 EBOn-Ramp MD I 0 1 1080 354 0.33 A 253 0.23 A 354 0.33 A 253 0.23 A 354 0.33 A 253 0.23 A 53 SR-57 NB Off -Ram athfinder Road DB 0 1 0 1800 533 0.30 A 9]2 0.54 A 533 0.30 A 984 0.55 A 533 0.30 A 972 0.54 A SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB I 0 1 1080 637 0.59 A 712 0.66 B 637 0.59 A 712 0.66 B 637 0.59 A 712 0,66 B 54 SR-575B OR Ramp/PathfinderRoad DB 0 1 0 I800 549 0.31 A 426 0.24 A 549 0.31 A 426 0.24 A 549 0.31 A 426 0,24 A SR-57 SB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 1 0 I 1080 406 0.38 A 541 0.50 A 406 0.38 A 563 0.51 A 406 038 A 541 0.50 A 16 17 SR-57 SB Off Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard SR-57 SB On-Aamp/Diamond Bar Boulevard SR-57 NB Off-Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB DB DB 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 0 I800 1500 18M 124 1092 431 0.07 0.73 0.24 A C A 138 740 14fi9 0.08 6.99 0.82 A A D 126 1220 701 0.07 0.81 039 A D A 155 1127 1720 0.09 0.75 0.96 A C E 125 1164 577 0.07 0.78 ' 0.32 A C A 141 951 1625 0.08 0.63 0.90 A B D SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 1 0 1 1080 166 0,15 A 78 0.07 A I72 0.16 A 81 0.08 A 169 0.16 A 80 0.07 A 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Rmad - DB' I 0 1 IU30 310 029 A E4 0.08 A 955 0.88 D 706 0.65 B 752 0.70 B 523 0.48 A 20 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road DB' 0 I 0 1800 783 0.44 A 355 020 -A 1082 0.60 A I'-73 0.71 B 992 0.55 A 966 0.54 A ❑ Level ofSmire exceeds lASE - ❑ (shade)=Significant Impact excds 0.02 increase in we Sourte: LSAAssodaq Inc V/C - Volume m Gpariry Ratio LAC-Gunry of Los Mgela 1ND-Ciryoflndmuy DB- City aInamoad Bar -Interscdon within proposed annexation by Ciry of Diamond Bar P:x'Rue!amm�TaWUNwva> PAm1 l.alsuAl9/lal�m]) T ftAI•FIC IMPACT' AN AI.YS I3 I.SA ASSOCIATES. INC. A MASTEN PLANNED COMMUNITY S EP'I EM tlER 10Y1 CITY OF UTAM OND BAN. LPOS AN NTY, C I.IFORNIA SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS A peak -hour signal warrant analysis was conducted for the four unsignalized intersections in the study area. These intersections include: 7. Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road -North l6. SR-57 southbound ramps/Diamond Baz Boulevard. 19. SR-57 northbound ramps/Brea Canyon Road 20. SR-57 southbound off ramp/Brea Canyon Road Figures 32a-32c illustrate the traffic volumes at each unsignalized intersection for 2025 No Project, 2025 Plus Proposed Project, and 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative conditions, respectively. The figures also illustrate the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Traffic_ Signal Warrant for rural intersections (i.e., speeds greater than 40 mph). Table V presents a summary of the peak -hour signal warrant analysis. As shown in the table, the intersection of SR-57 northbound on-rampBrea Canyon Road falls below the signal warrant threshold in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours for all three 2025 conditions. Based on this peak -hour analysis, a traffic signal would not be warranted at this location. The signal warrant threshold is not met at the intersection of SR-57 northbound on-ramp/Brea Canyon Road due to the minor street approach volumes (i.e., less than the threshold of 75 in the peak hour). However, as presented in the signal warrant figures, approximately 898 a.m: peak -hour eastbound left -turning vehicles are forecast at this intersection. Approximately 694 a.m. peak -hour eastbound left -turning vehicles are forecast at this intersection with the Road Connected Alternative. This peak -hour demand warrants dual -left -turn lanes. As such, the intersection would not operate at acceptable LOS without a traffic signal. Therefore, it is recommended that the project install a traffic signal at this location as part of the project design. As shown in Figure 3, this recommended traffic signal is included as part of the project design features. The peak -hour traffic signal warrant is satisfied for the 2025 baseline, 2025 Plus Proposed Project, and 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N), SR-57 southbound ramps/ Diamond Bar Boulevard, and SR-57 southbound off-rampBrea Canyon Road in the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. As a result of the peak -hour signal warrant analysis, a traffic signal would be warranted under a No Project scenario at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N), Diamond Baz Boulevard/SR-57 southbound ramps and SR-57 southbound off-ramp/Brea Canyon Road. Per the County's guidelines, the project would be responsible for its fair -share cost to instal] these traffic signals. The fair -share percentages for all intersections represent the average of the two peak -hour volumes since the warrant is satisfied in both peak flours at these locations. Based on the information provided in Table V, the project responsibility for the signalization of Harbor Boulevazd/Fullerton Road (N) is approximately 18 percent for the 2025 Plus Project scenario and 58 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. The project responsibility for the signalization of Diamond Bar Boulevard and SR-57 southbound ramps is approximately 77 percent for the 2025 Plus Proposed Project scenario P:\CRU830\200TTmtTc Study\I.A Study_September 2007.doc R09/24/07» - 109 2 OP MORE LANES (Molar) 4 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 2 OP OR MOPE 1 LANE LANES (Molar) 61 (Mojan A 2 OP MORE LANE (Minor) LANES (Minor) (3640,121) 1 LANE (Major) A 1 LANE (Minor) Soo Nt 00 M 400 0 300 1 `a 78/100 _T 1 1 0 W 200 m 22121 �o CQ 100 * N 0 300 400 500 800 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREETTOT OF BOTH APPROACHES- VPH 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N) 500 x 400 CO oD OU iJ F 599/1161 ru ¢ 300 507/227 g w zoo 311/337 Z 584/507 -1 o 100 0 300 400 Sao No 700 Soo 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES-VPH 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard 600 Z 400 0 300 a F 853/209 o w 2uu 275/44 ,' Z � 115/1960 o too c� = 0) 0 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 13 0 MAJOR STREET TOTALOF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH (1244, O) 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road Soo s 400cD a c7 G 0 300 n N a �, <— 864/205 o w z00 388/1989 z2E �3 0 Z 100 O 0 300 400 500 600 700 Boo 900 1000 1700 t200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES-VPH 20 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road OR MORE LANES (Major) & 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 2 Oq OR MOPE 1 LANE IANES (Major) & 1 (Major) 6: 2 OR MOPE LANE (Minor) LANES (Minor) #&I (2252,136) (2U01. 124) LANE (Minor) 2 OR MORE LANES (Major) A 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) Oq P MORE 1 LANE LANES (Major) & 1 LANE (Ninon (Major) & 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 1 LANE (Major) A 1 LANE (Minor) (2214, 2 OR MORE LANES (Major)&2Op MOq (1((262r 772) Opt LANE (Majo) & 2aOR)MOREALANE9 (Minor) (2317,321) 1 LANE (Major) & 1 LANE (Minor) Lt,+ A 123/456 AM/PM Volumes r 1liL-lxr' e6a J *Peak Hour Volume Warrant From MUTCD 2oo3 (XXX, YY) = AM (XXX, YY) = PM Area Master Planned Community Year 2025 No Project Intersection Volumes and Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Source: LSA Associates, Inc. 500 i 400 N tj � 300 r �a � a g w 299 7enoo � �, t 22/21 � �' �� a 0 t 100 +k � � * m 0 300 400 600 600 700 a00 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES-VPH 7 Harbor Bouevard/Fuedon Road (N) sao a 400 0 390 v � I`; f 1135/1717 � a � d L., .F 507/227 o w zoo 433/764 ,' 712/694 �. 0 i 100 �' 0 300 400 500 600 700 900 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES-VPH i6 SR-57 SB RampslDiamond Bar Boulevard 500 '� 1/1 � o F 974n13 �a a 698/650 ,' � T r' z� � o ) 396/2296 � r m � * 12/42 �. m � � x 'F 0 300 400 500 600 700 900 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road 500 �a �a � � f 1oo3n21 1292/2944 —> �� 0 u 0 300 400 500 600 700 a00 900 7000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH ZO SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road 2 OR MORE LANES (Ma(or) 6 2 OR MORE LANES (Mirwn 2 OR MOflE Ofl l LANE LANES (Me or) & 1 (Motor) 6 2 R MORE LANE (Minor) LANES (Minor) (3759,121) 1 LANE (Mayor) & l LANE (Minor) (4223, 1 BB) 2 OR MORE LANES (Mayon h 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) OR1 LANE (Mayo) h2 OR)MORE LANE51(Minor) (3662. 1551 1 LANE (Mayon & 1 LANE (Minor) (2767, 126) 2 OR MORE LANES (Mayor) A 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 400 OR1 LANE (Mato) & 2aOR)MORE LANESI (M�non 300 zaa (2277, 43 mo 1 LANE (Melon 41 LANE (Minor) (3762, 26) 2 OR MORE LANES (Melon A 2 OR MORE LANE (2295, 1 O71) aoo (3665, 1239) 2 OR MORE LANES (Motor) & 1 LANE (Minor) OR 1 LANE (Melor) & 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 300 zoo 100 l IANE (Ma1or) 81 UINE (MInoO L S A 123/456 AM/PM Volurae6 FIGURE 32s !\ *Peak Hour Volume Warrant From MUTCD 2003 (XXX, YY) = AM (XXX, YY) = PM Area Masfer Planned Community Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Intersection Volumes and Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Source: LSA Associates, Inc. P:\CRU830\2007\Fieures\Siznal Warrants\2025 + Proposed ProiecLxls\Fieure Soo > 400QO r y 00 N 0 300 m a < 1 o w 200 78/100 ,' F1 T 22121 -1 o I� O S 100 OCO 9 300 400 Soo 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES- VPH 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N) am a 40o MORE LANES S2 on o aoo v F 870/1450 507/227 o w 200 368/500 3 656/718 -. 0 i 100 'k O 0 1 1 1 1 1 k we 400 500 Boo 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES- VPH 16 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard Soo MOR LANES t 1/1 a f 9121387 O a ` 2/6 rt a 694/466 -T FI T ra 252/2085 4:) 12/43 1 0300 400 500 600 700 Boo 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES -VPH 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road 509 i 400 300 rn � a 4 F 943/395 o w zoo 950/2558 z2 �0 0 i 100 o 0 300 400 500 600 700 600 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 MAJOR STREET TOTA OF BOTH APPROACHES - VPH 20 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road 2 OR MORE LANES (Major) fi 20q MORE LANES (Minor) 2 OR OR MORE 1 LANE LANES (Motor) A 1 (Ma)or) fi 2 OR MORE LANE (Minor) LANES (Minor) (4449,121) (4719.1001 1 LANE (Major) fi 1 LANE (Minor) 2 Oq MORE LANES (Major) fi 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) ON SI LANE (Major) 62aOR)MOflE lAN(Esl (Minor) (2895,141) (24U1, 125) 1 LANE (Major) fi l LANE (Minor) 2 OR MOgE LANES (Major) & 2 OR MORE LANES (Minor) 400 1 (Major) OR)MORE OR LANE (Mato) 2 lAN(ESI (Minor) aoo zoo (1873, 100 1 IANE (Major) fi 1 LANE (Minor) (2989, 28) 2 0fl MORE LANES (Major) fi 20R MORE LANES (1993, 991) (2953, 932) OqH L^ANEE(Metor) &A2oOR)MORE LANES (Minor) 1 LANE (Major) fi 1 LANE (Minor) L C /� 123/456 AM/PM Volumes PICUU KI; SLc J !\ *Peak Hour Volume Warrant From MUTCD 2003 (XXX, YY) = AM (XXX, YY) = PM Area Master Planned Community Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Volumes and Peak Hour Traffic Signal Warrant source: LSA Associates. Inc. Table V - Signal Warrant Analysis Summary and Fair Share Estimates Signal Warrant Analysis Intersection 2025 Major Street No Protect Minor Street Signal Warranted 2025 Plus Street PM Proposed Project Minor Street AM PM Signal Warranted 2025 Plus Road Major Street AM PM Connected Minor Street AM PM Alternative Signal Warranted AM PM AM PM 7 Harbor I Fullerion(N) 42118 3,640 100 121 Yes 3,759 12S277 100 121 Yes 41719 4,449 100 121 Yes SR-57 SB Ramps / 16 Diamond Bar Boulevard 23001 23252 124 138 Yes 31602 126 155 Yes 2,401 2,895 125 141 Yes SR-57 NB On -Ramp / Brea 0 0 No 3,702 43 28 No 1,873 2,988 43 28 No 19 Canyon Road 17244 2,214 SR17 SB Off -Ramp / Bma Canyon Road 1,252 2,317 772 321 Yes 12,295 13,665 11,07111,239 Yes 1,893 2,953 981 932 Yes 20 Fair Share Estimates Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project 2025 No 2025 + Proposed Project ExistingProject Panic Traffic Total New Traffic' Fair Share ' AM PM AM PM AM - PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Intersection 7 Harbor/Fullerton(N) 3,6 66 3,277 43218 3,761 4,323 3,880 105 119 647 603 16% 20% SR-57 SB Ramps / 16 Diamond Bar Boulevard 1,852 2,083 2,125 20390 21913 39757 789 1,367 1,061 1,674 74% 82% SR-57 SB Off -Ramp /Brea Canyon Road 1,764 2, 192 2,024 21638 37366 41904 1,342 23266 1,602 2,712 84% 64% 20 Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative 2025 No 2025+Road Project Existing Project Connected Alt Traffic Total New Traffic' Fair Share' AM PM AM PM AM PM PMor/Fullenon(N) Intersection 3,676 3,277 4,218 3,761 4,819 4,570809 1,143 1,293 53% 63%SR-57 SB Ramps /16 Diamond Bar Boulevard 1,852 2,083 2,125 2,390 2,526 3,036646 JAPMAM 674 953 59% 68%SR-57 SB Off-liamp /Brea20 Canyon Road 1,764 2,192 2,024 2,638 2,874 3,885,247 I,110 1,693 77% 74% Notes: � (2025 Plus Projen)-(2025 No Project) ' (2025 Plus ProjW)-(Pxistlast ' (2025 Plus Projmrt - (2025 No Projmt) (2025 Plus Pmject)-(Exisft) Source:ISA Associates, loc. P:\CRU8aN20aATableLLAaipial Wamnl Analysiz.xn\V T RAPI•IC I FACT ANALYSIS LSA ASSOCI ATt:3, INC. AeRA M R PLAN NI:U C MM UNITY S RP'fCM SRR RYU] y Cy pIAM ONU N NCRLPCS C IFCRNIA and 63.5 percent for the 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative. The project responsibility for the signalization of the SR-57 southbopnd off -ramps at Brea Canyon Road is approximately 84 percent for the Proposed Project condition and 75.5 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. As shown in Figure 3, this traffic signal is included as part of the project design features and will be constructed by the project. P:\CRU830\200TTIaRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/Ob> � 114 S1 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ,9A ASSOCIATES, . INC. ACRA MASTER PIN COMMUNITYI hP'I-EMaFN2002 CITY ON DIAMOND aAR. 1.05ANORLPR COUNTY. CALIFORNIA VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS The Aera Master Planned Community (AMPC) is a primarily residential project proposed in an area of Los Angeles and Orange Counties that exhibits a relatively high job -to -housing ratio. The Aera development is an infill type of project almost completely surrounded by urban development and dedicated open space, with the urban communities of Brea to the south and Rowland Heights/ Industry/Diamond Bar to the north. These characteristics will lessen the relative traffic impacts by creating housing opportunities in a job -rich area, compared to similar residential developments in an outlying area. As such, an existing longer -distance commute trip might be replaced and eliminated with a shorter trip from this project. To illustrate this condition, the VMT were identified for the project site and compared to an alternative project location within Southern California. For the purposes of this VMT analysis, the alternative site is the Eagle Valley site north of Cajalco Road in northeast Corona (approximately 22 miles from the project site). The location of the alternative site is illustrated in Figure 33. This site was selected based on available vacant land that could be entitled for and accommodate approximately 3,600 dwelling units. The VMT analysis was conducted for existing (year 2000) and future (year 2030) conditions based on OCTA's latest OCTAM version 3.2. Kimley-Horn and Associates (KHA) utilized the project trip generation data developed by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) and split the trips into five trip purposes, consistent with the OCTAM model, using split percentages appropriate to the proposed land uses. KHA then used the OCTAM model to perform a redistribution of trips for each trip purpose to develop new trip tables, assuming the project is developed on the proposed Aera site. VMT for the project trips were calculated by trip purpose from the trip tables. This process was repeated for the alternative project. location (Eagle Valley). The total VMT by trip purpose for the AMPC project site and the Eagle Valley site is provided in Table W for the current condition (i.e., year 2000) and the future condition (i.e., year 2030). As this table indicates, compared to the project site, which will generate 473,875 VMT, the Eagle Valley site would generate approximately 57 percent greater VMT (746,139 VMT) based on the land use and circulation system in the existing condition. In the 2030 condition, compared to the project site, which will generate 492,204 VMT, the Eagle Valley site would generate approximately 49 percent greater VMT (732,152 VMT) based on the land use and circulation system in the future condition. Based on this data, implementation of the AMPC project at its current location would shorten trip lengths and produce fewer VMT than if the 3,600-unit project were constructed in outlying areas of Southern California. P:\CRU830\2007\Trafic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc IA924/ODI 1 15 angeres National Forest Lf—' PROJECT LOCATION Los Angeles County Orange County LSA Y MILES SOURCE: LSA Associates, Inc. San Bernardino National Forest __—G75f son aernardrna county Eagle Valley Site Riverside County San Bernardino CT nTTDR 4rz Aera Master Planned Community filternate Site Location I:\CRU830\G\LA County-6-05411t_Site_Loc.cdr (921/07) MOCIATr.S, INC. Table W - Vehicle -Miles of Travel for Trips to/from AMPC Site Year 2000 Vehicle Miles of Travel AMPC Ea le Valle Trip Purpose Home -Based Work 107,540 197,073 Home -Based Other 212,070 306,617 Work -Based Other 50J47 83M8 Other -Based Other 90,756 1393658 School 13,362 18,943 TOTAL 473,875 746,139 Percent Change 57% Site Year 2030 Vehicle Miles of Travel AMPC Eagle Valle Trip Purpose Home -Based Work 109J94 1762984 Home -Based Other 221A26 3123541 Work -Based Other 533359 82,456 Other -Based Other 943911 137,801 School 13,315 222369 TOTAL 492,204�1 7322152 Percent Change 49 Source: Kimsey-Hom and Associates P:\CRU830\2007\VMT Malysis\VMT Comparison for TlAxls\LA(9/25/2007) A SMtlE 1 Yop�]� INC. S M.PIC R HAI•VIC I A Y.0.A MASTC0. PLANNeU CUM Ot DIAMOND bA0., LUS ANCEI.CS COUNTY, CAI.1 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS/MITIGATION MEASURES The Aera Master Planned Community (AMPC) is a mixed -use urban infill project in a regional area characterized by a housing shortage. The project is located within close proximity to existing and expanding employment centers in Los Angeles and Orange County. The major corridors that surround the project site, such as Brea Canyon Road, Harbor Boulevard, Imperial Highway, Colima Road,.SR-57, and SR-60 are already deficient or are forecast to exceed its current capacity in the future. To improve these congested conditions, regional improvements (as illustrated in Figure 5) aze either planned or are under construction by the surrounding agencies. The Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative will contribute traffic to this congested condition. As a result, impacts have been identified in this traffic study -for 2025 conditions for each of the two project alternatives. A mitigation program has been developed to address these impacts for each project condition and accomplish the following objectives: Enhance the operation and capacity of the congested corridors adjacent to the project site Improve the intersections significantly impacted by the project Advance the technologies capable of improving traffic flow at surrounding intersections Pay the projects fair -share contribution toward future improvements. Brea Canyon -Road Enhancement Program One of the major project design features directed toward enhancing the congested corridors adjacent to the project site is the proposed widening of Brea Canyon Road. The comprehensive Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program, as illustrated iri Figure 4, will widen this facility to provide two travel lanes in each direction along the project frontage, from the project access point located south of the SR-57 southbound off -ramp in Los Angeles County to the Brea Canyon Road/Tonner Canyon Road intersection in Orange County a distance of 1.7 miles. This improvement is consistent with the buildout of both the Los Angeles County Highway Plan and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. The roadway widening will improve the design speed and safety of this facility. In addition, the Proposed Project will provide three lanes in each direction on Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and SR-57 southbound off -ramp. The purpose of this improvement is to ensure that the intersections at the project driveways as well as the access points to the freeway operate at acceptable LOS with implementation of the project. This improvement does not require physical widening, as adequatewidth is provided under the SR-57 freeway. Traffic signals will also be installed at the intersections along Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and Tonner Canyon Road. As a result of this improvement program, Brea Canyon Road, including three freeway ramp interchanges and three project driveways, will achieve improved operation. Overall, the Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program will provide the following benefits: P:\CRU830\200TTra/fic Study\LA Smdy_September 2D07.doc Idl9/24/Obi 118 'RAYYIC IMPAO'I' ANAI.VSIS .SA ASSOGI A'I'E3, INC. AERA MASTER PLAN NP.0 COMMUNITY SEP'I'I!M BL'N YRRJ CITY O DIAMOND BAR, I.OS ANCEI. Y.9 COU NTP. C I.IYONNIA Congestion relief to the SR-57 by providing a parallel local arterial Improved traffic flow between Diamond Bar and cities to the south, resulting from converting Brea Canyon Road from a congested two lane local collector to a four lane arterial highway The project will add more traffic capacity than the project will generate Upgrade the geometric design (including curve radii) to can-ent County standards, thereby enhancing the overall safety of this facility. Additionally, the internal design of the project's traffic circulation system will direct traffic away from Brea Canyon Road to schools, commercial uses, and local parks. Harbor Boulevard Improvements The conditions along Harbor Boulevard on the west side of the project site will also improve with implementation of the project design features. Specifically, a traffic signal will be installed at the project driveway on Harbor Boulevard to accommodate traffic generated by the project. With the Proposed Project, two lanes in each direction can be maintained while providing satisfactory LOS. In the Road Connected Alternative, three lanes in each direction will be provided on Harbor Boulevard adjacent to the project site. Two -Lane Roadway Mitigation Analysis Based on results of the analysis for the two-lane roadways, Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and Diamond Bar Boulevard is forecast to operate at LOS F in the a.m. and p.m. peak hour for 2025 No Project conditions. The Proposed Project will impact this condition based on the significance criteria established for this analysis. The recommended mitigation to improve this facility is for the project to contribute its fair share to widen Brea Canyon Road to four lanes if and when the City of Diamond Bar and County move forward with this General Plan build out improvement. The fair -share percentage, based on the project traffic contribution to the total 2025 Plus Proposed Project traffic, would be an average of 27 percent for the Proposed Project and 14 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. General Plan Roadway Mitigation Analysis The purpose of the long-range General Plan roadway is to determine, given a change in land use, whether the highway system as depicted on the Los Angeles County Highway Plan is adequate in 2025 conditions. The long-range analysis was conducted based on existing and General Plan buildout capacities on the circulation system. Existing Circulation System. The results of the peak -hour link analysis, assuming the existing circulation system and project site, show that Harbor Boulevard (between Fullerton Road -North and Fullerton Road -South) is forecast to exceed its existing capacity and the performance threshold with implementation of the Road Connected Alternative only. Brea Canyon Road (between Diamond Baz Boulevard and the SR-57 northbound on -ramp) is forecast to exceed its peak -hour link capacity with implementation of the Proposed Project and Road Connected Alternative. This roadway will also P:\CRU830\200TTmflic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/Ob> - 1 19 1'R APNIC IMPACT' ANAI.Y 313 A ASSOCIATES. INC. AP.RA MA5'1'Y.R PLANNED C MMUNITY SEI'TEM DER RBDR CITY O DIAMOND DAR. 1.05 AN GP.LES COUNTY. CAI.IFORNIA exceed its existing capacity with both project alternatives between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp. As set forth in the project description and project design features the intersection of Harbor Boulevard/ Fullerton Road (north) will be widened with the Road Connected Altemative to provide three northbound and southbound through lanes on Hazbor Boulevard, based on the results of the intersection analysis (described below). The purpose of adding these through lanes is to ensure that the intersections meet the County's LOS standard. These improvements will benefit the operation of Harbor Boulevazd, which is forecast to exceed its capacity even without the project; therefore, no further improvements are recommended. The recommended mitigation to offset the project impact on the impacted segment of Brea Canyon Road between Diamond Bar Boulevard and the SR-57 northbound on -ramp is consistent with the Two -Lane Mitigation Analysis described above. The Proposed Project will contribute its fair share to improve Brea Canyon Road to four lanes if and when the City and County move forward with this General Plan build out improvement. This mitigation measure is consistent with the approved Industry Business Center in the City of Industry. The fair -share percentage, based on the project traffic contribution to the tota12025 Plus Proposed Project traffic, would be an average of 39 percent for the Proposed Project and 33 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. To offset the impact on Brea Canyon Road between the two ramps, it is recommended this roadway segment be restriped to accommodate three lanes in each direction. As discussed in the Brea Canyon Road Enhancement Program, this improvement is included as part of the project design features. Existing General Plan Buildout Circulation System. The results of the peak -hour link analysis, assuming build out of the General Plan, show that Harbor Boulevard between Fullerton Road -North and Fullerton Road -South is forecast to exceed its General Plan capacity without implementation of the Proposed Project. Once the project is built, the Proposed Project will not add significant traffic (i.e., greater than 1 percent) to this condition; however, the Road Connected Alternative will add significant traffic to this roadway segment due to the increased number of units accessing Harbor Boulevard under this atemative. As described in the project description, this roadway segment will be widened to accommodate three lanes in each direction at its intersection with Fullerton Road (south) and the project driveway for the Road Connected Alternative. The purpose of adding these through lanes is to ensure that the intersection meets the County's LOS standard. This improvement will benefit the operation of this roadway segment, which is forecast to exceed its General Plan capacity even without the project. Based on this, the County Highway Plan will not be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project; therefore, no further improvements are recommended. The roadway segment on Brea Canyon Road is forecast to exceed its General Plan capacity without implementation of the Proposed Project. The recommended mitigation to offset the project impact on Brea Canyon Road between the SR-57 northbound on -ramp and the SR-57 southbound off -ramp is to widen this link to six lanes. This improvement is included as a project design feature. Based on this, the County Highway Plan will not be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project; therefore, no further improvements are recommended. P:\CRU830\2007\Traaic Study\LA-SWdy_September 2007.doc «0924/07>, � 120 '1'µ AYYIC IMYAC'I' ANALYSIS A ASS OCIATF.3, INC. � AGNA MASTeN PLANNED C MUNI'rY SE PTEN UNµ 1001 CITY OF UTAM OND B LOS A CEI.CS COUNTY. CA LIF00.NIA Intersection Impacts Mitigation Analysis Mitigation measures are provided for local intersections that exceed the established significance criteria based on the LOS analysis presented in this report. The following presents the approach to offset the project's impact at these deficient locations: 1. Increase the capacity at an intersection with implementation of feasible physical improvements. For purposes of this traffic study, only improvements within the existing right -of --way are defined as being feasible. 2. Improve traffic flow at an intersection with operational improvements. Implementation of ITS technology is a proven technique to improve the mobility and operational efficiency of freeways and local streets. This mitigation can be combined with physical improvements to meet the County's LOS objectives. To address intersection impacts, it is Aera's desire to advance the ideas that the County initiated as part of the Congested Corridors Study. The mitigation measures were developed by first consulting the recommended improvements in the Los Angeles County Supervisorial District 4 Congested Corridors Study (County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, February 2003). The purpose of the Congested Corridors Study was to document existing and future LOS and recommended improvements throughout a heavily traveled portion of the County. The following is the basic methodology of the Congested Corridors Study: Document existing LOS along each study route • Identify ongoing and future -planned roadway improvements in the study area Analyze future 2006 and 2021 traffic conditions with anticipated growth • Recommend feasible roadway and operational modifications to improve LOS The Congested Corridors Study included rough cost estimates and conceptual illustrations of the improvements recommended at study area intersections along Colima Road, Fullerton Road, Fairway Drive, Brea Canyon Cutoff/Diamond Bar Boulevard, and Brea Canyon Road. If the recommended improvements described in the Congested Corridor Study would not alleviate the impact, then other improvements were investigated. Every attempt was made to avoid recommending improvements that would require extensive intersection modifications and/orright-of--way acquisition at the affected intersection. The mitigation program for certain intersections will include optional mitigation measures that identify operational -Type improvements to alleviate the project's impact and attain LOS D at impacted locations. These optional improvements are based on the advanced technologies of ITS. ITS consists of programs and projects that use technology to improve the mobility and operational efficiency of freeways and local streets. For example, the advantages of computer -controlled traffic signals are substantial and include automatic adjustment of signal timing plans to reflect changing traffic conditions, identification of unusual traffic conditions caused by incidents, the ability to implement special-purpose short-term signal timing changes in response to incidents, and the ability to quickly identify signal equipment malfunctions. Other components of ITS technology include: . P:\CRU830\2007\Trefnc Study\LA Study_Seprember 2007.doc a09/24/070 - 121 'I'RAPFIC IMPACT AN ALY313 A ASSOCI A'I'E 3. INC. AEHA MAS'1'80. PLANNED COMMUNITY S F. P'I'EM bI:N 1 P DIAMOND D LOS AN OELES C CAI.IPON NIA Installation of Closed -Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras System detection to collect real-time volume and speed data Real-time traffic signal coordination Changeable message signs Trailblazer signs to direct motorists to major traffic generators (e.g., freeway) erected at key decision points A Web -based advanced traveler information system. One of the mast successful ITS systems in Southern California is the Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system in Los Angeles. ATSAC is state-of--the-art in computer control of traffic signals. The system was developed to assist in the traffic control plan for the 1984 Summer Olympics. Approximately 3,100 intersections are currently under ATSAC control. In June 1994, the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation conducted an evaluation of the ATSAC system (ATSAC Evaluation Study, Robert R: Yates, General Manager, June 1994). The study evaluated the improvement in travel time, speed, delay, air emissions, and fuel consumption compared to pre-ATSAC conditions. Based on this comparison, travel time decreased 12-18 percent, travel speed increased 12-16 percent, delay decreased 32�4 percent; air emissions decreased 10-13 percent and fuel consumption decreased 9-13 percent with implementation of this ITS technology. As communities build out and the feasibility to implement physical improvements diminish over time, ITS technology will provide an opportunity to improve the operation of critical intersections and roadway segments. Regional agencies and localjurisdictions in Southern California are beginning to recognize the importance of this type of technology as part of the overall system performance. This ITS concept has been successfully applied to many jurisdictions, including the Cities of Los Angeles, Glendale, and Pasadena, with demonstrated traffic flow improvements as a result. The County of Los Angeles is currently implementing asystem-wide study for ITS technology within Pomona Valley. The Pomona Valley ITS project includes implementing ITS improvements at 21 intersections on Colima Road between Hacienda Boulevard and Fairway Drive. However, these improvements are not ] 00 percent funded. The County of Los Angeles also prepared a Congested Corridors Study that identified physical improvements to local intersections for short-term and long-range horizons. Where physical improvements were not feasible or did not meet the County's LOS objectives, ITS technology was recommended. The County identified an improvement equivalent to 7 percent of the operation of each intersection with implementation of ITS. OCTA is working with local agencies to synchronize traffic signals across jurisdictional boundaries. This regional program is included in the OCTA Long -Range Transportation Plan. This coordination effort will have an objective to increase both speed and capacity by approximately 5 percent Countywide. P:\CRU830\2007\'rrafnc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07n � 122 'ran Frlc IMPACT ANALYSIS .SA ASSOCIA'I'B 3, INC. AF.aA MASTER P .ANNEU C MMONI'I'Y S I.PIBM BF.R YOU) pIAMONU B .OS AN CY.1.85 COUNTY. CAI.IFORNIA Harbor Boulevard provides a significant link between Los Angeles and Orange Counties adjacent to the AMPC site. The City of La Habra was recently awarded $250,000 from the Measure M Combined Transportation Funding Program for Fiberoptic Signal Interconnect along Harbor Boulevard, between Arliolita Drive (north'of Whittier Boulevard) and Las Palmas Drive (south of Imperial Highway). The results of this ITS project will enhance communication between signals and provide CCTV cameras at critical intersections along this key arterial highway. The project will also provide multijurisdictional benefit into the adjacent jurisdictions. As evidenced by the efforts of the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, OCTA, and the City of La Habra, implementation of ITS is recognized to provide a regional mobility benefit by optimizing traffic flow conditions and reducing traffic delays..As such, the implementation of ITS or the combination of ITS improvements with other intersection capacity improvements are intended to address the traffic impacts of the AMPC upon the surrounding community. Varying local conditions make it difficult to quantify the improvement in travel time and delay achieved through ITS. However, evaluation studies conducted throughout Southern California, as described above, have identified significant improvements in the operation of these corridors. The level of intersection capacity improvement with implementation of ITS technology has ranged between 5 and 10 percent throughout Southern Califomia. AMPC is proposing to advance the funds necessary to implement many of the ITS applications along the Colima Corridor. Implementation of this technology will optimize traffic flow conditions and reduce traffic delays along Colima Road. AMPC's participation will allow these improvements, already planned but not funded by the County (i.e., the Pomona Valley ITS Project) to be accelerated several years ahead of schedule for the benefit of the community. Based on the City and County requirements, the project is required to identify feasible mitigation measures that would mitigate the project and/or other related projects' significant impacts to a level of insignificance. When the Proposed Project and other nearby developments are expected to significantly impact adjacent roadways, one of the mitigation options to be considered is to have the developer enter into a secured agreement to contribute, on a fair-shaze basis, to a benefit district or other form of fee program to fund major roadway and bridge improvements in the region. Also, for all recommendations to increase the number of travel lanes on a street or at an intersection as a mitigation measure, the analysis will clearly identify measures associated with such a change, including whether or not additional right -of --way would be necessary and whether it would be feasible to acquire the right -of --way based on the existing adjacent land use. The proposed mitigation measure must be feasible in the sense that it is capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into consideration economic; environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. If the required mitigation measure requires property take, such necessary action must be fully evaluated and all factors involved must be researched for consideration. Table X shows the recommended mitigation measures for each intersection impacted by the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. In a number of cases, there is more than one "option" for mitigating potential impacts. Consequently, it is important for the reader to keep Table X at hand P:\CRU830@OOTTraffic Study\I.A Study_Septemlxr 2007.doc n09/24/07» I LS LSA ASS.00IAT ES. INC. Table X - Aera Master Planned Community Mitigation Summary Intersection � Option 1 Option 2 3 Fullerton Rd/Colima Rd Mitigation forProposed Project 2°" EBL t'1 and EBR t'1 ITS t'1 Mitigation for Road Connected Alt. 2°d WBL t'1 and WBR R) ITS (n 4 Fullerton Rd/Pathfmder Rd Mitigation for Proposed Project Restripe for 2°d SBL a) Mitigation for Road Connected Alt. Restripe 3`d SBT a) and 2vd SBL tZl. 5 Nogales St/Pathfmder Rd Add WBR (s> 6 Azusa Ave/Colima Rd (CMP) NBR Overlap t'1 ITS t'1 7 Hazbor 131vd/Fullerton Rd (I� Mitigation for Proposed Project Restripe to add EBR (s) Mitigation for Road Connected Alt. Restripe 3rd NBT (st and 3`d SBT (s) 10 Nogales SdColima Rd 2°" NBL t'1 and 3rd NBT t't ITS t:> 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Rd Mitigation for Proposed Project 2°d NBL tr) and EBR w/ Overlap tsl 2°d NBL and ITS (:) Mitigation for Road Connected Alt. 2°d NBL t't and 2°d SBL tal 2°d NBL and ITS tz> 15 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfmder Rd Mitigation for Proposed Project 2°d SBT t�1, 2°dNBT t" NBR Overlap 01, and EBR w/ Overlap t'1 Mitigation for Raad Connected Alt. 2°d SBT t�1 and 2°d NBT (a) 17 SR-57 NB Ramp/Diamond Baz Blvd �NB�L `31 and Restripe NBTL to 18 Brea Canyon Rd/Diamond Baz Blvd Mitigation for Proposed Project 2� WBL R) and 2°d NBT (s) l2J°dBWBL t�1 and Free Mitigation for Raad Connected Alt. 2°d NBT t'1 20 SR-57 SB RampBrea Canyon Rd 2°d SBR nl with Overlap and E-W Split Phasing Notes: Mitigation measures are the same for both alternatives unless specified. �'� Congested Corridor Study Recommended Improvement in 2006. «� Congested Corridor Study Recommended Improvement in 2021. tat Not a Congested Corridor Study Improvement. 629/07(P:\CRUS30\2007\T,(affic Study\LA Mitigation Summary.wpd) I.SA ASSOCI A'I'ES, INC. 'I'R AYYIC IMPACT ANALYSIS S hPTCM eER R00] ARRA MASTCR YOIINT COM MUNI'rY CITY OY UTAMUNU BAR. L05 AN CP.LF.3 C Y, CAI.IYORNIA when reviewing specific intersection mgation options. The mitigated LOS worksheets for the impacted intersections are provided in Appendix E. For intersections where more than one mitigation measure could alleviate the project impact, optional mitigation measures are presented. The intersections that are significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative in the 2025 condition are presented in Tables Y and Z, respectively. These tables identify the direct project impact and proposed mitigation for intersections within the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles (based on a comparison of the 2025 No Project and 2025 Plus Project scenarios). It should be noted that the LOS shown in these tables for intersections within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry are provided for informational purposes only, as mitigation is prescribed in the 2025 Cumulative condition for city intersections. The intersections that aze significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative in the 2025 Cumulative condition are presented in Tables AA and AB, respectively. These tables identify the direct project impact and proposed mitigation for intersections within the Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry (based on a compazison of the 2025 Cumulative No Project and 2025 Cumulative Plus Project scenarios). Tables AA and AB also identify the cumulative impact and mitigation for intersections within the County of Los Angeles (based on a comparison of the 2025 No Project and 2025 Cumulative Plus Project scenarios). The recommended mitigation measures and mitigation alternatives for each impacted intersection are described below. Conceptual drawings of each impacted intersection and the proposed mitigation measures aze provided in Appendix I. 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) Fullerton Road/Colima Road exceeds LOS D in the existing and 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. It should be noted that $l million has been approved in federal authorization for the design and construction of roadway improvements to enhance intersection mobility at the Fullerton Road/Colima Road intersection. The funding request is sponsored by Representative Gary Miller of California's Congressional District 42. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. Optional Mitigation Measure 1. 2025 Plus Proposed Project. The impact with the proposed project would be mitigated by the addition of a second eastbound left -turn lane and an eastbound right-tum lane. These same improvements are the recommended 2006 improvements in the Congested Corridor Study. The result of the Proposed Project improvements would require widening of approximately 7 feet (ft) on the north side of Colima Road, west of Fullerton Road; 3 fr on the south side of Colima Road, west of Fullerton Road; and 8 ft on the north side of Colima Road, east of Fullerton Road. The additional right -of --way required for implementation of these improvements would reduce the public right-of- way beyond the County's 8 ft requirement. Due to the location of existing and planned buildings at the northwest and southwest corners of this intersection, the constrnction of a second eastbound left - turn lane and an eastbound right -turn lane is not considered to be a feasible improvement at this intersection. P:\CRU630@007\TraRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc «0924/07n ] 25 Table Y -Year 2025 No Project and Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service and Midgadon Summary Year 2025 Plus Proposed Project Change in ICU Mitigation s Year 2025 No Project AM Peak PM Peak Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Aour PM Peak Hour Hour Hour AM Peak Aour PM Peak Hour No. Name City 1CU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU ICU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigation Los Angeles County 2 1 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp IND 0.83 D 0.59 A 0.86 D 0.62 B 0.030 0.029 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND 0.68 B 0.75 C 0.69 B 0.77 C 0.017 0.016 3 FullertonRoad/ColimaRoad LAC 1.04 F 1.07 F ��, ].07 - F 111 � = 0.027 0.044 1.03 F 1.07 F 2ndEBL• and EBR' ,F 1.00 E 1.04 F ITS ' 4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.07 F 1.13 F 1.08 F '-! , 1.20 '±-. F. �" 0.008 0.077 1.07 F ].06 F Restripe for 2nd SBL s 5 Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.28 F 1.16 F 1.33 F - - 1.22. L 0.056 0.061 1.24 F 1.14 F Add WBR 6 Azusa AvenuelColima Road (CMP) LAC 0.89 D 1.29 F _ 0.90 , D �� 131 F 0.014 0.017 0.89 D 1.21 F Add NBR Overlap s 0.83 D 7.24 F ITSs't 7 Hazbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road �3 LAC 1.06 F 0.92 E 1.07 F _�� 094 � F 0.008 0.013 1.06 F 0.92 E Add EBR ,' 8 Nogales StreeUSR-60 WB Ramps LAC 0.68 B 0.65 B 0.70 B 0.68 13 0.024 0.030 9 Nogales StreeUSR-60 EB Ramps LAC O.S2 A 0.67 B 0.54 A 0.70 B 0.024 0.030 10 Nogales Street/Colima Roads LAC 0.93 E 1.05 F 1.00'- E '- Li3 � F`R�' 0.073 0.073 0.93 E 1.04 F Add 2nd NBL`'and 3rd NBTs 0.93 E 1.06 F ITSs'7 11 Major lnternallntersection Added by Project DB* -- -- -- - 0.47 A 0.48 A --- - 12 Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps IND O.SS D 1.02 F 0.85 D 1.03 F 0.004 0.011 13 Fairway Drivr/SR-60 EB Ramps IND 0.75 C 0.68 B 0.75 C 0 69 B 0.008 0.007 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road LAC 0.90 D 0.82 D I A2 -' F; " I A2 F . ': 0.119 0.208 0.90 D 0.81 D 2nd NBL, EBR with Overlap 0.83 D 0.82 D 2nd NBL, ITS ' 1S Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Roads LAC 0.93 E 1.02 F 1.08" F 1.3P l� - O.ISS 0.296 0.87 D LOl F Add 2nd SBTS' 2nd NBT, NBR Overlap, and EBR with Overlap .:' _ � 16 SR-S7 SB RampsdJiamond Baz Boulevazd3 DB 0.56 A O.S3 A Q60 A 0.70 B 0.038 0.168 17 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard DB 0.55 A 0.79 C 0.81 C 1 03 , F 0.2SS 0.232 j g Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevards DB 0.81 D 0.97 E 0.98 E � <_ L06 _ F 0.167 0.091 19 SR-57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Road3•° DB* 0.54 A 0.71 C 0.63 D 0.84 D 0.092 0.127 2p SR-S7 SB Off-Ramp/Brea Canyon Road3 DB* 0.85 D 0.92 E 137 .. F `: 1:78 T " 0.317 0.858 _�'" � _ 53 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.84 D 0.97 E 0.84 D 0.98 F 0.000 0.006 S4 SR-S7 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.86 D 0.65 B 0.86 D 0.65 B 0.000 0.000 58 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S)3'4'9 LAC 27.7 sec C 20.6 sec C 40.4 sec D 44.3 sec D 12.7 sec 23.7 sec Sg Brea Canyon Road/Project Access3'4 DB* - -- --- 0.74 C 0.78 C -- -- 60 Brea Canyon Road (NNPathfinder Road DB 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.06 F 1.06 F 0.000 0.000 61 Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathfinder Road DB 0.74 C 0.52 A 0.74 C O.S2 A 0.000 0.004 62 DiamondBazBoulevard/PathfinderRoad DB 1.06 F 0.91 E 1.06 F 0.92 F. 0.000 0.007 ❑ =Level of Service exceeds IAS D (LOS E for CMP) 0 (Shade) =Significant bnpact based on criteria below. INTERSECTIONS Pre -Project Project v/c Increase LOS v/c C 0.71 m 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.8] to 0.90 0.02 or more FJF 0.91 or more 0.0] or more In an incorporated area (Cities oFDiamond Bar and Indusuy) a significant impact occurs when the project causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for ah intersection already operating at LOS E or F. At these intersections, baseline is determined by 2025 plus cumulative projects. � Impacts and mitigation in Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry are detemtined by the 2025 Cumulative condition. Notes: � Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, ]0 percent yellow clearsnce cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left tum lanes). CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection � Existing unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2025 conditrons. LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections ° hnprovements to intersections included within project desigi for "plus project" conditions. LAC -County of Los Angeles t CCS (Congested Corridors Study) bnprovements in 2006 IND -City of Industry c CCS (Congested Condors Smdy) hnprovements in 2021 DB -City of Diamond Bar 71TS = Intelfigent Transportation System. bnplementadon a0ows for credit of 0.070 to ICU value. Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diamond Bar s Industry Business Center impacted intersection. s This line reports seconds of delay analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. 10 Improvement not considered feasible due to right of way constraints. Source: ISA Associates, lnc. P:\CRU830\200TTables\Wirbom Road120251CU_LA_Sum_waRDWYCormect_3_07.x1s\Mir Sum Pmj(9252007) Table Z -Year 2025 No Project and Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service and Mitigation Summary Year 2025 Plus Road Connected Year 2025 No Project Alternative Cbange in ICU Mitigation t Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name Los Angeles County � Ci[y ICU LOS 1CU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU ICU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigation I 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IAID IND 0.83 0.68 D B 0.59 0.75 A C 0.86 0.72 D C 0.62 0.79 B C 0.032 0.043 0.030 0.034 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road LAC 1.04 F 1.07 F "� ].09.( fi � 1,13 �"F 0.043 0.065 1.02 F 1.07 F Add 2nd WBL' ,WBR 1.02 F 1.06 F ITS ' 4 5 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road LAC LAC 1.07 1.28 F F 1. ] 3 1.16 F F 1.12 L29 F F 3 19 1.19 - F F 0.057 0.012 0.064 0.032 1.05 1.19 - F F 1.07 L11 F F Restripe for 3rd SB'I'e and 2nd SBL s Add WBA 6 Azusa AvenuelColima Road (CMP) LAC 0.89 D 1.29 F 0.90 D ' 1.31 F 0.014 0.018 0.89 D 1.21 F Add NBR Overlap y 8 9 10 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N)a Nogales StreeVSR-60 WB Ramps Nogales StroeVSR-60 EB Ramps Nogales StreeVColima Roads LAC LAC LAC LAC 1.06 0.68 0.52 0.93 F B A E 0.92 0.65 0.67 ].OS E B B F --- F B 1.12 �� 0.70 0.54 �� 1 0� F B A .1 $� - -. � 1.02 . 0.68 0.70 `` 109 - F _ B B '; ��� F �' �. .... - 0.056 0.024 0.023 0.068 0.100 0.030 0.030 0.037 0.83 0.80 0.93 D C E 1.24 0.74 1.01 F C F ITSS'7 Restripe to add 3rd NBT and 3rd SBT Add 2nd NBLS and 3rd NBT s 11 12 13 Major Internmllntersection Added by Project Fairway Drive/SR-60 WB Ramps Fairway Drive/SR-6D EB Ramps DB* IND IND -- 0.85 0.75 --- D C --- 1.02 0.68 0.59 0.85 0.75 A D C 0.77 1.03 0.69 C F B -- 0.004 0.008 -- 0.012 0.008 0.93 E 1.02 F ffSsa ] 4 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road LAC 0.90 D 0.82 D 0.96 - E - : -- 0 96 �. ; i' E � 0.067 0.141 0.85 D 0.84 D 2nd NBL, Znd SBL I S ] 6 17 18 1 g 20 53 54 58 59 60 61 62 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Roads SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevazd3 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevards SR-57 NB On-RampBrea Canyon Road3'4 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Roada SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfmder Road Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (S)3'4'9 Brea Canyon Road/Project Accessz'a Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road Brea Canyon Road ($)/Pathfinder Road Diamond Bar Boulevard/Path£tnder Road LAC DB DB DB DB* DB* DB DB LAC DB* DB DB DB 0.93 0.56 0.55 0.81 0.54 0.85 0.84 0.86 27.7 sec __ 1.06 0.74 1.06 E A A D A D D D C __ F C F 1.02 0.53 0.79 0.97 0.71 0.92 0.97 0.65 20.6 sec ].06 0.52 0.91 F A C E C E E B C - F A E 0.97 0.58 0.69 0.89 0.54 1.01 0.84 0.86 27.7 sec 0.64 1.06 0.74 1.06 � " E A B D A � F D D C B F C F '_�" 1.18 0.63 -..:-0.93 "-1.03 0.80 `- 1.55 0.98 0.65 37.9 sec 0.71 1.06 0.52 0.92 - F B �-.-. E -': F - C 'F E B D C F A E 0.045 0.018 0.132 0.079 0.005 0.154 0.000 0.000 0 sec - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.164 0.100 0.138 0.063 0.086 0.626 0.006 0.000 77.3 sec -- 0.000 0.004 0.007 0.84 0.85 D D 0.79 L00 C F Add 2nd NBL, ITS ' Add 2nd SB"fs and 2nd NBT ❑ =Level of Service exceeds IAS D (LOS E for CMP) (Shade) =Significant Impact based on criteria below. WTERSECTIONS Pre -Project Project v/c. Increase LOS v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more F/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more Source: ISA Associates, lnc. Tn an incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry) a significant impact occurs when the project causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for an intersection already operating at LOS E or F. At these intersections, baseline is determined by 2025 plus cumulative projects. � Impacts and mitigation in Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry are determined by the 2025 Cumulative condition. Notes: � Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL� 10 percent yellow cleuance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left tum lanes). CMP -Congestion Management Program ]ntersection � Existing unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2025 conditions. LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections °Improvements to intersections included within project design for "plus project" conditions. LAC -County of Los Angeles s CCS (Congested Condors Study) Improvements in 2006 P]D - City of Industry 4 CCS (Congested Condors Study) Improvemaris in 2021 DB -City of Diamond Bar ° rfS =Intelligent Transportation System. hnplementation allows for credit of 0.070 m ICU value. Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diamond Bar s Industry Business Center impacted intersection. v This line reports seconds of delay analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. 10 Improvement not considered f ible due to right of way constraints. P:\CRUalO\2007\Tabks\Wi[b Road\]025ICL_LA_Sum_RDWYCormea_S_04.xtsU7i1 Sum Proj(9/14/2007) Table AA -Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project Intersection Level of Service and Mitigation Summary Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Year 2025 Cumulative Project Change in ICU Midgadon Intersection. AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City 1CU LOS 1CU LOS ]CU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU ICU LOS 1CU LOS Proposed Mitigation Los Angeles County I 1 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp IND )ND 0.83 0.68 D � B 0.60 0.76 A C 0.86 0.70 D B 0.62 0.77 B C 0.030 0.017 0.028 0.015 3 Fullerton Road/Co]ima Road LAC 1.05 F 1.09 F ``� 1.08 -�" F' 9"13 (F � - - 0.028 0.038 1.04 F 1.07 F 2nd EBL' , EBR • and WBL' 1.01 F 1.06 F ITS ' 4 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.07 F 1.14 F ].08 F '9:22 :�F ' 0.009 0.076 ].08 F ].07 F Restripe for 2nd SBLs 5 Noga]es Sneet/Pathfinder Road LAC 1.29 F 1.18 F r:; -134 -'- F ' 1.24 � � F 0.056 0.061 1.24 F 1.] 6 F Add WBR 6 Awsa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) LAC O.S9 D 1.30 F 0.91 D `�. 132 .. " F .. 0.014 0.017 0.89 D 1.22 F Add NBR Overlap ° 7 Harbor Boulevard/Fullenon Road (N)2 LAC 1.07 F 0.93 E 1.07 F -:.0.94 ��'H- -:' 0.009 0.013 O.S4 ].06 D F 1.25 0.93 F E ITS°'s Add EBR 8 9 Nogales StreetlSR-60 WB Ramps Nogales Street/SR-60 EB Ramps LAC LAC 0.68 0.62 B A 0.66 0.68 B B 0.71 0.54 B A 0.69 0.71 .B B 0.023 0.024 0.030 0.030 ]0 Nogales Street/Colima Road ° LAC 0.94 E 1.09 F 0.068 0.067 � 0.93 E 1.01 F Add 2nd NBL', 3rd NBT °' and EBR9 11 12 Major Interne!/ntersection Added by Project Fairway Dtive/SR-60 WB Ramps DB* IND --- 0.86 -- D 1.03 -- F 0.47 0.86 A D 0.48 1.04 A F - 0.004 -- 0.012 0.93 E 1.09 F ITS°'b 13 Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps ]ND 0.77 C 0.71 C 0.78 C 0.72 C 0.008 0.008 14 Brea Canyon G\rtoff/Colima Road LAC 0.92 E 0.86 D ��;' 1.03' - � -j -` E -'�:1.05 •F .` 0.111 0.189 0.89 D 0.84 D 2nd NBI, ]�R with Overlap,and 2nd SBL I S Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road ° LAC 0.95 E 1.06 F - �' 1.13 �-. ' F' �': i.34 � F 0.180 0.296 0.86 0.89 D D 0.86 0.99 D E 2nd NBL, ITS ' Add 2nd SB'I't's 2nd NBT, NBR Overlap, EBR with Overlap, and 2nd WBLs 16 17 18 SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard2 SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard r DB DB DB 0.57 0.56 0.82 A A D 0.54 0.80 0.99 A C E 0.6 ] - 0.81 :': 0 98 A D �>B 0.70 i.03 ;. =1:08 B rE' -z ;.F=-,, �_ 0.038 0.256 0.168 0.168 0.232 0.088 O.li4 0.81 B D 0.89 0.85 D D Add 2nd NBL Add 2nd WBL s and 2nd NBT 19 SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon RoadZ't DB* O.SB A 0.75 C 0.64 B 0.87 D 0.060 0.120 0.81 D 0.88 D Add 2nd WBL s and Free NBR 20 53 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Road SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathf nder Road DB* DB 0.88 0.89 D D 0.98 1.02 E F �-:-1,19 _ 0.89 ' ` . F D ':1.84 1.03 �-F - F 0.313 0.000 0.858 0.007 0.77 C 0.74 C Add 2nd SBR with Overlap and E-W Split Phase - 54 SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road DB 0.90 D 0.69 B 0.90 D 0.69 B 0.000 0.000 58 59 60 Harbor Boulevard/Flrllerton Road (S)Za.a Brea Canyon Road/Projec[ Access2� Brea Canyon Aaad (N)/Pathfinder Road LAC DB* DB 28.1 sec - 1.16 C --- F 21.5 sec ].17 C -- F 42.0 sec 0.75 1.16 D C F 45.9 sec 0.79 1.17 D C F 13.9 sec -- 0.000 24.4 sec -- 0.000 - 61 Brea Canyon Road (SpPathfinder Road DB 0.75 C 0.54 A 0.75 C 0.55 A 0.000 0.003 62 Diamond Baz Boulevard/Pathfinder Road DB 1.08 F 0.95 E 1.08 F 0.96 E 0.000 0.007 ❑ = Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) (Shade) =Significant Impacrbased on criteria below. INTERSECTIONS Pre-P ject P ject v/c Increase LOS v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more Source: LSA Assocutu, Inc. 1n an incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry) a significant impact occurs when the project cause LOS ro deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for an intersection already operating at LOS E or F. A[ these intersections, baseline is determined by 2025 plus cumulative projects. - Notes: CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections LAC - Counry of Los Angeles IND - City of Industry DB - City of Diamond Bar e Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diamond Bar r Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (1,600 VPHPL, ] 0 percent yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left mm lanes). zEzisting unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2026 conditions. ''Improvements to inersections included within pr ject design for'plus project" wnditions. ° CCS (Congested Corridors Study) Improvements in 2006 s CCS (Congested Corridors Study) Improvements in 2021 s ITS =Intelligent Transportation System. Implementation allows for credit of 0.070 to ICU value. ] Industry Business Center impacted intersection. s This line reports seconds ofdelay analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology s Improvement not considered feasible due to right of way constraints. P1CRUBle\20aTTablrs\Wi�bom Road\202d ICIl_[A_Sum woRDWYConneci 3_n].xls\Mit aura Cum(9/I420o]) Table AB -Year 2025 Cumulative and Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative Intersection Level of Service and�Nlitigation Summary Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Year 2025 Cumulative Connected Alternative Change in ICU Mitigation Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour No. Name City ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU ICU ICU LOS ICU LOS Proposed Mitigation Los Angeles County � 1 2 Fullerton Road/SR-60 WB Off -Ramp Fullerton Road/SR-60 EB Off -Ramp AID IND 0.83 0.68 D B 0.60 0.76 A C 0.86 0.72 D C 0.63 099 B C 0.032 0.043 0.029 0.033 3 Fullerton Road/Colima Road LAC LOS F ].09 F '�109:' F ,�� 116`- F'"- 0.044 0.071 1.03 F 1.06 F Add 2nd WBL',WBR' and EBR' 4 5 Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road LAC LAC 1.07 1.29 F F 1.14 ]18 F F 1 ] 3- t 130` F" F 120 ].21 F F 0958 0.012 0.064 0.032 1.05 120 F F 1.08 1.13 F F Restripe for 3rd SBTs and 2nd SBL s Add WBR 6 Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (CMP) LAC 0.89 D 1.30 F 0.9] E 1.32 F 0.014 0.017 0.89 D 121 F Add NBR Overlap ° 7 8 9 ] 0 Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N)2 Nogales Street/SR-60 WB Ramps Nogales Street/SR-60 EB Ramps Nogales StreeUColima Road � LAC LAC LAC LAC 1.07 F 0.68 B 0.52 A 0.94 E 0.93 0.66 0.68 1.09 E B B F 1 ] 2 ` 0.71 0.54 �1.00: �. F C A F '. - 1.03 0.69 0.71 1.72 ; ; F -- B C �F'' - 0.056 0.023 0.023 0.068 0.101 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.84 0.80 0.93 D C E 1.25 095 1.04 F C F ITS°'6 Restripe to add 3rd NBT and 3rd SBT Add 2nd NBL° and 3rd NBT ° 11 12 13 Majorinternal/ntersectionAddedbyProject Fairway Drivr/SR-60 WB Ramps Fairway Drive/SR-60 EB Ramps DB* IND IND -- 0.86 0.77 --- D C --- ].03 0.71 --- F C 0.59 0.86 0.78 A D C 0.77 1.04 0.72 C F C -- 0.004 0.009 -- 0.012 0.008 0.93 E 1.05 F ITS°'s 14 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road LAC 0.92 E 0.86 D 0.98 •< � E � 0.98 ;�, E OA59 0.122 0.87 D 0.81 D 2nd NBL, 2nd SBL, EBR ] 5 16 ] 7 18 19 20 53 54 58 59 60 61 62 Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road ] SR-57 SB Ramps/Diamond Baz Boulevards SR-57 NB Ramps/Diamond Baz Boulevard Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard ] SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Brea Canyon Roadz'3 SR-57 SB Off-RampBrea Canyon Roadz SR-57 NB On-Ramp/Pathfinder Road SR-57 SB Off-Ramp/Pathfinder Road Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road S z,3,s () Brea Canyon Road/Project AccessZ'r Brea Canyon Road (N)/Pathfinder Road Brea Canyon Road (S)/Pathfinder Road Diamond Bar Boulevard/Pathfinder Road LAC DB DB DB DB* DB* DB DB LAC DB* DB DB DB 0.95 0.57 0.56 0.82 0.58 0.88 0.89 0.90 28.1 sec - 1.16 0.75 1.08 E A A D q D D D C - F C F 1.05 0.54 0.80 0.99 095 0.98 1.02 0.69 21.5 sec ___ 1.17 0.54 0.95 F A D E C E F B C ___ F A E 1.00,;:, 0.59 0.69 0.90 0.56 � 7-03" �- 0.89 0.90 27.8 sec 0.64 1.16 0.75 1.08 " "F-• " - A B D A F D D C B F C F " 1.21' 0.64 0.94 ;: 1.06 - 0.83 ].6I 1.03 0.69 43.0 sec 072 1.17 0.55 0.96 F B E ". F D F F B D C F A E 0.052 0.018 0.132 0.080 -0.024 0.151 0.000 0.000 -03 sec - 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.164 0.100 0.138 0.064 0.079 Ob26 0.007 0.000 21.5 sec - 0.000 0.003 0.007 0.86 0.87 0.55 0.72 092 D D A C C 0.84 1.05 0.85 0.89 0.61 D F D D B Add 2nd NBL and ITS°' Add 2nd SBTs and 2nd NBT Add 2nd NBL Add 2nd NBT Add 2nd SBR with Overlap and E-W Split Phase _ ❑ =Level of Service exceeds LOS D (LOS E for CMP) (Shade) =Significant Mpac[ based on criteria below. INTERSECTIONS Pre -Project Project v/c Increase IAS v/c C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more FJF 0.91 or more 0.01 or more Source: ISA Associates, Inc Tn an incorporated area (Cities of Diamond Bar and Industry) a significant impact occurs when the project causes LOS to deteriorate to LOS E or F, or adds 0.02 to the ICU for an intersection already operating at LOS E or F. At these intersections, baseline is determined by 2025 plus cumulative proiects. � Los Angeles County ICU Methodology (],600 VPHPL, 10 percent yellow clearance cycle, 2,880 VPH for dual left mm lanes). Notes: z Existing unsignalized intersections analyzed as signalized in 2025 conditions. CMP -Congestion Management Program Intersection 3lmprovemenis to intersections included within project design for "plus project" conditions. - LOS E acceptable for CMP intersections °CCS (Congested Condors Smdy) hnpmvemerrts in 2006 LAC -County of Los Angeles s CCS (Congested Condors Smdy) hnprovements in 2021 MD -City of Industry 61TS =Intelligent Transportation System. Implementation allows for credit of 0.070 to ICU value. DB -City of Diamond Bar ]Industry Business Center impacted intersection. Intersection within proposed annexation by City of Diamond Bar a This line reports seconds of delay analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. v Improvement not considered feasible due [o right of way constraints. P:\CAU830\200TTables\With Aaad\20251CU LA Sum RDWYConnec� 8 04.x1s\Mit Sum Cam(9/I4/200]) TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SA AEKA MASTER PANNED COMMUNITY S EPTFSM»ER 90117 INC I'rY OF DIAMOND RAR. 1.08 ANCF.LES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative. The impact with the Road Connected Alternative would be mitigated by the addition of a second westbound left -turn lane (recommended 2006 improvement in the Congested Corridor Study) and a westbound right -turn lane (recommended 2021 improvement in the Congested Corridor Study). The result of the Road Connected Alternative improvements would require widening of approximately 10 ft on the north side of Colima Road, east of Fullerton Road. The additional right-of-way required for implementation of these improvements would reduce the public right-of-way beyond the County's eight ft requirement. Due to the location of existing and planned buildings at the northwest and southwest corners of this intersection, the construction of a second westbound left -turn lane and a westbound right -turn lane is not considered to be feasible improvement at this intersection. 2025 Cumulative Plus Project and Road Connected Alternative. This intersection is also impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Project condition (for both project alternatives). Mitigation tooffsetthe cumulative impact is not considered feasible, as additional right -of --way would be necessary to implement the improvements (similar to the condition described above). Optional Mitigation Measure 2. The impact of either the Proposed Project or Road Connected Alternative would also be fully mitigated by the implementation of ITS. ITS includes the capabilities of visually monitoring current traffic conditions during congestion and providing travelers with current traffic information. ITS technology includes installation of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras, system detection to collect real-time volume and speed data, changeable message signs, Trailblazers erected at key decision points, and the development of a Web -based advanced traveler information system. For purposes of this analysis, implementation of ITS allows for credit of up to 0.070 to the ICU value. Based on this, application of ITS would fully mitigate the impact of the Proposed Project or Road Connected Alternative at the intersection. Implementation of ITS would . also mitigate the cumulative impact at this intersection. The result of these improvements would not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, this alternative mitigation provides feasible improvements. Optional Mitigation Measure 3. Per discussion with County of Los Angeles Public Works staff, a grade separation was considered at this location. Construction of a grade separation would allow through vehicles (either north/south on Fullerton Road or east/west on Colima Road) unimpeded access through the intersection. Due to the right-of-way constraints at this intersection, this improvement would need to be implemented within the existing cross-section of the roadway. The. result of this improvement would restrict access to existing businesses adjacent to this intersection. In addition, this type of improvement would affect pedestrian traffic as well as the public transportation service provided along Colima Road. Based on these factors, this alternative mitigation was not considered a feasible improvement to offset the AMPC project impact at this deficient intersection. P:\CRU630\200TTranic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc R09/24/07» 130 I.SA ASSOCI ATh;3, INC. SEP'I'EM bE0. RRO] '1'0.AYYIC IMYAC'1' ANAI.Y313 AERA NCEI. ES CLAN NI'Y. COLIYONNIIA 4. Ful/erton Rond/Pathfinder Roud (County ojLos Angeles) Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road exceeds LOS D in the existing and 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Altemative. 2025 Plus Proposed Project. The impact caused by the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a second southbound left -turn lane. 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative. The impact in the Road Connected Alternative would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a third southbound through lane and a second southbound left -turn lane. These improvements are the recommended 2021 improvements in the Congested Corridor Study and would mitigate the entire project impact at the intersection. These improvements would also offset the cumulative project impact at this intersection. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. S. Nogales StreedPaNtfinder Road (County of Los Ange/es) Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road exceeds LOS D in the existing and 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. The impact in. either scenario would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a westbound.right-turn lane. This improvement would also offset the cumulative project impact at this intersection. This improvement is not shown in the Congested Corridor Study and therefore is not a planned improvement. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. 6. Azusa Avenue/Cotima Road (County of Los Angeles) Optional Mitigation Measure 1. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road exceeds LOSE (the CMP threshold) in the 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Altemative. The impact in either scenario would be fully mitigated with implementation of protected right-tum phasing in the northbound direction. This phasing would require that U-turns be prohibited in the eastbound direction. This improvement is recommended for 2006 by the Congested Corridor Study. This improvement would also offset the cumulative project impact at this ihtersection. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. Optional Mitigation Measure 2. The impact of either the Proposed Project or Road Connected Alternative would also be fully mitigated by the implementation of ITS. Implementation of ITS would also mitigate the cumulative impact at this intersection. The result of these improvements will P:\CRU830@007\Traaic Study\IA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» 13] l'RAYYIC IMYAC'I' AN ALY 313 I.SA ASSOCIATY�ti. INC. CITY O UTAMONU U LOSAAN CFI. F.S COAUNT Y. CAIAIYORNIA 31?PTEM tlYR 2n not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the alternative mitigation provides feasible improvements. 7. Harbor Boulevnrd/Fullerlon Road (North) (County ojlos Angeles) Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (North) is significantly impacted by the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. 2025 Plus Proposed Project. The impact of the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated with the addition of an eastbound right -turn lane. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative. In the Road Connected Altemative, the impact would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a third northbound through lane and a third southbound through Jane. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. These improvements would also offset the cumulative project impact at this intersection. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. I0. Nogales StreedCo[ima Road (County of Los Angeles) Optional Mitigation Measure T 2025 Plus Proposed Project and Road Connected Alternative. Nogales Street/Colima Road exceeds LOS D in the existing and 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Altemative. The impact in either scenario would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a second northbound ]eft -turn lane and a third northbound through lane. These improvements are recommended for2006 by the Congested Corridor Study. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the addition of a second northbound left-tum lane and a third northbound through lane is a feasible improvement. 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project. This intersection is also impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project condition. However, the proposed improvements identified above would not offset the cumulative impact. An eastbound right tum lane in addition to the second northbound left turn lane and third northbound through lane would be required to offset the cumulative impact. This mitigation is not considered feasible, as additional right -of --way would be necessary to implement the eastbound right turn lane. 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative. This intersection is also impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Road Connected Alternative. The proposed improvements identified above for the P:\CRU830\2007\'rra0ic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a0924�07» 132 TRAFFI C I MPAC'IANALYSIS LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY S RP'I'F:MBER2007 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA noncumulative condition would offset the cumulative impact. The impact would be Jully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a second northbound left -turn lane and a third northbound through lane. These improvements are recommended for 2006 by the Congested Corridor Study. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the addition of a second northbound left -turn lane and a third northbound through lane is a feasible improvement, Optional Mitigation Measure A. The impact of either the Proposed Project or Road Connected Alternative would also be fully mitigated by the implementation of ITS. ITS is a Congested Corridor Study -recommended improvement at this intersection in 2021. Implementation of ITS would also mitigate the cumulative impact at this intersection. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the alternative mitigation is a feasible improvement. 14. Brea Canyon Cu�ojj/Colima Road (County ojLos Angeles) Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road exceeds LOS D in the 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. It should be noted that Caltrans, in cooperation with the City of Industry, has initiated the project development phase to construct a new interchange on SR-60 at Lemon Avenue. Once constructed, this interchange improvement would provide significant benefit to the Fairway Drive -Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road intersection, as traffic.would be diverted to the new interchange, Optional Mitigation Measure 1 2025 Plus Proposed Project. Mitigation of the Proposed Project impact would require the addition of a second northbound left -turn lane and an eastbound right -turn lane with protected phasing. This would require northbound U-tums to be prohibited at the intersection, The result of the proposed eastbound right -turn lane would require widening of approximately four ft on the south side of Colima Road, west of Brea Canyon Cutoff, The additional right-of-way required for implementation of this improvement would reduce the public right-of-way beyond the County's eight ft requirement. Due to the location of the existing building on the southwest corner of this intersection, the construction of an eastbound right turn lane is not considered to be a feasible improvement at this intersection. 2025 Plus Road Connected Alternative. The intersection is also impacted in the Road Connected Alternative condition. Mitigation would include a second northbound left -turn lane and a second souhbound left -turn lane. These improvements would not require additional right-of-way and therefore would be considered a feasible improvement, 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project and Road Connected Alternative. This intersection is also impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Project condition (for both project alternatives). However, the proposed improvements identified above would not offset the cumulative impact.. An eastbound right -turn lane in addition to the improvements stated above would be required to offset the P:\CRU830\2007\Tmaic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc «09/24/Ob, 133 '1'R Al PIC IMPACT ANALYSIS .SA ASS OCIA'I'C9. INC. ARRA MAS'I't:R PLANNeO COMM UNI'I'V SRP'PEMtlF.R _2011] CITY O DIAM ONO S I.OS AN OF.LR9 COUNTY. C I.IPO0.NIA cumulative impact. This mitigation is not considered feasible as additional right -of --way would be necessary to implement the eastbound right -turn lane. Optional Mitigation Measure 2 2025 Plus Project and 202$ Cumulative Plus Project. The project impact in the 2025 and 2025 cumulative condition (for both project alternatives) would be mitigated by the addition of a northbound left -turn lane and implementation of ITS. These improvements would not require additional right -of --way and therefore would be considered feasible improvements. It should be noted that ITS is a Congested Corridor Study recommended improvement at this intersection in,2021. I5. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road exceeds LOS D in the 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. 2025 Plus Proposed Project. The impact of the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a second northbound through lane, a second southbound through lane, an eastbound right -turn lane, and protected right-tum phasing in the northbound and eastbound directions. This would require U-turns to be prohibited in the southbound and westbound directions. The addition of a second southbound through lane is recommended in 2021 by the Congested Corridor Study. The eastbound right -turn lane can be achieved through restriping. These improvements will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. 2025 Plus Reduced Road Alternative. The impact of the Road Connected Alternative would also require the intersection to be restriped to provide a second northbound through lane and a second southbound through lane. The result of this improvement will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the addition of a second northbound through lane and a second southbound through lane for the Road Connected Altemative are feasible improvements. 2025 Cumulative Plus Proposed Project. This intersection is also impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Project condition. A second westbound left turn lane in addition to the improvements_ identified above (second northbound and southbound through lane) would be required to offset the cumulative impact. The second westbound left -turn lane would require widening, approximately 12 ft on the . northside of Pathfinder Road west of Brea Canyon Cutoff, and 10 ft on the north side of Pathfinder Road, east of Brea Canyon Cutoff. This mitigation is not considered feasible, as additional right-of- way would be necessary to implement the second westbound left -turn lane. As a result, the cumulative impact at this location would be considered a significant unavoidable impact. 2025 Cumulative Plus Reduced Road Alternative. This intersection is impacted in the 2025 Cumulative Plus Reduced Road Alternative. The impact of the Proposed Project would be fully P:\CRU630\2007tTtafFic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc e09/24/Oh> / �`r 'TRAFFIC IMPACTANALYSIS I.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. AERAMASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY SEPTEMBER 2007 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. LOSANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA mitigated if the intersection were restriped to provide a second northbound through lane and a second southbound through lane. These improvements will not require widening of the intersection. Therefore, the mitigation is a feasible improvement. I7. SR-57 Northbound Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City of Diamond Bar) SR-57 Northbound Ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard is significantly impacted by the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative. The impact would be fully mitigated by the addition of a second northbound left -turn. The result of these improvements will require widening of approximately six ft, which is within the State right-of-way. Prior to implementation of this improvement, an encroachment permit will need to be obtained from Caltrans. Therefore, the addition of a second northbound left - turn lane is a feasible improvement. The project's fair share of this improvement would be 100 percent, based on the City's fair -share calculation methodology, outlined in the City of Diamond Bar Guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Reports, 18. Brea Canyon Rond/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City ojDiamond Bar) Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard exceeds LOS D in the 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative, 2025 Plus Proposed Project. The impact of the Proposed Project would be fully mitigated by the addition of a second westbound left -turn lane and either a second northbound through lane or a northbound free right -turn lane. The second westbound left -turn lane at this location is already recommended for 2021 by the Congested Corridor Study and will not require widening of the intersection. However, both the second northbound through lane and the northbound free right -turn lane will require widening on the east side of Brea Canyon Road south of Diamond Bar Boulevard. While this is vacant land, it is outside of the existing right -of --way. The northbound through lane or the northbound free right -turn lane mitigation is not considered feasible, as additional right-of-way would be necessary to implement either improvement. As a result, the impact at this location would be considered a significant unavoidable impact. 2025 Plus Raad Connected Alternative. The impact of the Road Connected Alternative would be fully mitigated by the addition of a second northbound through lane. This improvement will require widening on the east side of Brea Canyon Road south of Diamond Bar Boulevard. While this is vacant land, it is outside of the existing right-of-way. The second northbound through lane mitigation is not considered feasible, as additional right -of --way would be necessary to implement the improvement. As a result, the impact would be considered a significant unavoidable cumulative impact. 20. SR-57 southbound Ramp/Brea Canyon Road (City of Diamond Bar) SR-57 Southbound ramp re Canyon Road exceeds LOS D in the 2025 condition without the Proposed Project. This already deficient intersection is significantly impacted by both the Proposed P:\CRU830\2007\TratFc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc R0924/07» - 135 'I'R AYPIC IMPACT' ANALYSIS. OCI AT'Es, INC. AERA NAST'ER PLANNP.D C MMUNI'I'Y S EPTfMtlER 2UU] CITY OP UTAM ONU B I.OS AN ei CI. P.S COUNTY. C ORNIA Project and the Road Connected Alternative. The impact in either scenazio would be fully mitigated with the addition of a second southbound right -turn lane. The result of this improvement will require widening of approximately 10 ft, which is within the State right -of --way. Prior to implementation of this improvement, an encroachment permit will need to be obtained from Caltrans. Therefore, the addition of a second southbound right -turn lane is a feasible improvement. The project's fair share of this improvement would be 78.18 percent, based on the City's fair-shaze calculation methodology, outlined in the City of Diamond Bar Guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Reports. It should be noted that the mitigation is based on the signalization of this intersection, which is included as a project design feature. The impact of the intersection will be fully mitigated with the physical improvement as well as the addition of asplit-phased traffic signal with a southbound right - turn overlap. Congestion Management Program Analysis There are no significant impacts or mitigation measures identified for the CMP arterial monitoring locations. Two freeway mainline segments are forecast to exceed the CMP threshold on SR-60 eastbound in the p.m. peak hour (east of Nogales Street and at Brea Canyon Road). These mainline segments operate at LOS F in the existing condition as well as LOS F in the future 2025 No Project condition. No improvements are proposed to address the project impact on the SR-60 mainline. Improvements to the freeway are part of regional transportation improvement programs with associated timing and funding sources. If the responsible agencies establish a cumulative mitigation program to address freeway mainline impacts, the project applicant will participate on a fair -share basis. Signal Warrant Mitigation Analysis As a result of the peak -hour signal warrant analysis, a traffic signal would be warranted at the intersections of Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road, Diamond Bar Boulevard/SR-57 southbound ramps, and SR-57 southbound off-rampBrea Canyon Road. The project's fair -share responsibility for the signalization of Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N) is approximately 18 percent for the 2025 Plus Project scenazio and 58 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. The project responsibility for the signalization of Diamond Baz Boulevard and SR-57 southbound ramps is approximately 77 percent for the 2025 Plus Proposed Project scenario and 63.5 percent for the 2025 Plus Road Connected Altemative. The project responsibility for the signalization of the SR-57 southbound off - ramps at Brea Canyon Road is approximately 84 percent for the Proposed Project condition and 75.5 percent for the Road Connected Alternative. A traffic signal is also recommended at the intersection of SR-57 northbound on-rampBrea Canyon Road despite the fact that the peak -hour volume does not exceed the threshold. The traffic volume destined to SR-57 (via eastbound left-tum movements) warrants dual left -turn lanes. As such, the intersection would not operate at acceptable LOS without a traffic signal. Therefore, it is recommended that the project install a traffic signal at this location. This improvement has been included as a project design feature. P:\CRU830\2007\TraRc Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc �A9/24/07n � t � � TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ASSOCIATES, INC. AERA MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY S EPTEMBNR 2007 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA MITIGATION PHASING ANALYSIS Mitigation measures were identified for impacted intersections based on implementation of the 3,600-dwelling-unit project build out. A mitigation phasing analysis was prepared to summarize the intersection mitigation measures associated with build out of the project, as well as identify the mitigation required for different phases of the AMPC project. The results of the mitigation phasing analysis are not intended to disclose the project impacts for a reduced land use intensity alternative. The build out condition remains at 3,600 units. Two project phases have been analyzed for interim project development years: 2013 (1,200 dwelling units) and 2019 (2,400 dwelling units). The specific land uses identified for each phase are described below. It should be noted that for purposes of this phasing analysis, the. internal east -west roadway is disconnected (consistent with the Proposed Project). It is assumed that construction will begin on the east side of the project site and any connection of the internal road to Harbor Boulevard would only occur in the final stages of the project. 2013: 1,200 Dwelling Units 646 single-family units • 379 multifamily units 175 senior housing units 100,000 sf of commercial use (Los Angeles County only) 40-acre sports park 2019: 2,400 Dwelling Units • 1,349 single-family units 694 multifamily units 357 senior housing units 200,000 sf of commercial use (150,000 sf in Los Angeles County; 50,000 sf in Orange County) 40-acre sports park The land uses identified in 2013 with 1,200 dwelling units and 2019 with 2,400 dwelling units are illustrated in Figures 34 and 351 respectively. The methodology to develop the forecast traffic volumes and determine the mitigation measures for each project phase is described below. Project trip generation for 2013 and 2019 is calculated in Tables AC and AD, respectively. 2025 Plus 3,600 Dwelling Units The impacts and mitigation measures for the project build out (3,600 dwelling units) in a 2025 horizon for the City of Diamond Bar and Los Angeles County are discussed earlier in this report. Table Y shows the project impacts and mitigation measures for the 2025 plus Proposed Project P:\CRU830\2007\Traflic Study\LA Study_Septembeo 2007.doc R09@4/07» 137 Table AC - 2013 Project Trip Generation (Total Units =1,200 DU, Senior Housing=175 DU) Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Land Use Size Units ADT Trip Rotes Single Family Residential DU 9.57 0.19 0.56 0.75 0.65 0.36 1.0] School Sudents 1.29 0.23 0.19 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 _ Commercial TSF ITE Regression Equation Multi -Family Residential � DU 5.86 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.36 0.18 0.54 Senior Housing -Attached DU 3.48 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.17 2.74 Golf Course Holes 35.74 1.75 0.47 2.22 1.21 1.53 Pazkr � AC 61.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.42 3.41 9.83 S orts Trip Generation TAZ1 Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ2 Single Family Residential 328 DU 62 185 246 212 179 331 Trip Generation 3,139 Net Trip Generationa 2,885 55 ]75 230 103 23 126 School 0 � Students 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Genemtion - 0 ]n[emal Trip Captures 75.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 Sports Pazk 40.00 AC 2,462 0 0 0 257 136 393. Trip Generation TAZ3 Commercial 100.00 TSF 6,791 95 61 157 300 326 626 Trip Generation -10 -6 -16 --30 -33 -63 Internal Trip Capture° 10.0% -679 6,112 86 55 141 270 293 563 Net Trip Generation TAZ4 Single Family Residential 218 DU 41 123 164 141 79 220 Trip Generation 2,086 Net Trip Generation 1,918 37 117 153 69 15 84 Multi -Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0� 0 0 Net Trip Generationr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ 5-A Senior Housing -Attached 175 DU 7 14 72 7 19 Trip Generation 609 7 Multi -Family Residential 187 DU - 82 68 33 101 TripGeneration 1,096 ]4 68 Net Trip Generationa 1,007 12 65 77 33 6 39 TAZ 5-B Commercial 0.00 TSF 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 Internal Trip Capture° 10.0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 Net Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 TAZ6 Single Family Residential ]00 DU 56 75 65 36 101 Trip Generation 957 19 Net Trip Generation' 880 17 S3 70 31 7 38 Multi -Family Residential 192 DU 84 69 34 104 Trip Generation 1,125 �14 70 Net Trip Generation; 1,034 13 � 67 79 34 7 40 P:\CRU830\200TTripgen.xk\Trip Gen w-1200du - LA(9/142007) TAZ7 Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 0 Trip Genemtioit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net "£rip Generation} 0 0 TAZS Golf Course. 0.00 Holes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Genemtion 0 TAZ 9A (Berry) Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 TAZ 9B (Berry) Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 TAZ ]0 Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Trip Generations 0 0 � 16,907 226 539 765 809 495 1,304 Total Net Trip Generation Notes: � Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation , 7th Edition, 2003. . Commercial trips calculated using the ITE regression equation for Shopping Centers. z Sports park trip rate derived from trip rates from the Brea and Long Beach Sports Park traffic studies. s Net Trip Generation for Residential includes adjustment for internal trips to Commemial use. Internal Trip Capture based on discussion with County of Orange and County of Los Angeles. Internal Trip Capture based on conservative interaction of uses on site. ' TSF Thousand Square Feet . DU Dwelling Unit AC Acres .....-- ^--... worn„ _ r eranarznn7l Table AD- 2013 Project Trip Generation (Total Units= 21400 DU, Sent,,r Housing=357 DU) Total AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Land Use Size Units ADT Trip Rates Single Family Residential DU 9.57 0,19 0.56 0.75 0,65 0.36 1.01 School Students 1,29 0,23 0.19 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 commercial TSF HER Equation Multi -Family Residential DU 5.86 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.36 0,18 0.54 Senior Housing -Attached - DU 3.48 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.07 0.04 0,11 2.74 Golf Course Holes 35.74 1.75 0.47 222 1.21 1,53 AC 61.55 0,00 0.00 0.00 6.42 3.41 9.83 Sports Park Trip Generation TAZI Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 AZ2 Single Family Residential 609 DU 343 457 394 221 615 Trip Generation 5,828 114 Net Trip Generation' 5,376 108 334 442 294 133 427 School 0 Students 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 Internal Trip Capture' 75.0% 0 0 00 0 0 D 0 Net Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 Sports Park 40.00 AC 27462 0 0 0 257 136 393 Trip Generation TAZ3 Commercial 150.00 TSF 8,839 122 78 200 393 425 818 Trip Generation 4 -12 -8 -20 -39 43 .82 Internal Trip Capture 10.0% -884 7,955 I10 70 180 353 363 736 Net Trip Generation AZ4 Single Family Residential 409 DU 230 307 264 149 413 Trip Generation 3,914 77 Net Trip Generation' 3,611 73 224 297 197 90 287 Multi -Family Residential 142 DU 62 51 25 77 . Trip Generation 832 11 52 Net Trip Generation 768 10 51 61 38 IS 54 TAZ 5-A Senior Housing -Attached 357 DU 14 29 25 14 39 Trip Generation 13242 14 ulti-Family Residential 187 DU 68 82 68 33 101 Trip Generation 10096 14 Net Trip Generatiou 3 I,OIl 13 67 80 50 20 71 TAZ 5-B ' Commercial 50.00 TSF 4,328 63 40 103 190 206 396 Trip Generation 4 10.0% -4 -10 -19 .21 -40 Internal Trip Capture 36 93 171 185 357 Net Trip Generation AZ6 Single. Family Residential 331 DU r21139 r27 186 248 214 120 334 Trip Generation Net Trip Generation 182 240 160 73 232 Multi -Family Residential 365 DU 133 161 132 65 197 Trip Generation Net Trip Generation 1,973 26 130 156 99 39 138 TAZ7 Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 Net Trip Generation 0 0 TAZB Golf Course 0.00 Holes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 TA29A (Berry) Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 TAZ 9B (Berry) - SingleFamilyResidential 0 DU 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 TAZ 10 Single Family Residential 0 DU 0 0 Trip Generation 0 0 0 0 0 Net Trip Generations 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Net Trip Generation 31,214 469 1,108 ],577 1,644 1,089 2,734 Notes: � Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 7th Edition, 2003. Commercial trips calculated using the 1TE regression equation for Shopping Centers. s Sporis park trip rate derived Gom trip rates from the Hrea and Long Beach Sports Park traffic studies. s Ne[ Trip Generation for Residential includes adrystrnent for internal trips to Commercial use. ° Internal Trip Capture based on discussion with County of Orange and County of Los Angeles. s Internal Trip Capture based on conservative interaction of uses on site. TSF Thousand Square Feet DU Dwelling Unit AC Acros ...__ .��... ��nna�. _ r erolldl�nnT 'I'R AYPIC IMPACT AN AI.Y 31S LSA A IATES. INC. - 8RA NASTHR PLANNED COMMUNITY SEPTEN NER 1&S] CITY OY D ONU BAR, I.OS ANCEI. P.3 COU NTV, CALIY ORNIA scenario, while Tablet shows the project impacts and mitigation measures for the 2025 plus Road Connected Alternative. The following 11 intersections are forecast to be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project in 2025. Mitigation measures to offset the significant impact of the Proposed Project and the Road Connected Alternative aze identified in Tables Y and Z. 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 7. Hazbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N) (County of Los Angeles) ] 0. Nogales Street/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 17. SR-57 northbound ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard. (City of Diamond Bar) 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City of Diamond Bar) 20. SR-57 southbound ramp/Brea Canyon Road (City of Diamond Bar) 2013 Plus 1,200 Dwelling Units The same procedure used to forecast traffic volumes for 2025 was used to forecast traffic volumes for 2013 and to identify the mitigation measures required for a reduced project consisting of 1,200 dwelling units. The 1,200 dwelling units are analyzed in a 2013 horizon (consistent with the interim year analyzed in the AMPC Orange County Traffic Impact Analysis). Ambient traffic for 2013 conditions was developed based on a growth rate of 0.82 percent per year for six years (i.e., from 2007 to 2013). LSA manually assigned the trip generation from the 1,200-unit project description to the 2013 baseline to identify LOS, project impacts, and mitigation measures for this increment of project development The LOS for the 2013 Baseline and 2013 Plus Project are shown in Table AE. This table also shows the mitigation measures that would be required with the 1,200-dwelling-unit project in the 2013 horizon. As shown in Table AE, the following eight intersections would be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project in 2013. 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) ] 0. Nogales Street/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) . P:\CRU830\ZOOTTraalc Smdy\LA Smdy_September 2007.doc R0924/Ohl � � `tom k > / k\N §§k \ � N\+ \ƒ §t§ k !!! !) !!! k BE § 5B! !&§ § | ■!e §B5!! § r i\i k | §!!E!!B!]§e �\) % !,f)#)mmtomw )\!)&\� ,§#! ]!k(/ )�{)) §)\\) /k)#! !!|4!| \! ;! \£\\) ]\\\\( 'R APFIC IM AN AI.YSIS LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. AIiEA MAS'1'EE PLANNED COMMUNITY SF P'rCM HEN Poll) CITY O DIAM ONU tlAR. LOS AN GEI. P.3 COUNTY, CAI.IPORNIA 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City of Diamond Baz) 20. SR-57 southbound rampBrea Canyon Road (City of Diamond Bar) Three of the 11 intersections significantly impacted by the 3,600-dwelling-unit project (Azusa Avenue/Colima Road, Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N), and SR-57 NB ramps/Diamond Bar Boulevard) would not be impacted with the 1,200-dwelling-unit project. 2019 Plus 2,400 Dwelling Units The 2,400-dwelling-unit project was analyzed in a 2019 horizon (i.e., the year between the First phase [2013] and the project completion year [2025]). Ambient traffic for 2019 conditions was developed based on a growth rate of 0.82 percent per year for 12 years (i.e., from 2007 to 20 ] 9). LSA manually assigned the trip generation from the 2,400-unit project description to the 2019 baseline to identify LOS, project impacts, and mitigation measures for this increment of project development. The LOS for the 2019 Baseline and 2019 Plus Project are shown in Table AF. This table also shows the mitigation measures that would be required with the 2,400-dwelling-unit project in the 2019 horizon. As shown in Table AF, the fallowing 10 intersections would be significantly impacted by the Project in 2019. 3. Fullerton Road/Colima Road (County of Los Augeles) 4. Fullerton Road/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 5. Nogales Street/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 6. Azusa Avenue/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 10. Nogales Street/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 14. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road (County of Los Angeles) 15. Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road (County of Los Angeles) 17. SR-57 northbound ramp/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City of Diamond Bar) 18. Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard (City of Diamond Baz) 20. SR-57 southbound ramp/Brea Canyon Road (City of Diamond Bar) One of the 11 intersections significantly impacted by the 3,600-dwelling-unit project (Harbor Boulevard/Fullerton Road (N)) would not be impacted with the 2,400-dwelling-unit project. P:\CRU830\2007\Trafiic Study\LAStudy_September 2007.doc «0924/07» - � 144 � ( \§ fi§§ dodo } 4¥®¥§k \\\\ )))\\\ { k IT !! 5co !§55 Pool wo § §555!§ § !!5e Io ! --. / (Ie 0.4 rodi oo Im \ ; }LID IT \ ' Iol pod o, do -oodoo § Lou c5 a !!§c; \\ u���� , !i;&)k)�/ f])`!!!«#*j\ !:§)))§!li;2 :!!ElV) -•�,l _ |\klkiit!/7}§ \ Z;!!!!a!!l,�� i§= ]i#!! ;I`!§ §\§os j\ \\�\� \: ] 7) \ |: . \\} �f)(� )|§�\ l•;,� § \ ) AFNIC IMYA C'I' AN ALY319 LSA A OCI ATP.S, INC. AY.RA MAR!I'E0. PI.ANNBD C MUNI'I'Y SBPTRM tlRN RUU] CITY OF OIAM ONU BAR. LOS AN CRLRS COUNTY, CAI.?IFORNIA Mitigation Phasing The mitigation measures described in Tables Y and Z would be necessary when the entire project (i.e., 3,600 dwelling units) is built out. However, due to the size of the project, it will be built out over a period of 10 to ea years. Mitigation measures would not be required with construction of the first dwelling unit. A mitigation phasing program has been prepared to identify the phase that each . mitigation measure would require. As explained previously, the project has been analyzed in three phases corresponding to development years (2073 and 2019) and build out year (2025). Table AG summarizes the results of the mitigation required for each phase. In 2013, approximately 1,200 dwelling units would be constructed. With this level of development, eight intersections would be impacted by the project and would require mitigation. By 2019, the project could have up to 2,400 dwelling units completed and would require mitigation at 10 intersections. The entire 3,600-dwelling-unit project would be completed by 2025 and would require mitigation at 1 ]intersections in Los Angeles CounTy. Conclusion Based on implementation of the project design features, recommended improvements, and mitigation measures identified above, the AMPC project will not result in significant, unavoidable impacts at intersections, roadway segments, or CMP arterial locations, with the exception of following intersections: Proposed Project Conditions: Road Connected Alternative Conditions: Cumulative Conditions: Fullerton Road/Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard Fullerton Road/Colima Road Fullerton Road/Colima Road Nogales Street/Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road Should the County of Los Angeles accept ITS improvements as a feasible mitigation measure, the project impacts at Fullerton Road/Colima Road and Nogales StreetlColima Road would be fully mitigated under each scenario. A combination of ITS and feasible physical improvements at the intersection of Brea Canyon Cutoff/Colima Road would fully mitigate this intersection under each scenario. As a result, each significant impact identified in this report has been mitigated to a level of insignificance, with the exception of the cumulative impact at Brea Canyon Cutoff/Pathfinder Road and the project impact at Brea Canyon Road/Diamond Bar Boulevard. Two freeway mainline segments are forecast to exceed the significance threshold on SR-60 eastbound in the p.m. peak hour. However, improvements to the freeway are part of regional transportation improvement programs with associated timing and funding sources. In the absence of a cumulative mitigation program established by the responsible agencies, no improvements are proposed by AMPC on the freeway mainline. P:\CRU830\200TTra0ic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a0924/07„ 146 ! � d{f 27( � ) / § \ Z � )]§ § � Ow � P4 \ P4 77 C 2 f )� e�- lo \k§ lo ;9 \ 2ƒ ) /)k §\ .ate \)) \) 2\! §\!m) , \)\ §|k! ( \/jf))\)[(§( !§®§k±%m §2z:«f=lkk=mom ==e„ ( \»j\ .«$]! )\\\\ _ TRAFI'IC I PACT AN AI.YSIS I.SA ASSOCI ATIi3, INC. AERA MASTEN PI.ANN EU COMMUNITY PI'F.M11EH 2O01 CITY OF UTAM ONO » AN OGLES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA APPENDIX A TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPE OF WORK P:\CRU830@OOTTru�c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a09/24/07» q ASS UCIATEg. INC. R AI'I•IC IMYAC'1' AN AI.YSIg ERA M 4I1'ER PI.ANNEU C MMUNI'rY AMOND MAR. I.OS ANCELES COUNTY, CALII.O RNIA APPENDIX B SCAG RTP CORRESPONDENCE P:\CRU8301200TTreRc StudyU.4 Study_Sep[ember 2007.doc «09/24/Ohl 'rxnYrlc IMPnc'r n nt.vsls .SA ASSOCI A'I'Y.3. INC. AF:NA MAS'1'aa PI-ANNaO COMMUNITY S EYTEM aY.« RSO] ni�v OP UTAMONp nAN. 1.03 AN CEI. ES COU N'I'Y, C IPORNIA APPENDIX C STUDY AREA CORRESPONDENCE P:\CRU830@007\TraRic Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc «09/24/07» A A55U CI A'1'a3. INC. S M.PTEM BI:R RIIR] 'RAP PIC IMYAC'1' ANALYSIS AERA MAS!I'P.0. PLANNED COMMIINI'1'Y CITY OI• UTAMONII VAR. 1.05 AN UEI.ES COUNTY. CAI.IPORNIA APPENDIX D EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNT DATA P:\CRU830\2007\Traffc Study\LA Smdy_September 2007.doc <A9/24/07s 'RAPYIC IMPACT' AN AI.Y515 I VATaMtleR RVV] INC. AtlRA MA9TYN PI.ANNep COM MUNI'I'Y UCP Il'Y OY DIAM UNO a NOYI.CS COUN'I'V. CALIFORNIA APPENDIX E LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS P:\CRU830\200TTrafiu: Study\I.A Scudy_Sep[ember 2007.doc R0924/07» 'I'RAYYIG IMPACT AN AI.YSIS CI AI'Eg INO � R MASTER P.ANNEO COMMUNITY gE P'18MHER 100] CITY O ONO E LFO SAANOEI. F.3 COUNTY. CALIYORNIA APPENDIX F TWO-LANE ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS P:\CRU830\2007\TcaO;c Study\LA Study_September 2007.doc a0924/07» O CI A'1'1:5. INC. 'TRAFFIC 1 PACT ANAI.YSIY Sa PTCMaRR RUUI AaRA MASTEN Y NCD COM MII NI'1'Y ' CI'I'V O AMOND 11 R. I.OS AN ORI. F.S C Nl'Y. CAI,1 t'URNIA APPENDIX G TRAFFIC MODEL FORECAST METHODOLOGY P:\CRU830\200TTra0ic Study\l,A Study_September 2007.doc <A9/24/Obl AFYIC IMPAL•'I' AN AI.V SIS A ASSUCIATRS. INC. AENA MAS I'F:N PLANNY.0 COMMUNITY SC Y'I'NM»P.R RAY] CITY OY OIAM ONO XAR. I.OS ANCE LES C N'I'V. CALIF00.NIA APPENDIX H CMP LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT P:\CRU830\200TTratiic Swdy\LA Smdy_Seprember 2007.doc tt0924/07s INC. T'R &YYI^ IMYA ANAI.Y313 SaPt'RMB RI R011] � NNt:I) CIOMNONI'I'Y BAR, L GEI.a3 C CAt.IYO RNIA APPENDIX I MITIGATION CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS P:\CRU830@007\TraRc Study\LA S[udy_September 2007.doc n09/24/07»