Agenda packet — Bellflower City Council, September 26, 2022 (part 1 of 4)

T h e C i t y o f B e l l f l o w e r
Families. Businesses. Futures.
16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower, CA 90706
Tel 562.804.1424 Fax 562.925.8660 www.bellflower.org

Next CC Resolution No. 22-61 Next CC Agreement No. 955 Next Ordinance No. 1419

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (562) 804-1424, extension 2220 or [email protected]. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

Agenda Items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for public inspection during normal business hours. For your convenience, the Agenda is also posted on the City’s Website at www.bellflower.org with links to each Agenda Item (unless they are too lengthy or unavailable at the time of posting). Any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the members of the City Council/Successor Agency after the posting of this Agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours in the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower. (Privileged documents and Closed Session documents are exempted.)

REGULAR MEETING OF THE BELLFLOWER CITY COUNCIL

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2022

BELLFLOWER CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7 P.M. OPEN SESSION / CLOSED SESSION

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The City Council Chambers will be open to the public. Per the Los Angeles County Health Officer Order effective March 4, 2022, it is strongly recommended, but not required, to wear a face covering when inside Bellflower City Hall.

OPEN SESSION

1 CALL TO ORDER

2 ROLL CALL: Mayor Ray Dunton
Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines
Council Member Raymond Y. Hamada
Council Member Dan Koops
Council Member Victor A. Sanchez

Page 1 of 6 ends

AGENDA

Bellflower City Council Agenda
September 26, 2022

Page 2 of 6 ends

3 INVOCATION: Mayor Pro Tem Sonny R. Santa Ines

4 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Len Gorecki, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works

5 CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS / PRESENTATIONS

A City Council Announcements

B Compton College Presentation

6 PUBLIC COMMENTS

This is the time set aside for the public to address the City Council on matters not listed on the Agenda. Anyone wishing to address the City Council should come to the podium, be recognized by the Mayor, and state your name for the record. If you wish to address the City Council on an Agenda Item, you may do so by approaching the podium as we review that particular item. You will be given three (3) minutes to address the City Council.

7 PUBLIC HEARINGS

A Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) and adopt Resolution No. 22-57 - A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit the Fiscal Year 2021 -2022 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 22-57 with the addition of any public comments received during the Public Comment period; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

B Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to consider an application from Greg James of McKently Malak Architects, Inc. for Conditional Use Permit and Development Review, and to adopt Resolution No. 22-60 – A Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Case No. CU 21-03 for three restaurants with drive-through components; a fuel station with accessory off-site alcohol sales; for developing on lots that will measure less than 1.5 acres; and Development Review Case No. DR-6-21- 12018 to allow for the construction of five commercial buildings on properties located at 17617-17639 Bellflower Boulevard within the Design for Development for South Bellflower Commercial Area (“DFD”). Applicant:

Greg James of McKently Malak Architects, Inc.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
September 26, 2022

Page 3 of 6 ends

7 PUBLIC HEARINGS – Continued

B Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to consider an application from Greg James of McKently Malak Architects, Inc. for Conditional Use Permit and Development Review, and to adopt Resolution No. 22-60 – Continued
CEQA: The proposed Project is categorically exempt from the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines § 15332 (Class 32 – In-Fill Development Projects), because the site is less than five acres, surrounded by urban uses and has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The Project would not result in significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality and it can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Furthermore, it can be seen with certainty that no special circumstances exist that would create a reasonable possibility that the proposed Project will have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 22-60; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

8 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

None

9 CONSIDERATION ITEMS

None

10 CONSENT CALENDAR

All items under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. Specific items may be removed from the Consent Calendar at the request of any member of the City Council for separate consideration.

A Consideration and possible action to receive and file City Council Warrant Register No. 23-032, dated September 26, 2022.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Warrant Register No. 23-032; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

B Consideration and possible action to receive and file Treasurer’s Report for the Month of August 2022.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Receive and file Treasurer’s Report; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

C Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the September 12, 2022, Special Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the September 12, 2022, Special Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
September 26, 2022

Page 4 of 6 ends

10 CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued

D Consideration and possible action to approve the Minutes of the September 12, Regular Meeting of the City Council.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Approve the September 12, Regular Meeting Minutes; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

E Consideration and possible action to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1418 – An Ordinance approving the first amendment to Development Agreement File No. 837.1, in a form approved by the City Attorney, by and between the City of Bellflower and 16411 Bellflower, LLC, to modify and reconfigure the mixed-use development project within the Downtown Bellflower TOD Specific Plan on property located at 16411 Bellflower Boulevard; Applicant and Developer: 16411 Bellflower, LLC.

CEQA: The City Council previously approved a mitigated negative declaration (“MND”) for the originally approved project on June 22, 2020 via Resolution No. 20-29 (Case No. MND 20-01). For the revised project, the City reviewed the project's environmental impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq., “CEQA”) and the regulations promulgated thereunder (14 Cal. Code of Regulations §§15000, et seq., the “CEQA Guidelines”). An Addendum to MND was prepared pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines § 15164. Pursuant to CEQA, the Addendum need not be circulated for public review (CEQA § 15164(c)). It must, however, be considered by the City Council before it makes a decision regarding the project (CEQA § 15164(d)). Based upon the Addendum, no new significant impacts would occur with the revised project.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1418; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

F Consideration and possible action to award a contract to LCR Earthwork & Engineering Corp. to Reconstruct City-Owned Parking Lot Located at 9818 Artesia Boulevard (Specifications No. 20/21-03); and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with LCR Earthwork & Engineering Corp., in a form approved by the City Attorney.

CEQA: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §§ 15000, et seq.), the City conducted an environmental assessment. Based on the environmental assessment, the project was determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15303 (Class 1 – Existing Facilities).

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Award a contract to LCR Earthwork for the Project and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with LCR Earthwork, in a form approved by the City Attorney; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
September 26, 2022

Page 5 of 6 ends

10 CONSENT CALENDAR – Continued

G Consideration and possible action to adopt 1) Resolution No. 22-58 – A Resolution fixing the employer contribution at an equal amount for employees and annuitants under the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act (Government Code § 22892); and 2) Resolution No. 22 -59 – A Resolution fixing the Employer Contribution under the Public Employees’ Medical and Hospital Care Act (Government Code § 22893).

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Adopt Resolutions Nos. 22-58 and 22-59; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

H Consideration and possible action to consider a $1,000 contribution in Cannabis Education Funding to the Bellflower Ministerial Association for the 2022 Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast, which is scheduled for October 11, 2022.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) If appropriate, approve a $1,000 contribution in Cannabis Education Funding to the Bellflower Ministerial Association; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

I Consideration and possible action to authorize the City Manager to execute a Master Cooperative Agreement (MCA) File No. 328.6 with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), in a form approved by the City Attorney, establishing the procedures and processes associated with the construction of the West Santa Ana Branch (WSAB) light rail line within the City.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File No. 328.6, in a form approved by the City Attorney; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

J Consideration and possible action to execute Agreement File No. 952 with The Addressers, Agreement File No. 953 with Intergraphics Company, and Agreement File No. 954 with OnGraphics, in forms approved by the City Attorney, for on-call commercial printing services.

Recommendation to City Council: 1) Authorize the City Manager to execute Agreement File Nos. 952, 953, and 954, in forms approved by the City Attorney; or 2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

11 COUNCIL REPORTS

CLOSED SESSION

12 RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

A CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – THREAT OF LITIGATION – GOVERNMENT CODE § 54956.9(d)(2). Number of Cases: One.

Facts and Circumstances: Claim submitted on September 21, 2022, by Luster Electric, Inc.; on file with the City Clerk’s Office.

Bellflower City Council Agenda
September 26, 2022

Page 6 of 6 ends

13 RECONVENE FOR OPEN SESSION

14 ADJOURNMENT

Adjourn to the next Regular Meeting of the Bellflower City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, October 10, 2022.

�� "��<>�.�;� SPEAKER SIGN-IN SHEET
�,,, .
r (Voluntary)
�"�rr'u-�.vc)Toor-Tj1e�
� REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 26, 2022

PLEASE PR/NT LEGIBLY
NAME ORGANIZATION
if a licable
i� �� V' �� L�� r�
' �� 1�� 7 U ZOl

Page 1 of 4 ends

7-A

TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council

ATTENTION: Jeffrey L. Stewart, City Manager

FROM: Jim DellaLonga, Director of Economic Development

SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to conduct a public hearing to receive comments on the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) and adopt
Resolution No. 22-57 - A Resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit the Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

DATE: September 26, 2022

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This action approves the FY 2021-2022 CAPER, following incorporation of any public comments received during the Public Hearing and Public Comment period ending on September 26, 2022. It also authorizes the City Manager to submit the CAPER to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL

1) Open the public hearing; take testimonial and documentary and testimonial evidence; and after considering the evidence, adopt Resolution No. 22-57 with the addition of any public comments received during the Public Comment period; or

2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

FISCAL IMPACT

None.

PUBLIC NOTICE

The FY 2021-2022 CAPER was made available for a public review period beginning on September 12, 2022, through September 26, 2022. A notice of availability was duly published in the Herald American (The Wave) newspaper on September 8, 2022. The CAPER was made available for public review on the City’s website at www.bellflower.org .

- Page 1 of 50 -

Staff Report – Fiscal Year 2020-2021 CAPER
September 26, 2022

Page 2 of 4 ends

BACKGROUND

HUD requires the City to annually submit the CAPER which summarizes its activities and expenditures supported through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) funds. At the conclusion of the fiscal year, the City must prepare a year-end performance report known as the CAPER. The FY 2021-22 CAPER covers the period of July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, and provides a summary of activities undertaken within CDBG and HOME funds during the report period.

CDBG: All activities funded by the City through the CDBG Program must meet one of the following three national objectives:

1. Benefit low- and moderate-income persons as defined by federal statutes;

2. Prevent or eliminate slums or blight; or

3. Address a community development urgent need posing a severe and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community.

The federal statutes for the various grant programs covered by the CAPER include several basic goals. These goals relate to HUD’s major commitments and priorities, as set by Congress, covering the following three major areas:

1. Provide decent housing by assisting the homeless in obtaining appropriate housing; preserve the affordable housing stock; increase the availability of permanent housing that is affordable for low-income households without discrimination, and increase the supply of supportive housing for those with special needs;

2. Provide suitable living environment by improving the safety and livability of neighborhoods; reduce the isolation of income groups within an area through decentralization of housing opportunities and revitalization of deteriorating neighborhoods; restore and preserve properties of special architectural, historical, or aesthetic value; and conserve energy resources; and

3. Expand economic opportunities by creating jobs accessible to low-income persons; provide access for low-income households to mortgage financing and credit for development activities that promote long-term community viability and empower low-income persons to achieve self-sufficiency to reduce poverty in federally assisted and public housing.

- Page 2 of 50 -

Staff Report – Fiscal Year 2020-2021 CAPER
September 26, 2022

Page 3 of 4 ends

DISCUSSION

The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report is comprised of the following components:

1. Narrative: The narrative provides the description of activities undertaken during the 2021-2022 fiscal year. It compares achievements to the goals identified in the Annual Action Plan at the beginning of the same year.

2. PR-26: The Financial Summary lists the CDBG obligations and expenditures for the program year. It includes analysis of those expenditures for the purpose of confirming that the caps on planning/administration costs (20%) and public services (15%) have not been exceeded. It also verifies that the funds were used to benefit low-and-moderate-income people. CDBG-CV funds are not subject to the 15% cap on the amount of grant funds that can be used for public services activities.

Summary of Annual Goals and Objectives: The Summary of the Annual Goals and Objectives provides the budgeted amounts, expenditure amounts, and program outcomes for each program activity.

Summary of Accomplishments

The CAPER reports the accomplishments of CDBG and HOME programs. Summarized below is a list of accomplishments from July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022.

CDBG: The City of Bellflower received an allocation of $938,612 in CDBG funds in FY 2021-22 in addition to funds that were carried over and reprogrammed from previous fiscal years. The total CDBG funds expended were $898,856. Accomplishments included:

• 207 tenant/landlord issues addressed via the Fair Housing Program • 1462 persons were assisted via Public Services
• 439 households were assisted with Neighborhood Preservation • 30 persons were assisted with job placements through Kingdom Causes CDBG-CV: The City also received $1,188,480 in supplemental CDBG Coronavirus (CDBG-CV) funding to help prepare, prevent, and respond to the COVID 19 pandemic.

The City amended its 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan to allocate funds to programs and activities throughout the City to help struggling residents in the community. To date, the City expended $449,948 of CDBG-CV funds. Expenditures continue. Below is a summary of the accomplishments thus far.

• 64 households were assisted with Rental Assistance
• 112 persons were serviced by Mercy House

HOME: The City received $359,523 of HOME funds in FY 2021-2022 in addition to funds that were carried over and reprogrammed from previous fiscal years. The City expended $184,836 in HOME funds for program administration and rehabilitation of 5 homes.
- Page 3 of 50 -

Staff Report – Fiscal Year 2020-2021 CAPER
September 26, 2022

Page 4 of 4 ends

• 5 homes were rehabilitated

NEXT STEPS

Public comments received during the public comment period will be included in the 2021-2022 CAPER prior to its submittal to HUD. Following the receipt of all public comments, and City Council adoption, the amended CAPER will be submitted to HUD for approval. Once it is approved by HUD, the CAPER will be posted on the City’s website.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 22-57 …………………………………………………………..……...…...5

2. Draft Fiscal Year 2021-2022 CAPER ………………………………………..…………..7 - Page 4 of 50 -

CITY OF BELLFLOWER

RESOLUTION NO. 22-57

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
SUBMIT THE 2021-2022 CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL

PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER) TO THE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN

DEVELOPMENT (HUD)

THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council finds and declares as follows:

A. The City receives both Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership (HOME) funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);

B. Pursuant to Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the City is required to submit a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to HUD, detailing the City’s uses of CDBG and HOME funds during the 2021- 2022 Fiscal Year;

C. The City prepared this CAPER and provided opportunities to receive public comments during a 15-day public review period through a notice of availability duly published in the Bellflower Herald American (The Wave) newspaper starting on September 12, 2022.

SECTION 2. Approval. The City Council approves the CAPER for Fiscal Year 2021-2022, attached as Attachment “A,” and incorporated by reference.

SECTION 3. Authorizations. The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to take reasonable action needed to implement this Resolution, including submittal of the CAPER to the appropriate HUD office on behalf of the City.

SECTION 4. If any part of this Resolution or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of the Resolution are severable.

SECTION 5. Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.

SECTION 6. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is hereby authorized to affix his signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption and the City Clerk, or her duly appointed deputy, is directed to attest thereto.

Page 1 of 2 ends

- Page 5 of 50 -

City of Bellflower
Resolution 22-57

Page 2 of 2 ends

SECTION 7. The Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER THIS 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022.

_______________________________
Ray Dunton, Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney

ATTACHMENT:

A: Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for FY 2021-2022 - Page 6 of 50 -

CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER)
FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022
DRAFT

Funding Source Allocations:

Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
HOME Investment Partnership Programs (HOME)

Submitted By:

CITY OF BELLFLOWER, CALIFORNIA

Economic Development Department
Housing and Grants Division
City of Bellflower
16600 Civic Center Drive
Bellflower, California 90706
- Page 7 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 3 CR-05: GOALS AND OUTCOMES – 91.520(A) ............................................................................. 4 CR-10: RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF BENEFICIARIES ....................................... 8 CR-15: RESOURCES AND INVESTMENTS – 91.520(A) ............................................................ 9 CR-20: AFFORDABLE HOUSING – 91.520(B) ............................................................................ 14 CR-25: HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS – 91.220(D,E); 91.320(D,E);

91.520(C) ............................................................................................................................................ 17 CR-30: PUBLIC HOUSING – 91.220(H); 91.320(J) ..................................................................... 20 CR-35: OTHER ACTIONS – 91.220(J,K); 91.320(I,J) ................................................................. 21 CR-40: MONITORING – 91.10(D,E); 91.520(C)........................................................................... 25 CR-45: CDBG– 91.520(C)................................................................................................................ 27 CR-50:– HOME 91.520(D) ............................................................................................................... 28 CR-58 – Section 3 ............................................................................................................................. 31 APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 33

APPENDIX A: Proof of Public Notice
APPENDIX B: Public Comments (pending)
APPENDIX C: IDIS Reports – PR26 & Section 3

- Page 8 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 3

City of Bellflower
FY 2021-2022 Consolidated Annual Performance
Evaluation Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) is a summary of the City’s progress toward meeting the goals specified in the City's 2020-2025 Five-Year Consolidated Plan (Consolidated Plan). The Consolidated Plan coordinates all elements of housing and community development, neighborhood revitalization and economic development into a single plan, and vision of activities to be undertaken during the five-year period. The CAPER is the main document that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) utilizes to measure the City’s success in meeting the local and national objectives of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Programs.

The Consolidated Plan 1) identifies needs and problems; 2) analyzes market conditions and resources; and 3) sets priorities and adopts goals and strategies for addressing identified activities and programs within a program year. Within the general parameters of each of the HUD programs, the City of Bellflower developed its own local needs and priorities and tailored a strategy and funding plan which will provide services that preserve and revitalize neighborhoods.

Each year, the City of Bellflower also completes an Annual Action Plan that describes the City’s budget and planned activities for carrying out the Consolidated Plan goals and objectives. The approved and adopted 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan (Action Plan) established the goals, objectives and activities to be undertaken in that year. The CAPER evaluates and measures the accomplishments as they pertain to the goals, objectives, and activities set forth in the Action Plan.

- Page 9 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 4

CR-05: GOALS AND OUTCOMES – 91.520(A)

Summary of Objectives and Outcomes identified in the Consolidated Plan Needs Assessment Overview.

Objectives

 Decent Housing – Seek opportunities to expand affordable housing, retain affordable housing stock, and increase the availability of affordable permanent housing.

 Suitable Living Environment – Improve the safety and livability of neighborhoods by providing access to quality facilities and services; create affordable housing opportunities and revitalize deteriorating neighborhoods; restore and preserve natural and physical features of special value for architectural or aesthetic reasons; and conserve energy resources.

 Economic Opportunity – This includes job creation and or retention activities for low- and very low- income persons and provides access to credit for community development projects that promote long-term economic and social viability.

Performance Outcomes (New or Improved)

 Availability/Accessibility
 Affordability
 Sustainability

Outcomes

During this CAPER reporting period, the City implemented the following projects, programs, and/or activities to meet Consolidated Plan goals:

 Single Family Rehabilitation Program
 Fair Housing Services
 Section 108 Loan Repayment
 Acquisition/Development of Affordable Housing
 Code Enforcement
 Public Services – Bellflower Volunteer Center
 Economic Opportunities – Kingdom Causes Bellflower (Good Soil Industries)  Collaboration with Public Agencies – Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority (LAHSA), Our Place Housing Solutions (OPHS), the Housing Authority of the County of Los Angeles, local non-profits, and community members to meet the needs of the underserved.

Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan. 91.520(a)
- Page 10 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 5

For the 2021-2022 Program Year, the City of Bellflower (City) received CDBG and HOME funds to facilitate accomplishing the goals set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

The City funded public service programs which made significant progress in meeting the annual goals. Programs including providing rehabilitation loans and grants to Bellflower homeowners, employment training, and fair housing services. Table 1 outlines the progress made accomplishing the program year goals.

Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g)

For comparison purposes, the City of Bellflower generally attained the goals and objectives during this reporting period. The majority of CDBG funds is used to repay a Section 108 loan.

Since there are limited CDBG funds and no redevelopment (RDA) funds available, community development activities are more difficult to carry out. The City will continue to look at market trends and funding opportunities and amend the Consolidated Plan, as necessary, upon review of progress being made towards its annual goals and five-year goals.

Accomplishments-ANNUAL ACTION PLAN- FY 2020-2021
Goal Category
Expected
Program Year 20-
21 Actual
Program Year 20-21
Percent
Completed
Improve and
Conserve Existing
Affordable Housing
Affordable Housing
4 Households
Assisted
5 Households Assisted 125%
Development of
Affordable Housing Affordable Housing 1
Housing Unit 0 0%
Affirmatively
Furthering
Fair Housing
Public Service
60 Households
Assisted
207 345%
Neighborhood
Preservation
Non-Housing
Community
Development
70 Household
Assisted
439
Households Assisted 627%
Public Services Public Services
Programs
200
Persons Assisted
1462
Persons Assisted 703%
Employment Training Employment Training 10
Persons Assisted
30 Persons Assisted 300%
Section 108 Loan
Repayment
Section 108 Loan
Repayment N/A N/A N/A
Administration Administration N/A N/A N/A
- Page 11 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 6

Economic
Development
Non-Housing
Community
Development
12 Businesses
Assisted
0 Businesses Assisted 0%
COVID-19 Pandemic
Response N/A
100
Households
Assisted
64 Households Assisted
thus far
64%
Table 1 – Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date

Goal Category Strategic Plan Actual Percent
Completed
Improve and
Conserve Existing
Affordable Housing
Affordable Housing
16 Households
Assisted
9 Households Assisted 56%
Development of
Affordable Housing Affordable Housing 1
Housing Unit 0 0%
Affirmatively
Furthering
Fair Housing
Public Service
300
Households
Assisted
347 116%
Neighborhood
Preservation
Non-Housing
Community
Development
600
Household
Assisted
1032
Households Assisted 172%
Public Services Public Services
Programs
9500
Persons Assisted
3031
Persons Assisted 32%
Employment Training Employment Training 50
Persons Assisted
42 Persons Assisted 84%
Section 108 Loan
Repayment
Section 108 Loan
Repayment N/A N/A N/A
Administration Administration N/A N/A N/A
Economic
Development
Non-Housing
Community
Development
12 Businesses
Assisted
10 Businesses Assisted 83%
COVID-19 Pandemic
Response N/A
100
Households
Assisted
64 Households Assisted
thus far
64%
Table 2 – Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date

- Page 12 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 7

The following table identifies the activities funded during FY 2021-2022 to meet Consolidated Plan goals and objectives:

CDBG Activity Funded Amount Actual
Expenditures
CDBG Program
Administration $182,831 $143,117
Fair Housing Foundation $18,000 $18,000
Kingdom Causes $25,000 $25,000
Bellflower Volunteer
Center $115,791 $115,791
Code Enforcement $291,633 $90,408
Section 108 Loan
Payment $506,540 $506,540
Business Assistance $150,000 $0
Table 2 – Program Funding Accomplishments

Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified.

The City’s use of funds is based on several factors including, but not limited to, priority needs, Consolidated Plan and Action Plan Objectives, and available financial resources. Through the various meetings with community stakeholders, residents, and non-profit agencies, the City works to identify the high priority community development and housing needs. Subsequently, annual funding may be limited and addressing specific objectives with high priority needs is given special attention by the City Council. The City Council assesses the highest needs, along with the available resources and the specific objectives to be achieved and allocates funding to agencies that submitted proposals in alignment with the goals and objectives outlined in the City’s Consolidated Plan.
- Page 13 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 8

CR-10: RACIAL AND ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF

BENEFICIARIES

The following table identifies the race and ethnic breakdown of families assisted with program funds 91.520(a):

Table 3 – Assistance to racial & ethnic populations by source funds

Fair Housing Foundation – Assisted a total of 207 Bellflower residents with fair housing services, including outreach, education, and discrimination counseling.

Kingdom Causes – A social organization that provides employment opportunities to low- and moderate-income residents at risk of becoming homeless. These employment opportunities are offered through Good Soils Industries. In addition, the programs assist “hard-to-hire” populations in need of re-integration skills. More specifically individuals with criminal records and at risk of becoming homeless are provided with work experience, job acquisition skills and certification programs. During FY 21-22, the agency employed 30 low-income individuals.

In addition, the organization provides services including a community center; life skills classes including 24/7 Dad, Love Notes, Job Preparedness, and Money Smarts; and employment case management. In total, Kingdom Causes assisted 56 persons.

Bellflower Volunteer Center – The City funded youth services by providing assistance to Bellflower Volunteer Center. The Bellflower Volunteer Center recruits, trains, supervises youth, and recognizes individuals who volunteer their time to serve low- and moderate- income area residents in the City of Bellflower. This past fiscal year, the Volunteer Center served 1,406 unduplicated persons.

Code Enforcement – The City inspected 439 housing units through targeted code enforcement in CDBG-eligible areas.

CDBG HOME
White 1410 4
Black or African American 161 1
Asian 14
American Indian or Alaskan Native 11
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 11
Other (Multi-Racial) 62
Total 1669 5
Hispanic 1327 2
Non-Hispanic 342 3
- Page 14 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 9

CR-15: RESOURCES AND INVESTMENTS – 91.520(A)

The following table identifies the resources made available to the City:

Source of Funds Resources Made
Available for 2021-22
Amount Expended During
Program Year
Federal - CDBG
2020-21 $1,246,686 $898,856
Federal – HOME $1,821,764 $184,836
Housing Successor Agency
Residual Receipts $450,000 $249,637
Table 4 – Resources made available
Resources
A total of $359,523 was received in HOME Funds. An additional $1,507,633 was available as carryover funds, which was slightly more than the estimated amount in the Action Plan, including program income from prior years. During this program year, the City received program income of $64,853 and a total of $184,836 was expended in HOME rehabilitation projects and HOME Administration.

A total of $938,612 was received in CDBG Funds. An additional $370,595 was available as carryover funds, which was slightly more than the estimated amount in the Action Plan. The City also received program income of $63,353 during the program year. A total of $898,856 of CDBG funds were expended on CDBG programs including Code Enforcement, Administration, Kingdom Causes, Volunteer Center, Section 108 loan repayment and Fair Housing.

Geographic Distribution and Location of Investments

Target Area Planned Percentage of
Allocations
Actual Percentage of
Allocation
Narrative
Description
City of Bellflower 100% 100% Citywide
Table 5 – Geographic distribution & location of investments

As funding has been reduced and a majority of CDBG funds are being used to repay a Section 108 loan, the City has not established a target area to distribute the investment of CDBG and HOME funds. The City’s approach is rather to address the needs and fill the gaps whenever possible. The City concentrates on projects that have the greatest positive impact on the community as a whole while meeting the needs of the underserved. A few projects are geared towards low- and moderate-income areas in the City, which are defined as block groups where at least 51 percent of the population have incomes not exceeding 80 percent of the Area Median Income. Investments and provision of services serving special needs populations and primarily low- and moderate-income persons will be made throughout the - Page 15 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 10

City; however, housing assistance and housing acquisition will be available to income- qualified households citywide. One-hundred percent of all funds will benefit low- and moderate-income persons.

Leveraging

The City of Bellflower used HOME, CDBG, and Successor Agency Housing Set Aside funds to meet the housing and community development needs outlined in the Consolidated Plan. In addition, the City uses services/resources from Los Angeles County and Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. The City continues to search for competitive funds through various sources including federal and state grant funding opportunities when available.

HOME Match Report

As a recipient of HOME funds, the City is required to make non-Federal financial contributions to projects that qualify as affordable housing under the HOME Program.

Annually, the contributions must total a minimum of 25 percent of the HOME funds expended from the City’s HOME entitlement amount, less administration costs, unless the City has received a reduction in the match requirement.

To receive a match reduction, the City must meet the following distress criteria: 1) family poverty rate, and/or 2) per capita income (PCI). When a City meets one of the distress criteria, it is determined to be in fiscal distress and receives a 50 percent reduction of match. If a City satisfies both of the distress criteria, it is determined to be in severe fiscal distress and receives a 100 percent reduction of match.

FY 2020 Distress Calculations

The City’s poverty rate for FY 2021-2022 was 13.83% and the PCI was $23,395. As such, the City met the PCI criterion and qualifies for a 50% HOME Match reduction.

Fiscal Year Summary – HOME Match

1. Excess match from prior Federal fiscal year $951,632.86

2. Match contributed during current Federal fiscal year $0

3. Total match available for current Federal fiscal year (Line 1 plus Line 2) $0

4. Match liability for current Federal fiscal year $0

5. Excess match carried over to next Federal fiscal year (Line 3 minus Line 4) $951,632.86 Table 6 – Fiscal Year Summary - HOME Match Report
- Page 16 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 11

Table 7 – Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year

HOME MBE/WBE Report

The City advertises its contracting opportunities in its local paper, the Bellflower Herald American (The Wave) and at the City’s major facilities. The City will continue its efforts to offer contracting opportunities to minority and women-owned businesses.

A total of $359,523 was received in HOME Funds. An additional $1,507,633 was available as carryover funds including program income from prior years. In addition, the City received HOME-funded housing loan repayments in an amount of $64,661 and $192 in interest earnings, for a total of $1,932,009 in HOME funds for FY 2021-2022.

During this program year, program income funds totaling $304 were expended on HOME Administration and $132,315 were expended on HOME rehabilitation projects. The remaining $89,275 will be used to finance future activities in Affordable Owner Housing Development project or Single-Family Rehabilitation loans.

Program Income – Enter the program amounts for the reporting period Balance on
hand at
beginning of
reporting period
Amount
received during
reporting period
Total amount
expended
during reporting
period
Amount
expended for
TBRA
Balance on
hand at end of
reporting period
$157,041 $64,853 $132,619 $0 $89,275

Table 8 – Program Income

Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year
Project
No. or
Other ID
Date of
Contribut
ion
Cash
(non-
Federal
sources)
Foregone
Taxes,
Fees,
Charges
Appraised
Land/Real
Property
Required
Infrastruc
ture
Site
Preparation,
Construction
Materials,
Donated
labor
Bond
Finan
cing
Total
Match
Rental
Assistance
and Other
SHA
funded
Assistance FY 21-22 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
- Page 17 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 12

Minority Business Enterprises and Women Business Enterprises – Indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period Total Minority Business Enterprises White
Non-
Hispanic
Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Contracts
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Women
Business
Enterprises
Male
Contracts
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0
Number 0 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0
Table 9 - Minority Business and Women Business Enterprises

Minority Owners of Rental Property – Indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners and the total amount of HOME funds in these rental properties assisted Total Minority Property Owners White Non-
Hispanic Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dollar
Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 10 – Minority Owners of Rental Property

- Page 18 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 13

RELOCATION AND REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION

During FY 2021-2022, there was no voluntary or involuntary displacement that would trigger the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act. The City of Bellflower’s policy is to minimize displacement, whether permanently or temporarily, of person(s) from projects funded with Federal funds, such as Property Acquisition, Single or Multi-Family Rehabilitation and Demolition. If the City undertakes any of these activities with funds provided under the CDBG or HOME Programs, the City would follow the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Act of 1978 (URA) and Section 104 (d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974.

Relocation and Real Property Acquisition – Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition Parcels Acquired 0 0
Businesses Displaced 0 0
Nonprofit Organizations
Displaced 0 0
Households Temporarily
Relocated, not Displaced 0 0
Households
Displaced
Total Minority Property Enterprises White Non-
Hispanic Alaskan
Native or
American
Indian
Asian or
Pacific
Islander
Black Non-
Hispanic
Hispanic
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0
Cost 0 0 0 0 0 0
Table 11 – Relocation and Real Property Acquisition

- Page 19 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 14

CR-20: AFFORDABLE HOUSING – 91.520(B)

The following tables represent the City’s progress in providing planned affordable housing, including the number and types of families served:

One-Year
Goal Actual
# of homeless households to be provided
affordable housing units 0 1
# of non-homeless households to be provided
affordable housing units 5 0
# of special needs households to be provided
affordable housing units 0 0
Total 5 1
Table 12 – Number of Households

One-Year
Goal Actual
# of households supported through rental
assistance 0 54
# of households supported through production of
new units (Partnership Housing) 0 0
# of households supported through the rehab of
existing units (Housing Rehab) 4 5
# of households supported through acquisition of
existing units (1st Time Homebuyer) 0 0
Total 4 59
Table 13 – Number of Households Supported

Difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting these goals

During this reporting period, the City allocated funds to the following programs/activities, through various sources of funds to meet housing affordability goals:

Project Source of Funds Priority Amount
Allocated
Amount
Expended
Single-Family Housing
Rehabilitation Program HOME High $250,000 $132,315
CHDO Project HOME High $1,535,812 $0
Fair Housing CDBG High $18,000 $18,000
Table 14 – Funds Made Available
- Page 20 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 15

Problems Encountered in Meeting Affordable Housing Goals

Overall, the largest impact on the identified housing and community development goals and outcomes has been the coronavirus pandemic. The uncertainty of the pandemic caused minor delays to projects.

The following activities were conducted in FY 2021-2022 to preserve existing affordable housing stock through homeowner rehabilitation and preventing slum and blight through Code Enforcement Activities in targeted areas.

Activity Accomplishment Data
Code Enforcement Inspections 439 housing units inspected in CDBG-eligible areas
Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation 5 housing units rehabilitated CHDO Project 0 project
Table 15 – Programs Made Available

The following housing activities assisted in meeting the affordable housing goals:

A Rapid Re-Housing program funded with Housing Successor Agency Low and Moderate Housing Funds assisted 54 persons with rental assistance.

Approximately 207 unduplicated persons were assisted with fair housing services through a Public Service Agreement with Fair Housing Foundation.

Under the Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program, 5 loans/grants were funded, and all 5 were completed during the year.

The City has made progress in meeting most of it goals as evidenced in the outcomes.

How outcomes will impact future annual Action Plans

The annual goals are modest with specific consideration being given to the current housing trends, the availability of funds, and interested investors that will assist in the development of affordable housing. Outcomes of the prior annual report period may impact future annual Action Plans as they provide an assessment of the City’s success in meeting established goals and outcomes.

The City will re-assess areas, projects, or types of activities where program year goals were not met. Prioritizing of needs will continue to impact future annual Action Plans. The City is interested in developing affordable owner-occupied projects and will entertain assisting developers with viable projects as they present themselves.

- Page 21 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 16

The City regularly reviews projects to ensure compliance with Section 215 Homeownership requirements. The City’s consultant verifies that affordable housing projects funded with HOME are in compliance with rent restrictions, purchase price, resale and recapture provisions and energy efficiency standards for new construction.

The City also collaborates with local Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDO) to provide affordable housing.

Include the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons served by each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine the eligibility of the activity.

# of Persons Served CDBG Actual HOME Actual
Extremely Low-Income 1309
Very Low-Income 296
Low-Income 64 1
Moderate-Income 4
Total 1669 5
Table 16 – Number of Households Served

The numbers above reflect the number of low-income persons funded with CDBG and HOME activities. CDBG funds were used to benefit low-income persons under the Fair Housing Program administered by the Fair Housing Foundation and Good Soil Industries Program administered by Kingdom Causes Bellflower. During FY 21-22, 207 unduplicated persons were served under the Fair Housing Program and 30 persons were provided employment opportunities through the Kingdom Causes public service activity. In addition, 55 households were served by local non-profit Kingdom Causes Bellflower through the organization’s Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing Program funded partially through the City’s Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Funds (LMIHAF).
- Page 22 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 17

CR-25: HOMELESS AND OTHER SPECIAL NEEDS –

91.220(D,E); 91.320(D,E); 91.520(C)

The following narrative reflects the City’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending homelessness.

Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs

Bellflower recognizes the importance of outreach and will continue to provide input and referrals to Kingdom Causes Bellflower and LAHSA to assist efforts to end homelessness.

According to the 2020 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count by City/County conducted by the Los Angeles Continuum of Care (CoC), in Bellflower, there are 242 homeless persons, 225 of whom are unsheltered persons. This number includes 103 persons on the street, 16 persons in makeshift shelters, and 106 persons in cars, vans, and campers.

As funds are extremely limited the City must rely primarily on LAHSA, OPHS, and public service agencies to address this need. LAHSA oversees the collection of regional homeless data, serves as a clearinghouse for regional information and resources, identifies gaps in services, and leads strategic planning efforts to get people from homelessness to permanent housing. Needed services include housing counseling; temporary shelters; hotel and motel vouchers; emergency food and transportation; clothing; and job search assistance. Most of the funded activities include an outreach component.

Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons

In May 2020, the City opened a Temporary Homeless Shelter, New Hope, which provides beds and services to homeless persons in the City. The Shelter provides temporary and short- term housing needs for persons experiencing homelessness in the City. Services at the Shelter include: Intake/Bed Reservations, Food/Meals, Laundry, Storage, Animal/Pet Assistance, Security, Transportation, Recreational Activities, Assessment and Housing Navigation, Case Management, Housing Placement Services, Life Skills Classes, Employment/Job Referrals, Health Care Resources, Mental Health Resources, Drug & Alcohol Treatment Referrals, and Benefits Enrollment.

CDBG funds can be used to rehabilitate a building for the purpose of or to construct an emergency shelter or transitional housing, as long as it is owned or operated by the City or a non-profit entity. CDBG typically cannot be used to operate or maintain these facilities for the homeless, unless it qualifies as a Public Service. CDBG funds were not used to construct the New Hope Temporary Shelter.

Because the City does not receive Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) or CoC funding to assist the homeless, the City relies heavily on LAHSA and local non-profit organizations to provide additional homeless services.

- Page 23 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 18

Helping low income and extremely low income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, and those who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions) and those receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs.

CDBG funds are used to benefit low-income persons under the Fair Housing Program administered by the Fair Housing Foundation and Good Soil Industries Program administered by Kingdom Causes Bellflower. The City has a public service agreement with Kingdom Causes Bellflower, in which the non-profit provides a job training and employment program for nonviolent offenders reentering society. The program assists in hiring Bellflower’s unemployed and under-employed. The program provides on-the-job training, certification programs, and job acquisition skills.

In addition, the City funded an Emergency Housing Assistance program with CDBG-CV funds.

The program was able to assist additional low-and-moderate income households with housing related costs such as rent, mortgage, and utilities to prevent eviction and/or foreclosures. The City received 28 applications and qualified 13 additional households during the 2021-2022 program year.

Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living. This includes shortening the time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

Bellflower will continue its efforts to assist in such endeavors through the preservation of existing affordable units through the rehabilitation program, the creation of new affordable units, or helping to fill vacant assisted units with people who meet the requirements of this category. The direct work in assisting the homeless is done through LAHSA’s CoC initiatives.

However, as CDBG funds become available, Bellflower will assist by providing funding through supportive services. The City funds local public services including Kingdom Causes, which provides employment opportunities to under employed and unemployed Bellflower residents. Kingdom Causes also provides on-the-job training, certification programs, and job acquisition skills for those who may have criminal records or are at risk of homelessness.

Collaboration with local community housing developer non-profits such as Partnership Housing Inc. CHDO can provide affordable housing for special populations such as veterans and their families.

Chronically homeless persons require rehabilitation services, employment training and placement, health services, and case management services to move from homelessness to transitional housing, and then to supportive/permanent housing. The CoC Strategy coordinated by LAHSA offers a full range of services and facilities. The City supports LAHSA’s strategy for constructing housing facilities that help transition chronically homeless persons to a stable housing situation and receive supportive services that would improve their employment skills. LAHSA’s main goals include Housing First (permanent supportive housing), Housing Plus (wraparound services and support), Homeless Prevention, - Page 24 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 19

Enhanced Data Collection, and Securing Mainstream Resources. - Page 25 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 20

CR-30: PUBLIC HOUSING – 91.220(H); 91.320(J)

Actions taken to address the needs of public housing

Not applicable as the City of Bellflower does not have any public housing.

Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership

Not applicable as the City of Bellflower does not have any public housing.

Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs

Not applicable as the City of Bellflower does not have any public housing.

- Page 26 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 21

CR-35: OTHER ACTIONS – 91.220(J,K); 91.320(I,J)

Actions taken to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment

Governmental and market barriers both have the potential to affect the City's ability to provide and maintain affordable housing. The City's land use controls, although developed to ensure quality and sound development, may play a role in limiting the production of affordable housing for all income levels. In addition, requirements mandated by state and federal agencies (e.g., energy conservation requirements and the American Disabilities Act) may impede the production of affordable housing.

Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs 91.220(k); 91.320(j)

The City has had success in supporting homeless families with children, female victims of abuse or female alcoholics by offering public service agency funds to local non-profits and non-profits that provide services to Bellflower residents. The City does not provide its own Human or Health Services and depends on the Los Angeles County system and LAHSA to meet these needs.

Additionally, using CDBG funds, the City supports local non-profits such as Kingdom Causes Bellflower whose programs, such as Our Place Housing Solutions and Good Soil Industries, strive to address the needs of underserved neighbors through employment and training, technology access, classes, and workshops, as well as homeless assistance and referrals. CDBG funds also support the non-profit agency, Fair Housing Foundation to help households and landlords understand fair housing laws and prevent undue evictions or other conditions that make housing unaffordable.

The primary obstacle to address the needs of the underserved is funding availability. Since the elimination of redevelopment in California and the 20% Low and Moderate Housing Set Aside funding that was part of redevelopment, it is more difficult to undertake revitalization projects.

Another obstacle in meeting the needs of the underserved is lack of local data. While some data is available from LAHSA and other local service agencies, the data is generally aggregated for the region and not specific to Bellflower. To help bridge this gap, the City is working to establish closer ties and ways to support local non-profits such as Kingdom Causes Bellflower along with the public service agencies who provide homeless resources: Beacon Light Mission, Catholic Charities, Christian Outreach Appeal, Year Round Shelter Hotline, Little House, Long Beach Rescue Mission, Lutheran Social Services of Southern California, Rio Hondo Transitional Housing, Salvation Army, and United Way Hotline.

Actions taken to address obstacles to lead based paint hazards 91.220(k); 91.320(j)

The majority of the City’s housing stock was built before 1980 which increases the likelihood of the unit to contain lead-based paint. According to CHAS data 82% of the owner-occupied units and 74% of rental units were built before 1980. The City's efforts are not restricted to a specific area: since the majority of the City’s housing stock is over 35 years old, efforts will be made citywide. HUD’s Lead Based Paint (LBP) regulations require all units assisted with CDBG and HOME funds to be inspected for LBP and abated if LBP is found to be present.

Bellflower’s program guidelines include measures to ensure compliance with the regulations. - Page 27 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 22

The guidelines include testing, LBP removal, and control activities. The City will refer any cases of suspected lead poisoning to the Los Angeles County Public Health Department for investigation.

Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty-level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)

The City of Bellflower regularly provides service referrals to those living below the poverty line. The City provides a listing of public service agencies, homeless resources and contact information/links to social service agencies on the City’s website:
www.bellflower.org . In addition, the City supports other government agencies, private developers, and non-profit agencies that are involved in creating affordable housing and economic opportunities for low- and moderate-income residents.

The City continually reviews its own policies and procedures and attempts to implement policies that help reduce poverty and coordinate available resources and services. For example, the city implemented a mixed-use development zone in the downtown which encourages integration of services and higher density development around transit centers.

Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)

The City seeks to maintain effective and efficient methods of communicating with other agencies to develop programs and projects that ensure cost effective program delivery. To overcome gaps in the institutional structure, the City maintains communication with HUD, the State Department of Housing and Community Development, the Economic Development Administration, interagency staff, and neighboring cities to help overcome gaps in institutional structure.

In addition, the City consulted with both public and private agencies to develop the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. Agencies consulted include the Los Angeles County Health Department, (specifically the Childhood Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Program), the Los Angeles County Housing Authority, LAHSA, the Department of Health and Human Services, HUD, the California Department of Housing and Community Development, the Department of Social Services, the Fair Housing Foundation, local public services agencies, and CHDOs.

The community was asked to rank the priority of various CDBG and HOME eligible activity categories as high, medium, or low. The City actively sought to understand the needs of the community and more specifically low-and moderate-income populations and those most in need of CDBG and HOME funds. A list of Public Service Agencies and other interested community members were notified via e-mail about the development of the Consolidated Plan.

The agencies contacted are included in the Consolidated Plan.

Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)

The City maintains a contact list of interested nonprofits, public agencies, social services agencies, and private housing developers that have capacity and potential to carry out activities and meet some of the goals described in the Consolidated Plan. Letters or notices - Page 28 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 23

announcing the availability of funds are emailed to potential applicants and interested agencies when funding is available. In addition, notices are published in the local newspaper, posted at various locations in the City, and posted on the City website. Staff participates in local and regional meetings, which include service providers, neighboring agencies and elected officials to keep abreast of issues impacting the quality of life for Bellflower’s low- income residents. When funds are available the City maintains a web presence and it actively provides technical assistance throughout the year to assist interested citizens and agencies applying for CDBG and HOME funds. The City will continue to strengthen its coordination and consultation efforts with other agencies, including State and local public agencies, to ensure that needed services and funding for homeless and other services are addressed. The City will also continue to work with agencies and organizations to strengthen coordination, assess gaps in the delivery of services, and develop strategies to overcome the gaps and carry out the goals and objectives of the Action Plan.

Actions Taken to Overcome the Effects of any Impediments identified in the City’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice 91.520(a)

In 202 the City of Bellflower updated its Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice.

Its conclusions provide the basis for the recommendations also made in the report. Through counseling and case management, the Fair Housing Foundation identified that the most common complaints were on the basis of disability, race, familial status and retaliation. During FY 2021-2022, the City continued to monitor and implement the recommendations in the AI through a public service agreement with the Fair Housing Foundation.

The Fair Housing Foundation provided the City with comprehensive Fair Housing Program services that include:

1. Discrimination Counseling and Complaint Intake and Investigation

2. General Housing (landlord/tenant) Counseling and Resolutions

3. Enforcement and Impact Litigation

4. Education and Outreach Programs

Proposed Actions to Address Identified Impediments

Proposed actions to address the impediments to fair housing choice identified within the City are as follows:

Action 1 – Continue to Provide Fair Housing Services

The City will continue to contract with the Fair Housing Foundation to provide fair housing services to Bellflower residents, which includes the processing of housing discrimination complaints and landlord/tenant counseling services.

Action 2 – Provide Targeted Fair Housing Education and Outreach

The Fair Housing Foundation will collaborate and coordinate with multiple agencies, including lender, realtors and cultural groups to provide increased efforts in educating residents. - Page 29 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 24

Action 3 – Increase Fair Housing Awareness and Education Through the City’s Website

The City, on its website, will increase efforts in educating residents on potential sources of discrimination and avenues to address fair housing.

Action 4 – Provide Information on Property Management Practices at Landlord Workshops

The Fair Housing Foundation will continue to hold Landlord Workshops via virtual or in person as permitted and include discussions on the prohibited discriminatory practices pertaining to service and companion animals, reasonable accommodations, and reasonable modifications.

Action 5 – Continue Affirmative Marketing Actions for CDBG and HOME Programs

The City will continue to affirmatively market CDBG and HOME funded programs. Marketing efforts will include advertising housing programs in local publications and on the City’s website. The City will continue to promote fair housing by ensuring outreach to all potential eligible households.

- Page 30 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 25

CR-40: MONITORING – 91.10(D,E); 91.520(C)

Describe the standards and procedures that will be used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will be used to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and comprehensive planning requirements.

The objective of monitoring is to ensure that all projects and activities that receive funding are in compliance with all HUD regulations. For all of the City’s housing programs, including Home Rehabilitation, and New Housing Construction Projects, the City works closely with its Building and Safety Department in order to ensure that all projects meet Housing and Quality Standards and are free from any building substandard issues. Monitoring of public service agencies and CHDOs is conducted on a 1-3 year basis depending on the number of housing units. The monitoring emphasizes program and financial performance and regulatory compliance. The City uses a monitoring checklist, which includes a review of federal compliance and relevant documentation to be monitored as required by HUD, including program performance, record keeping, financial performance, and regulatory compliance.

In FY 21-22 the City of Bellflower enlisted the services of Avant-Garde Inc. to complete onsite desk and unit inspections for three (3) rental HOME-Assisted properties (Bellflower Terrace Senior Apartments, Our Place Housing Solutions, and HOPE CHDO Project). The City created a schedule and coordinated with property managers to provide supporting documentation and demonstrate compliance with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) HOME regulations. The monitoring consisted of review of all relevant tenant, maintenance, financial and administrative files as well as property standards that meet HUD requirements as well as other applicable regulations.

During monitoring for Bellflower Terrace Senior Apartments located at 9920 Flora Vista Street, it was found that financial documentation such as 1) Independent Financial Audit, 2) Current Year’s Budget, and 3) General Ledgers were not presented during desk review. As a corrective action, Staff requested the information to be submitted within 15 calendar days.

Additionally, repairs were needed for the water heater which was addressed by property management.

Desk monitoring and unit inspections were conducted for 8822 Oak Street. Based on the supporting documentation presented during monitoring it was found that income determinations were calculated on net wages instead of gross income for all household members. As a corrective action, Property Management was required to submit appropriate source documentation and demonstrate correct calculations for current household recertification. Based on the evidence obtained during review, the City has determined that Kingdom Causes is in noncompliance in accordance with 24 CFR 92.252 (i) Over-income tenants. The City will continue to work with property owners to resolve noncompliance determination.

Finally, monitoring and inspections were conducted for HOPE CHDO Project located at 9610 Laurel Street. The monitoring indicated that the agency was in compliance with income and rent restrictions. Some findings were reported regarding collection of at least two months of income source documentation, income calculations and rental agreements.

Staff conducted a second desk review and were presented with correct tenant - Page 31 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 26

documentation. Property inspections reported minor concerns with property’s roof line and fascia, and over-accumulation of items in the garage. Property management is currently working with tenants to clear garage. Roof line and fascia were properly inspected and do not currently present a hazard to tenants. This item will be addressed in the future.

The City of Bellflower will continue to inspect units and monitor property management to ensure ongoing compliance with HUD HOME regulations.

Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d)

The City of Bellflower’s 2021-2022 CAPER was developed in accordance with requirements and federal regulations. To ensure compliance with program and comprehensive planning requirements, the Economic Development Department staff regularly conducts a review of projects and programs to ensure that they are eligible and meet national objectives. In addition, the City conducts periodic self-audits of all programs and projects to ensure compliance and verify supporting documentation is in the project files. Subrecipient quarterly reports and summary reports were used as the source of information for CAPER reporting.

The Draft CAPER adheres to the City’s Citizen Participation Plan for public noticing, public review and comment period, public hearings and meetings.

Description of the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment on performance reports.

To provide notice to citizens, the City published a Notice of a Public Hearing and 15-day comment period to receive comments on the performance report.

To ensure that all City residents had ample opportunity to take notice of all scheduled public hearings, all notices regarding such hearings were published, including the date, time and location, and availability of the CAPER for public review and comment for a period of at least 15 days, from September 12, 2022 through September 26, 2022. The notice was physically posted at several locations including Bellflower City Hall, the Brakensiek Library, the Bellflower substation, and various city owned park and recreation facilities. The City’s notice was also published in the Bellflower Herald American (The Wave). The document was made available to the public for review on the City’s website, www.bellflower.org ,. and mail upon request. After HUD approval, it will be included on the City’s website. The CAPER document will be presented to City Council.

Summary of Public Comments

Pending public comments.

- Page 32 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 27

CR-45: CDBG– 91.520(C)

Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives and indications of how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its experiences.

The City amended their 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan to program and re-program unspent CDBG-CV funds to multiple public services described below.

The City programed CDBG-CV funds for a New Small Business Start-Up Loan Program. The program is intended to offer 5-year forgivable loans to start-up businesses in the City’s low/moderate income redeveloped area (Northeast corner of Bellflower Blvd. & Cedar St).

The City also programed CDBG-CV funds for a Homeless Shelter Meals Program, which provided meals to homeless Bellflower persons out of the New Hope Temporary Shelter.

CDBG-CV funds were programed for a Food Insecurity Program which will provide groceries to low-moderate-income households in the City.

In addition, CDBG-CV funds were programmed for emergency Rental, Mortgage, and Utility assistance.

CDBG-CV Activity Funded Amount Expenditures
Thus far
CV-Program
Administration $237,696 $225,605
CV-Emergency Housing
Needs Assistance $186,784 $178,603
CV-Food Insecurity
Program $27,000 $15,740
CV-Homeless Shelter
Meals Program $30,000 $30,000
CV-Youth/Family/Senior
Services $507,000 $0
CV-Business Grant
Assistance $100,000 $0
CV-New Small Business
Start-Up Loan Program $100,000 $0
Table 17 – CDBG-CV Programs
*funds expected to be exhausted by year 2023

- Page 33 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 28

CR-50:– HOME 91.520(D)

Include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing assisted under the program to determine compliance with housing codes and other applicable regulations.

The City has three HOME-funded projects in its rental housing portfolio. They are: 1) Bellflower Terrace Senior Apartments on 9920 Flora Vista Street; 2) Our Place Housing Solutions CHDO on 8822 Oak Street; and 3) HOPE CHDO Project on 9610 Laurel Street.

During the program year each agency is required to submit a quarterly report, which accounts for the agency’s service patterns. Most of the agencies provide client-based services; the City provides the public service agencies with the annual income limits developed by HUD which helps the agencies apply the correct income guidelines. For new construction projects, plans have to be submitted and approved before construction can begin. Once the project is complete, both the City’s Building and Planning Departments complete a final inspection of the project. Once all requirements are met, the owner is issued a Certificate of Occupancy. In order to ensure compliance with HUD regulations, all properties including covenants with periods of affordability are annually inspected to ensure compliance with building codes and the habitability of the home. If any defects are detected during the inspections, they have to be corrected.

An assessment of the jurisdiction's affirmative marketing actions for HOME units.

92.351(b)

The City has the mechanisms in place to affirmatively market CDBG and HOME funded programs. Marketing efforts include advertising housing programs in local publications. The City collects and maintains statistical information on race and ethnicity to ensure all segments of the community are being served. The City’s Limited English Proficiency Plan has identified that the City has a significant portion of Spanish-speaking residents. To ensure that all residents are aware of programs, publications are provided in both English and Spanish brochures of programs and program information are placed at City department desks and libraries as well as on the City’s website.

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 29

earnings, for a total of $1,932,009 in HOME funds for FY 2021-2022.

Data on the amount and use of program income for projects, including the number of projects and owner and tenant characteristics.

During FY 2021-2022, a total of $359,523 was received in HOME Funds and $64,853 was received in HOME program income. The total program income received was receipted in IDIS during the program year. An additional $1,507,633 was available as carryover funds including program income from prior years.

HOME Program activities are consistent with the City's stated goals and objectives of the Consolidated Plan. However due to annual reductions in HOME funds, the City continues to re-evaluate and amend goals as needed depending on the availability of future funding.

The City’s identified housing needs included preservation and upgrading of existing housing, development of home ownership and rental opportunities as its principal housing goals.

During this reporting period, the City allocated HOME funds to the following projects/programs:

Project Activity Amount
Allocated
Actual
Expended
Home Administration
Administration $35,952 $52,521
Single-Family Housing
Rehabilitation Program Rehabilitation $250,000 $132,315 Partnership Housing
CHDO
Acquisition,
Rehabilitation,
and/or
Construction
$1,535,812 $0
Table 18 – Funds Made Available

The Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program provides grants and/or loans to low- and moderate-income owner-occupied households that need financial assistance to bring their house up to current housing quality standards. 5 loans/grants were given to eligible Bellflower residents during this program year.

Rental monitoring and on-site inspections are conducted according to a schedule as prescribed by federal regulations at 24 CFR 92.504(d). Depending on the number of units, the project is monitored annually or as required. Staff and the City’s Consultant, Avant Garde, Inc., conducted HOME rental inspections in September 2019. The inspections included 15% of all units and the exteriors of the buildings. In addition, the City’s consultant, Urban Futures conducts affordability and occupancy compliance annual reports on - Page 35 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 30

Bellflower Terrace Senior Apartments to ensure HOME assisted units are income compliant within affordable housing income limits.

Describe other actions taken to foster and maintain affordable housing. 91.220(k) (STATES ONLY: Including the coordination of LIHTC with the development of affordable housing). 91.320(j)

In the 2021-2022 program year, the City allocated funds to the following housing activity:

Single-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program This program assists the City with meeting the goals and objectives as adopted in the Five-Year Consolidated Plan and Housing Element.

In addition, the City will continue to make efforts to facilitate the development of affordable housing, including:

1. Efforts to streamline the environmental review process for housing developments, using available state categorical exemptions and federal categorical exclusions when applicable.

2. Annually pursue state, federal and other funding opportunities to increase the supply of safe, decent, affordable housing in Bellflower for lower income households (including extremely low-income households), such as seniors, the disabled, the homeless, and those at risk of homelessness.

3. Amend the Zoning Code to provide zoning incentives for affordable housing projects, such as increases in density, or provide incentives through existing affordable housing provisions of the Bellflower Municipal Code.

4. Support and refer residents to HACoLA and LAHSA for emergency housing, shelters and special needs housing, and supportive services.

- Page 36 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 31

CR-58 – Section 3
Identify the number of individuals assisted and the types of assistance provided Total Labor Hours CDBG HOME
Total Number of Activities 0 0
Total Labor Hours
Total Section 3 Worker Hours
Total Targeted Section 3 Worker Hours
Table 2 – Total Labor Hours

Qualitative Efforts - Number of Activities by Program CDBG HOME Outreach efforts to generate job applicants who are Public Housing Targeted Workers 0 0
Outreach efforts to generate job applicants who are Other Funding Targeted Workers. 0 0
Direct, on-the job training (including apprenticeships). 0 0 Indirect training such as arranging for, contracting for, or paying tuition for, off-site training. 0 0
Technical assistance to help Section 3 workers compete for jobs (e.g., resume assistance, coaching). 0 0
Outreach efforts to identify and secure bids from Section 3 business concerns. 0 0
Technical assistance to help Section 3 business concerns understand and bid on contracts. 0 0
Division of contracts into smaller jobs to facilitate participation by Section 3 business concerns. 0 0
Provided or connected residents with assistance in seeking employment including: drafting resumes, preparing for interviews, finding job opportunities, connecting residents to job placement services.
0 0
Held one or more job fairs. 0 0
Provided or connected residents with supportive services that can provide direct services or referrals. 0 0
Provided or connected residents with supportive services that provide one or more of the following: work readiness health screenings, interview clothing, uniforms, test fees, transportation. 0 0
Assisted residents with finding child care. 0 0
Assisted residents to apply for, or attend community college or a four year educational institution. 0 0
- Page 37 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 32

Assisted residents to apply for, or attend vocational/technical training. 0 0
Assisted residents to obtain financial literacy training and/or coaching. 0 0
Bonding assistance, guaranties, or other efforts to support viable bids from Section 3 business concerns. 0 0
Provided or connected residents with training on computer use or online technologies. 0 0
Promoting the use of a business registry designed to create opportunities for disadvantaged and small businesses. 0 0 Outreach, engagement, or referrals with the state one-stop system, as designed in Section 121(e)(2) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.
0 0
Other. 0 0
Table 3 – Qualitative Efforts - Number of Activities by Program

Narrative
The City did not have active Section 3 eligible activities for Program Year 2021-2022.

- Page 38 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report Page 33

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A:

Proof of Public Notice

APPENDIX B:

Public Comments

APPENDIX C:

IDIS Reports – PR26

- Page 39 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report

APPENDIX A:

Proof of Public Notice

- Page 40 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report

- Page 41 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report

APPENDIX B:

Public Comments

Pending.
- Page 42 of 50 -

2021-22 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report

APPENDIX C:

IDIS Reports –PR26 & Section 3

- Page 43 of 50 -

- Page 44 of 50 -

- Page 45 of 50 -

- Page 46 of 50 -

- Page 47 of 50 -

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
Integrated Disbursement and Information System
Section 3 Report
DATE:

TIME:

PAGE:
08-31-22
19:29
1 Grantee:Filed Office:

CDBGREPORT FOR CPD PROGRAM
PGM YR 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022
No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data. - Page 48 of 50 -

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
Integrated Disbursement and Information System
Section 3 Report
DATE:

TIME:

PAGE:
08-31-22
19:29
2 Grantee:Filed Office:

No data returned for this view. This might be because the applied filter excludes all data.

Section 3 Details By Program, Program Year & Activity
Legend
A Outreach efforts to generate job applicants who are Public Housing Targeted Workers B Outreach efforts to generate job applicants who are Other Funding Targeted Workers.

C Direct, on-the job training (including apprenticeships).

D Indirect training such as arranging for, contracting for, or paying tuition for, off-site training.

E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
Assisted residents to obtain financial literacy training and/or coaching.

Bonding assistance, guaranties, or other efforts to support viable bids from Section 3 business concerns.

Provided or connected residents with training on computer use or online technologies.

Provided or connected residents with supportive services that provide one or more of the following: work readiness health screenings, interview clothing, uniforms, test fees, transportation.

Assisted residents with finding child care.

Assisted residents to apply for/or attend community college or a four year educational institution.

Assisted residents to apply for or attend vocational/technical training.

Division of contracts into smaller jobs to facilitate participation by Section 3 business concerns.

Provided or connected residents with assistance in seeking employment including: drafting resumes,preparing for interviews, finding job opportunities, connecting residents to job placement services.

Held one or more job fairs.

Provided or connected residents with supportive services that can provide direct services or referrals.

Technical assistance to help Section 3 workers compete for jobs (e.g., resume assistance, coaching).

Outreach efforts to identify and secure bids from Section 3 business concerns.

Technical assistance to help Section 3 business concerns understand and bid on contracts. - Page 49 of 50 -

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Community Planning and Development
Integrated Disbursement and Information System
Section 3 Report
DATE:

TIME:

PAGE:
08-31-22
19:29
3 Grantee:Filed Office:

U Other
T Outreach, engagement, or referrals with the state one-stop system, as designed in Section 121(e)(2) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act.

S Promoting the use of a business registry designed to create opportunities for disadvantaged and small businesses. - Page 50 of 50 -

6/30/2022 Page 1
Proposed Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study Comments and Responses
Comment Response

CITY OF BELLFLOWER

1.Page 1
a.Project Description. The description describes fast food restaurants of 2,200 SF, 2,321 SF and 2,509 SF. The site plan reflected on page 3 reflects something different than 2,200 and 2,231 SF described. Please revise accordingly.
b.Project Description. The middle driveway on Bellflower Boulevard is described as left out restricted access. This should be revised to left in restricted access.
a.The description has been updated accordingly.
b.Based on prior discussions with City staff, the middle driveway on Bellflower Boulevard would allow for left turns and right turns in to the site and only right turns out of the site. Left turns out of the site at this driveway are not permitted.

2.Page 14
a.Summary of Cumulative Projects. The total AM and PM peak hour trips do not add up correctly. Please double check and revise accordingly. This is also reflected on the Figure 6 exhibit on page 15, Figure 7, page 16 and Table 3, page 17. Please revise accordingly.
a.The total AM and PM peak hour trips on table 2 have been corrected and updated accordingly. It should be noted that this correction only applies to Table 2 and does not affect the cumulative traffic trips noted on Figure 6 and subsequent figures and analysis.

A cumulative project trip distribution spreadsheet has been added to the report as Appendix F for reference.

3.Table 4
a.Summary of Trip Generation. The square footage of floor area used in the computation are consistent with the site plan shown on page 3. a.Confirmed. The square footage of floor area used in trip generation computation is consistent with the proposed site plan.

4.Figure 10
a.Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project-Related Traffic Volume shown on page 24 shall be revised to reflect the corrected cumulative volumes as stated in bullet point 3 above. The same applies to Table 5, page 25. a.See the Response to Comment 2.

6/30/2022 Page 2
Proposed Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study Comments and Responses
Comment Response

5. a.The analysis from May 27, 2021 states that a Vehicle Miles Travelled analysis (VMT) is not required as projects containing locally serving retail uses is assumed to have less than significant VMT impacts, hence a VMT analysis is not required. This consistent with the guidelines contained in the Los Angeles County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines as well as the criteria contained in the State of California Office of Planning and Researched (OPR) guidelines.
a. Acknowledged.

6. a.The Traffic Study on Page 30 indicates that unaccptebale level of service will result at Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street during morning and afternoon peak hours. The City will be installing a future traffic signal at the intersection which will alleviated level of service impacts. Please add a new discussion of this in the Summary of Findings and Conclusions section on pages 30 and 31.
a.Language has been updated to the Traffic Signal Warrant section (see page 23) and the Summary of Findings and Conclusion section (see pages 30 and 31) of the Traffic Study report. Figure 4C-3 of the CA MUTCD for Existing and Opening Year Plus Project conditions at Intersection #3 (Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street) has been added to Appendix D for reference. It should be noted that Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) is met for this intersection under Existing Conditions (pre-project).

Traffic Study
for the:

Bellflower Convenience Center
In the City of Bellflower
June 2022

TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR THE
BELLFLOWER CONVENIENCE CENTER PROJECT
IN THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER
Prepared by:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 W. Town and County Road, Suite 700
Orange, California 92868
June 2022

TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR THE
BELLFLOWER CONVENIENCE CENTER PROJECT
IN THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 1 Analysis Scenarios ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Study Locations ................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Intersection Analysis Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Performance Criteria........................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Significance Thresholds .................................................................................................................................................................. 5 EXISTING TRAFFIC ENVIRONMENT / AREA CONDITIONS ............................................................................................... 6 Existing Transportation System ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Transit Service ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Existing Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Existing Operating Conditions .................................................................................................................................................... 9 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 12 Cumulative Projects ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Trip Generation ..................................................................................................................................................................... 12 Trip Distribution and Assignment .............................................................................................................................. 12 Peak Hour Operating Conditions ................................................................................................................................. 12 PROJECT TRAFFIC ................................................................................................................................................................................ 18 Project Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................................... 18 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ......................................................................................................................... 18 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT ..................................................................................................................... 23 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................... 23 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. 23 DRIVE-THROUGH OPERATIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 26 Proposed Drive-Through Queuing Capacity ..................................................................................................................... 26 Pad 1 (Fast-Food Restaurant) ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Pad 2 (Fast-Food Restaurant) ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Pad 3 (Fast-Food Restaurant) ....................................................................................................................................... 26 Queuing Data Collection .............................................................................................................................................................. 27 Queuing Observations .................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Drive-through Queue Length Calculation........................................................................................................................... 28 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................... 30

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 – Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 3 – Existing Lane Configuration and Traffic Control .............................................................................................. 7 Figure 4 – Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 5 – Location of Cumulative Projects ............................................................................................................................ 13 Figure 6 – Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 7 – Opening Year Cumulative Traffic Volumes....................................................................................................... 16 Figure 8A –Non-Pass-By Project-Related Trip Distribution .......................................................................................... 20 Figure 8B –Pass-By Project-Related Trip Distribution ..................................................................................................... 21 Figure 9 – Project-Related Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................ 22 Figure 10 –Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes .......................................................................... 24

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 – Summary of Intersection Operation – Existing Conditions ....................................................................... 11 Table 2 – Summary of Cumulative Projects ............................................................................................................................ 14 Table 3 – Summary of Intersection Operations – Opening Year Cumulative ........................................................ 17 Table 4 – Summary of Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5 –Summary of Intersection Operation – Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project ................................ 25 Table 6 –Summary of Drive-Through Queuing Data Collection - Popeyes ............................................................. 29

APPENDICES
Appendix A – Approved Scoping Agreement
Appendix B – Traffic Data Collection Worksheets
Appendix C – Intersection Analysis Worksheets
Appendix D – Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
Appendix E – Drive-Through Queuing Analysis
Appendix F – Cumulative Project Trip Distribution Spreadsheet

Bellflower Convenience Center - 1 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR THE
BELLFLOWER CONVENIENCE CENTER PROJECT
IN THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER

INTRODUCTION
This traffic study has been prepared to evaluate the project-related traffic effects associated with the proposed Bellflower Convenience Center project in the City of Bellflower. This report has been prepared in accordance with the City of Bellflower’s traffic study requirements and the Los Angeles County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 2020).

The project location is shown in its regional setting on Figure 1.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located between the southwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Ramona Street and the northwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Cedar Street, in the City of Bellflower. The project site is currently vacant. The project will involve construction of three fast-food restaurants with drive-throughs, a gas station with a convenience market, and a one retail building. The proposed fast- food restaurants will be 3,164 square feet (SF), 2,378 SF, and 2,509 SF, respectively. The proposed gas station will contain 8 fueling positions. The proposed retail building will be 8,356 SF. The proposed site plan is shown on Figure 2.

Vehicular access provisions for the project site would be provided via one proposed full-movement driveway on Ramona Street, one full-movement driveway on Cedar Street, and three restricted access driveways on Bellflower Boulevard. The north and south driveways on Bellflower Boulevard would be right-in-right-out (RIRO) access. The middle driveway on Bellflower Boulevard would be left-out restricted access. All proposed project driveways would be unsignalized.

ANALYSIS SCENARIOS AND METHODOLOGY
Analysis Scenarios
This traffic analysis provides an evaluation of morning and evening peak hour intersection operations for the following scenarios:
·Existing Conditions
·Opening Year Cumulative
·Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project

Bellflower Convenience Center - 4 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
Study Locations
This traffic study includes documentation of existing conditions, analysis of future traffic conditions, and identification of project-related effects, if any, at the following study intersections:

Existing Intersections:

1.Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard

2. Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street

3. Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street
Project Driveway Intersections:

D1. Ramona Street at Project Driveway
D2. Bellflower Boulevard at North Project Driveway
D3. Bellflower Boulevard at Middle Project Driveway
D4. Bellflower Boulevard at South Project Driveway
D5. Cedar Street at Project Driveway
The study locations were established in consultation with City staff through the Scoping Agreement process. A copy of the approved Scoping Agreement is provided in Appendix A.

Intersection Analysis Methodology
For signalized intersections, the HCM methodology estimates the average delay (in average seconds per vehicle) for each of the movements through the intersection, considering a number of factors, including number of lanes, volume of traffic, cycle length, and signal timing and phasing.

The procedure for stop-control analysis determines the average total delay, expressed in seconds of delay per vehicle, for left turns from the major street and from the stop-controlled minor street traffic stream. Delay values are calculated based on the relationship between traffic on the major street and the availability of acceptable “gaps” in this stream through which conflicting traffic movements can be made.

The HCM delay forecast translates to a Level of Service designation, ranging from LOS A to LOS F. A summary description of each Level of Service and the corresponding delay is provided in the following chart.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 5 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS
HCM METHODOLOGY

LOS
Average Delay
(sec / vehicle) Description
Signalized Unsignalized
A 10.0 - 20.0 > 10.0 - 15.0
LOS B represents stable flow, but the presence of others in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the freedom to maneuver.

C > 20.0 - 35.0 > 15.0 - 25.0
LOS C is in the range of stable flow but marks the beginning of operation in which individual users become affected by interaction with others in the traffic stream.

D > 35.0 - 55.0 > 25.0 - 35.0
LOS D represents high-density, but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are restricted, and the driver
experiences a generally poor level of comfort and
convenience.

E > 55.0 - 80.0 > 35.0 - 50.0
LOS E represents operating conditions at or near the
capacity of the intersection. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform level. Small increases in flow will cause breakdowns in traffic movement.

F > 80.0 > 50.0
LOS F represents forced, or breakdown flow. This condition occurs when the amount of traffic approaching the
intersection exceeds the volume which can pass through the intersection, resulting in queues and congestion.

Performance Criteria
The City of Bellflower Level of Service standard for peak hour intersection operation is Level of Service D (LOS D).

Significance Thresholds
If project traffic causes operations at an intersection to go from acceptable to unacceptable, the project would have a project-related effect at the intersection.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 6 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
EXISTING TRAFFIC ENVIRONMENT / AREA CONDITIONS
Existing Transportation System
Regional access to the site is provided primarily by State Route 91 (SR-91), and the Interstate 605 (I- 605) Freeway. The SR-91 freeway is located approximately 0.25 miles north of the project site. The I- 605 Freeway is located approximately 1.5 miles east of the project site.

Existing lane configurations and traffic controls of the study intersections are shown on Figure 3 . Local access to the project vicinity is provided by the following roadways:

Bellflower Boulevard is a north-south roadway that forms the eastern boundary of the project site. It provides two travel lanes in each direction, separated by a two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL) within the project vicinity. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph), and on-street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Bellflower Boulevard is classified as a Secondary Arterial in the City of Bellflower Circulation Element of the General Plan. Bellflower Boulevard provides direct access to the project site.

Artesia Boulevard is an east-west divided roadway that provides two travel lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit is 40 mph, and on-street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Artesia Boulevard is classified as a Major Arterial in the City’s Circulation Element.

Ramona Street is an east-west roadway that forms the northern boundary of the project site and provides one travel lane in each direction. The posted speed limit is 25 mph, and on-street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Ramona Street is classified as a local in the Circulation Element.

Ramona Street provides direct access to the project site.

Cedar Street is an east-west roadway that forms the southern boundary of the project site and provides one travel lane in each direction. The posted speed limit is 25 mph, and on-street parking is permitted on both sides of the street. Cedar Street provides direct access to the project site.

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 7 -
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection
= Turn or Through Lane
= Signal
= Stop Sign

1. Bellflower Blvd atArtesia Blvd 2. Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St

3. Bellflower Blvd at
Cedar St
D2. Bellflower Blvd atNorth Project Dwy D3. Bellflower Blvd atMiddle Project Dwy D4. Bellflower Blvd atSouth Project Dwy D5. Cedar St atProject Dwy D1. Ramona St atProject Dwy

FUTUREINTERSECTION FUTUREINTERSECTION FUTUREINTERSECTION FUTUREINTERSECTION FUTURE

INTERSECTION

PROJECT
SITE

Bellflower Convenience Center - 8 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
Transit Service
Public transit service in the project vicinity is provided by the City of Bellflower (Bellflower Bus), Metro Bus, and the Long Beach Transit (LBT). The bus stops near the project site are currently located:
·On the northeast corner of the intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street ·On the southeast corner of the intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street The following discussion provides a brief description of the transit routes that operate on the roadways serving the project site.

Long Beach Transit Route 91

Long Beach Transit Route 91 operates along Bellflower Boulevard within the project vicinity. On weekdays, Route 91 operates with 12-minute headways from approximately 5:00 AM to 6:00 PM, and with approximately 20-minute headways again from 6:00 PM to 11:00 PM. On Saturday and Sunday, Route 91 operates from approximately 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM, with approximately 20-minute headways throughout the day.

Bellflower Bus (South Route)

Bellflower Bus South Route operates along Artesia Boulevard within the project vicinity. On weekdays, the South Route operates from approximately 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, with approximately 30-minute headways throughout the day. On Saturday and Sunday, the route does not operate.

Metro Bus Route 130

Metro Bus Route 130 operates along Artesia Boulevard within the project vicinity. Route 130 operates every day from approximately 5:00 AM to 9:20 PM, with approximately 30-minute headways throughout the day.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 9 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
Existing Traffic Volumes

Existing morning and evening peak hour turning movement counts for the study intersections were collected in December 2021. Morning and evening peak hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 4.

Copies of the traffic count data worksheets are provided in Appendix B to this report.

Existing Operating Conditions
An intersection Level of Service analysis was conducted for the morning and evening peak hours using the analysis procedures and assumptions described previously in this report. A summary of the intersection Level of Service is presented in Table 1. Intersection analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C of this report. Review of the table shows that the following study intersection currently operates at an unacceptable LOS:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F The Level of Service for an unsignalized intersection is reported based on the single approach movement with the highest delay, which in this case, would be the westbound approach for intersection #3. The side street traffic at this intersection experiences delay during the peak hours while waiting for an acceptable gap in traffic on Bellflower Boulevard. While the side street approach operates at a deficient Level of Service based on the highest delay approach, the overall intersection delay would be acceptable. Any queuing that occurs on the side street is contained on the minor intersection approach and does not impact the progression of traffic on the main arterial.

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 10 -
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection

1. Bellflower Blvd atArtesia Blvd

2. Bellflower Blvd at
Ramona St

3. Bellflower Blvd at
Cedar St
D2. Bellflower Blvd at
North Project Dwy
D3. Bellflower Blvd at
Middle Project Dwy
D4. Bellflower Blvd at
South Project Dwy D5. Cedar St atProject Dwy
D1. Ramona St atProject Dwy
FUTURE

INTERSECTION
FUTURE

INTERSECTION

FUTUREINTERSECTION

PROJECT
SITE

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION OPERATION

EXISTING CONDITIONS
Int. # Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard S 39.7 D 33.9 C 2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street S 9.0 A 7.4 A
3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street U >180 F 81.7 F
##
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Notes:
- S = Signalized; U = Unsignalized
- LOS = Level of Service
- Delay refers to the average control delay measured in seconds per vehicle. - Bold and shaded values indicate intersections operating at LOS E or F per City standards.

Traffic
Control
Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study
- 11 - Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Bellflower Convenience Center - 12 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
Project completion is estimated to occur in Year 2023. Future year forecasts for Opening Year 2023 were developed using the “build-up” forecasting process, starting with adding a background growth factor of one percent per year, for a total of two years, to existing traffic volumes.

Cumulative Projects
Cumulative Projects consists of development projects that have been approved but are not yet constructed/occupied, and projects that are in various stages of the application and approval process but have not yet been approved. The location of Cumulative Projects are shown on Figure 5.

Trip Generation
Trip generation information for the Cumulative Projects was obtained from approved traffic studies, where available; or was developed by Kimley-Horn if approved traffic studies were not available. A summary of Cumulative Projects in the project vicinity and the trip generation associated with each is provided on Table 2.

Trip Distribution and Assignment
Likewise, trip distribution and assignment for the Cumulative Projects were either obtained from approved traffic studies, where available; or were developed by Kimley-Horn if approved traffic studies were not available. Trip distribution assumptions for Cumulative Projects are provided in Appendix F.

Traffic volumes associated with the Cumulative Projects were compiled for each of the study intersections and are shown on Figure 6. The Cumulative Projects traffic volumes were added to the Opening Year base traffic volumes. Traffic volumes for Opening Year Cumulative are shown on Figure

7. Peak Hour Operating Conditions
Intersection Level of Service analysis was conducted for Opening Year Cumulative conditions, and the results are shown on Table 3. Intersection analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C. Review of this table indicates that, with the addition of ambient growth and cumulative projects traffic, the following intersection would operate at an unacceptable Level of Service under Opening Year Cumulative conditions:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F

Trip Generation Estimates
Proj #Description Land Use
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Shopping Center 15.000 KSF 566 9 5 14 27 30 57
Pass-by Trips (PM:34%)-9 -10 -19
Sub Total 566 9 5 14 18 20 38
2 8740 Cedar Street Single-Family Detached Housing 5 DU 47 1 3 4 3 2 5 3 8617 Ramona Street Single-Family Detached Housing 4 DU 38 1 2 3 2 1 3 4 10036-10044 Alondra Boulevard Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)48 DU 351 5 17 22 17 10 27 5 9437 Rose Street Single-Family Detached Housing 2 DU 19 0 1 1 1 1 2 Shopping Center 15.100 KSF 570 9 5 14 28 30 58
Pass-by Trips (PM:34%)-10 -10 -20
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)91 DU 666 10 32 42 32 19 51 Internal Trips (PM:20%)-12 -10 -22
Sub Total 1,236 19 37 56 38 29 67
Shopping Center 16.257 KSF 614 9 6 15 30 32 62
Pass-by Trips (PM:34%)-10 -11 -21
Sub Total 614 9 6 15 20 21 41
Shopping Center 5.409 KSF 204 3 2 5 10 11 21
Pass-by Trips (PM:34%)-3 -4 -7
Sub Total 204 3 2 5 7 7 14
9 9323 Park Street Single-Family Detached Housing 5 DU 47 1 3 4 3 2 5 10 14721 Blaine Avenue Single-Family Detached Housing 4 DU 38 1 2 3 2 1 3 11 17115 Lakewood Boulevard Automobile Parts and Service Center 6.675 KSF 109 10 4 14 6 9 15 Total Project Trips 3,269 59 82 141 117 103 220
1 7 16710 Bellflower Boulevard
6 9735 Oak St, 9742 Mayne St, 16411
Bellflower Blvd
TABLE 2

SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
Quantity Units
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
8 10100 Rosecrans Avenue
17640-17648 Bellflower Blvd
DU = Dwelling Unit, KSF = 1,000 square feet
Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study
- 14 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 15 -
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection

1. Bellflower Blvd atArtesia Blvd

2. Bellflower Blvd at
Ramona St

3. Bellflower Blvd at
Cedar St
D2. Bellflower Blvd at
North Project Dwy
D3. Bellflower Blvd at
Middle Project Dwy
D4. Bellflower Blvd at
South Project Dwy D5. Cedar St atProject Dwy
D1. Ramona St atProject Dwy
FUTURE

INTERSECTION
FUTURE

INTERSECTION

FUTUREINTERSECTION

PROJECT
SITE

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 16 -
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection

PROJECT
SITE

1. Bellflower Blvd atArtesia Blvd

2. Bellflower Blvd at
Ramona St

3. Bellflower Blvd at
Cedar St
D2. Bellflower Blvd at
North Project Dwy
D3. Bellflower Blvd at
Middle Project Dwy
D4. Bellflower Blvd at
South Project Dwy D5. Cedar St atProject Dwy
D1. Ramona St atProject Dwy
FUTURE

INTERSECTION
FUTURE

INTERSECTION

FUTUREINTERSECTION

TABLE 3

SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION OPERATION

OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE
Int. # Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard S 41.2 D 35.1 D 2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street S 9.1 A 7.6 A
3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street U >180 F 97.1 F
##
Traffic
Control
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Notes:
- S = Signalized, U = Unsignalized
- LOS = Level of Service
- Delay refers to the average control delay measured in seconds per vehicle. - Bold and shaded values indicate intersections operating at LOS E or F per City standards.

Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study
- 17 - Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Bellflower Convenience Center - 18 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
PROJECT TRAFFIC
Project Trip Generation
Trip generation estimates for the proposed Bellflower Convenience Center Project are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition average rates for Shopping Center (ITE Land Use 820), Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through (ITE Land Use 934), and Gas Station with Convenience Market (ITE Land Use 945). Pass-by reduction factors were applied to applicable uses based on the ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition).

Trip generation rates and the resulting trip generation estimates for the proposed Bellflower Convenience Center project are summarized on Table 4. Based on the trip generation estimates, the project is expected to generate 2,815 net new trips on a daily basis, including 211 net new trips (109 inbound and 102 outbound) during the morning peak hour and 202 net new trips (104 inbound and 98 outbound) during the evening peak hour.

Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Project trip distribution assumptions for the project site were developed based on existing traffic patterns, as well as the likely origins and destinations of site employees and patrons. Trip distribution assumptions for non-pass-by and pass-by trips are shown on Figures 8A and 8B, respectively. Based on the trip distribution and assignment assumptions, the project trips to be added to the street system by the proposed project were calculated and are shown on Figure 9.

TABLE 4

SUMMARY OF PROJECT TRIP GENERATION

BELLFLOWER CONVENIENCE CENTER
Trip Generation Rates 1
ITE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Code Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-Through 934 KSF 470.950 20.497 19.693 40.190 16.988 15.682 32.670 Shopping Center 820 KSF 37.750 0.583 0.357 0.940 1.829 1.981 3.810 Gasoline Station w/ Convenience Market 945 FP 205.360 6.360 6.110 12.470 7.135 6.855 13.990 Trip Generation Estimates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Quantity Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-Through - Pad 1 3.164 KSF 1,490 65 62 127 54 50 104 -730 -32 -30 -62 -27 -25 -52
Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-Through - Pad 2 (Sonic) 2.378 KSF 1,120 49 47 96 40 37 77 -549 -24 -23 -47 -20 -19 -39
Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-Through - Pad 3 2.509 KSF 1,182 51 49 100 43 39 82 -579 -25 -24 -49 -22 -20 -41
Gas Station w/ Convenience Market - Pad 4 8 FP 1,643 51 49 100 57 55 112 -969 -32 -30 -62 -32 -31 -63
Shopping Center - Pad 5 8.356 KSF 315 5 3 8 15 17 32
-107 0 0 0 -5 -6 -11
2,815 109 102 211 104 98 202
Pass-by Trips (49% AM, 50% PM, 49% Daily)
Pass-by Trips (62% AM, 56% PM, 59% Daily)
DU = Dwelling Unit, KSF = 1,000 square feet, FP = Fueling Position Pass-by Trips (34% PM, 34% Daily)
1 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, Volume 2 (September 2017) Total Net Trips for Proposed Conditions
Pass-by Trips (49% AM, 50% PM, 49% Daily)
Pass-by Trips (49% AM, 50% PM, 49% Daily)
Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study - 19 -
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 20 -
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection
= Trip Distribution
Percentage
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes

1. Bellflower Blvd atArtesia Blvd 2. Bellflower Blvd atRamona St 3. Bellflower Blvd atCedar St D2. Bellflower Blvd atNorth Project Dwy D3. Bellflower Blvd atMiddle Project Dwy D4. Bellflower Blvd atSouth Project Dwy D5. Cedar St atProject Dwy D1. Ramona St atProject Dwy

PROJECT
SITE

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 21 -
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection
= Pass-By Distribution
Percentage
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes

PROJECT
SITE

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 22 -
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection

PROJECT
SITE

Bellflower Convenience Center - 23 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
Project-related traffic was added to Opening Year Cumulative traffic volumes to develop Opening Year Plus Project traffic forecasts. The resulting traffic volumes are shown on Figure 10.

A summary of the resulting intersection Level of Service is provided on Table 5. Intersection analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C. With the addition of project traffic, all study intersections would continue to operate at an acceptable Level of Service in the morning and evening peak hours, with the exception of the following intersection:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted for the unsignalized intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street (Intersection #3) under Existing Conditions. The signal warrant analysis was based on the 2014 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) using Warrant 3 (Peak Hour Warrant).

Traffic signal warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix D. Based on the signal warrant analysis, Warrant 3 was met for the intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street under Existing Conditions.

The CA MUTCD specifically states that, “The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal.” The reference document goes on to state a number of other factors to take into account when considering a signal for a specific location, including whether or not a signal would improve the overall safety of the intersection, whether it would benefit or disrupt progressive traffic flow, and consideration of site-specific characteristics such as queuing, signal spacing, and overall delay to the main street through movements.

The decision to install a traffic signal should be based on engineering judgement, and not solely upon satisfying a single peak hour warrant. Based on discussion with City staff, the City of Bellflower will be installing a future traffic signal at the intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street (Intersection #3).

RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Based on the Level of Service standards and requirements for improvements noted earlier in the report (see page 5), no improvements are required for the project.

Ramona Street Bellfolwer Boulevard
Cedar Street
Artesia Boulevard
- 24 -
= AM/PM Peak Hour
Turning Movement
Volumes
LEGEND:
= Study Intersection

PROJECT
SITE

TABLE 5

SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION OPERATION

OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Int. # Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard S 41.2 D 41.8 D 0.6 No 35.1 D 35.7 D 0.6 No 2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street S 9.1 A 12.6 B 3.5 No 7.6 A 9.3 A 1.7 No 3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street U >180 F >180 F -Yes 97.1 F >180 F -Yes D1 Project Driveway 1 at Ramona Street U 10.8 B - -10.3 B - - D2 Project Driveway 2 at Bellflower Boulevard U 12.2 B - -11.6 B - - D3 Project Driveway 3 at Bellflower Boulevard U 12.3 B - -12 B - - D4 Project Driveway 4 at Bellflower Boulevard U 12.1 B - -12 B - - D5 Project Driveway 5 at Cedar Street U 9.9 A - -10 A - - Traffic
Control
Without Project With Project
Project
Impact
Impact
Sig?
Without Project With Project
Project
Impact
Impact
Sig?
Notes:
- S = Signalized, U = Unsignalized
-LOS = Level of Service
- Delay refers to the average control delay measured in seconds per vehicle. -Bold and shaded values indicate intersections operating at LOS E or F per City standards.

Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study
- 25 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Bellflower Convenience Center - 26 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022

DRIVE-THROUGH OPERATIONS
The City has requested that a drive-through (DT) queuing analysis be conducted for the proposed project, to evaluate the adequacy of the drive-through lane queuing capacity.

Proposed Drive-Through Queuing Capacity
Pad 1 (Fast-Food Restaurant)
The opening to the drive-through lane would be located at the northwestern corner of the proposed building, and the drive-through lane would wrap around the west and south sides of the building in a counter-clockwise direction. The drive-through would provide a dual drive-through lanes prior to the order board. The two lanes would merge into a single drive-through lane prior to the order board.

There will be approximately 160 feet of total queuing capacity from the drive-through entrance to the order board and approximately 60 feet from the order board to the pick-up window. This would provide a total drive-through queue length of approximately 220 feet, for a drive-through queueing capacity of 11 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle, from the beginning of the drive-through lane to the pay and pick-up window.

Pad 2 (Fast-Food Restaurant)
The opening to the drive-through lane would be located at the northeastern corner of the proposed building, and the drive-through lane would wrap around the north, west, and south sides of the building in a counter-clockwise direction. The drive-through would provide a single drive-through lane.

There will be approximately 120 feet of total queuing capacity from the drive-through entrance to the order board and approximately 100 feet from the order board to the pick-up window. This would provide a total drive-through queue length of approximately 220 feet, for a drive-through queueing capacity of 11 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle, from the beginning of the drive-through lane to the pay and pick-up window.

Pad 3 (Fast-Food Restaurant)
The opening to the drive-through lane would be located at the northwestern corner of the proposed building, and the drive-through lane would wrap around the west and south sides of the building in a counter-clockwise direction. The drive-through would provide a single drive-through lane.

There will be approximately 60 feet of total queuing capacity from the drive-through entrance to the order board and approximately 60 feet from the order board to the pick-up window. This would provide a total drive-through queue length of approximately 120 feet, for a drive-through queueing capacity of 6 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle, from the beginning of the drive-through lane to the pay and pick-up window.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 27 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
Queuing Data Collection
Kimley-Horn collected existing drive-through queuing data at three comparable drive-through locations (Popeyes). Drive-through observations and counts were conducted at the following drive- through sites (Popeyes):
·City of San Fernando: 14723 Rinaldi Street
·City of Santa Clarita: 19025 Golden Valley Road
·City of Azusa: 994 E. Alosta Ave
Assuming an average length of 20 feet per vehicle, the selected sites contain the following approximate drive-through vehicle capacity from the start of the drive-through entrance to the pick-up window:
·San Fernando Site: 5 vehicles
·Santa Clarita Site: 10 vehicles
·Azusa Site: 9 vehicles
The drive-through queue was observed during the following times:
·Weekday: 11:00 AM to 1:00 PM (lunch time)
·Weekday: 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM (dinner time)
The results of the observations are summarized on Table 6 . The data summary on Table 6 presents the number of vehicles in the drive-through lane, broken down into 15-minute periods, based on the observed average queue, peak queue, and the 85th percentile queue for each of the data collection periods. A copy of the queuing data collection worksheets is provided in Appendix E.

Queuing Observations
The queuing activity was observed to vary with an ebb and flow pattern throughout the data collection period. The following vehicle movement and queuing observations of the drive-through operations were made:

San Fernando Site:
·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday lunch-time period was from 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM, with an average queue of 8 vehicles and a peak queue of 9 vehicles. ·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday dinner-time period was from 5:45 PM to 6:00 PM, with an average queue of 8 vehicles and a peak queue of 9 vehicles.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 28 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
Santa Clarita Site:
·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday lunch-time period was from 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM, with an average queue of 8 vehicles and a peak queue of 9 vehicles. ·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday dinner-time period was from 6:15 PM to 6:30 PM, with an average queue of 12 vehicles and a peak queue of 13 vehicles.

Azusa Site:
·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday lunch-time period was from 12:45 PM to 1:00 PM, with an average queue of 5 vehicles and a peak queue of 5 vehicles. ·The peak 15 minutes during the weekday dinner-time period was from 6:00 PM to 6:15 PM, with an average queue of 8 vehicles and a peak queue of 8 vehicles.

Based on the drive-through queuing data presented above, the average observed peak queue was 9 vehicles (rounded up from 8.833). Pads 1 and 2 would have sufficient drive-through queuing capacity to accommodate the average peak queue. Pad 3 would not have sufficient drive-through queuing capacity to accommodate the average peak queue. However, there are internal drive aisles just north of the project site to provide additional drive-through queue capacity to keep the peak drive-through queue from spilling out into main drive aisles within the project site.

Drive-through Queue Length Calculation

To supplement the empirical data collected at the existing Popeyes restaurants in San Fernando, Santa Clarita, and Azusa, the drive-through queuing capacity was also analyzed using queuing analysis formulas published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Transportation Planning Handbook (3rd Edition).

Fast-food restaurants typical service time in the drive-through is 2-1/2 minutes from the order board to the pick-up window, with a vehicle being processed and progressing through the order board, pay window and pick-up window every 40 to 50 seconds during the peak drive-through periods. Assuming the more conservative processing time of 50 seconds, and applying the ITE queuing formulas, the analysis indicates that the average queue length is estimated to be 4 vehicles, and that the probability of exceeding 11 vehicles for the proposed fast-food restaurants on Pad 1 and Pad 2 are estimated to be

8.30%. The probability of exceeding 6 vehicles for the proposed fast-food restaurant on Pad 3 is estimated to be 23.74%. The queuing calculation worksheet and formulas are provided as Appendix E of this report.

San Fernando Santa Clarita Azusa San Fernando Santa Clarita Azusa San Fernando Santa Clarita Azusa Lunch
11:00-11:15 AM 5.8 2.0 0.3 6.6 3.1 0.6 7.0 4.0 1.0
11:15-11:30 AM 3.3 1.3 2.0 4.1 2.0 3.6 5.0 2.0 4.0
11:30-11:45 AM 3.3 1.0 1.8 4.1 1.6 2.6 5.0 2.0 3.0
11:45-12:00 PM 5.8 2.0 1.3 7.0 3.7 2.7 7.0 5.0 4.0
12:00-12:15 PM 5.3 3.3 3.5 6.1 4.6 4.0 7.0 5.0 4.0
12:15-12:30 PM 4.5 3.3 2.3 5.0 4.0 3.6 5.0 4.0 4.0
12:30-12:45 PM 6.8 6.3 3.8 8.1 7.6 4.6 9.0 8.0 5.0
12:45-1:00 PM 7.3 7.3 4.5 8.6 8.1 5.0 9.0 9.0 5.0
Highest Value 7.3 7.3 4.5 8.6 8.1 5.0 9.0 9.0 5.0
Dinner
5:00-5:15 PM 4.0 2.8 4.3 4.6 5.8 5.0 5.0 8.0 5.0
5:15-5:30 PM 3.5 6.8 3.5 4.6 8.0 5.1 5.0 8.0 6.0
5:30-5:45 PM 5.5 9.8 2.8 7.0 11.1 4.0 7.0 12.0 4.0
5:45-6:00 PM 8.0 11.0 5.3 8.6 12.0 6.6 9.0 12.0 7.0
6:00-6:15 PM 6.5 11.0 7.3 7.6 11.6 8.0 8.0 12.0 8.0
6:15-6:30 PM 5.3 11.8 6.3 5.6 12.6 7.6 6.0 13.0 8.0
6:30-6:45 PM 6.0 11.0 6.8 7.1 12.1 7.6 8.0 13.0 8.0
6:45-7:00 PM 6.0 8.0 6.0 7.1 9.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 7.0
Highest Value 8.0 11.8 7.3 8.6 12.6 8.0 9.0 13.0 8.0
Notes: ¹ 85th percentile = The queue will be less than the queue shown 85% of the time.

TABLE 6

SUMMARY OF DRIVE-THROUGH QUEUING DATA COLLECTION
Time Period
Number of Drive-through Vehicles in the Queue
Average Queue 85th %-ile ¹ Queue Peak Queue
Bellflower Convenience Center
Traffic Study - 29 -
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

June 2022

Bellflower Convenience Center - 30 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
·The project site is located between the southwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Ramona Street and the northwest corner of Bellflower Boulevard and Cedar Street, in the City of Bellflower.
·The project will involve construction of three fast-food restaurants with drive-throughs, a gas station with a convenience market, and a one retail building. The proposed fast-food restaurants will be 3,164 square feet (SF), 2,378 SF, and 2,509 SF, respectively. The proposed gas station will contain 8 fueling positions. The proposed retail building will be 8,356 SF. The project site is currently vacant.
·Morning and evening peak hour operating conditions were evaluated at three study intersections for the following study scenarios:
o Existing Conditions
o Opening Year Cumulative
o Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project
·Existing peak hour traffic counts were collected in December 2021. ·Under Existing Conditions, the following study intersection would operate at an unacceptable Level of Service:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F ·The project is estimated to generate 2,815 net new daily trips, with 211 net new trips (109 inbound and 102 outbound) in the morning peak hour, and 202 net new trips (104 inbound and 98 outbound) in the evening peak hour.
·Under Opening Year Cumulative condition, the following study intersections would operate at an unacceptable Level of Service:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F ·Under Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project condition, the following study intersection would operate at an unacceptable Level of Service:
o #3 - Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street: AM & PM - LOS F ·A traffic signal warrant analysis was completed for the unsignalized intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street (Intersection #3). Based on the California MUTCD, Warrant 3 is met for the intersection under Existing Conditions.

Bellflower Convenience Center - 31 -Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Traffic Study June 2022
·Based on discussion with City staff, the City of Bellflower will be installing a future traffic signal at the intersection of Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street (Intersection #3). It should be noted that Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) is met for this intersection under Existing Conditions (pre-project). ·The Fast-Food Restaurant on Pad 1 will provide a dual lane drive-through prior to the order board with a total queue length of approximately 220 feet, or 11 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle.
·The Fast-Food Restaurant on Pad 2 will provide a single lane drive-through with a total queue length of approximately 220 feet, or 11 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle. ·The Fast-Food Restaurant on Pad 3 will provide a single lane drive-through with a total queue length of approximately 120 feet, or 6 vehicles, assuming 20 feet per vehicle.

APPENDIX A

APPROVED SCOPING AGREEMENT

APPENDIX B

TRAFFIC COUNT DATA SHEETS

National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location:Bellflower Blvd & Artesia Blvd
City:Bellflower Project ID:

Control:Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 3 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 16 148 15 0 42 92 26 0 14 49 10 0 9 64 61 0 546 7:15 AM 19 153 13 0 39 144 43 0 11 46 23 0 8 96 62 0 657 7:30 AM 25 152 17 0 52 180 47 0 21 77 23 0 9 76 52 0 731 7:45 AM 24 168 20 0 80 167 46 0 13 95 14 0 24 100 55 0 806 8:00 AM 34 174 21 0 105 179 35 0 11 152 35 0 20 93 70 1 930 8:15 AM 31 230 50 0 73 167 22 0 16 115 35 0 31 147 94 1 1012 8:30 AM 40 187 25 0 51 167 56 0 18 84 27 0 35 160 85 0 935 8:45 AM 22 133 18 0 55 165 52 0 15 61 23 0 16 79 48 0 687

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :211 1345 179 0 497 1261 327 0 119 679 190 0 152 815 527 2 6304 APPROACH %'s :12.16%77.52%10.32%0.00%23.84%60.48%15.68%0.00%12.04%68.72%19.23%0.00%10.16%54.48%35.23%0.13% PEAK HR :7:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :129 759 116 0 309 680 159 0 58 446 111 0 110 500 304 2 3683 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.806 0.825 0.580 0.000 0.736 0.950 0.710 0.000 0.806 0.734 0.793 0.000 0.786 0.781 0.809 0.500 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 1 3 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 20 165 38 0 49 171 33 0 27 145 32 0 20 123 108 1 932 4:15 PM 22 161 29 0 50 181 33 0 33 121 33 0 25 137 93 0 918 4:30 PM 31 166 25 0 64 187 33 0 46 120 24 0 16 122 93 0 927 4:45 PM 21 150 30 0 59 191 38 0 29 125 28 0 17 152 82 1 923 5:00 PM 29 190 28 0 58 150 28 0 35 139 32 0 28 149 105 0 971 5:15 PM 36 199 31 0 59 159 35 0 35 131 20 0 25 151 92 0 973 5:30 PM 30 180 18 0 62 160 40 0 33 151 36 0 23 164 104 1 1002 5:45 PM 27 170 31 0 69 176 34 0 32 126 27 0 18 123 82 0 915

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :216 1381 230 0 470 1375 274 0 270 1058 232 0 172 1121 759 3 7561 APPROACH %'s :11.82%75.59%12.59%0.00%22.18%64.89%12.93%0.00%17.31%67.82%14.87%0.00%8.37%54.55%36.93%0.15% PEAK HR :4:45 PM 292 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :116 719 107 0 238 660 141 0 132 546 116 0 93 616 383 2 3869 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.806 0.903 0.863 0.000 0.960 0.864 0.881 0.000 0.943 0.904 0.806 0.000 0.830 0.939 0.912 0.500 Data - Totals
Bellflower Blvd Bellflower Blvd Artesia Blvd Artesia Blvd

0.807 0.900 0.777 0.818
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
21-020377-001
12/15/2021
04:45 PM - 05:45 PM

0.9650.885 0.902 0.902 0.937
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.910

National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location:Bellflower Blvd & Ramona St
City:Bellflower Project ID:

Control:Signalized Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 6 148 4 0 11 99 7 1 3 3 6 0 3 1 21 0 313
7:15 AM 6 172 4 0 9 164 8 0 7 8 9 0 7 2 11 0 407
7:30 AM 4 157 8 0 14 177 6 1 8 6 6 0 9 3 18 0 417
7:45 AM 13 199 11 0 16 197 6 0 3 6 6 0 13 2 19 0 491
8:00 AM 14 217 8 0 20 185 8 0 12 7 24 0 17 5 13 0 530
8:15 AM 24 269 25 0 21 222 11 1 9 11 24 0 18 3 15 0 653 8:30 AM 17 229 22 0 17 201 18 0 8 4 8 0 10 6 14 0 554
8:45 AM 11 144 11 0 14 173 11 0 5 3 4 0 15 3 16 0 410

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :95 1535 93 0 122 1418 75 3 55 48 87 0 92 25 127 0 3775 APPROACH %'s :5.51%89.09%5.40%0.00%7.54%87.64%4.64%0.19%28.95%25.26%45.79%0.00%37.70%10.25%52.05%0.00% PEAK HR :7:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :68 914 66 0 74 805 43 1 32 28 62 0 58 16 61 0 2228 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.708 0.849 0.660 0.000 0.881 0.907 0.597 0.250 0.667 0.636 0.646 0.000 0.806 0.667 0.803 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 11 209 13 0 23 190 13 0 8 10 21 0 11 5 14 1 529 4:15 PM 13 182 10 0 20 198 11 1 4 6 16 0 9 8 17 0 495
4:30 PM 12 192 10 1 19 188 18 2 12 7 7 0 14 8 12 0 502
4:45 PM 12 183 9 0 23 204 15 2 9 11 9 0 8 8 14 0 507
5:00 PM 12 227 20 0 16 173 16 2 5 7 9 0 12 6 21 0 526
5:15 PM 15 235 18 1 17 176 14 0 12 7 11 0 11 5 18 0 540 5:30 PM 14 205 13 0 22 184 11 3 7 6 7 0 20 1 21 0 514
5:45 PM 7 194 14 0 20 187 12 1 8 5 8 0 15 7 17 0 495

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :96 1627 107 2 160 1500 110 11 65 59 88 0 100 48 134 1 4108 APPROACH %'s :5.24%88.81%5.84%0.11%8.98%84.22%6.18%0.62%30.66%27.83%41.51%0.00%35.34%16.96%47.35%0.35% PEAK HR :4:45 PM 292 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :53 850 60 1 78 737 56 7 33 31 36 0 51 20 74 0 2087 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.883 0.904 0.750 0.250 0.848 0.903 0.875 0.583 0.688 0.705 0.818 0.000 0.638 0.625 0.881 0.000 Data - Totals
Bellflower Blvd Bellflower Blvd Ramona St Ramona St

0.824 0.905 0.693 0.938
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
21-020377-002
12/15/2021
04:45 PM - 05:45 PM

0.9660.896 0.900 0.833 0.863
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.853

National Data & Surveying ServicesIntersection Turning Movement Count Location:Bellflower Blvd & Cedar St
City:Bellflower Project ID:

Control:2-Way Stop(EB/WB)Date:

NS/EW Streets:
1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
7:00 AM 3 133 1 1 7 101 1 0 2 0 6 0 3 0 22 0 280
7:15 AM 7 159 2 0 5 165 5 0 4 0 7 0 2 0 15 0 371
7:30 AM 4 140 2 0 4 180 3 0 10 0 8 0 3 0 15 0 369
7:45 AM 5 202 1 0 3 205 7 0 6 0 12 0 4 0 14 0 459
8:00 AM 14 228 4 0 9 207 6 0 4 2 31 0 3 3 13 0 524
8:15 AM 17 287 8 0 22 233 10 0 1 1 20 0 3 1 29 0 632
8:30 AM 22 234 3 0 11 196 10 0 2 0 7 0 3 2 29 0 519
8:45 AM 6 154 3 0 6 176 9 1 3 1 5 0 1 0 12 0 377

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :78 1537 24 1 67 1463 51 1 32 4 96 0 22 6 149 0 3531 APPROACH %'s :4.76%93.72%1.46%0.06%4.24%92.48%3.22%0.06%24.24%3.03%72.73%0.00%12.43%3.39%84.18%0.00% PEAK HR :7:45 AM 40 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :58 951 16 0 45 841 33 0 13 3 70 0 13 6 85 0 2134 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.659 0.828 0.500 0.000 0.511 0.902 0.825 0.000 0.542 0.375 0.565 0.000 0.813 0.500 0.733 0.000 Headers NBL NBT NBR NBU SBL SBT SBR SBU EBL EBT EBR EBU WBL WBT WBR WBU 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
4:00 PM 7 213 4 0 10 200 9 0 6 1 9 0 6 1 9 0 475
4:15 PM 10 192 9 0 4 206 10 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 8 0 450
4:30 PM 11 197 3 1 5 190 14 0 8 2 7 0 0 0 4 0 442
4:45 PM 10 182 2 1 8 207 13 0 5 1 9 0 2 1 9 0 450
5:00 PM 12 240 8 0 8 172 8 0 7 0 8 0 2 1 12 0 478
5:15 PM 13 253 3 0 7 191 10 0 1 0 13 0 2 0 9 0 502
5:30 PM 11 209 7 0 12 184 10 1 8 0 9 0 3 1 8 0 463
5:45 PM 13 207 2 1 6 190 6 0 3 1 17 0 1 1 5 0 453

NL NT NR NU SL ST SR SU EL ET ER EU WL WT WR WU TOTAL
TOTAL VOLUMES :87 1693 38 3 60 1540 80 1 38 6 80 0 16 7 64 0 3713 APPROACH %'s :4.78%92.97%2.09%0.16%3.57%91.61%4.76%0.06%30.65%4.84%64.52%0.00%18.39%8.05%73.56%0.00% PEAK HR :5:00 PM 293 0 0 TOTAL
PEAK HR VOL :49 909 20 1 33 737 34 1 19 1 47 0 8 3 34 0 1896 PEAK HR FACTOR :0.942 0.898 0.625 0.250 0.688 0.965 0.850 0.250 0.594 0.250 0.691 0.000 0.667 0.750 0.708 0.000 Data - Totals
Bellflower Blvd Bellflower Blvd Cedar St Cedar St

0.821 0.867 0.581 0.765
AM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
PM

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
21-020377-003
12/15/2021
05:00 PM - 06:00 PM

0.9440.910 0.968 0.798 0.750
07:45 AM - 08:45 AM

0.844

APPENDIX C

INTERSECTION ANALYSIS

WORKSHEETS

APPENDIX C-1

INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
WORKSHEETS –
EXISTING CONDITIONS

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX AM.pdf
Scenario 1 EX AMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail AM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

F274.10.271WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
A9.00.454EB RightHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
D39.70.619SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.619Volume to Capacity (v/c):

DLevel Of Service:

39.7Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Artesia BlvdArtesia BlvdBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
33454912312249064175747340127834142Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8413731301231644187853220935Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 30450011211144658159680309116759129Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 30450011211144658159680309116759129Base Volume Input [veh/h] Artesia BlvdArtesia BlvdBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 03311031930301803018Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Amber [s]
030300303030303003030Maximum Green [s]
01050105101050105Minimum Green [s]
--Lead--Lead--Lead--LeadLead / Lag
2,3Auxiliary Signal Groups
047083225061Signal Group
PermissPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteOverlapPermissProtectePermissPermissProtecteControl Type Phasing & Timing

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

0.0Offset [s]
Semi-actuatedActuation Type
Time of Day Pattern CoordinatedCoordination Type
90Cycle Length [s]
-Signal Coordination Group
NoLocated in CBD
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

308.19226.76148.87259.28271.6570.4585.74239.91568.09233.27227.53154.0695th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

12.339.075.9510.3710.872.823.439.6022.729.339.106.1695th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 193.99132.4082.71156.65166.0039.1447.63142.15363.28137.22132.9785.5950th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

7.765.303.316.276.641.571.915.6914.535.495.323.4250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoNoYesNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCEDDDBCFCCDLane Group LOS

41.6931.2057.8336.0835.7548.5412.0720.12149.1324.7123.3147.60d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.860.630.890.770.760.650.210.501.230.490.490.80X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

9.100.7716.713.222.936.900.581.17111.132.711.337.97d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.180.110.110.110.110.110.500.500.140.500.500.11k, delay calibration

32.5930.4341.1132.8632.8241.6411.5018.9538.0022.0021.9839.62d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3878681393864149983215072776421308178c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781174318701781158935601781174735601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.210.150.070.170.170.040.110.210.190.180.180.08(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.240.240.080.220.220.060.520.420.160.370.370.10g / C, Green / Cycle 222272020547381433339g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCLCCLRCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]47.60 23.63 24.71 149.13 20.12 12.07 48.54 35.87 36.08 57.83 31.20 41.69 Movement LOS D C C F C B D D D E C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]26.84 53.76 37.11 37.94
Approach LOS C D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]39.71
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.619
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.795 2.943 2.602 2.773 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 578 600 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 22.76 22.05 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.166 2.601 2.117 2.390 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.454Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

9.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
135.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00105.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100000001001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
721968733338519478878107580Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 18517188913237221926920Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.8500Peak Hour Factor 61165862283243805756691468Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 61165862283243805756691468Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0300030006000600Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Amber [s]
0300030003000300Maximum Green [s]
0100010001000100Minimum Green [s]
------------Lead / Lag
Auxiliary Signal Groups
040080020060Signal Group
PermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissPermissControl Type Phasing & Timing

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

62.4480.91146.90121.72123.6740.03149.71152.5531.6395th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.503.245.884.874.951.605.996.101.2795th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

34.6944.9581.6167.6268.7022.2483.1784.7517.5750th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.391.803.262.702.750.893.333.390.7050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
CDDAAAAAALane Group LOS

33.0535.4238.984.864.849.805.335.308.05d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.270.410.650.360.360.230.420.420.18X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

0.531.243.140.750.741.450.960.940.92d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.110.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

32.5234.1835.844.114.118.364.364.367.13d1, Uniform Delay [s] 2692142231362138737713541387436c, Capacity [veh/h]
158984310151837187048718261870564s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.100.140.270.270.180.310.310.14(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.170.170.170.740.740.740.740.740.74g / C, Green / Cycle 151515676767676767g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]8.05 5.31 5.33 9.80 4.85 4.86 38.98 38.98 38.98 35.42 35.42 33.05 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D D D D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]5.49 5.25 38.98 34.35
Approach LOS A A D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]8.98
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.454
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.851 2.798 1.973 2.183 Crosswalk LOS C C A B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1244 1244 578 578 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]6.42 6.42 22.76 22.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.577 2.456 1.797 1.822 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.271Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:
274.1Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00105.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000001001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
101715834153910015419113269Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 252421141025013528317Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.8400Peak Hour Factor 856137031333841451695158Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 856137031333841451695158Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

FIntersection LOS

13.98d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
FFAAApproach LOS
165.04135.280.570.62d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]
177.78177.78177.78140.63140.63140.630.000.007.350.000.008.6595th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

7.117.117.115.635.635.630.000.000.290.000.000.3595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] FFFFFFAABAABMovement LOS
142.35274.14266.95110.15240.50246.270.000.0011.560.000.0011.05d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.220.270.550.170.150.600.000.010.090.000.010.10V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX PM.pdf
Scenario 1 EX PMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail PM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

F81.70.018EB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
A7.40.344EB RightHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
C33.80.623SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.623Volume to Capacity (v/c):

CLevel Of Service:

33.8Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
39563598120563136145680245110741120Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 9915924301413436170612818530Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 38361695116546132141660238107719116Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 38361695116546132141660238107719116Base Volume Input [veh/h] Artesia BlvdArtesia BlvdBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 033140301128281603018Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

368.20248.63110.09262.33274.76187.9773.70235.60303.68220.22213.62131.4095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

14.739.954.4010.4910.997.522.959.4212.158.818.545.2695th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 240.92148.6561.16158.95168.36104.4340.94138.95187.41127.60122.7673.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

9.645.952.456.366.734.181.645.567.505.104.912.9250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoNoYesNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCDCCEBCFCCDLane Group LOS

44.7329.1550.6330.0929.9672.8112.8422.8274.6326.8225.3148.43d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.890.640.770.660.660.980.180.501.030.490.480.78X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

13.620.699.551.801.6831.370.501.3535.632.881.418.18d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.260.110.110.130.130.110.500.500.110.500.500.11k, delay calibration

31.1228.4641.0828.2928.2841.4412.3321.4739.0023.9423.9040.26d1, Uniform Delay [s] 44499412750253413979613482375811182154c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781175818701781158935601781174935601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.250.180.060.190.190.080.090.190.140.160.160.07(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.280.280.070.290.290.080.500.380.130.330.330.09g / C, Green / Cycle 252562626745341230308g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]48.43 25.66 26.82 74.63 22.82 12.84 72.81 30.01 30.09 50.63 29.15 44.73 Movement LOS D C C F C B E C C D C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]28.61 33.33 37.13 36.47
Approach LOS C C D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]33.85
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.623
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.758 2.922 2.637 2.787 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 533 578 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 24.20 22.76 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.094 2.442 2.235 2.490 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.344Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

7.4Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
76215337323458760886287656Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 1951398914190221521914Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 74205136313356737856085054Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 74205136313356737856085054Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
000050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0300030006000600Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

73.2870.81106.3757.3158.5425.8868.7570.1214.2095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.932.834.252.292.341.042.752.800.5795th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

40.7139.3459.1031.8432.5214.3838.1938.967.8950th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.631.572.361.271.300.581.531.560.3250th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DDDAAAAAALane Group LOS

39.1538.5742.342.752.745.422.952.944.36d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.440.350.580.280.280.180.320.320.10X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

1.700.972.960.470.460.770.570.560.36d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.110.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

37.4437.5939.392.282.284.652.382.384.00d1, Uniform Delay [s] 1752131781461149850014641498558c, Capacity [veh/h]
1589131211351824187059718271870668s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.060.090.220.220.150.250.250.08(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.110.110.110.800.800.800.800.800.80g / C, Green / Cycle 101010727272727272g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]4.36 2.94 2.95 5.42 2.75 2.75 42.34 42.34 42.34 38.57 38.57 39.15 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]3.02 3.01 42.34 38.86
Approach LOS A A D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]7.40
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.344
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 4.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 41.09 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.736 2.723 1.912 2.175 Crosswalk LOS B B A B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1244 1244 578 578 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]6.42 6.42 22.76 22.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.380 2.307 1.730 1.807 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.018Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:

81.7Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
36395012036784362196753Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
912130591969524213Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.9400Peak Hour Factor 34384711934737342090950Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 34384711934737342090950Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

FIntersection LOS

2.45d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
DEAAApproach LOS

31.9135.280.440.50d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

25.5025.5025.5040.8940.8940.890.000.004.090.000.005.2895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.021.021.021.641.641.640.000.000.160.000.000.2195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] CFFCFFAABAAAMovement LOS

18.9478.2968.3622.2481.6965.560.000.0010.460.000.009.79d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.070.060.140.080.020.270.000.010.050.000.010.07V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

APPENDIX C-2

INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
WORKSHEETS –

OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX WP AM.pdf
Scenario 3 OY CUM AMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail AM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

A0.00.001WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Cedar St8
A0.00.011NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
South7
A0.00.011NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
Middle6
A0.00.011NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
North5
A0.00.001WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Ramona St4
F397.80.310WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
A9.10.467EB RightHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
D41.20.635SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.635Volume to Capacity (v/c):

DLevel Of Service:

41.2Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
34356012512450066178773349130858146Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8614031311251645193873221537Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 31251011411345560162703318118781133Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
200001093071In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 03312030929291803019Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

316.75229.41138.77267.05279.8073.2089.35252.28611.21242.25236.07157.8595th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

12.679.185.5510.6811.192.933.5710.0924.459.699.446.3195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 200.61134.3677.10162.52172.1940.6749.64151.39391.10143.89139.2987.6950th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

8.025.373.086.506.891.631.996.0615.645.765.573.5150th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoNoYesNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCDDDDBCFCCDLane Group LOS

42.1030.8649.6937.1836.8049.1812.5321.00163.5925.5023.9647.27d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.870.630.810.800.790.670.220.521.260.520.510.80X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

9.740.759.363.853.517.500.611.33125.592.981.467.79d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.190.110.110.110.110.110.500.500.150.500.500.11k, delay calibration

32.3630.1140.3333.3333.2941.6811.9219.6738.0022.5122.5039.48d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3968871553794079981914782776331289183c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781174418701781158935601781174735601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.220.160.070.170.170.040.110.220.200.190.190.08(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.250.250.090.220.220.060.520.420.160.360.360.10g / C, Green / Cycle 222282020546371433339g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]47.27 24.31 25.50 163.59 21.00 12.53 49.18 36.93 37.18 49.69 30.86 42.10 Movement LOS D C C F C B D D D D C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]27.41 58.12 38.15 36.90
Approach LOS C E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]41.16
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.635
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.805 2.953 2.608 2.781 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 556 578 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 23.47 22.76 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.183 2.632 2.129 2.408 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.467Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

9.1Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
731969743439529799179110681Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 185171991013245232027620Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.8500Peak Hour Factor 62165963293344832776794069Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0000000110080In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0270027006300630Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

63.0481.65150.28130.06132.0843.13159.26162.1333.1295th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.523.276.015.205.281.736.376.491.3295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

35.0245.3683.4972.2673.3823.9688.4890.0718.4050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.401.813.342.892.940.963.543.600.7450th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
CDDAABAAALane Group LOS

32.8535.2839.105.045.0310.375.535.508.41d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.270.410.660.380.380.250.430.430.19X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

0.521.243.280.800.781.631.020.991.01d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.110.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

32.3434.0435.824.244.248.754.514.517.40d1, Uniform Delay [s] 2732152231358138236513501382422c, Capacity [veh/h]
158983710051837187047318271870547s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.110.150.280.280.190.320.320.15(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.170.170.170.740.740.740.740.740.74g / C, Green / Cycle 161616666666666666g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]8.41 5.51 5.53 10.37 5.03 5.04 39.10 39.10 39.10 35.28 35.28 32.85 Movement LOS A A A B A A D D D D D C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]5.70 5.47 39.10 34.18
Approach LOS A A D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]9.12
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.467
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.865 2.813 1.977 2.190 Crosswalk LOS C C A B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1311 1311 511 511 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]5.34 5.34 24.94 24.94
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.604 2.485 1.802 1.825 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.310Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:
397.8Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
106718854154010306024116270Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 262421141025715629018Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.8400Peak Hour Factor 896157131334865502097659Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
202000074460In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

FIntersection LOS

21.76d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
FFAAApproach LOS
274.42188.340.630.63d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]
230.95230.95230.95165.66165.66165.660.000.008.530.000.009.0595th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

9.249.249.246.636.636.630.000.000.340.000.000.3695th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] FFFFFFAABAABMovement LOS
246.31397.76391.99158.99309.21322.460.000.0011.860.000.0011.24d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.240.310.770.170.180.710.000.010.100.000.010.11V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.001Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 4: Project Dwy at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
ThruLeftRightThruRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
1300012400Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
33003100Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
1300012400Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1270012200Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.009.39d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.007.460.000.008.889.90d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.011Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 5: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy North
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00095510780Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002392700Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
00095510780Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0001180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 00092510490Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

24.190.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

11.7436.630.000.000.0010.03d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.010.010.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.011Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 6: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy Middle
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00095510780Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002392700Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 00092510490Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

24.190.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

11.7436.630.000.000.0010.03d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.011Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 7: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy South
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00095510780Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002392700Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 00092510490Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

24.190.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

11.7436.630.000.000.0010.03d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.001Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 8: Project Dwy at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
09988000Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
02522000Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
09988000Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 09786000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.009.13d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.000.000.007.418.769.49d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX CUM PM.pdf
Scenario 3 OY CUM PMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail PM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

A0.00.001WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Cedar St8
A0.00.010NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
South7
A0.00.010NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
Middle6
A0.00.010NB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
North5
A0.00.001WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Ramona St4
F102.60.063WB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
A7.60.369EB RightHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
D35.10.644SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.644Volume to Capacity (v/c):

DLevel Of Service:

35.1Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
407647101123574139149708254113772123Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 10216225311443537177632819331Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 39562898119557135145687246110749119Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
40110011431161In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 033130311128281603018Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

381.06250.97113.51266.36279.12197.2877.61249.01335.04231.52224.22134.4895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

15.2410.044.5410.6511.167.893.109.9613.409.268.975.3895th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 251.12150.4063.06162.00171.68110.7643.12148.94207.53135.92130.5374.7150th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

10.046.022.526.486.874.431.725.968.305.445.222.9950th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoNoYesNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCDCCFBCFCCDLane Group LOS

45.5428.7350.7029.9429.8177.9013.3223.8386.8327.8826.1748.30d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.900.640.780.660.661.000.190.541.070.510.510.78X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

14.670.679.681.911.7836.400.541.5747.833.291.618.13d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.280.110.110.140.140.110.500.500.110.500.500.11k, delay calibration

30.8728.0741.0228.0328.0341.5012.7822.2639.0024.5924.5640.17d1, Uniform Delay [s] 454101713051154313978313192375701159157c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781175718701781158935601781175135601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.260.180.060.190.190.080.090.200.140.170.170.07(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.290.290.070.290.290.080.490.370.130.330.330.09g / C, Green / Cycle 262672626744331229298g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]48.30 26.56 27.88 86.83 23.83 13.32 77.90 29.86 29.94 50.70 28.73 45.54 Movement LOS D C C F C B F C C D C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]29.36 36.83 37.86 36.58
Approach LOS C D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]35.14
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.644
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.770 2.934 2.644 2.795 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 533 600 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 24.20 22.05 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.114 2.476 2.249 2.512 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.369Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

7.6Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
77215438333559792906391257Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 19513108915198221622814Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 75205237323457768876188555Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00000001600180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
000050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0280028006200620Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

72.1871.11109.7170.0971.5928.5484.1985.8615.4995th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.892.844.392.802.861.143.373.430.6295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

40.1039.5160.9538.9439.7715.8646.7747.708.6050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.601.582.441.561.590.631.871.910.3450th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DDDAAAAAALane Group LOS

37.4437.6541.493.193.185.983.433.414.76d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.390.360.590.290.290.190.340.340.11X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

1.231.063.090.520.510.870.630.620.40d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.110.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

36.2136.6038.402.682.685.112.802.804.36d1, Uniform Delay [s] 1992071791434147047814371470535c, Capacity [veh/h]
1589110910071825187057718281870648s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.070.110.230.230.160.260.260.09(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.130.130.130.790.790.790.790.790.79g / C, Green / Cycle 111111717171717171g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]4.76 3.42 3.43 5.98 3.19 3.19 41.49 41.49 41.49 37.65 37.65 37.44 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D D D D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]3.49 3.46 41.49 37.54
Approach LOS A A D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]7.60
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.369
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 4.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 41.09 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.752 2.739 1.916 2.180 Crosswalk LOS C B A B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1289 1289 533 533 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]5.69 5.69 24.20 24.20
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.411 2.336 1.735 1.810 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.063Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:
102.6Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
473185112037809463099654Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
12151305920211724914Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.9400Peak Hour Factor 443174811935760432893651Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
909000088890In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

FIntersection LOS

3.58d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
FEAAApproach LOS

51.8741.710.550.50d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

55.7155.7155.7148.5548.5548.550.000.005.490.000.005.5195th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.232.232.231.941.941.940.000.000.220.000.000.2295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] DFFDFFAABAAAMovement LOS

33.58102.6191.1826.4696.0077.900.000.0010.750.000.009.91d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.090.060.320.090.020.320.000.010.070.000.010.07V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.001Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 4: Project Dwy at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
ThruLeftRightThruRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
1330010200Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
33002600Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
1330010200Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1300010000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.009.28d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.007.420.000.008.789.78d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.010Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 5: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy North
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00085610010Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002142500Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
00085610010Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00016180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

20.960.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.2630.660.000.000.009.62d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.010Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 6: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy Middle
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00085610010Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002142500Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

20.960.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.2630.660.000.000.009.62d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.010Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 7: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy South
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
00085610010Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
0002142500Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
CAAApproach LOS

20.960.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.2630.660.000.000.009.62d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.001Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

0.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 8: Project Dwy at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
08968000Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
02217000Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
08968000Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
000000Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 08767000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

0.00d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.009.02d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.000.000.007.398.729.32d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

APPENDIX C-3

INTE RSECTION ANALYSIS
WORKSHEETS –

OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE PLUS

PROJECT

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX CUM WP AM.pdf
Scenario 4 OY CUM WP AMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail AM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

A9.90.056SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Cedar St8
B12.10.033EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
South7
B12.30.046EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
Middle6
B12.20.025EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
North5
B10.80.005NB LeftHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Ramona St4
F1,715.83.634EB LeftHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
B12.60.540EB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
D41.80.652SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.652Volume to Capacity (v/c):

DLevel Of Service:

41.8Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
34356014314850066178802349146887168Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 8614036371251645201873722242Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.91000.9100Peak Hour Factor 31251013013545560162730318133807153Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
001622000270152620Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
200001093071In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 03312030927271803021Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

316.75229.41172.06280.87296.0373.2092.61268.83611.21253.15247.52179.8895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

12.679.186.8811.2311.842.933.7010.7524.4510.139.907.2095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 200.61134.3695.59173.01184.6240.6751.45163.86391.10152.04147.8299.9350th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

8.025.373.826.927.381.632.066.5515.646.085.914.0050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesYesNoNoNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCEDDDBCFCCDLane Group LOS

42.1030.8657.2339.1238.4649.1813.2422.40163.5926.0524.3646.30d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.870.630.900.840.830.670.220.561.260.540.540.81X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

9.740.7516.615.334.717.500.651.60125.593.301.617.48d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.190.110.110.110.110.110.500.500.150.500.500.11k, delay calibration

32.3630.1140.6233.7833.7441.6812.5920.8138.0022.7622.7538.82d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3968871583724039979714302776291289207c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781172518701781158935601781173835601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.220.160.080.180.180.040.110.230.200.200.190.09(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.250.250.090.220.220.060.500.400.160.360.360.12g / C, Green / Cycle 2222819195453614333310g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]46.30 24.73 26.05 163.59 22.40 13.24 49.18 38.68 39.12 57.23 30.86 42.10 Movement LOS D C C F C B D D D E C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]27.91 58.25 39.74 38.15
Approach LOS C E D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]41.77
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.652
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.827 2.961 2.617 2.786 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 511 578 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 24.94 22.76 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.220 2.656 2.149 2.423 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.540Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

12.6Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
73227378381127210359181111896Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 186181992818259232027924Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.85000.8500Peak Hour Factor 62196266329561880776995082Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
00030214-400-1010Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0330341135202203Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0000000110080In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0300030006000600Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

56.3176.59224.90204.57207.6759.15224.82228.0158.6895th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.253.069.008.188.312.378.999.122.3595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

31.2842.55131.04116.18118.4332.86130.97133.3232.6050th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.251.705.244.654.741.315.245.331.3050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
CCDAABAABLane Group LOS

27.2028.3840.238.318.2716.818.778.7215.41d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.190.280.720.450.450.290.490.490.28X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

0.230.465.201.201.172.401.391.352.08d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.190.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

26.9727.9235.027.117.1114.417.387.3713.33d1, Uniform Delay [s] 3883353181220124831012181248339c, Capacity [veh/h]
1589108210611828187046718261870509s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.090.210.300.300.200.320.320.19(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.240.240.240.670.670.670.670.670.67g / C, Green / Cycle 222222606060606060g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]15.41 8.74 8.77 16.81 8.29 8.31 40.23 40.23 40.23 28.38 28.38 27.20 Movement LOS B A A B A A D D D C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]9.24 8.94 40.23 27.87
Approach LOS A A D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]12.64
Intersection LOS B
Intersection V/C 0.540
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.889 2.948 2.057 2.194 Crosswalk LOS C C B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1244 1244 578 578 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]6.42 6.42 22.76 22.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.628 2.548 1.936 1.837 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

3.634Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:
1,715.8Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
106718954584510566024117399Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 2624241151126415629325Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.84000.8400Peak Hour Factor 896158034938887502098583Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
00030133-300-1111Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0006023125002013Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
202000074460In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

FIntersection LOS
110.81d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
FFAAApproach LOS
410.391583.030.620.90d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]
268.78268.78268.78451.00451.00451.000.000.008.630.000.0013.8795th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

10.7510.7510.7518.0418.0418.040.000.000.350.000.000.5595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] FFFFFFAABAABMovement LOS
374.33562.39563.621497.741683.311715.810.000.0011.940.000.0011.78d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.240.380.990.200.213.630.000.010.100.000.010.16V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.005Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

10.8Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 4: Project Dwy at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
ThruLeftRightThruRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
130333124683Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
338131171Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
130333124683Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
01400240Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
01930443Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1270012200Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

2.52d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

1.520.009.29d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

1.731.730.000.006.346.3495th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.070.070.000.000.250.2595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAABMovement LOS

0.007.520.000.009.2310.83d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.020.000.000.070.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.025Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

12.2Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 5: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy North
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
1302498611040Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
3062472760Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
1302498611040Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
707-700Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
601738260Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0001180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 00092510490Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

0.07d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

12.210.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

1.951.950.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.080.080.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

12.2139.640.000.000.0010.28d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.030.000.000.010.010.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.046Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

12.3Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 6: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy Middle
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
24039960108932Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
60102402728Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
24039960108932Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
14015-15-1515Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
10024202617Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0001180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

BIntersection LOS

0.29d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

12.310.000.30d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

3.653.650.000.000.003.6595th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.150.150.000.000.000.1595th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

12.3143.640.000.000.0010.48d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.050.000.000.010.010.05V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.033Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

12.1Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 7: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy South
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
1702196411210Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
4052412800Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
1702196411210Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
707-700Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
1001416430Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
0001180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 00092510490Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

0.10d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

12.130.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

2.522.520.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.100.100.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BEAAABMovement LOS

12.1338.900.000.000.0010.16d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.056Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

9.9Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 8: Project Dwy at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
27100891144Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
725220011Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
27100891144Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
14000016Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
13111128Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 09786000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

1.72d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.089.86d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.050.054.544.5495th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.180.1895th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.000.000.007.479.119.87d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.06V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Intersection Analysis Summary
2/25/2022Report File: K:\...\EX CUM WP PM.pdf
Scenario 4 OY CUM WP PMVistro File: K:\...\Bellflower Retail PM.vistro V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.

A9.50.033SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Cedar St8
B11.50.016EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
South7
B11.60.016EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
Middle6
B11.60.011EB RightHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Project Dwy
North5
B10.30.004NB LeftHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopProject Dwy at Ramona St4
F191.00.024EB ThruHCM 6th
EditionTwo-way stopBellflower Blvd at Cedar St3
A9.30.418EB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Ramona St2
D35.70.652SB LeftHCM 6th
EditionSignalizedBellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd1
LOSDelay (s/veh)V/CWorst MvmtMethodControl TypeIntersection NameID Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.652Volume to Capacity (v/c):

DLevel Of Service:

35.7Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 1: Bellflower Blvd at Artesia Blvd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft] 000000000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket

90.00100.00150.00100.00100.00190.00100.00100.00150.00100.00100.00105.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 101001001101No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
407647118144574139149735254129798143Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 10216229361443537184633219936Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 395628114140557135145713246125774139Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
001621000260152520Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
40110011431161In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.02.00.02.02.02.02.02.00.02.02.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 02400210171700210Pedestrian Clearance [s]
050050550050Walk [s]

0.03.03.00.03.03.03.03.03.00.03.03.0Vehicle Extension [s] 033120321129291603017Split [s]

0.01.01.00.01.01.01.01.01.00.01.01.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

381.06250.97131.50280.27295.59197.2879.96264.23335.04242.05235.31155.4795th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

15.2410.045.2611.2111.827.893.2010.5713.409.689.416.2295th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 251.12150.4073.06172.55184.28110.7644.42160.38207.53143.74138.7386.3750th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

10.046.022.926.907.374.431.786.428.305.755.553.4550th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] YesNoNoNoNoYesNoNoYesYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
DCDCCFBCFCCDLane Group LOS

45.5428.7350.0231.8031.6077.9013.9425.2086.8328.4826.5847.78d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.900.640.800.710.711.000.190.581.070.540.540.80X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

14.670.679.492.722.5236.400.571.8947.833.651.788.15d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.280.110.110.150.150.110.500.500.110.500.500.11k, delay calibration

30.8728.0740.5329.0829.0741.5013.3723.3139.0024.8324.8039.63d1, Uniform Delay [s] 454101714848952413976512782375661159178c, Capacity [veh/h] 158935601781174218701781158935601781174035601781s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.260.180.070.200.200.080.090.210.140.180.170.08(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.290.290.080.280.280.080.480.360.130.330.330.10g / C, Green / Cycle 262672525743321229299g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.000.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]47.78 27.00 28.48 86.83 25.20 13.94 77.90 31.67 31.80 50.02 28.73 45.54 Movement LOS D C C F C B F C C D C D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]29.96 37.48 39.19 36.71
Approach LOS C D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]35.71
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.652
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 36.45 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.790 2.941 2.652 2.800 Crosswalk LOS C C B C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]578 556 622 644 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]22.76 23.47 21.36 20.67
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.148 2.498 2.267 2.527 Bicycle LOS B B B B
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8765Ring 2
------------4321Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.418Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

9.3Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

SignalizedControl Type:

Intersection 2: Bellflower Blvd at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesYesYesCrosswalk
NoNoNoNoCurb Present

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0000Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h]
0000v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
0000v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi
0000v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
0000v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m
0000v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing
000000000000Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h]
000000000000On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h]
NoNoNoNoNoNoNoNoPresence of On-Street Parking
77245738367672843906593360Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 196141091918211221623315Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.97000.9700Peak Hour Factor 75235537357470818876390558Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0330340135002203Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00000001600180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

0Pedestrian Clearance [s]
0Pedestrian Walk [s]
0Pedestrian Signal Group
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Length [ft]

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Detector Location [ft] NoNoNoNoPedestrian Recall
NoNoNoNoMaximum Recall
NoNoNoNoMinimum Recall

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.00.02.00.0l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] NoNoNoNoRest In Walk

0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 017001700700100Pedestrian Clearance [s]
000050050050Walk [s]

0.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.00.03.00.0Vehicle Extension [s] 0300030006000600Split [s]

0.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.00.01.00.0All red [s]

0.00Lost time [s]
SingleBandPermissive Mode
Lead Green - Beginning of First GreenOffset Reference

66.3470.83151.44112.43115.2737.77126.76129.3822.3495th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.652.836.064.504.611.515.075.180.8995th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln]

36.8539.3584.1362.4664.0420.9870.4271.8812.4150th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

1.471.573.372.502.560.842.822.880.5050th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] NoNoYesNoNoNoYesNoNoCritical Lane Group
CCDAAAAAALane Group LOS

32.5832.9639.994.904.898.845.125.107.40d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh]

0.270.290.630.340.340.210.370.370.13X, volume / capacity Lane Group Results

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00PF, progression factor

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00Rp, platoon ratio

0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00d3, Initial Queue Delay [s]

0.520.572.670.690.671.110.780.760.57d2, Incremental Delay [s]

1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00I, Upstream Filtering Factor

0.110.110.110.500.500.500.500.500.50k, delay calibration

32.0632.4037.324.224.227.744.354.356.83d1, Uniform Delay [s] 2812802401336137343013421373464c, Capacity [veh/h]
1589119810151819187056418271870610s, saturation flow rate [veh/h]

0.050.070.150.250.250.160.270.270.10(v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate

0.180.180.180.740.740.740.740.740.74g / C, Green / Cycle 161616666666666666g_i, Effective Green Time [s]

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00l2, Clearance Lost Time [s]

0.002.002.000.000.002.000.000.002.00l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s]

4.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.004.00L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 909090909090909090C, Cycle Length [s]
RCCCCLCCLLane Group
Lane Group Calculations
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]7.40 5.11 5.12 8.84 4.89 4.90 39.99 39.99 39.99 32.96 32.96 32.58 Movement LOS A A A A A A D D D C C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]5.24 5.25 39.99 32.78
Approach LOS A A D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]9.28
Intersection LOS A
Intersection V/C 0.418
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s]9.0 4.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped]0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s]36.45 41.09 36.45 36.45
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.772 2.822 1.951 2.183 Crosswalk LOS C C A B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h]1244 1244 578 578 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s]6.42 6.42 22.76 22.76
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.432 2.389 1.807 1.820 Bicycle LOS B B A A
----------------Ring 4
----------------Ring 3
------------8-6-Ring 2
------------4-2-Ring 1
Sequence
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.024Volume to Capacity (v/c):

FLevel Of Service:
191.0Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 3: Bellflower Blvd at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesYesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft] RightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftRightThruLeftTurning Movement Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
0000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
4731857144388324630101667Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
1215140111020811725417Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

0.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.94000.9400Peak Hour Factor 443175414136782432895563Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
0006022122001912Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
909000088890In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

FIntersection LOS

8.85d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
FFAAApproach LOS

61.94138.010.550.61d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

64.0364.0364.03141.96141.96141.960.000.005.590.000.007.1295th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

2.562.562.565.685.685.680.000.000.220.000.000.2895th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] EFFFFFAABAABMovement LOS

40.85119.75107.38111.74191.04170.830.000.0010.850.000.0010.12d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.090.070.370.100.020.800.000.010.070.000.010.09V/C, Movement V/C Ratio Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
0000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoNoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
0000Storage Area [veh]
NoNoFlared Lane
StopStopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.004Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

10.3Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 4: Project Dwy at Ramona St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
ThruLeftRightThruRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundNorthboundApproach
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
133183102433Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
335126111Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
133183102433Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
01830433Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1300010000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Ramona StRamona StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

1.83d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.890.009.07d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.920.920.000.003.903.9095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.040.040.000.000.160.1695th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAABMovement LOS

0.007.450.000.008.9910.29d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.010.000.000.050.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.011Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

11.6Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 5: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy North
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
601689310260Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
2042232570Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
601689310260Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
601637250Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00016180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy NorthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

0.04d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

11.580.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.820.820.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.030.030.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.5833.070.000.000.009.83d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.010.000.000.010.010.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.016Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

11.6Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 6: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy Middle
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
9024875102616Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
2062192574Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
9024875102616Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
9024192516Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00016180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy MiddleBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

0.13d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

11.570.000.15d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

1.231.230.000.000.001.6395th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.050.050.000.000.000.0795th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.5734.510.000.000.009.90d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.020.000.000.010.010.02V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.016Volume to Capacity (v/c):

BLevel Of Service:

11.5Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 7: Bellflower Blvd at Project Dwy South
Intersection Level Of Service Report
YesNoNoCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000001No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightLeftRightThruThruLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
EastboundSouthboundNorthboundApproach
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
901387110420Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
2032182610Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
901387110420Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
901315410Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
00016180In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 0008249640Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Project Dwy SouthBellflower BlvdBellflower BlvdName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

BIntersection LOS

0.05d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
BAAApproach LOS

11.500.000.00d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

1.221.220.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.050.050.000.000.000.0095th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] BDAAAAMovement LOS

11.5032.450.000.000.009.73d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.020.000.000.010.010.00V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
StopFreeFreePriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

0.033Volume to Capacity (v/c):

ALevel Of Service:

9.5Delay (sec / veh):
15 minutesAnalysis Period:

HCM 6th EditionAnalysis Method:

Two-way stopControl Type:

Intersection 8: Project Dwy at Cedar St
Intersection Level Of Service Report
NoNoYesCrosswalk

0.000.000.00Grade [%]

30.0030.0030.00Speed [mph]

0.000.000.000.000.000.00Exit Pocket Length [ft]
000000No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket
100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00100.00Entry Pocket Length [ft] 000000No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket

12.0012.0012.0012.0012.0012.00Lane Width [ft]
RightThruThruLeftRightLeftTurning Movement
Lane Configuration
WestboundEastboundSouthboundApproach
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Intersection Setup
000Pedestrian Volume [ped/h]
1290691127Total Analysis Volume [veh/h]
32317007Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Other Adjustment Factor

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Peak Hour Factor
1290691127Total Hourly Volume [veh/h]
000000Other Volume [veh/h]
000000Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h]
000000Pass-by Trips [veh/h]
000000Diverted Trips [veh/h]
12111127Site-Generated Trips [veh/h]
000000In-Process Volume [veh/h]

1.02001.02001.02001.02001.02001.0200Growth Factor

2.002.002.002.002.002.00Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%]

1.00001.00001.00001.00001.00001.0000Base Volume Adjustment Factor 08767000Base Volume Input [veh/h]
Cedar StCedar StProject DwyName
Volumes
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

AIntersection LOS

1.37d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh]
AAAApproach LOS

0.000.119.51d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh]

0.000.000.050.052.632.6395th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln]

0.000.000.000.000.110.1195th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] AAAAAAMovement LOS

0.000.000.007.428.909.53d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh]

0.000.000.000.000.000.03V/C, Movement V/C Ratio
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
000Number of Storage Spaces in Median
NoTwo-Stage Gap Acceptance
000Storage Area [veh]
NoFlared Lane
FreeFreeStopPriority Scheme
Intersection Settings
Version 2022 (SP 0-2)
Generated with

APPENDIX D

TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT

ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2000 MUTCD)
MAJOR STREET: Bellflower Blvd NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:2 MINOR STREET: Cedar Street EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE: Bellflower, CA
COMMENTS:Existing Counts
0 ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3

TWO-WAY

TRAFFIC

HEAVY LEG
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
Four-Hour Peak Hour
THRESHOLD VALUES 600 150 900 75 480 120 720 60
06:00 AM TO 07:00 AM 0 0
07:00 AM TO 08:00 AM 0 0
08:00 AM TO 09:00 AM 1,944 104 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
09:00 AM TO 10:00 AM 0 0
10:00 AM TO 11:00 AM 0 0
11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 0 0
12:00 PM TO 01:00 PM 0 0
01:00 PM TO 02:00 PM 0 0
02:00 PM TO 03:00 PM 0 0
03:00 PM TO 04:00 PM 0 0
04:00 PM TO 05:00 PM 0 0
05:00 PM TO 06:00 PM 1,775 67 Y Y Y Y Y Y
06:00 PM TO 07:00 PM 0 0
07:00 PM TO 08:00 PM 0 0
08:00 PM TO 09:00 PM 0 0
09:00 PM TO 10:00 PM 0 0
3,719 171 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 2 2 2 1 1
4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED
NOT

SATISFIED SATISFIED
02/25/22
Kimley-Horn and Associates
8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B
WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1

NOT SATISFIED
8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED

NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED
WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2

TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2000 MUTCD)
MAJOR STREET: Bellflower Blvd NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:2 MINOR STREET: Cedar Street EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE: Bellflower, CA
COMMENTS:Opening Year Cumulative Plus Project
0 ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3

TWO-WAY

TRAFFIC

HEAVY LEG
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
MAIN
LINE
SIDE
STREET
BOTH
MET
Four-Hour Peak Hour
THRESHOLD VALUES 600 150 900 75 480 120 720 60
06:00 AM TO 07:00 AM 0 0
07:00 AM TO 08:00 AM 0 0
08:00 AM TO 09:00 AM 2,063 132 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
09:00 AM TO 10:00 AM 0 0
10:00 AM TO 11:00 AM 0 0
11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 0 0
12:00 PM TO 01:00 PM 0 0
01:00 PM TO 02:00 PM 0 0
02:00 PM TO 03:00 PM 0 0
03:00 PM TO 04:00 PM 0 0
04:00 PM TO 05:00 PM 0 0
05:00 PM TO 06:00 PM 1,907 96 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
06:00 PM TO 07:00 PM 0 0
07:00 PM TO 08:00 PM 0 0
08:00 PM TO 09:00 PM 0 0
09:00 PM TO 10:00 PM 0 0
3,970 228 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1
4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED
NOT

SATISFIED SATISFIED
02/25/22
Kimley-Horn and Associates
8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B
WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1

NOT SATISFIED
8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED

NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED
WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2

APPENDIX E

DRIVE-THROUGH QUEUING

ANALYSIS

ATTACHMENT E

DRIVE-THROUGH QUEUING ANALYSIS - FAST-FOOD
Project:Bellflower Convenience Center - Fast-Food
Location:Bellflower, CA

INPUT VALUES
Variable Description Value
A = average number of vehicle arrivals per hour 1 57
S = service rate, number of vehicles per hour 70
I = traffic intensity, utilization factor = A/S 0.81
Q = queue capacity (vehicles) 6

FORMULAS
Average Length of Queue
Avg Q = A 2 / S(S-A) = I 2 / 1-I 3.57
Probability of Q Number of Vehicles in Queue
P(Q) = (I) Q (1-I)5.41%
Probability of Queue Exceeding Q Vehicles

23.74%
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Transportation Planning Handbook, 3rd Edition
() ≥ 0.95
Bellflower Convenience Center
Appendix E Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

ATTACHMENT E

DRIVE-THROUGH QUEUING ANALYSIS - FAST-FOOD
Project:Bellflower Convenience Center - Fast-Food
Location:Bellflower, CA

FORMULAS
Average Length of Queue
Avg Q = A 2 / S(S-A) = I 2 / 1-I 3.57
Probability of Q Number of Vehicles in Queue
P(Q) = (I) Q (1-I)1.94%
Probability of Queue Exceeding Q Vehicles

8.50%
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Transportation Planning Handbook, 3rd Edition
() ≥ 0.95
Bellflower Convenience Center
Appendix E Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-001
Location:Popeyes, 14723 Rinaldi St
City:San Fernando
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
*NOTE: Max queue indicates that the queue has spilled over to the parking aisle Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue Notes
11:00 5
11:05 7 Max queue
11:10 6
11:15 5
11:20 3
11:25 3
11:30 2
11:35 3
11:40 3
11:45 5
11:50 4
11:55 7
12:00 7 Max queue
12:05 5
12:10 5
12:15 4
12:20 4
12:25 5
12:30 5
12:35 7
12:40 6
12:45 9 Max queue
12:50 8 Max queue
12:55 7 Max queue
13:00 5
17:00 4
17:05 4
17:10 5
17:15 3
17:20 2
17:25 4
17:30 5
17:35 3
Queue Study
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-001
Location:Popeyes, 14723 Rinaldi St
City:San Fernando
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
*NOTE: Max queue indicates that the queue has spilled over to the parking aisle Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue Notes
Queue Study
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
17:40 7 Max queue
17:45 7
17:50 8 Max queue
17:55 9 Max queue
18:00 8 Max queue
18:05 7 Max queue
18:10 6
18:15 5
18:20 6
18:25 5
18:30 5
18:35 8 Max queue
18:40 6
18:45 5
18:50 5
18:55 8 Max queue
19:00 6
Total 271
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-002
Location:Popeyes, 19025 Golden Valley Road
City:Santa Clarita
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue Zone 1 Drive Thru Lane Queue Zone 2 Drive Thru Lane Queue Total Notes 11:00 1 0 1
11:05 4 0 4
11:10 1 1 2
11:15 1 0 1
11:20 2 0 2
11:25 0 0 0
11:30 1 1 2
11:35 1 0 1
11:40 0 0 0
11:45 0 1 1
11:50 0 0 0
11:55 2 0 2
12:00 4 1 5
12:05 4 0 4
12:10 0 1 1
12:15 3 0 3
12:20 3 1 4
12:25 2 0 2
12:30 3 1 4
12:35 5 2 7 Max Queue in Zone 1
12:40 4 4 8
12:45 3 3 6
12:50 4 3 7
12:55 3 6 9 Max Queue in Zone 2
13:00 4 3 7
17:00 3 0 3
17:05 0 0 0
17:10 0 0 0
17:15 5 3 8
17:20 5 1 6
17:25 4 1 5
17:30 5 3 8
17:35 5 7 12
17:40 5 4 9
17:45 5 5 10
17:50 5 7 12
17:55 5 7 12
18:00 5 5 10
18:05 6 6 12 Max Queue in Zone 1
18:10 4 7 11
18:15 4 7 11
18:20 4 7 11
18:25 5 7 12
18:30 5 8 13 Max Queue in Zone 2
18:35 4 7 11
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
Queue Study
*NOTE: Max Queue indicates that the technician can no longer track the number of vehicles due to limited access and that the queue has spilled past the zone entrance
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-002
Location:Popeyes, 19025 Golden Valley Road
City:Santa Clarita
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue Zone 1 Drive Thru Lane Queue Zone 2 Drive Thru Lane Queue Total Notes Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
Queue Study
*NOTE: Max Queue indicates that the technician can no longer track the number of vehicles due to limited access and that the queue has spilled past the zone entrance
18:40 5 6 11
18:45 4 5 9
18:50 5 4 9
18:55 5 2 7
19:00 5 2 7
Total 163 139 302
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-003
Location:Popeyes, 994 E Acosta Ave
City:Azusa
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue
11:00 0
11:05 0
11:10 1
11:15 0
11:20 4
11:25 1
11:30 3
11:35 2
11:40 2
11:45 0
11:50 1
11:55 0
12:00 4
12:05 4
12:10 2
12:15 4
12:20 1
12:25 1
12:30 3
12:35 5
12:40 3
12:45 4
12:50 4
12:55 5
13:00 5
17:00 3
17:05 5
17:10 5
17:15 4
17:20 6
17:25 4
17:30 0
17:35 4
17:40 4
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
Queue Study
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Project#:21-020009-003
Location:Popeyes, 994 E Acosta Ave
City:Azusa
Day:Thursday
Date:1/14/2021
Interval Drive Thru Lane Queue
Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services
Queue Study
17:45 3
17:50 7
17:55 5
18:00 6
18:05 8
18:10 8
18:15 7
18:20 5
18:25 5
18:30 8
18:35 6
18:40 6
18:45 7
18:50 7
18:55 5
19:00 5
Total 192
Popeyes Queuing Data Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

APPENDIX F

CUMULATIVE PROJECTS

INFORMATION

TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
AM Peak Hour

NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard 1 7 0 3 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street 0 6 4 4 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 Project Driveway 1 at Ramona Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Project Driveway 2 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Project Driveway 3 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Project Driveway 4 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Project Driveway 5 at Cedar Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Peak Hour

NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard 1 16 1 3 14 1 0 0 1 1 0 4 2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street 0 9 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 4 Project Driveway 1 at Ramona Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Project Driveway 2 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Project Driveway 3 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 Project Driveway 4 at Bellflower Boulevard 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 Project Driveway 5 at Cedar Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Totals

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:1
Mirror distribution?Y Entire Intersection TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
Mirror distribution?AM In 1 5 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
AM Out 0 2 0 3 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 1 7 0 3 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
PM In 0 9 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 1 0 4
PM Out 1 7 1 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 1 16 1 3 14 1 0 0 1 1 0 4
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%5%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Y 0%0%0%5%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 PM Out 0%0%0%5%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%10%5%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%5%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%10%5%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 35%5%5%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 5%35%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%35%0%0%0%5%5%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 PM Out 5%35%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 20%10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%20%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%20%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%20%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int1

Int. #:1 Bellflower Boulevard at Artesia Boulevard
Zone #5 9
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%10%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 5%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%10%AM In 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 5%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int1

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:2

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%5%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%5%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%5%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 45%2%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 2%45%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%45%0%0%0%2%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 2%45%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%10%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%10%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%10%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 2

Int. #:2 Bellflower Boulevard at Ramona Street
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 2

Int. #:3

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
AM Tot 0 6 4 4 7 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
PM In 0 9 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 9 0 9
PM Tot 0 9 8 8 8 0 0 0 0 9 0 9
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 45%47%2%AM In 9 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%45%2%47%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
PM In 0%0%45%47%0%0%0%2%0%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%45%2%47%PM Out 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 3

Int. #:3 Bellflower Boulevard at Cedar Street
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 3

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:4

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 2%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 2%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%2%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 2%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Project Driveway 1 at Ramona Street
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 4

Int. #:4 Project Driveway 1 at Ramona Street
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 4

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:5

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 47%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Project Driveway 2 at Bellflower Boulevard
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 5

Int. #:5 Project Driveway 2 at Bellflower Boulevard
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 5

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:6

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 47%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Project Driveway 3 at Bellflower Boulevard
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 6

Int. #:6 Project Driveway 3 at Bellflower Boulevard
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 6

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:7

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 6 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 8 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 9 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 18 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 37 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%5%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 47%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%47%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 20 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%10%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Project Driveway 4 at Bellflower Boulevard
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 7

Int. #:7 Project Driveway 4 at Bellflower Boulevard
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 15%AM In 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%15%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 7

Enter only in blue cells
Int. #:8

Y TOTAL CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR
AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Out 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AM Tot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Out 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM Tot 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Zone #1 4, 6, 7, 8, 10
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 64 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #2 2, 3
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 5%AM In 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%PM In 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%5%0%0%0%0%PM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #3 1
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 2%AM In 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%2%0%
AM Out AM Out 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%2%0%0%0%0%PM In 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%2%0%PM Out 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #4 5
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In 10%AM In 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%PM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%10%0%0%0%0%PM Out 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #5 9
Project Driveway 5 at Cedar Street
Yellow cells calculate
Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 8

Int. #:8 Project Driveway 5 at Cedar Street
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zone #6 11
Pk Hr NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR Pk Hr T Gen NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR AM In AM In 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%
AM Out AM Out 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PM In 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM In 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PM Out 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%PM Out 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Related Projects Trip Distribution.xlsx, Int 8

Air Quality Assessment
Bellflower Convenience Center Project
City of Bellflower, California

Prepared by:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 W. Town and Country Road, Suite 700
Orange, CA 92868
Contact: Mr. Ryan Chiene
714.705.1343

June 2022

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Project Description .................................................................................................................. 1

2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Climate and Meterology........................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Air Pollutants of Concern ......................................................................................................................... 7

2.3 Sensitive Receptors .................................................................................................................................. 9

3 REGULATORY SETTING

3.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 State of California ................................................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Regional .................................................................................................................................................. 13

3.4 Local ....................................................................................................................................................... 15

4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY

4.1 Air Quality Thresholds ............................................................................................................................ 16

4.2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 17

5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

5.1 Air Quality Analysis................................................................................................................................. 19

6 REFERENCES
References .............................................................................................................................................. 30

TABLES
Table 1 Air Contaminants and Associated Public Health Concerns ...................................................................... 7 Table 2 Ambient Air Quality Data ......................................................................................................................... 9 Table 3 Sensitive Receptors ................................................................................................................................ 10 Table 4 State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards ................................................................................. 11 Table 5 South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status ............................................................................................... 14 Table 6 South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds ................................................... 16 Table 7 Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations .................................................................. 17 Table 8 Construction-Related Emissions ............................................................................................................. 21 Table 9 Long-Term Operational Emissions ......................................................................................................... 22 Table 10 Equipment-Specific Grading Rates ......................................................................................................... 24 Table 11 Localized Significance of Construction Emissions .................................................................................. 24 Table 12 Localized Significance of Operational Emissions .................................................................................... 25

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1 Regional Vicinity ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit 2 Site Vicinity ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Exhibit 3 Conceptual Site Plan ................................................................................................................................ 5

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Air Quality Modeling Data

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS

AQMP air quality management plan
AB Assembly Bill
ADT average daily traffic
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CO carbon monoxide
cy cubic yards
DPM diesel particulate matter
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FCAA Federal Clean Air Act
H2S hydrogen sulfide
Pb Lead
LST local significance threshold
µg/m3 micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m3 milligrams per cubic meter
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOx nitrogen oxide
O3 Ozone
PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter ppm parts per million
ROG reactive organic gases
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SB Senate Bill
SRA source receptor area
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
sf square foot
SO4-2 Sulfates
SO2 sulfur dioxide
TAC toxic air contaminant
C2H3Cl vinyl chloride
VOC volatile organic compound

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 1
1 INTRODUCTION

This report documents the results of an Air Quality Assessment completed for the Bellflower Convenience Center Project (“Project” or “Proposed Project”). The purpose of this Air Quality Assessment is to evaluate the potential construction and operational emissions associated with the Project and determine the level of impact the Project would have on the environment.

1.1 Project Location and Setting

The Project site is located in southern Bellflower, in Los Angeles County (County), California; refer to Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity. The proposed Project site is located at 17671 Bellflower Boulevard, on the west side of Bellflower Boulevard, between Cedar Street and Ramona Street, in the City of Bellflower. The Project site is bounded by Ramona Street and commercial uses to the north, Cedar Street, commercial uses, and residential uses to the south, Bellflower Boulevard and commercial uses to the east, and residential and commercial uses to the west; see Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity.

The Project site is a vacant rectangular-shaped site on 3.63 acres. Previously, there was an automotive dealership, a restaurant, and other commercial/retails buildings on the Project Site. These buildings were demolished at the end of 2017. The Project site is currently vacant and shows signs of ruderal grasses, but no native habitat remains on-site. The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial (C) and is zoned DFD (Design for Development).

1.2 Project Description

The proposed Project is a commercial development composed of a shopping center. This would include a convenience store and automotive fueling station, three drive-thru quick-serve restaurants, and one retail building for multiple tenants; refer to Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan.

Building 1: Restaurant
The proposed Project consists of the construction of a new one-story drive-thru restaurant totaling approximately 3,164-square feet (sf). The restaurant would be located on the southern portion of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on the north side of the building via an entrance to the building. The drive-thru portion would have an entrance on the western side of the building and exit on the eastern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 464 sf on the eastern side of the building.

Building 2: Restaurant
The proposed Building 2 would be a new one-story drive-thru restaurant totaling approximately 2,378 sf.

The restaurant would be located on the southern portion of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on western side of the building via an entrance to the building. The drive- thru portion would have an entrance on the northern side of the building and exit on the southern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 185 sf on the eastern side of the building.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 2
Building 3: Restaurant
The proposed Building 3 would be a new one-story drive-thru restaurant totaling approximately 2,509 sf.

The restaurant would be located in the center of the overall Project site. The main entrance for guests would be provided on the northern side of the building via an entrance to the building. The drive-thru portion would have an entrance on the western side of the building and exit on the southern side of the building. There would also be an outdoor seating area of approximately 544 sf on the eastern side of the building.

Building 4: Retail
The proposed Building 4 would be a one-story, approximately 3,997 sf, gas station convenience store with eight fueling pumps. The proposed building would be generally located on the northern portion of the site. The main entrance would be located on the eastern side of the building and the fueling pumps would be to the east of the building.

Building 5: Retail
The proposed Building 5 would be an approximately 8,356 sf retail building with space for multiple tenants. This proposed building would be generally located on the northwestern portion of the overall site. The main entrance would be located on the northeastern side of the building.

Project Circulation
Ingress and egress to the site would be provided via five driveways in total. Three driveways would be on Bellflower Boulevard, two of these driveways would be 30’ and the driveway closes to the proposed gas station would be 35’. A 26’ driveway would be on Cedar Street and another 35’ driveway would be on Ramona Street, directly to the north of the proposed gas station. All driveways would allow access to the entire Project site.

Parking
The Project would provide 132 parking stalls, with vehicle parking located throughout the site and between the various establishments.

Project Phasing and Construction
The Project is anticipated to be developed in one phase. Should the Project be approved, construction is anticipated to occur over a duration of approximately 11 months, beginning in February 2023 and completed by the end of January 2024.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 3
Exhibit 1: Regional Vicinity

Source: Google Maps, 2022

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 4
Exhibit 2: Site Vicinity

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 5
Exhibit 3: Conceptual Site Plan

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 6
2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

2.1 Climate and Meteorology

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) divides the State into 15 air basins that share similar meteorological and topographical features. The Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, as well as all of Orange County. The SCAB is on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the southwest and high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter1. Air quality in this area is determined by such natural factors as topography, meteorology, and climate, in addition to the presence of existing air pollution sources and ambient conditions. These factors along with applicable regulations are discussed below.

The SCAB is part of a semi-permanent high-pressure zone in the eastern Pacific. As a result, the climate is mild and tempered by cool sea breezes. This usually mild weather pattern is occasionally interrupted by periods of extreme heat, winter storms, and Santa Ana winds. The annual average temperature throughout the 6,645-square-mile SCAB ranges from low 60 to high 80 degrees Fahrenheit with little variance. With more oceanic influence, coastal areas show less variability in annual minimum and maximum temperatures than inland areas.

Contrasting the steady pattern of temperature, rainfall is seasonally and annually highly variable. Almost all annual rainfall occurs between the months of November and April. Summer rainfall is reduced to widely scattered thundershowers near the coast, with slightly heavier activity in the east and over the mountains.

Although the SCAB has a semiarid climate, the air closer to the Earth’s surface is typically moist because of the presence of a shallow marine layer. Except for occasional periods when dry, continental air is brought into the SCAB by offshore winds, the “ocean effect” is dominant. Periods of heavy fog are frequent and low clouds known as high fog are characteristic climatic features, especially along the coast.

Annual average humidity is 70 percent at the coast and 57 percent in the eastern portions of the SCAB.

Wind patterns across the SCAB are characterized by westerly or southwesterly on-shore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Wind speed is typically higher during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter. Between periods of wind, air stagnation may occur in both the morning and evening hours. Air stagnation is one of the critical determinants of air quality conditions on any given day. During winter and fall, surface high-pressure systems over the SCAB, combined with other meteorological conditions, result in very strong, downslope Santa Ana winds. These winds normally continue for a few days before predominant meteorological conditions are reestablished.

The mountain ranges to the east affect the diffusion of pollutants by inhibiting the eastward transport of pollutants. Air quality in the SCAB generally ranges from fair to poor and is similar to air quality in most of coastal Southern California. The entire region experiences heavy concentrations of air pollutants during prolonged periods of stable atmospheric conditions.

In addition to the characteristic wind patterns that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal pollutant transport, two distinct types of temperature inversions control the vertical depth through which air pollutants are mixed. These inversions are the marine inversion and the radiation inversion. The height of

1 South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 7
the base of the inversion at any given time is called the “mixing height.” The combination of winds and inversions is a critical determinant leading to highly degraded air quality for the SCAB in the summer and generally good air quality in the winter.

2.2 Air Pollutants of Concern

The air pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated by state and federal laws. These regulated air pollutants are known as “criteria air pollutants” and are categorized into primary and secondary pollutants.

Primary air pollutants are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, NOX, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 are criteria pollutants.

ROG and NOX are criteria pollutant precursors and form secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. For example, the criteria pollutant ozone (O3) is formed by a chemical reaction between ROG and NOX in the presence of sunlight. O3 and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary pollutants. Sources and health effects commonly associated with criteria pollutants are summarized in Table 1: Air Contaminants and Associated Public Health Concerns.

Table 1: Air Contaminants and Associated Public Health Concerns Pollutant Major Man-Made Sources Human Health Effects
Particulate Matter
(PM10 and PM2.5)
Power plants, steel mills, chemical plants,
unpaved roads and parking lots, wood-
burning stoves and fireplaces, automobiles
and others.

Increased respiratory symptoms, such as
irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty
breathing; asthma; chronic bronchitis; irregular
heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks; and
premature death in people with heart or lung
disease. Impairs visibility.

Ozone (O3) Formed by a chemical reaction between
reactive organic gases/volatile organic
compounds (ROG or VOC)1 and nitrogen
oxides (NOX) in the presence of sunlight.

Motor vehicle exhaust industrial emissions,
gasoline storage and transport, solvents,
paints and landfills.

Irritates and causes inflammation of the
mucous membranes and lung airways; causes
wheezing, coughing, and pain when inhaling
deeply; decreases lung capacity; aggravates
lung and heart problems. Damages plants;
reduces crop yield.

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) A colorless gas formed when fuel containing sulfur is burned and when gasoline is
extracted from oil. Examples are petroleum
refineries, cement manufacturing, metal
processing facilities, locomotives, and ships.

Respiratory irritant. Aggravates lung and heart
problems. In the presence of moisture and
oxygen, sulfur dioxide converts to sulfuric acid
which can damage marble, iron and steel.

Damages crops and natural vegetation. Impairs
visibility. Precursor to acid rain.

Carbon Monoxide (CO) An odorless, colorless gas formed when carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a
component of motor vehicle exhaust.

Reduces the ability of blood to deliver oxygen
to vital tissues, affecting the cardiovascular and
nervous system. Impairs vision, causes
dizziness, and can lead to unconsciousness or
death.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) A reddish-brown gas formed during fuel combustion for motor vehicles and
industrial sources. Sources include motor
vehicles, electric utilities, and other sources
that burn fuel.

Respiratory irritant; aggravates lung and heart
problems. Precursor to O3. Contributes to
global warming and nutrient overloading which
deteriorates water quality. Causes brown
discoloration of the atmosphere.

Lead (Pb) Lead is a metal found naturally in the
environment as well as in manufactured
products. The major sources of lead
Exposure to lead occurs mainly through
inhalation of air and ingestion of lead in food,
water, soil, or dust. It accumulates in the blood,

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 8
Table 1: Air Contaminants and Associated Public Health Concerns Pollutant Major Man-Made Sources Human Health Effects
emissions have historically been motor
vehicles (such as cars and trucks) and
industrial sources. Due to the phase out of
leaded gasoline, metals processing is the
major source of lead emissions to the air
today. The highest levels of lead in air are
generally found near lead smelters. Other
stationary sources are waste incinerators,
utilities, and lead-acid battery
manufacturers.
bones, and soft tissues and can adversely affect
the kidneys, liver, nervous system, and other
organs. Excessive exposure to lead may cause
neurological impairments such as seizures,
mental retardation, and behavioral disorders.

Even at low doses, lead exposure is associated
with damage to the nervous systems of fetuses
and young children, resulting in learning
deficits and lowered IQ.

Notes:

1. Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs or Reactive Organic Gases [ROG]) are hydrocarbons/organic gases that are formed solely of hydrogen and carbon. There are several subsets of organic gases including ROGs and VOCs. Both ROGs and VOCs are emitted from the incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons or other carbon-based fuels. The major sources of hydrocarbons are combustion engine exhaust, oil refineries, and oil-fueled power plants; other common sources are petroleum fuels, solvents, dry cleaning solutions, and paint (via evaporation).

Source: California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Health Effects, http://www.capcoa.org/health-effects/ , accessed January 12, 2022.

Toxic Air Contaminants

Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are airborne substances that can cause short-term (acute) or long-term (i.e., chronic, carcinogenic or cancer causing) adverse human health effects (i.e., injury or illness). TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances. They may be emitted from a variety of common sources including gasoline stations, automobiles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, and painting operations. The current California list of TACs includes more than 200 compounds, including particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines.

CARB identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a toxic air contaminant. DPM differs from other TACs in that it is not a single substance but rather a complex mixture of hundreds of substances. Diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of particles and gases produced when an engine burns diesel fuel. DPM is a concern because it causes lung cancer; many compounds found in diesel exhaust are carcinogenic. DPM includes the particle-phase constituents in diesel exhaust. The chemical composition and particle sizes of DPM vary between different engine types (heavy-duty, light-duty), engine operating conditions (idle, accelerate, decelerate), fuel formulations (high/low sulfur fuel), and the year of the engine. Some short-term (acute) effects of diesel exhaust include eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, and diesel exhaust can cause coughs, headaches, light-headedness, and nausea. DPM poses the greatest health risk among the TACs.

Almost all diesel exhaust particle mass is 10 microns or less in diameter. Due to their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung.

Ambient Air Quality

CARB monitors ambient air quality at approximately 250 air monitoring stations across the State. These stations usually measure pollutant concentrations ten feet above ground level; therefore, air quality is often referred to in terms of ground-level concentrations. Existing levels of ambient air quality, historical trends, and projections near the Project are documented by measurements made by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the air pollution regulatory agency in the SCAB that maintains air quality monitoring stations which process ambient air quality measurements.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 9
Pollutants of concern in the SCAB include O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The closest air monitoring station to the Project that monitors ambient concentrations of these pollutants is the Compton Monitoring Station (located approximately 5 miles to the northwest). Local air quality data from 2018 to 2020 are provided in Table 2: Ambient Air Quality Data, which lists the monitored maximum concentrations and number of exceedances of state or federal air quality standards for each year.

Table 2: Ambient Air Quality Data
Criteria Pollutant 2018 2019 2020
Ozone (O3) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.075 0.100 0.152
8-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.064 0.079 0.115
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.09 ppm) 0 1 3
NAAQS 8-hour (>0.070 ppm) 0 1 4
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 4.66 3.82 4.54
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>35 ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS 1-hour (>20 ppm) 0 0 0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.068 0.070 0.072
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>.100 ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns (PM10) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration — — —
State 24-hour Maximum Concentration — — —
State Annual Average Concentration (CAAQS=20 µg/m3) — — — Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>150 µg/m3) — — —
CAAQS 24-hour (>50 µg/m3) — — —
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration 49.4 39.5 67.5
State 24-hour Maximum Concentration 49.4 39.5 67.5
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>35 µg/m3) 2 1 19
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; – = not measured
Notes:

1. Measurements taken at the Compton Monitoring Station at 700 N. Bullis Road, Compton, CA 90221 Source: All pollutant measurements are from the CARB Aerometric Data Analysis and Management system database ( https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam) except for CO, which were retrieved from the CARB Air Quality and Meteorological Information System ( https://www.arb.ca.gov/qaweb/siteinfo.php) .

2.3 Sensitive Receptors

Sensitive populations are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than is the general population.

Sensitive receptors that are in proximity to localized sources of toxics are of particular concern. Land uses considered sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Sensitive land uses surrounding the Project consist mostly of residential communities. Table 3: Sensitive Receptors lists the distances and locations of nearby sensitive receptors.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 10
Table 3: Sensitive Receptors
Receptor Description Distance and Direction from the Project Site Multi-family residential Adjoining to the west
Multi-family residential 55 feet south
Ramona Senior Center 495 feet northeast
Grace Filipino Christian Church 700 feet east
BellOne Christian Reformed Church 850 feet east
Bellflower Senior Center 885 feet east
Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses 960 feet east
Thomas Jefferson Elementary School 1300 feet southeast

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 11
3 REGULATORY SETTING

3.1 Federal

Federal Clean Air Act

Air quality is federally protected by the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) and its amendments. Under the FCAA, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the criteria air pollutants including O3, NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and lead. Proposed projects in or near nonattainment areas could be subject to more stringent air- permitting requirements. The FCAA requires each state to prepare a State Implementation Plan to demonstrate how it will attain the NAAQS within the federally imposed deadlines.

The EPA can withhold certain transportation funds from states that fail to comply with the planning requirements of the FCAA. If a state fails to correct these planning deficiencies within two years of Federal notification, the EPA is required to develop a Federal implementation plan for the identified nonattainment area or areas. The provisions of 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 51 and 93 apply in all nonattainment and maintenance areas for transportation-related criteria pollutants for which the area is designated nonattainment or has a maintenance plan. The EPA has designated enforcement of air pollution control regulations to the individual states. Applicable federal standards are summarized in Table 4: State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Table 4: State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time State Standards1 Federal Standards2 Ozone (O3) 2, 5, 7 8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm 1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) NA
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) 1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3)
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.10 ppm11 Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 8
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3)
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3)
Annual Arithmetic Mean NA 0.03 ppm (80 µg/m3)
Particulate Matter (PM10) 1, 3, 6 24-Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 20 µg/m3 NA
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 3, 4, 6, 9 24-Hour NA 35 µg/m3 Annual Arithmetic Mean 12 µg/m3 12 µg/m3
Sulfates (SO4-2) 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 NA
Lead (Pb) 10, 11
30-Day Average 1.5 µg/m3 NA
Calendar Quarter NA 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling 3-Month Average NA 0.15 µg/m3
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (0.42 µg/m3) NA
Vinyl Chloride (C2H3CI) 10 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) NA ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter; – = no information available.

Notes:

1. California standards for O3, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate matter - PM10, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. The standards for sulfates, Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide, lead, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or exceeded. If the standard is for a 1-hour, 8-hour or 24-hour average (i.e., all standards except for lead and the PM10 annual standard), then some measurements may be excluded.

Measurements are excluded that CARB determines would occur less than once per year on the average. The Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide standard is 6.0 ppm, a level one-half the national standard and two-thirds the State standard.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 12
Table 4: State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time State Standards1 Federal Standards2

2. National standards shown are the "primary standards" designed to protect public health. National standards other than for O3, particulates and those based on annual averages are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 1-hour O3 standard is attained if, during the most recent three-year period, the average number of days per year with maximum hourly concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one. The 8-hour O3 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 4th highest daily concentrations is 0.070 ppm or less. The 24-hour PM10 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of monitored concentrations is less than 150 µg/m3. The 24-hour PM2.5 standard is attained when the 3-year average of 98th percentiles is less than 35 µg/m3.

3. Except for the national particulate standards, annual standards are met if the annual average falls below the standard at every site. The national annual particulate standard for PM10 is met if the 3-year average falls below the standard at every site. The annual PM2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of annual averages spatially-averaged across officially designed clusters of sites falls below the standard.

NAAQS are set by the EPA at levels determined to be protective of public health with an adequate margin of safety.

4. On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour O3 primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm. An area will meet the standard if the fourth-highest maximum daily 8-hour O3 concentration per year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than

0.070 ppm. EPA will make recommendations on attainment designations by October 1, 2016, and issue final designations October 1, 2017.

Nonattainment areas will have until 2020 to late 2037 to meet the health standard, with attainment dates varying based on the O3 level in the area.

5. The national 1-hour O3 standard was revoked by the EPA on June 15, 2005.

6. In June 2002, CARB established new annual standards for PM2.5 and PM10.

7. The 8-hour California O3 standard was approved by the CARB on April 28, 2005 and became effective on May 17, 2006.

8. On June 2, 2010, the EPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard, effective August 23, 2010, which is based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The existing 0.030 ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour SO2 NAAQS however must continue to be used until one year following EPA initial designations of the new 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.

9. In December 2012, EPA strengthened the annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 15.0 to 12.0 μg/m3. In December 2014, the EPA issued final area designations for the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Areas designated “unclassifiable/attainment” must continue to take steps to prevent their air quality from deteriorating to unhealthy levels. The effective date of this standard is April 15, 2015.

10. CARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as ‘toxic air contaminants’ with no threshold level of exposure below which there are no adverse health effects determined.

11. National lead standard, rolling 3-month average: final rule signed October 15, 2008. Final designations effective December 31, 2011.

Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan, 2016; California Air Resources Board, Ambient Air Quality Standards, May 6, 2016.

3.2 State of California

California Air Resources Board

CARB administers the air quality policy in California. The California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) were established in 1969 pursuant to the Mulford-Carrell Act. These standards, included with the NAAQS in Table 4, are generally more stringent and apply to more pollutants than the NAAQS. In addition to the criteria pollutants, CAAQS have been established for visibility reducing particulates, hydrogen sulfide, and sulfates.

The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), which was approved in 1988, requires that each local air district prepare and maintain an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) to achieve compliance with CAAQS. These AQMPs also serve as the basis for the preparation of the State Implementation Plan for meeting federal clean air standards for the State of California. Like the EPA, CARB also designates areas within California as either attainment or nonattainment for each criteria pollutant based on whether the CAAQS have been achieved. Under the CCAA, areas are designated as nonattainment for a pollutant if air quality data shows that a state standard for the pollutant was violated at least once during the previous three calendar years.

Exceedances that are affected by highly irregular or infrequent events such as wildfires, volcanoes, etc. are not considered violations of a state standard, and are not used as a basis for designating areas as nonattainment. The applicable State standards are summarized in Table 4.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 13

3.3 Regional

South Coast Air Quality Management District

The SCAQMD is the air pollution control agency for Orange County and the urban portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The agency’s primary responsibility is ensuring that state and federal ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the SCAB. The SCAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, conducting public education campaigns, and many other activities. All projects are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction.

The SCAQMD is also the lead agency in charge of developing the AQMP, with input from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and CARB. The AQMP is a comprehensive plan that includes control strategies for stationary and area sources, as well as for on-road and off-road mobile sources.

SCAG has the primary responsibility for providing future growth projections and the development and implementation of transportation control measures. CARB, in coordination with federal agencies, provides the control element for mobile sources.

The 2016 AQMP was adopted by the SCAQMD Governing Board on March 3, 2017. The purpose of the AQMP is to set forth a comprehensive and integrated program that would lead the SCAB into compliance with the federal 24-hour PM2.5 air quality standard, and to provide an update to the SCAQMD’s commitments towards meeting the federal 8-hour O3 standards. The AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories.

The SCAQMD has published the CEQA Air Quality Handbook (approved by the SCAQMD Governing Board in 1993 and augmented with guidance for Local Significance Thresholds [LST] in 2008). The SCAQMD guidance helps local government agencies and consultants to develop environmental documents required by California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and provides identification of suggested thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants for both construction and operation (see discussion of thresholds below). With the help of the CEQA Air Quality Handbook and associated guidance, local land use planners and consultants are able to analyze and document how proposed and existing projects affect air quality in order to meet the requirements of the CEQA review process. The SCAQMD periodically provides supplemental guidance and updates to the handbook on their website.

The SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and serves as a forum for regional issues relating to transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. Under federal law, SCAG is designated as a Metropolitan Planning Organization and under State law as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments.

The state and federal attainment status designations for the SCAB are summarized in Table 5: South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status. The SCAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area with respect to the State O3, PM10, and PM2.5 standards, as well as the national 8-hour O3 and PM2.5 standards. The SCAB is designated as attainment or unclassified for the remaining state and federal standards.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 14
Table 5: South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status
Pollutant State Federal
Ozone (O3)
(1 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Extreme) Ozone (O3)
(8 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Extreme) Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
(24 Hour Standard) – Non-Attainment (Serious)
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
(Annual Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Moderate) Particulate Matter (PM10)
(24 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Attainment (Maintenance) Particulate Matter (PM10)
(Annual Standard) Non-Attainment –
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
(1 Hour Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
(8 Hour Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
(1 Hour Standard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
(Annual Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance)
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
(1 Hour Standard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
(24 Hour Standard) Attainment –
Lead (Pb)
(30 Day Standard) – Unclassifiable/Attainment
Lead (Pb)
(3 Month Standard) Attainment –
Sulfates (SO4-2)
(24 Hour Standard) Attainment –
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S)
(1 Hour Standard) Unclassified –
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan, 2016; United States Environmental Protection Agency, Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book), 2018.

The following is a list of SCAQMD rules that are required of construction activities associated with the Project:

 Rule 402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. This rule does not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.

 Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best available control measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. PM 10 suppression techniques are summarized below.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 15
a) Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized. b) All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
c) All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times.
e) Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface.

 Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories.

3.4 Local

City of Bellflower General Plan

The Conservation Element of the City’s General Plan identifies goals that will result in a healthier city.

Goals and policies that relate to air quality impacts include the following:

Goal 2: Improve air quality.

Policy 2.2: Encourage increased vehicle occupancy and carpooling.

Policy 2.3: Actively participate in regional and local governmental efforts to improve air quality.

Policy 2.6: Encourage the creation of alternate fuel and energy regeneration stations and repair facilities within the city.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 16
4 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA AND METHODOLOGY

4.1 Air Quality Thresholds

Based upon the criteria derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a Project normally would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:

 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.  Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard.  Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.  Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

SCAQMD Thresholds

The significance criteria established by SCAQMD may be relied upon to make the above determinations.

According to the SCAQMD, an air quality impact is considered significant if the Project would violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality during construction and operational activities of land use development projects, as shown in Table 6: South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds.

Table 6: South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors Maximum Pounds Per Day Construction-Related Operational-Related
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 55
Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 150
Coarse Particulates (PM10) 150 150
Fine Particulates (PM2.5) 55 55
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, April 2019.

Localized Carbon Monoxide

In addition to the daily thresholds listed above, development associated with the Project would also be subject to the ambient air quality standards. These are addressed though an analysis of localized CO impacts. The significance of localized impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels near the Project are above state and federal CO standards (the more stringent California standards are 20 ppm for 1-hour and 9 ppm for 8-hour). The SCAB has been designated as attainment under the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.

Localized Significance Thresholds

In addition to the CO hotspot analysis, the SCAQMD developed LSTs for emissions of NO 2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at new development sites (off-site mobile source emissions are not included in the LST

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 17
analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions that can be generated at a project without expecting to cause or substantially contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent state or federal ambient air quality standards. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the Project source receptor area (SRA), as demarcated by the SCAQMD, and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST analysis for construction is applicable for all projects that disturb 5 acres or less on a single day. The City of Bellflower is located within SCAQMD SRA 5 (Southeast LA County). Table 7: Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations, shows the LSTs for a 1-acre, 2-acre, and 5-acre project in SRA 5 with sensitive receptors located within 25 meters of the Project site. LSTs associated with all acreage categories are provided in Table 7 for informational purposes. Table 7 shows that the LSTs increase as acreages increase. It should be noted that LSTs are screening thresholds and are therefore conservative. The construction LST acreage is determined based daily acreage disturbed. The operational LST acreage is based on the total area of the Project site. The Project site is less than one acre, therefore the 1-acre operational LST will be used to evaluate the Project.

Table 7: Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations Project Size
Maximum Pounds Per Day
Nitrogen Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse Particulates
(PM10)
Fine Particulates
(PM2.5)
1 Acre 80/80 571/571 4/1 3/1
2 Acres 114/114 861/861 7/2 4/1
5 Acres 172/172 1,480/1,480 14/4 7/2
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July 2008.

4.2 Methodology

This air quality impact analysis considers construction and operational impacts associated with the Project. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). CalEEMod is a Statewide land use emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Air quality impacts were assessed according to methodologies recommended by CARB and the SCAQMD.

Construction equipment, trucks, worker vehicles, and ground-disturbing activities associated with Project construction would generate emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors. Daily regional construction emissions are estimated by assuming construction occurs at the earliest feasible date (i.e., a conservative estimate of construction activities) and applying off-road, fugitive dust, and on-road emissions factors in CalEEMod.

Project operations would result in emissions of area sources (consumer products), energy sources (natural gas usage), and mobile sources (motor vehicles from Project generated vehicle trips). Project-generated increases in operational emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use. Since the site is currently vacant, the proposed Project would cause an increase of traffic over existing conditions.

Other operational emissions from area, energy, and stationary sources were quantified in CalEEMod based on land use activity data.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 18
As discussed above, the SCAQMD provides significance thresholds for emissions associated with proposed Project construction and operations. The proposed Project’s construction and operational emissions are compared to the daily criteria pollutant emissions significance thresholds in order to determine the significance of a Project’s impact on regional air quality.

The localized effects from the Project’s on-site emissions were evaluated in accordance with the SCAQMD’s LST methodology, which uses on-site mass emissions rate look-up tables and Project-specific modeling. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 19
5 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION

5.1 Air Quality Analysis

Threshold 5.1 Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the EPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The State Implementation Plan must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based programs. Similarly, under State law, the CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment regarding the state and federal ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.

The Project is located within the SCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the FCAA, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the SCAB is in nonattainment. To reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted the 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state (California) and national air quality standards. The 2016 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort including the SCAQMD, the CARB, the SCAG, and the EPA. The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s growth projections and RTP/SCS, updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Project is subject to the SCAQMD’s AQMP.

Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined by the following indicators:

 Consistency Criterion No. 1: The project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.  Consistency Criterion No. 2: The project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of the project build-out phase.

According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the purpose of the consistency finding is to determine if a project is inconsistent with the assumptions and objectives of the regional air quality plans, and thus if it would interfere with the region’s ability to comply with CAAQS and NAAQS.

The violations to which Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers are CAAQS and NAAQS. As shown in Table 8 and Table 9 below, the Project would not exceed the construction and operational emission standards. Thus, the Project would be consistent with the first criterion.

Concerning Consistency Criterion No. 2, the AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial (C) and is within the Design for Development (DFD) Zoning District. The Project

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 20
is consistent with the City’s General Plan Land Use Designations and the Zoning Designations and would not require a General Plan Amendment (GPA) or a Zone Change. As such, the Project is consistent with SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. Thus, the Project is consistent with the second criterion. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.

Threshold 5.2 Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard?

Construction Emissions

Construction associated with the Project would generate short-term emissions of criteria air pollutants.

The criteria pollutants of primary concern within the Project area include O3-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOX) and PM10 and PM2.5. Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.

Construction results in the temporary generation of emissions resulting from site grading, road paving, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, and the movement of construction equipment, especially on unpaved surfaces. Emissions of airborne particulate matter are largely dependent on the amount of ground disturbance associated with site preparation activities as well as weather conditions and the appropriate application of water.

The duration of construction activities associated with the Project is estimated to last approximately 11 months. Construction-generated emissions associated the Project were calculated using the CARB- approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. See Appendix A: Air Quality Modeling Data for more information regarding the construction assumptions used in this analysis. Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Project are summarized in Table 8: Construction-Related Emissions.

Fugitive dust emissions may have a substantial, temporary impact on local air quality. In addition, fugitive dust may be a nuisance to those living and working in the Project vicinity. Uncontrolled dust from construction can become a nuisance and potential health hazard to those living and working nearby.

SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 (prohibition of nuisances, watering of inactive and perimeter areas, track out requirements, etc.), are applicable to the Project and were applied in CalEEMod to minimize fugitive dust emissions. Standard Condition (SC) AQ-1 requires the implementation of Rule 402 and 403 dust control techniques to minimize PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations. While impacts would be considered less than significant, Project would be subject to SCAQMD Rules for reducing fugitive dust, described in the Regulatory Framework subsection above and identified in Standard Conditions SC AQ-1.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 21
Table 8: Construction-Related Emissions
Construction Year
Maximum Pounds Per Day
Reactive
Organic
Gases
(ROG)
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Sulfur
Dioxide
(SO2)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
2023 17.97 14.49 13.89 0.03 3.74 2.05
2024 17.95 1.23 2.00 >0.01 0.12 0.08
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed SCAQMD
Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes: SCAQMD Rule 403 Fugitive Dust applied. The Rule 403 reduction/credits include the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stock piles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. No mitigation was applied to construction equipment. Refer to Appendix A for Model Data Outputs.

Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

As shown in Table 8, all criteria pollutant emissions would remain below their respective thresholds. While impacts would be considered less than significant, the Project would be subject to SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113, described in the Regulatory Framework subsection above and required by SC AQ-1.

Operational Emissions

The Project’s operational emissions would be associated with area sources (e.g., landscape maintenance equipment, architectural coatings, consumer products, etc.), energy sources, mobile sources (i.e., motor vehicle use), and off-road equipment. Primary sources of operational criteria pollutants are from motor vehicle use. Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are summarized in Table 9:

Operational Emissions. The operational emissions sources are described below.

 Area Source Emissions. Area source emissions would be generated due to consumer products (e.g., fertilizers/pesticides, detergents; cleaning compounds; polishes; floor finishes; cosmetics; personal care products; home, lawn, and garden products; disinfectants; sanitizers; aerosol paints, etc.), architectural coating, and gasoline-powered landscaping equipment that were previously not present on the site.

 Energy Source Emissions. Energy source emissions would be generated due to electricity and natural gas usage associated with the Project. Primary uses of electricity and natural gas by the Project would be for space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics.

 Mobile Source. Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern. NOX and ROG react with sunlight to form O3, known as photochemical smog. Additionally, wind currents readily transport PM 10 and PM2.5.

However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source.

Project-generated vehicle emissions are based on the trip generation within the Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (Kimley-Horn and Associates, February 2022) and incorporated into

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 22
CalEEMod as recommended by the SCAQMD. Per the Project Traffic Impact Analysis, the Project would generate 2,815 daily vehicle trips.

Table 9: Operational Emissions
Source
Maximum Pounds Per Day
Reactive
Organic
Gases
(ROG)
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Sulfur
Dioxide
(SO2)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
Area Source Emissions 0.47 >0.01 0.02 0.00 >0.01 >0.01
Energy Emissions 0.06 0.50 0.42 >0.01 0.04 0.04
Mobile Emissions 7.51 7.13 71.03 0.15 16.01 4.34
Drive Thru Idling
Emissions >0.01 >0.01 >0.01 >0.01 >0.01 >0.01
Total Emissions 8.04 7.63 71.47 0.15 16.05 4.38
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

As shown in Table 9, operational emissions would remain below the SCAQMD criteria pollutant thresholds. All criteria pollutant emissions would remain below their respective thresholds during Project operations. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact.

Cumulative Construction Emissions

The SCAB is designated nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for State standards and nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5 for Federal standards. Appendix D of the SCAQMD White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution (2003) notes that projects that result in emissions that do not exceed the project-specific SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance should result in a less than significant impact on a cumulative basis unless there is other pertinent information to the contrary. The mass-based regional significance thresholds published by the SCAQMD are designed to ensure compliance with both NAAQS and CAAQS and are based on an inventory of projected emissions in the SCAB. Therefore, if a project is estimated to result in emissions that do not exceed the thresholds, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact on air quality in the SCAB would not be cumulatively considerable. As shown in Table 8 above, Project construction-related emissions by themselves would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for criteria pollutants. Therefore, the proposed Project would not generate a cumulatively considerable contribution to air pollutant emissions during construction.

The SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the AQMP pursuant to the FCAA mandates. The analysis assumed fugitive dust controls would be utilized during construction, including frequent water applications. SCAQMD rules, mandates, and compliance with adopted AQMP emissions control measures would also be imposed on construction projects throughout the SCAB, which would include related projects. Compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations would further reduce the Project construction-related impacts. Therefore, Project-related construction emissions, combined with those from other projects in the area, would not substantially deteriorate local air quality. Construction emissions associated with the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative air quality impacts.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 23
Cumulative Operational Impacts

The SCAQMD has not established separate significance thresholds for cumulative operational emissions.

The nature of air emissions is largely a cumulative impact. As a result, no single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, individual project emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. The SCAQMD developed the operational thresholds of significance based on the level above which individual project emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SCAB’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, a project that exceeds the SCAQMD operational thresholds would also be a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact.

As shown in Table 9, the Project operational emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project would not generate a cumulatively considerable contribution to air pollutant emissions during construction.

Standard Conditions and Requirements:

SC AQ-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the City Engineer shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans and Specifications require all construction contractors to comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Rules 402 and 403 to minimize construction emissions of dust and particulates. The measures include, but are not limited to, the following:

 Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized.  All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
 All material transported off site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
 The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times.
 Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.

Threshold 5.3 Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Localized Construction Significance Analysis

The nearest sensitive receptors are the multi-family residences adjoining the Project site to the west. To identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing LSTs for construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 24
(I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with Project-specific emissions.

Since CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment, Table 10: Equipment- Specific Disturbance Rates, is used to determine the maximum daily disturbed acreage for comparison to LSTs. The appropriate SRA for the localized significance thresholds is the Southeast LA County (SRA 5) since this area includes the Project. LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced look- up tables for projects that disturb areas less than or equal to 5 acres in size. Project construction is anticipated to disturb a maximum of 2 acres in a single day.

Table 10: Equipment-Specific Disturbance Rates
Construction Phase Equipment
Type
Equipment
Quantity
Acres Disturbed
per 8-Hour Day
Operating
Hours
per Day
Acres Graded
per Day
Grading
Tractors 2 0.5 8 1.0
Graders 1 0.5 8 0.5
Dozers 1 0.5 8 0.5
Scrapers 0 1.0 8 0
Total Acres Graded per Day 2.0
Source: SCAQMD, Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

The SCAQMD’s methodology states that “off-site mobile emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, only emissions included in the CalEEMod “on- site” emissions outputs were considered. The nearest sensitive receptors are the multi-family residences adjoining the Project site to the west. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. Therefore, LSTs for receptors located at the closest distance of 25 meters are utilized in this analysis. Table 11: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions, presents the results of localized emissions during construction.

Table 11: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions Construction Activity
Maximum Pounds Per Day
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
Demolition (2023) 14.32 13.46 0.68 0.63
Site Preparation (2023) 12.43 6.64 3.19 1.75
Grading (2023) 14.47 8.70 3.63 2.02
Building Construction (2023) 11.71 12.61 0.51 0.50
Paving (2023) 6.24 8.80 0.31 0.28
Architectural Coating (2023) 1.30 1.81 0.07 0.07
Architectural Coating (2024) 1.22 1.81 0.06 0.06
SCAQMD Localized Screening Threshold
(2 acres at 25 meters) 114 861 7 4
Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 25
Table 11 shows that the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of Project construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact concerning LSTs during construction activities.

Localized Operational Significance Analysis

Since the Project site is approximately 3.63 acres, the 3-acre threshold was used for evaluation of operational emissions. As noted above, the LSTs increase as site acreage increases. The on-site operational emissions are compared to the LST thresholds in Table 12: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions.

Table 12 shows that the maximum daily emissions of these pollutants during Project operations would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact concerning LSTs during operational activities.

Table 12: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions Activity
(Maximum Pounds Per Day)
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
On-Site Area and Energy Source Emissions 0.50 0.44 0.04 0.04 SCAQMD Localized Screening Threshold
(3 acres at 25 meters) 133 1,067 3 1
Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.

Criteria Pollutant Health Impacts
On December 24, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion identifying the need to provide sufficient information connecting a project’s air emissions to health impacts or explain why such information could not be ascertained (Sierra Club v. County of Fresno [Friant Ranch, L.P.] [2018] Cal.5th, Case No. S219783). The SCAQMD has set its CEQA significance thresholds based on the FCAA, which defines a major stationary source (in extreme ozone nonattainment areas such as the South Coast Air Basin) as emitting 10 tons per year. The thresholds correlate with the trigger levels for the federal New Source Review (NSR) Program and SCAQMD Rule 1303 for new or modified sources. The NSR Program 2 was created by the FCAA to ensure that stationary sources of air pollution are constructed or modified in a manner that is consistent with attainment of health-based federal ambient air quality standards. The federal ambient air quality standards establish the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health. Therefore, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s LSTs and mass emissions thresholds would not violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation and no criteria pollutant health impacts.

NOX and ROG are precursor emissions that form ozone in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight where the pollutants undergo complex chemical reactions. It takes time and the influence of meteorological conditions for these reactions to occur, so ozone may be formed at a distance downwind from the sources. Breathing ground-level ozone can result health effects that include: reduced lung function, inflammation of airways, throat irritation, pain, burning, or discomfort in the chest when taking

2 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) [i.e., PSD (40 CFR 52.21, 40 CFR 51.166, 40 CFR 51.165 (b)), Non-attainment NSR (40 CFR

52.24, 40 CFR 51.165, 40 CFR part 51, Appendix S)

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 26
a deep breath, chest tightness, wheezing, or shortness of breath. In addition to these effects, evidence from observational studies strongly indicates that higher daily ozone concentrations are associated with increased asthma attacks, increased hospital admissions, increased daily mortality, and other markers of morbidity. The consistency and coherence of the evidence for effects upon asthmatics suggests that ozone can make asthma symptoms worse and can increase sensitivity to asthma triggers.

According the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP, ozone, NOX, and ROG have been decreasing in the Basin since 1975 and are projected to continue to decrease in the future. Although vehicle miles traveled in the Basin continue to increase, NOX and ROG levels are decreasing because of the mandated controls on motor vehicles and the replacement of older polluting vehicles with lower-emitting vehicles. NOX emissions from electric utilities have also decreased due to the use of cleaner fuels and renewable energy. The 2016 AQMP demonstrates how the SCAQMD’s control strategy to meet the 8-hour ozone standard in 2023 would lead to sufficient NOX emission reductions to attain the 1-hour ozone standard by 2022. In addition, since NOX emissions also lead to the formation of PM2.5, the NOX reductions needed to meet the ozone standards will likewise lead to improvement of PM2.5 levels and attainment of PM2.5 standards.

The SCAQMD’s air quality modeling demonstrates that NOX reductions prove to be much more effective in reducing ozone levels and will also lead to significant improvement in PM2.5 concentrations. NOX- emitting stationary sources regulated by the SCAQMD include Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) facilities (e.g., refineries, power plants, etc.), natural gas combustion equipment (e.g., boilers, heaters, engines, burners, flares) and other combustion sources that burn wood or propane. The 2016 AQMP identifies robust NOX reductions from new regulations on RECLAIM facilities, non-refinery flares, commercial cooking, and residential and commercial appliances. Such combustion sources are already heavily regulated with the lowest NOX emissions levels achievable but there are opportunities to require and accelerate replacement with cleaner zero-emission alternatives, such as residential and commercial furnaces, pool heaters, and backup power equipment. The SCAQMD plans to achieve such replacements through a combination of regulations and incentives. Technology-forcing regulations can drive development and commercialization of clean technologies, with future year requirements for new or existing equipment. Incentives can then accelerate deployment and enhance public acceptability of new technologies.

The 2016 AQMP also emphasizes that beginning in 2012, continued implementation of previously adopted regulations will lead to NOX emission reductions of 68 percent by 2023 and 80 percent by 2031. With the addition of 2016 AQMP proposed regulatory measures, a 30 percent reduction of NOX from stationary sources is expected in the 15-year period between 2008 and 2023. This is in addition to significant NO X reductions from stationary sources achieved in the decades prior to 2008.

As previously discussed, localized effects of on-site Project emissions on nearby receptors were found to be less than significant (refer to Table 11 and Table 12). The LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard. The LSTs were developed by the SCAQMD based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each SRA and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The ambient air quality standards establish the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health, including protecting the health of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. However, as discussed above, neither the SCAQMD nor any other air district currently have methodologies that would provide Lead Agencies and CEQA practitioners with a consistent, reliable, and meaningful analysis to correlate specific health impacts that may result from a proposed project’s mass emissions. Information on health impacts related to exposure to ozone and

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 27
particulate matter emissions published by the U.S. EPA and CARB have been summarized above and discussed in the Regulatory Framework section. Health studies are used by these agencies to set the NAAQS and CAAQS.

Ozone concentrations are dependent upon a variety of complex factors, including the presence of sunlight and precursor pollutants, natural topography, nearby structures that cause building downwash, atmospheric stability, and wind patterns. Because of the complexities of predicting ground-level ozone concentrations in relation to the NAAQS and CAAQS, none of the health-related information can be directly correlated to the pounds/day or tons/year of emissions estimated from a single, proposed project.

It should also be noted that this analysis identifies health concerns related to particulate matter, CO, O 3, and NO2. Table 1 includes a list of criteria pollutants and summarizes common sources and effects. Thus, this analysis is reasonable and intended to foster informed decision making.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots

An analysis of CO “hot spots” is needed to determine whether the change in the level of service of an intersection resulting from the Project would have the potential to result in exceedances of the CAAQS or NAAQS. It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when vehicles are idling at intersections. Vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last 20 years. Currently, the CO standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams per mile for passenger cars (requirements for certain vehicles are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations have steadily declined. Accordingly, with the steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do not result in exceedances of the CO standard.

The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) was re-designated as attainment in 2007 and is no longer addressed in the SCAQMD’s AQMP. The 2003 AQMP is the most recent version that addresses CO concentrations. As part of the SCAQMD CO Hotspot Analysis, the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection, one of the most congested intersections in Southern California with an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day, was modeled for CO concentrations. This modeling effort identified a CO concentration high of 4.6 ppm, which is well below the 35-ppm Federal standard. Based on data within the Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis, the surrounding roadways would have a maximum ADT volume of 24,552 during the Opening Year 2023 plus Project scenario. Therefore, the Project would not produce the volume of traffic required to generate a CO hot spot in the context of SCAQMD’s CO Hotspot Analysis. As the CO hotspots were not experienced at the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection even as it accommodates 100,000 vehicles daily, it can be reasonably inferred that CO hotspots would not be experienced at any vicinity intersections resulting from 2,815 additional vehicle trips attributable to the Project. Therefore, the Project would not result in a CO hotspot and impacts would be less than significant.

Construction-Related Diesel Particulate Matter

Construction of the Project would result in the generation of DPM emissions from the use of required off- road diesel equipment. The amount to which the receptors are exposed (a function of concentration and duration of exposure) is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Health-related risks associated with diesel-exhaust emissions are primarily linked to long-term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer. The use of diesel-powered construction equipment would be temporary and episodic. The duration of exposure would be short and exhaust from construction equipment dissipates rapidly. Current models

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 28
and methodologies for conducting health risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods of 9, 30, and 70 years, which do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) has not identified short-term health effects from DPM. Construction is temporary and would be transient throughout the site (i.e., move from location to location) and would not generate emissions in a fixed location for extended periods of time which would limit the exposure of any proximate individual sensitive receptor to TACs.

Additionally, construction is subject to and would comply with California regulations (e.g., California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Sections 2485 and 2449), which reduce diesel PM and criteria pollutant emissions from in-use off-road diesel-fueled vehicles and limit the idling of heavy-duty construction equipment to no more than five minutes. These regulations would further reduce nearby sensitive receptors’ exposure to temporary and variable DPM emissions. Given the temporary and intermittent nature of construction activities likely to occur within specific locations in the Project site (i.e., construction is not likely to occur in any one location for an extended time), the dose of DPM of any one receptor is exposed to would be limited. Therefore, considering the relatively short duration of DPM-emitting construction activity at any one location, and the highly dispersive properties of DPM, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial concentrations of construction-related TAC emissions. Impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.

Threshold 5.4 Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

Construction

Odors that could be generated by construction activities are required to follow SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent odor nuisances on sensitive land uses. SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, states:

A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.

During construction, emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust, and volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings and paving activities may generate odors. However, these odors would be temporary, are not expected to affect a substantial number of people and would disperse rapidly. Therefore, impacts related to odors associated with the Project’s construction-related activities would be less than significant.

Operations

The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook identifies certain land uses as sources of odors. These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The Project

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 29
would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources.

Therefore, the Project would not create objectionable odors.

Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.

City of Bellflower Bellflower Convenience Center
Air Quality Assessment
June 2022
Page | 30
6 REFERENCES

1. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Health Effects, 2018.

2. California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects, 2009.

3. California Air Resources Board, Aerometric Data Analysis and Measurement System (ADAM) Top Four Summaries from 2018 to 2020, 2021.

4. California Air Resources Board, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, 2005.

5. California Air Resources Board, Current Air Quality Standards, 2016.

6. California Air Resources Board, Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, 2000.

7. City of Bellflower, General Plan, 1994.

8. Federal Highway Administration, Interim Guidance on Mobile Source Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA Documents, 2016.

9. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Traffic Study for the Bellflower Convenience Center Project, June 2022.

10. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines, 2015.

11. South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2016 Air Quality Management Plan, March 2017.

12. South Coast Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Handbook, 1993.

13. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, 2009.

14. United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards Table , 2016.

15. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants, 2019.

16. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Policy Assessment for the Review of the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 2013.

Appendix A
Air Quality Modeling Data

Bellflower Convenience Center
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:57 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 0 Regional Shopping Center 8.36 1000sqft 0.19 8,356.00 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 8.00 Pump 0.76 3,997.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 8.05 1000sqft 2.13 8,050.00 0 Parking Lot 132.00 Space 1.19 52,800.00
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
390.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days)33
Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2024

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Dust Control Measures Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Construction Phase - Anticipated Construction Schedule
Trips and VMT -
Demolition - No demolition
Grading -
Vehicle Trips - Trip Gen
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Per Site Plan

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:57 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Water Mitigation -
Waste Mitigation - Per AB 939
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.03 0.76
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,129.40 3,997.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.18 2.13
tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 6 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 11.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 14.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 65.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 50.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 35.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 46.12 24.89
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 240.22
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 29.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 54.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 37.75 24.89
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 240.22
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 240.22
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 21.10 24.89

2.0 Emissions Summary

17.9652 14.4900 13.9288
N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
340.9524 340.9524 0.0172 1.2900e-
003
341.7666

0.6479 0.0446 2,598.2637
2024 17.9530 1.2308 2.0125 3.5500e-003 0.0671 0.0613 0.1284 0.0178 0.0613 0.0791 0.0000

0.6336 4.0110 0.0000 2,576.0649 2,576.06490.0276 7.1944 0.6775 7.7994 3.45442023

0.6479 0.0446 2,598.2637
Mitigated Construction

0.6336 4.0110 0.0000 2,576.0649 2,576.06490.0276 7.1944 0.6775 7.7994 3.4544Maximum 17.9652 14.4900 13.9288

17.9652 14.4900 13.9288
CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO
340.9524 340.9524 0.0172 1.2900e-
003
341.7666

0.6479 0.0446 2,598.2637
2024 17.9530 1.2308 2.0125 3.5500e-003 0.0636 0.0613 0.1249 0.0169 0.0613 0.0782 0.0000

0.6336 2.0489 0.0000 2,576.0649 2,576.06490.0276 3.1338 0.6775 3.7388 1.49232023

0.6479 0.0446 2,598.26370.6336 2.0489 0.0000 2,576.0649 2,576.06490.0276 3.1338 0.6775 3.7388 1.4923Maximum 17.9652 14.4900 13.9288

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:57 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.97 0.00 51.26 56.53 0.00 47.99 0.00

0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
604.1231 604.1231 0.0116 0.0111 607.7131

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Energy 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Area
18,779.828
8 1.1732 0.7194 18,172.079
3 Total 8.5260 8.3707 79.2906 0.1759 18.0252 0.1622 18.1874 4.8014 0.1533 4.9547

0.1150 4.9164 17,928.355
4 17,928.355
4 0.1729 18.0252 0.1239 18.1491 4.8014Mobile 7.9978 7.8671 78.8518 18,532.512
7 18,532.512
7 1.1849 0.7305

0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Area0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

0.1106 16.0088 4.2348Mobile 7.5192 7.1378 71.0316
604.1231 604.1231 0.0116 0.0111 607.7131

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Energy 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005
ROG NOx CO SO2
16,464.836
7 16,464.836
7 1.0814 0.6639 16,689.714
9 1.0697 0.6528 16,081.965
3 Total 8.0474 7.6414 71.4704 0.1560 15.8982 0.1489 16.0471 4.2348 0.1409 4.3757

0.1026 4.3374 15,860.679
3 15,860.679
3 0.1530 15.8982

8.73 9.12 11.13

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

5.61 8.71 9.86 11.33 11.80 8.21 11.77 11.80 8.07 11.68 0.00 11.16 11.16 PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
5 2
3 Grading Grading 3/3/2023 3/8/2023 5 4
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/1/2023 3/2/2023
Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 2/1/2023 2/28/2023 5 20
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date
5 106 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/28/2023 1/10/2024 5 200
5 Paving Paving 12/14/2023 12/27/2023 5 10
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/9/2023 12/13/2023

0.73 Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81
Acres of Paving: 1.19
Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 26,065; Non-Residential Outdoor: 8,688; Striped Parking Area: 3,552 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor

0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 1 7.00 247

0.37 Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 8.00 97

0.37 Building Construction Cranes 1 6.00 231 0.29
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 7.00 97

0.41 Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187

0.37 Building Construction Welders 3 8.00 46 0.45
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 6.00 97

0.20 Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74 Building Construction Forklifts 1 6.00 89

0.36 Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Paving Paving Equipment 1 8.00 132

0.56 Paving Pavers 1 6.00 130 0.42
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 6.00 9

0.37 Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48 Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97

14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_MixSite Preparation 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 HHDT

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Reduce Vehicle Speed on Unpaved Roads

14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_MixArchitectural Coating 1 6.00 0.00 0.00 HHDT
Paving 5 13.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT

14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix
NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Clean Paved Roads

3.2 Demolition - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2
2,324.3959 2,324.3959 0.5893 2,339.1278
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 1.4725 14.3184 13.4577 0.0241 0.6766 0.6766 0.6328 0.6328

0.5893 2,339.12780.6328 0.6328 2,324.3959 2,324.39590.0241 0.6766 0.6766Total1.4725 14.3184 13.4577

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0416 0.0290 0.4711

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
131.6397 131.6397 3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157

3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157
Total 0.0416 0.0290 0.4711 1.2900e-003 0.1453 8.8000e-
004

0.1462 0.0385 8.1000e-
004

0.0393

8.1000e-
004

0.0393 131.6397 131.63971.2900e-003 0.1453 8.8000e-
004

0.1462 0.0385Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
2,339.1278

0.5893 2,339.1278
Total 1.4725 14.3184 13.4577 0.0241 0.6766 0.6766 0.6328 0.6328 0.0000

0.6328 0.6328 0.0000 2,324.3959 2,324.39590.0241 0.6766 0.6766Off-Road 1.4725 14.3184 13.4577 2,324.3959 2,324.3959 0.5893

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

0.0416 0.0290 0.4711

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
131.6397 131.6397 3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157

3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157
Total 0.0416 0.0290 0.4711 1.2900e-003 0.1377 8.8000e-
004

0.1386 0.0367 8.1000e-
004

0.0375

8.1000e-
004

0.0375 131.6397 131.63971.2900e-003 0.1377 8.8000e-
004

0.1386 0.0367Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
1,666.0573 1,666.0573 0.5388 1,679.5282

0.0000
Off-Road 1.1339 12.4250 6.6420 0.0172 0.5074 0.5074 0.4668 0.4668

0.0000 3.0041 0.00006.2662 0.0000 6.2662 3.0041Fugitive Dust

0.5388 1,679.52820.4668 3.4709 1,666.0573 1,666.05730.0172 6.2662 0.5074 6.7736 3.0041Total1.1339 12.4250 6.6420

0.0256 0.0179 0.2899

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000

81.0090 81.0090 2.0200e-
003

1.8500e-
003

81.6097

2.0200e-
003

1.8500e-
003

81.6097
Total 0.0256 0.0179 0.2899 7.9000e-004 0.0894 5.4000e-
004

0.0900 0.0237 5.0000e-
004

0.0242

5.0000e-
004

0.0242 81.0090 81.00907.9000e-004 0.0894 5.4000e-
004

0.0900 0.0237Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
1,666.0573 1,666.0573 0.5388 1,679.5282

0.0000
Off-Road 1.1339 12.4250 6.6420 0.0172 0.5074 0.5074 0.4668 0.4668 0.0000

0.0000 1.2843 0.00002.6788 0.0000 2.6788 1.2843Fugitive Dust

0.5388 1,679.52820.4668 1.7510 0.0000 1,666.0573 1,666.05730.0172 2.6788 0.5074 3.1862 1.2843Total1.1339 12.4250 6.6420

0.0256 0.0179 0.2899

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000

81.0090 81.0090 2.0200e-
003

1.8500e-
003

81.6097

2.0200e-
003

1.8500e-
003

81.6097
Total 0.0256 0.0179 0.2899 7.9000e-004 0.0848 5.4000e-
004

0.0853 0.0226 5.0000e-
004

0.0231

5.0000e-
004

0.0231 81.0090 81.00907.9000e-004 0.0848 5.4000e-
004

0.0853 0.0226Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.4 Grading - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
1,995.6147 1,995.6147 0.6454 2,011.7503

0.0000
Off-Road 1.3330 14.4676 8.7038 0.0206 0.6044 0.6044 0.5560 0.5560

0.0000 3.4247 0.00007.0826 0.0000 7.0826 3.4247Fugitive Dust

0.6454 2,011.75030.5560 3.9807 1,995.6147 1,995.61470.0206 7.0826 0.6044 7.6869 3.4247Total1.3330 14.4676 8.7038

0.0320 0.0223 0.3624

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
101.2613 101.2613 2.5200e-
003

2.3100e-
003
102.0121

2.5200e-
003

2.3100e-
003
102.0121
Total 0.0320 0.0223 0.3624 9.9000e-004 0.1118 6.7000e-
004

0.1125 0.0296 6.2000e-
004

0.0303

6.2000e-
004

0.0303 101.2613 101.26139.9000e-004 0.1118 6.7000e-
004

0.1125 0.0296Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
1,995.6147 1,995.6147 0.6454 2,011.7503

0.0000
Off-Road 1.3330 14.4676 8.7038 0.0206 0.6044 0.6044 0.5560 0.5560 0.0000

0.0000 1.4641 0.00003.0278 0.0000 3.0278 1.4641Fugitive Dust

0.6454 2,011.75030.5560 2.0201 0.0000 1,995.6147 1,995.61470.0206 3.0278 0.6044 3.6322 1.4641Total1.3330 14.4676 8.7038

0.0320 0.0223 0.3624

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
101.2613 101.2613 2.5200e-
003

2.3100e-
003
102.0121

2.5200e-
003

2.3100e-
003
102.0121
Total 0.0320 0.0223 0.3624 9.9000e-004 0.1060 6.7000e-
004

0.1066 0.0282 6.2000e-
004

0.0288

6.2000e-
004

0.0288 101.2613 101.26139.9000e-004 0.1060 6.7000e-
004

0.1066 0.0282Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.5 Building Construction - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
2,010.2858

0.3399 2,010.2858
Total 1.5233 11.7104 12.6111 0.0221 0.5145 0.5145 0.4968 0.4968

0.4968 0.4968 2,001.7877 2,001.78770.0221 0.5145 0.5145Off-Road 1.5233 11.7104 12.6111 2,001.7877 2,001.7877 0.3399

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

0.0993 0.0692 1.1234
260.3672 260.3672 8.7300e-
003

0.0374 271.7404

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0150 0.4990 0.1933 2.4200e-003 0.0833 2.5100e- 003

0.0858 0.0240 2.4000e-
003

0.0264

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
574.2772 574.2772 0.0166 0.0446 587.9779

7.8200e-
003

7.1500e-
003
316.2375
Total 0.1142 0.5682 1.3167 5.4900e-003 0.4298 4.6000e-
003

0.4344 0.1159 4.3200e-
003

0.1202

1.9200e-
003

0.0938 313.9100 313.91003.0700e-003 0.3465 2.0900e-
003

0.3486 0.0919Worker
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
2,010.2858

0.3399 2,010.2858
Total 1.5233 11.7104 12.6111 0.0221 0.5145 0.5145 0.4968 0.4968 0.0000

0.4968 0.4968 0.0000 2,001.7877 2,001.78770.0221 0.5145 0.5145Off-Road 1.5233 11.7104 12.6111 2,001.7877 2,001.7877 0.3399

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

0.0993 0.0692 1.1234
260.3672 260.3672 8.7300e-
003

0.0374 271.7404

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0150 0.4990 0.1933 2.4200e-003 0.0797 2.5100e- 003

0.0822 0.0231 2.4000e-
003

0.0255

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
574.2772 574.2772 0.0166 0.0446 587.9779

7.8200e-
003

7.1500e-
003
316.2375
Total 0.1142 0.5682 1.3167 5.4900e-003 0.4081 4.6000e-
003

0.4127 0.1106 4.3200e-
003

0.1149

1.9200e-
003

0.0894 313.9100 313.91003.0700e-003 0.3284 2.0900e-
003

0.3305 0.0875Worker

0.6446 6.2357 8.8024
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.6 Paving - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.0000 0.0000

0.4114 1,307.9725
Paving 0.3118 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.2846 0.2846 1,297.6880 1,297.68800.0136 0.3084 0.3084Off-Road

0.4114 1,307.97250.2846 0.2846 1,297.6880 1,297.68800.0136 0.3084 0.3084Total0.9564 6.2357 8.8024

0.0416 0.0290 0.4711

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
131.6397 131.6397 3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157

3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157
Total 0.0416 0.0290 0.4711 1.2900e-003 0.1453 8.8000e-
004

0.1462 0.0385 8.1000e-
004

0.0393

8.1000e-
004

0.0393 131.6397 131.63971.2900e-003 0.1453 8.8000e-
004

0.1462 0.0385Worker

0.6446 6.2357 8.8024
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.0000 0.0000

0.4114 1,307.9725
Paving 0.3118 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.2846 0.2846 0.0000 1,297.6880 1,297.68800.0136 0.3084 0.3084Off-Road

0.4114 1,307.97250.2846 0.2846 0.0000 1,297.6880 1,297.68800.0136 0.3084 0.3084Total0.9564 6.2357 8.8024

0.0416 0.0290 0.4711

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000
131.6397 131.6397 3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157

3.2800e-
003

3.0000e-
003
132.6157
Total 0.0416 0.0290 0.4711 1.2900e-003 0.1377 8.8000e-
004

0.1386 0.0367 8.1000e-
004

0.0375

8.1000e-
004

0.0375 131.6397 131.63971.2900e-003 0.1377 8.8000e-
004

0.1386 0.0367Worker

17.7544
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2023
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690

0.0000
Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708

0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating

0.0168 281.86900.0708 0.0708 281.4481 281.44812.9700e-003 0.0708 0.0708Total 17.9460 1.3030 1.8111

0.0192 0.0134 0.2174

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000

60.7568 60.7568 1.5100e-
003

1.3800e-
003

61.2073

1.5100e-
003

1.3800e-
003

61.2073
Total 0.0192 0.0134 0.2174 5.9000e-004 0.0671 4.0000e-
004

0.0675 0.0178 3.7000e-
004

0.0182

3.7000e-
004

0.0182 60.7568 60.75685.9000e-004 0.0671 4.0000e-
004

0.0675 0.0178Worker

17.7544
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
281.4481 281.4481 0.0168 281.8690

0.0000
Off-Road 0.1917 1.3030 1.8111 2.9700e-003 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0708 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating

0.0168 281.86900.0708 0.0708 0.0000 281.4481 281.44812.9700e-003 0.0708 0.0708Total 17.9460 1.3030 1.8111

0.0192 0.0134 0.2174

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000

60.7568 60.7568 1.5100e-
003

1.3800e-
003

61.2073

1.5100e-
003

1.3800e-
003

61.2073
Total 0.0192 0.0134 0.2174 5.9000e-004 0.0636 4.0000e-
004

0.0640 0.0169 3.7000e-
004

0.0173

3.7000e-
004

0.0173 60.7568 60.75685.9000e-004 0.0636 4.0000e-
004

0.0640 0.0169Worker

17.7544
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443

0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-003 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609

0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating

0.0159 281.84430.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.44812.9700e-003 0.0609 0.0609Total 17.9351 1.2188 1.8101

0.0179 0.0120 0.2024

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000

59.5043 59.5043 1.3700e-
003

1.2900e-
003

59.9223

1.3700e-
003

1.2900e-
003

59.9223
Total 0.0179 0.0120 0.2024 5.8000e-004 0.0671 3.9000e-
004

0.0675 0.0178 3.6000e-
004

0.0181

3.6000e-
004

0.0181 59.5043 59.50435.8000e-004 0.0671 3.9000e-
004

0.0675 0.0178Worker

0.0000
Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e-003 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Archit. Coating

0.0159 281.84430.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.44812.9700e-003 0.0609 0.0609Total 17.9351 1.2188 1.8101

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Hauling

1.3700e-
003

1.2900e-
003

59.9223
Total 0.0179 0.0120 0.2024 5.8000e-004 0.0636 3.9000e-
004

0.0640 0.0169 3.6000e-
004

0.0173

3.6000e-
004

0.0173 59.5043 59.50435.8000e-004 0.0636 3.9000e-
004

0.0640 0.0169Worker 0.0179 0.0120 0.2024

4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile

4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Pedestrian Network
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2

59.5043 59.5043 1.3700e-
003

1.2900e-
003

59.9223
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 7.5192 7.1378 71.0316 0.1530 15.8982 0.1106 16.0088 4.2348 0.1026 4.3374 15,860.679 3 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
17,928.355
4 17,928.355
4 1.1732 0.7194 18,172.079
3 15,860.679
3 1.0697 0.6528 16,081.965
3Unmitigated 7.9978 7.8671 78.8518 0.1729 18.0252 0.1239 18.1491 4.8014 0.1150 4.9164

4.2 Trip Summary Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
5,150,061
Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,933.77 1,933.77 1933.77 5,839,071 Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 674.00 674.00 674.00 2,006,996 1,770,170 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT

4.3 Trip Type Information
Miles Trip %Trip Purpose %
631,101
Total 2,815.75 2,815.75 2,815.75 8,561,600 7,551,332
Regional Shopping Center 207.98 207.98 207.98 715,534

80.20 19.00 100 0 0Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps

16.60 8.40 6.90 0.80
H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W

0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00

78.80 19.00 100 0 0Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

16.60 8.40 6.90 2.20
OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD

4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2

64.70 19.00 100 0 0Regional Shopping Center 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.30

0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352
Fast Food Restaurant with Drive
Thru

0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795

0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923Convenience Market with Gas Pumps

0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899

0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.0033520.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923Regional Shopping Center 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899

0.000702 0.003352
Parking Lot 0.542464 0.063735 0.188241 0.126899 0.023249 0.006239 0.010717 0.008079 0.000923 0.000604 0.024795 0.000702 0.003352

5.0 Energy Detail

0.0554 0.5034 0.4229
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Historical Energy Use: N

5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
604.1231 604.1231 0.0116 0.0111 607.7131

0.0116 0.0111 607.7131
NaturalGas
Unmitigated

0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

0.0383 0.0383 604.1231 604.12313.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383NaturalGas Mitigated
CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2

5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
Unmitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5

2.1000 4.0000e-005 4.0000e-
005

2.1124
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru
5079.88 0.0548 0.4980 0.4183 2.9900e-
003

0.0379 0.0379 0.0379

1.3000e-
004

1.3000e-004 2.10001.4700e-003 1.0000e-
005

1.3000e-004 1.3000e-004Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

17.8496 1.9000e-004 1.7500e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0110 601.1845
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0379 597.6330 597.6330 0.0115

4.3901 8.0000e-005 8.0000e-
005

4.4162
Total 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-
003

0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

2.8000e-
004

2.8000e-004 4.39013.0700e-003 2.0000e-
005

2.8000e-004 2.8000e-004Regional Shopping
Center

37.3158 4.0000e-004 3.6600e-003

0.0111 607.71310.0383 604.1231 604.1231 0.0116

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:57 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated
NaturalGas
Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.1000 4.0000e-005 4.0000e-
005

2.1124
Fast Food
Restaurant with
Drive Thru

5.07988 0.0548 0.4980 0.4183 2.9900e-
003

0.0379 0.0379 0.0379

1.3000e-
004

1.3000e-004 2.10001.4700e-003 1.0000e-
005

1.3000e-004 1.3000e-004Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps

0.0178496 1.9000e-004 1.7500e-003

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0110 601.1845
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0379 597.6330 597.6330 0.0115

4.3901 8.0000e-005 8.0000e-
005

4.4162
Total 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-
003

0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

2.8000e-
004

2.8000e-004 4.39013.0700e-003 2.0000e-
005

2.8000e-004 2.8000e-004Regional Shopping
Center

0.0373158 4.0000e-004 3.6600e-003

0.0111 607.71310.0383 604.1231 604.1231 0.0116

6.0 Area Detail

6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159 0.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O

9.0000e-
005

0.0365

6.2 Area by SubCategory
Unmitigated

0.0365
Unmitigated 0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159 0.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.0342

0.0342 0.0342 9.0000e-
005

0.0486
CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.4227 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Architectural
Coating

0.0365

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Total 0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159 0.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Landscaping 1.4700e-
003

1.4000e-004 0.0159

0.0342 0.0342 9.0000e-
005

0.0000 0.0000Architectural
Coating

0.0486
N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

1.4700e-
003

1.4000e-004 0.0159

0.0000 0.0000

0.0000
Consumer
Products

0.4227 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

0.0342 0.0342 9.0000e-
005

0.0365

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Total 0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159 0.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Landscaping
Install Low Flow Shower
Use Water Efficient Irrigation System

7.0 Water Detail

7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
Install Low Flow Bathroom Faucet
Install Low Flow Kitchen Faucet
Install Low Flow Toilet

10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators

9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year

8.0 Waste Detail

8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
Institute Recycling and Composting Services
User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number

11.0 Vegetation
Load Factor Fuel Type
Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation - SCAQMD Dust Control Measures Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Construction Phase - Anticipated Construction Schedule
Trips and VMT -
Demolition - No demolition
Grading -
Vehicle Trips - Trip Gen
N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.004

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Per Site Plan
8,050.00 0
Parking Lot 132.00 Space 1.19 52,800.00
Utility Company Southern California Edison
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
390.98 CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)

0.033
Precipitation Freq (Days)33
Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2024

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2
Bellflower Convenience Center
Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:55 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 0 Regional Shopping Center 8.36 1000sqft 0.19 8,356.00 0 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 8.00 Pump 0.76 3,997.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 8.05 1000sqft 2.13

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:55 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 37.75 24.89
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 240.22
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 240.22
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 21.10 24.89
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 46.12 24.89
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 84.25
tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 240.22
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 29.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 54.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 11.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PR_TP 14.00 100.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 65.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips PB_TP 50.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 35.00 0.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.03 0.76
tblVehicleTrips DV_TP 21.00 0.00
tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,129.40 3,997.00
tblLandUse LotAcreage 0.18 2.13
tblConstDustMitigation CleanPavedRoadPercentReduction 0 6 tblConstDustMitigation WaterUnpavedRoadVehicleSpeed 0 15 Water Mitigation -
Waste Mitigation - Per AB 939
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value

0.6480 0.0452 2,582.32990.6336 2.0489 0.0000 2,559.9544 2,559.95440.0274 3.1338 0.6775 3.7388 1.4923Maximum 17.9667 14.4923 13.8907 337.8204 337.8204 0.0172 1.3800e-
003
338.6611

0.6480 0.0452 2,582.3299
2024 17.9544 1.2320 1.9963 3.5200e-003 0.0636 0.0613 0.1249 0.0169 0.0613 0.0782 0.0000

0.6336 2.0489 0.0000 2,559.9544 2,559.95440.0274 3.1338 0.6775 3.7388 1.49232023 17.9667 14.4923 13.8907 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO

0.6480 0.0452 2,582.3299
Mitigated Construction

0.6336 4.0110 0.0000 2,559.9544 2,559.95440.0274 7.1944 0.6775 7.7994 3.4544Maximum 17.9667 14.4923 13.8907 337.8204 337.8204 0.0172 1.3800e-
003
338.6611

0.6480 0.0452 2,582.3299
2024 17.9544 1.2320 1.9963 3.5200e-003 0.0671 0.0613 0.1284 0.0178 0.0613 0.0791 0.0000

0.6336 4.0110 0.0000 2,559.9544 2,559.95440.0274 7.1944 0.6775 7.7994 3.45442023 17.9667 14.4923 13.8907 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

2.0 Emissions Summary

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:55 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 17,772.887
8 17,772.887
8 1.2205 0.7625 18,030.617
1 1.2088 0.7514 17,422.867
6 Total 8.3736 8.9993 77.8150 0.1686 18.0252 0.1623 18.1874 4.8014 0.1534 4.9547

0.1150 4.9164 17,168.730
4 17,168.730
4 0.1655 18.0252 0.1239 18.1491 4.8014Mobile 7.8454 8.4957 77.3761 604.1231 604.1231 0.0116 0.0111 607.7131

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Energy 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Area0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.97 0.00 51.26 56.53 0.00 47.99 0.00 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1
Date: 6/23/2022 1:55 PM
Bellflower Convenience Center - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied 5 106 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 12/28/2023 1/10/2024 5 200
5 Paving Paving 12/14/2023 12/27/2023 5 10
4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/9/2023 12/13/2023 5 2
3 Grading Grading 3/3/2023 3/8/2023 5 4
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 3/1/2023 3/2/2023
Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 2/1/2023 2/28/2023 5 20
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date

8.43 9.08 11.10

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

5.77 8.75 9.46 11.31 11.80 8.21 11.77 11.80 8.07 11.68 0.00 11.13 11.13 PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
ROG NOx CO SO2
15,795.566
2 15,795.566
2 1.1176 0.6932 16,030.083
6 1.1059 0.6821 15,422.334
1 Total 7.8907 8.2121 70.4567 0.1495 15.8982 0.1489 16.0471 4.2348 0.1410 4.3758

0.1027 4.3375 15,191.408
9 15,191.408
9 0.1465 15.8982 0.1106 16.0088 4.2348Mobile 7.3625 7.7085 70.0178 604.1231 604.1231 0.0116 0.0111 607.7131

9.0000e-
005

0.0365
Energy 0.0554 0.5034 0.4229 3.0200e-003 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383 0.0383

6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005 0.0342 0.03420.0000 6.0000e-
005

6.0000e-005Area0.4728 1.4000e-004 0.0159
N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4
Mitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10 Total Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5