Beverly Hills City Council
June 27, 2024

City of Beverly Hills
Linden Drive
N/ Charleville Boulevard
24 Hour Directional Volume Count
BVH002W
Site Code: 057-23627
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
Phone: (951) 268-6268
email: [email protected]
Start 6/21/23 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Wed Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 4 38 2 10
12:15 3 40 1 19
12:30 2 34 1 15
12:45 1 52 10 164 1 15 5 59 15 223
01:00 1 45 2 15
01:15 0 55 3 16
01:30 1 54 2 11
01:45 0 66 2 220 0 17 7 59 9 279
02:00 0 58 0 23
02:15 2 58 0 20
02:30 1 61 1 15
02:45 0 67 3 244 0 17 1 75 4 319
03:00 0 53 0 16
03:15 1 58 1 18
03:30 0 66 0 28
03:45 1 44 2 221 0 18 1 80 3 301
04:00 0 64 0 12
04:15 1 54 2 20
04:30 1 57 0 16
04:45 6 51 8 226 0 17 2 65 10 291
05:00 0 55 1 19
05:15 5 68 1 18
05:30 9 46 0 16
05:45 15 35 29 204 28 4 61 33 265
06:00 11 55 3 24
06:15 26 62 2 14
06:30 43 58 3 16
06:45 42 45 122 220 3 13 11 67 133 287
07:00 38 37 28
07:15 48 33 2 10
07:30 41 16 3 10
07:45 43 23 170 109 3 11 10 39 180 148
08:00 50 19 28
08:15 46 18 24
08:30 42 19 66
08:45 51 19 189 75 95 19 23 208 98
09:00 54 19 12 5
09:15 56 10 76
09:30 58 10 86
09:45 52 11 220 50 13 7 40 24 260 74
10:00 38 15 10 4
10:15 45 13 53
10:30 35 11 57
10:45 45 10 163 49 19 9 39 23 202 72
11:00 51 10 22 7
11:15 30 7 11 0
11:30 40 4 13 1
11:45 41 3 162 24 15 0 61 8 223 32
Total 1080 1806 1080 1806 200 583 200 583 1280 2389
Combined
Total 2886 2886 783 783 3669
AM Peak - 09:00 - - - 10:45 - - - - -
Vol. - 220 - - - 65 - - - - -
P.H.F. 0.948 0.739
PM Peak - - 02:00 - - - 03:00 - - - -
Vol. - - 244 - - - 80 - - - -
P.H.F. 0.910 0.714
Percentag
e 37.4% 62.6% 25.5% 74.5%
ADT/AADT ADT 3,669 AADT 3,669

City of Beverly Hills
Linden Drive
N/ Charleville Boulevard
24 Hour Directional Volume Count
BVH002S
Site Code: 057-23627
Counts Unlimited, Inc.

PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
Phone: (951) 268-6268
email: [email protected]
Start 6/24/23 Northbound Hour Totals Southbound Hour Totals Combined Totals Time Sat Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon 12:00 2 40 0 14
12:15 1 27 0 15
12:30 2 30 1 15
12:45 2 29 7 126 0 15 1 59 8 185
01:00 1 36 07
01:15 3 36 1 14
01:30 4 31 0 12
01:45 2 48 10 151 0 11 1 44 11 195
02:00 1 32 1 18
02:15 2 37 0 16
02:30 1 44 1 12
02:45 0 33 4 146 0 13 2 59 6 205
03:00 0 26 28
03:15 1 30 0 14
03:30 0 31 0 21
03:45 0 26 1 113 0 18 2 61 3 174
04:00 0 37 0 12
04:15 0 36 0 10
04:30 3 29 0 15
04:45 2 36 5 138 0 15 0 52 5 190
05:00 3 34 1 11
05:15 3 41 1 10
05:30 1 27 0 11
05:45 7 36 14 138 17 3 39 17 177
06:00 5 30 0 15
06:15 8 21 0 11
06:30 13 35 28
06:45 9 21 35 107 08 2 42 37 149
07:00 6 26 18
07:15 6 22 28
07:30 13 22 11
07:45 17 17 42 87 35 7 22 49 109
08:00 11 17 24
08:15 13 11 32
08:30 11 15 54
08:45 37 10 72 53 74 17 14 89 67
09:00 27 6 51
09:15 27 8 53
09:30 19 13 12 3
09:45 32 7 105 34 74 29 11 134 45
10:00 19 11 68
10:15 21 9 50
10:30 27 15 63
10:45 31 7 98 42 67 23 18 121 60
11:00 27 6 10 3
11:15 21 4 9 0
11:30 34 3 6 3
11:45 27 4 109 17 15 2 40 8 149 25
Total 502 1152 502 1152 127 429 127 429 629 1581
Combined
Total 1654 1654 556 556 2210
AM Peak - 10:45 - - - 11:00 - - - - -
Vol. - 113 - - - 40 - - - - -
P.H.F. 0.831 0.667
PM Peak - - 01:45 - - - 03:15 - - - -
Vol. - - 161 - - - 65 - - - -
P.H.F. 0.839 0.774
Percentag
e 30.4% 69.6% 22.8% 77.2%
ADT/AADT ADT 2,210 AADT 2,210
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 1-23-4565-1 129 Linden
O:\JOB_FILE\4565\report\4565-Appendix Covers.docx

APPENDIX B

HCM AND LEVELS OF SERVICE EXPLANATION
SYNCHRO 11 DATA WORKSHEETS –

WEEKDAY AM, MD, AND PM PEAK HOURS AND SAT PEAK HOUR

LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
In the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), published by the Transportation Research Board, 2010, level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and increased travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions: in the absence of traffic control, in the absence of geometric delay, in the absence of incidents, and when there are no other vehicles on the road. Only the portion of total delay attributed to the control facility is quantified. This delay is called control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay.

Level of Service criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control delay per vehicle. Delay is a complex measure and is dependent on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group in question.

Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Level of Service Control Delay (Sec/Veh)
A ≤ 10
B > 10 and ≤ 20
C > 20 and ≤ 35
D > 35 and ≤ 55
E > 55 and ≤ 80
F > 80
Level of Service (LOS) values are used to describe intersection operations with service levels varying from LOS A (free flow) to LOS F (jammed condition). The following descriptions summarize HCM criteria for each level of service:

LOS A describes operations with very low control delay, up to 10 seconds per vehicle. This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay values.

LOS B describes operations with control delay greater than 10 and up to 20 seconds per vehicle. This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of delay.

LOS C describes operations with control delay greater than 20 and up to 35 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping.

LOS D describes operations with control delay greater than 35 and up to 55 seconds per vehicle. At LOS D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.

LOS E describes operations with control delay greater than 55 and up to 80 seconds per vehicle. This level is considered by many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.

LOS F describes operations with control delay in excess of 80 seconds per vehicle. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the lane groups. It may also occur at high v/c ratios with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors to such delay levels.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 472 826 50 183 674 18 0 517 84 0 1072 338 Future Volume (veh/h) 472 826 50 183 674 18 0 517 84 0 1072 338 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 513 898 0 199 733 20 0 562 91 0 1165 367 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 593 1205 231 991 27 0 1855 827 0 1855 827
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.24 0.00 0.13 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 5110 139 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 513 898 0 199 488 265 0 562 91 0 1165 367 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1845 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.3 19.6 0.0 13.1 16.2 16.2 0.0 10.8 3.5 0.0 28.0 17.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.3 19.6 0.0 13.1 16.2 16.2 0.0 10.8 3.5 0.0 28.0 17.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.08 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 593 1205 231 660 358 0 1855 827 0 1855 827 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.75 0.86 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.30 0.11 0.00 0.63 0.44 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 615 0 1855 827 0 1855 827 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.4 42.5 0.0 51.2 45.5 45.5 0.0 16.3 14.5 0.0 20.4 17.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.0 1.1 0.0 9.1 1.6 3.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 1.6 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.9 13.2 0.0 10.6 11.3 12.2 0.0 7.9 2.4 0.0 17.3 10.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.4 43.6 0.0 60.3 47.1 48.5 0.0 16.7 14.8 0.0 22.0 19.6 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1411 952 653 1532
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.3 50.3 16.4 21.4
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 67.1 20.0 32.8 67.1 25.1 27.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.8 15.1 21.6 30.0 19.3 18.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.4 0.4 6.4 6.2 1.3 5.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.1
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 446 801 53 172 613 39 0 681 93 0 947 364 Future Volume (veh/h) 446 801 53 172 613 39 0 681 93 0 947 364 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 485 871 0 187 666 42 0 740 101 0 1029 396 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 566 1163 218 917 58 0 1908 851 0 1908 851
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.23 0.00 0.12 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.54 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4911 308 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 485 871 0 187 461 247 0 740 101 0 1029 396 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1815 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 16.4 19.1 0.0 12.3 15.3 15.4 0.0 14.6 3.8 0.0 22.6 18.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 16.4 19.1 0.0 12.3 15.3 15.4 0.0 14.6 3.8 0.0 22.6 18.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.17 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 566 1163 218 636 339 0 1908 851 0 1908 851 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.75 0.86 0.72 0.73 0.00 0.39 0.12 0.00 0.54 0.47 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 605 0 1908 851 0 1908 851 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.8 43.1 0.0 51.6 45.9 45.9 0.0 16.2 13.7 0.0 18.1 17.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.1 1.1 0.0 9.1 1.6 3.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 1.1 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.2 12.9 0.0 10.1 10.8 11.6 0.0 10.0 2.6 0.0 14.4 11.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.9 44.2 0.0 60.7 47.4 48.9 0.0 16.8 14.0 0.0 19.2 19.0 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1356 895 841 1425
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.4 50.6 16.5 19.1
Approach LOS D D B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 68.9 19.2 31.8 68.9 24.1 26.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.6 14.3 21.1 24.6 18.4 17.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.8 0.4 6.3 7.8 1.3 4.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.7
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 462 982 28 113 914 48 0 755 74 0 939 503 Future Volume (veh/h) 462 982 28 113 914 48 0 755 74 0 939 503 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 502 1067 0 123 993 52 0 821 80 0 1021 547 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 1731 152 1270 66 0 1646 734 0 1646 734
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.34 0.00 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4968 260 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 502 1067 0 123 680 365 0 821 80 0 1021 547 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1824 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 21.0 0.0 8.1 22.3 22.4 0.0 19.3 3.4 0.0 26.0 33.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 21.0 0.0 8.1 22.3 22.4 0.0 19.3 3.4 0.0 26.0 33.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.14 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 1731 152 870 466 0 1646 734 0 1646 734 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.62 0.81 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.50 0.11 0.00 0.62 0.74 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1731 401 1135 608 0 1646 734 0 1646 734 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 33.1 0.0 53.9 41.5 41.6 0.0 22.5 18.2 0.0 24.2 26.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 0.7 0.0 9.3 2.5 4.7 0.0 1.1 0.3 0.0 1.8 6.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.6 13.7 0.0 7.3 14.6 15.8 0.0 13.0 2.4 0.0 16.6 20.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.2 33.8 0.0 63.3 44.1 46.3 0.0 23.6 18.5 0.0 26.0 33.1 LnGrp LOS E C E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1569 1168 901 1568
Approach Delay, s/veh 41.0 46.8 23.1 28.5
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.1 14.7 45.2 60.1 24.7 35.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.3 10.1 23.0 35.9 19.0 24.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.8 0.3 7.4 2.7 1.3 6.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.4
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 530 713 40 137 633 37 0 706 64 0 955 480 Future Volume (veh/h) 530 713 40 137 633 37 0 706 64 0 955 480 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 576 775 0 149 688 40 0 767 70 0 1038 522 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 652 1416 179 935 54 0 1810 808 0 1810 808
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.28 0.00 0.10 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4937 286 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 576 775 0 149 473 255 0 767 70 0 1038 522 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1819 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 19.5 15.5 0.0 9.9 15.7 15.8 0.0 16.2 2.7 0.0 24.3 28.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 19.5 15.5 0.0 9.9 15.7 15.8 0.0 16.2 2.7 0.0 24.3 28.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.16 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 652 1416 179 645 344 0 1810 808 0 1810 808 V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.55 0.83 0.73 0.74 0.00 0.42 0.09 0.00 0.57 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 606 0 1810 808 0 1810 808 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.4 36.9 0.0 53.0 45.8 45.8 0.0 18.4 15.1 0.0 20.4 21.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.3 0.0 9.4 1.6 3.1 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 1.3 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 14.4 10.8 0.0 8.5 11.0 11.9 0.0 11.0 1.9 0.0 15.4 16.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.7 37.3 0.0 62.3 47.4 48.9 0.0 19.1 15.3 0.0 21.7 25.5 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1351 877 837 1560
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.0 50.4 18.8 23.0
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 65.6 16.6 37.8 65.6 27.1 27.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.2 11.9 17.5 30.9 21.5 17.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.7 0.3 5.9 5.6 1.2 4.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 34.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 231 639 51 69 470 52 33 371 135 50 356 365 Future Volume (veh/h) 231 639 51 69 470 52 33 371 135 50 356 365 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 251 695 0 75 511 0 36 403 147 54 387 397 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 355 1008 97 2170 287 1688 753 430 844 753
Arrive On Green 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.11 0.85 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 866 3300 0 1781 5274 0 690 3554 1585 858 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 265 681 0 75 511 0 36 403 147 54 387 397 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 915 1549 0 1781 1702 0 690 1777 1585 858 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 25.0 17.2 0.0 3.7 1.7 0.0 3.5 6.0 4.8 3.6 13.2 15.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.0 17.2 0.0 3.7 1.7 0.0 19.3 6.0 4.8 9.6 13.2 15.8 Prop In Lane 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 371 993 97 2170 287 1688 753 430 844 753 V/C Ratio(X) 0.71 0.69 0.77 0.24 0.13 0.24 0.20 0.13 0.46 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 383 1033 336 2922 287 1688 753 430 844 753 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.71 0.71 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.3 26.6 0.0 39.6 4.0 0.0 23.3 14.0 13.7 16.8 15.9 16.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 1.3 0.0 12.2 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.6 1.8 2.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 9.1 9.9 0.0 3.4 1.0 0.0 1.1 4.4 3.3 1.4 9.5 10.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.6 27.9 0.0 51.7 4.1 0.0 24.2 14.3 14.2 17.4 17.6 19.2 LnGrp LOS C C D A C B B B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 946 586 586 838
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.5 10.2 14.9 18.4
Approach LOS CBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.3 9.4 33.3 47.3 42.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.3 5.7 27.0 17.8 3.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.3 0.1 1.9 4.5 4.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.6
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 291 624 47 124 556 73 46 504 169 47 259 218 Future Volume (veh/h) 291 624 47 124 556 73 46 504 169 47 259 218 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 316 678 0 135 604 0 50 548 184 51 282 237 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 352 1033 167 2436 359 1503 670 310 786 641
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.19 0.95 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 816 3251 0 1781 5274 0 882 3554 1585 724 1859 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 316 678 0 135 604 0 50 548 184 51 269 250 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 816 1549 0 1781 1702 0 882 1777 1585 724 1777 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 16.8 0.0 6.5 0.6 0.0 3.7 9.5 6.8 4.7 9.3 9.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 16.8 0.0 6.5 0.6 0.0 13.3 9.5 6.8 14.1 9.3 9.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 352 1033 167 2436 359 1503 670 310 751 676 V/C Ratio(X) 0.90 0.66 0.81 0.25 0.14 0.36 0.27 0.16 0.36 0.37 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 352 1033 336 2922 359 1503 670 310 751 676 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.71 0.71 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.1 25.6 0.0 35.8 1.1 0.0 22.3 17.7 17.0 22.5 17.7 17.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 19.0 1.1 0.0 8.9 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.0 9.7 0.0 5.4 0.4 0.0 1.5 7.1 4.7 1.6 7.2 6.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.1 26.7 0.0 44.7 1.1 0.0 23.1 18.4 17.9 23.7 19.0 19.3 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 994 739 782 570
Approach Delay, s/veh 34.4 9.1 18.6 19.6
Approach LOS C A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.6 12.9 34.5 42.6 47.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.3 8.5 32.0 16.1 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.2 0.2 0.0 3.2 5.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.6
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 239 778 18 108 727 45 95 707 193 55 238 287 Future Volume (veh/h) 239 778 18 108 727 45 95 707 193 55 238 287 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 260 846 0 117 790 0 103 768 210 60 259 312 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 309 1033 147 2379 328 1542 688 240 771 688
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.17 0.93 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 686 3251 0 1781 5274 0 841 3554 1585 575 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 260 846 0 117 790 0 103 768 210 60 259 312 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 686 1549 0 1781 1702 0 841 1777 1585 575 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 22.5 0.0 5.7 1.4 0.0 8.9 14.0 7.8 7.6 8.7 12.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 22.5 0.0 5.7 1.4 0.0 21.3 14.0 7.8 21.6 8.7 12.5 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 309 1033 147 2379 328 1542 688 240 771 688 V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.82 0.79 0.33 0.31 0.50 0.31 0.25 0.34 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 309 1033 336 2922 328 1542 688 240 771 688 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.79 0.79 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 31.8 27.5 0.0 36.8 1.7 0.0 25.5 18.4 16.6 26.2 16.9 17.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.3 4.2 0.0 9.3 0.1 0.0 2.3 1.1 1.1 2.5 1.2 2.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 11.0 13.1 0.0 4.8 0.7 0.0 3.5 9.7 5.4 2.2 6.7 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.1 31.8 0.0 46.1 1.8 0.0 27.8 19.5 17.7 28.7 18.0 20.1 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1106 907 1081 631
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.4 7.5 19.9 20.1
Approach LOS D A B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 43.6 11.9 34.5 43.6 46.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 23.3 7.7 32.0 23.6 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.4 0.2 0.0 2.2 7.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 238 532 45 71 422 35 40 378 126 32 200 299 Future Volume (veh/h) 238 532 45 71 422 35 40 378 126 32 200 299 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 259 578 0 77 459 0 43 411 137 35 217 325 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 371 966 100 2133 381 1714 764 436 857 764
Arrive On Green 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.11 0.84 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 933 3251 0 1781 5274 0 864 3554 1585 859 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 259 578 0 77 459 0 43 411 137 35 217 325 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 933 1549 0 1781 1702 0 864 1777 1585 859 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 23.8 14.2 0.0 3.8 1.6 0.0 3.1 6.1 4.4 2.2 6.5 12.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 23.8 14.2 0.0 3.8 1.6 0.0 15.1 6.1 4.4 8.3 6.5 12.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 371 966 100 2133 381 1714 764 436 857 764 V/C Ratio(X) 0.70 0.60 0.77 0.22 0.11 0.24 0.18 0.08 0.25 0.43 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 391 1033 336 2922 381 1714 764 436 857 764 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.83 0.83 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.5 26.2 0.0 39.4 4.4 0.0 20.1 13.6 13.2 16.1 13.7 15.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.3 0.7 0.0 11.9 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 9.2 8.7 0.0 3.4 1.0 0.0 1.2 4.4 3.0 0.9 4.9 8.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.8 26.9 0.0 51.3 4.5 0.0 20.7 14.0 13.7 16.4 14.5 16.9 LnGrp LOS C C D A C B B B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 837 536 591 577
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.0 11.2 14.4 16.0
Approach LOS CBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.9 9.5 32.6 47.9 42.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.1 5.8 25.8 14.0 3.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.9 0.1 2.3 3.5 3.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 39 410 18 46 391
Future Volume (veh/h) 30 39 410 18 46 391
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 33 42 446 20 50 425
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 84 75 2644 118 825 3031
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.76 0.76 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3558 155 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 33 42 228 238 50 425
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1842 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.6 2.3 3.1 3.2 0.5 1.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.6 2.3 3.1 3.2 0.5 1.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 84 75 1356 1406 825 3031
V/C Ratio(X) 0.39 0.56 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.14
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1356 1406 963 3031
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.6 42.0 2.9 2.9 1.6 1.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.0 6.5 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.4 1.9 1.6 1.7 0.1 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.6 48.5 3.2 3.2 1.6 1.2
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 75 466 475
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.8 3.2 1.2
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.1 73.2 81.3 8.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 5.2 3.8 4.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.5
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 65 41 614 65 49 389
Future Volume (veh/h) 65 41 614 65 49 389
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 71 45 667 71 53 423
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 108 96 2427 258 645 2984
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.06 0.75 0.75 0.04 0.84
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3334 345 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 71 45 365 373 53 423
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1808 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 2.5 5.9 5.9 0.5 2.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.5 2.5 5.9 5.9 0.5 2.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.19 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 108 96 1331 1354 645 2984
V/C Ratio(X) 0.66 0.47 0.27 0.28 0.08 0.14
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1331 1354 780 2984
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.4 40.9 3.6 3.6 2.0 1.3
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.7 3.6 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.1 1.9 3.2 3.2 0.2 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.1 44.4 4.1 4.1 2.1 1.4
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 116 738 476
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.7 4.1 1.5
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 71.9 80.1 9.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 7.9 4.0 5.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.3 3.2 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.9
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 52 25 875 87 28 359
Future Volume (veh/h) 52 25 875 87 28 359
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 57 27 951 95 30 390
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 87 77 2519 252 498 3025
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.77 0.77 0.03 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3356 326 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 57 27 518 528 30 390
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1812 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 1.5 8.4 8.4 0.3 1.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 1.5 8.4 8.4 0.3 1.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.18 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 87 77 1372 1399 498 3025
V/C Ratio(X) 0.66 0.35 0.38 0.38 0.06 0.13
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1372 1399 654 3025
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.1 41.4 3.3 3.3 2.1 1.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.1 2.7 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 2.6 1.1 4.2 4.3 0.1 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.2 44.1 4.1 4.1 2.1 1.2
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 84 1046 420
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.2 4.1 1.3
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.1 74.0 81.1 8.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 10.4 3.7 4.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.5 2.9 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.7
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 32 37 448 39 39 280
Future Volume (veh/h) 32 37 448 39 39 280
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 35 40 487 42 42 304
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 84 75 2539 218 780 3031
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.77 0.77 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3405 285 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 35 40 261 268 42 304
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1819 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 2.2 3.6 3.6 0.4 1.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 2.2 3.6 3.6 0.4 1.2
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.16 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 84 75 1363 1395 780 3031
V/C Ratio(X) 0.42 0.54 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.10
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1363 1395 923 3031
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 41.9 2.9 2.9 1.6 1.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.3 5.9 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.5 1.8 1.8 1.9 0.1 0.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.0 47.8 3.2 3.2 1.6 1.1
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 75 529 346
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.5 3.2 1.2
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.8 73.5 81.3 8.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 5.6 3.2 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 2.2 0.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.9
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 734 39 1 503 0 162 0 42 54 0 29 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 734 39 1 503 0 162 0 42 54 0 29 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 798 42 1 547 0 176 0 46 59 0 32
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1240 65 41 1239 0 1159 0 0 1159 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5135 261 1 5117 0 1781 176 1781 59
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 546 294 206 342 0 176 6.2 59 5.7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1823 1868 1549 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 0.0 9.5 0.0 3.4 1.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 9.5 9.5 0.0 3.4 1.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 849 455 506 773 0 1159 1159
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.64 0.65 0.41 0.44 0.00 0.15 0.05
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 861 919 1463 0 1159 1159
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.4 37.4 35.3 35.3 0.0 6.1 5.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.6 11.4 8.2 7.1 0.0 2.2 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 38.2 39.0 35.8 35.7 0.0 6.2 5.7 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 840 548
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.5 35.7
Approach LOS D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.0 27.0 63.0 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 16.1 5.4 11.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.4 0.3 4.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 32.9
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 800 80 0 584 0 139 0 53 91 1 44 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 800 80 0 584 0 139 0 53 91 1 44 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 870 87 0 635 0 151 0 58 99 1 48
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1305 130 0 1412 0 187 0 0 1111 0 743
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4888 470 0 5443 0 1781 151 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 627 330 0 635 0 151 47.5 99 0 48 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1786 0 1702 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.4 15.5 0.0 10.6 0.0 7.5 2.0 0.0 1.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.4 15.5 0.0 10.6 0.0 7.5 2.0 0.0 1.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 941 494 0 1412 0 187 1111 0 743 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.81 0.09 0.00 0.06 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 843 0 2411 0 307 1111 0 743 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.67 0.67 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 32.8 32.8 0.0 34.4 0.0 39.4 6.8 0.0 13.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.0 11.6 0.0 8.4 0.0 6.6 1.3 0.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 33.6 34.4 0.0 34.6 0.0 47.5 6.8 0.0 13.3 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 957 635 147
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.9 34.6 8.9
Approach LOS C C A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.6 29.4 13.9 46.7 29.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 17.5 9.5 3.5 12.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 7.4 0.2 0.1 5.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.3
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 976 54 0 673 0 221 0 46 130 0 63 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 976 54 0 673 0 221 0 46 130 0 63 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1061 59 0 732 0 240 0 50 141 0 68 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1524 85 0 1572 0 1055 0 0 1055 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5118 275 0 5443 0 1781 240 1781 141
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 729 391 0 732 0 240 8.8 141 8.2
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1821 0 1702 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 17.0 17.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 5.7 3.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 17.0 17.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 5.7 3.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1048 560 0 1572 0 1055 1055
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.23 0.13
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 860 0 2411 0 1055 1055
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 27.4 27.5 0.0 33.5 0.0 8.6 8.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.2 12.0 0.0 9.3 0.0 3.8 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 28.3 29.0 0.0 33.7 0.0 8.8 8.2 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1120 732
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.5 33.7
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 57.8 32.2 57.8 32.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 19.0 7.7 14.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 8.7 0.4 5.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.8
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 589 49 1 460 0 115 0 19 44 1 23 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 589 49 1 460 0 115 0 19 44 1 23 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 640 53 1 500 0 125 0 21 48 1 25
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1014 83 41 1046 0 158 0 0 1228 0 873
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.55 0.55 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4976 395 2 5117 0 1781 125 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 452 241 189 312 0 125 48.7 48 0 25 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1799 1868 1549 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 11.6 11.7 0.0 8.7 0.0 6.2 0.8 0.0 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 11.6 11.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 6.2 0.8 0.0 0.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 718 379 434 653 0 158 1228 0 873 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.63 0.64 0.43 0.48 0.00 0.79 0.04 0.00 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 850 919 1463 0 307 1228 0 873 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 38.5 38.5 37.1 37.1 0.0 40.2 4.5 0.0 9.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.9 1.8 0.7 0.5 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 9.2 9.8 7.8 6.5 0.0 5.5 0.5 0.0 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 39.4 40.3 37.8 37.6 0.0 48.7 4.5 0.0 9.3 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A D A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 693 501 73
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.7 37.7 6.1
Approach LOS D D A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 66.5 23.5 12.5 54.0 23.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 13.7 8.2 2.6 10.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.2 0.2 0.0 3.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 38.0
HCM 6th LOS D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 618 38 25 454 154 0 0 59 0 184 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 166 618 38 25 454 154 0 0 59 0 184 87 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 180 672 41 27 493 167 0 0 64 0 200 95 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 222 2928 178 49 1893 621 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4922 299 1781 3803 1247 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 180 464 249 27 440 220 0.0 0 200 95 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1817 1781 1702 1646 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.0 10.3 10.4 1.3 6.7 7.0 0.0 4.1 4.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.0 10.3 10.4 1.3 6.7 7.0 0.0 4.1 4.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.76 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 222 2025 1081 49 1695 819 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.23 0.23 0.56 0.26 0.27 0.00 0.25 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 2025 1081 228 1695 819 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.79 0.79 0.79 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.1 18.8 18.8 43.2 13.0 13.1 0.0 28.4 28.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.6 0.2 0.4 9.6 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.7 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.7 7.8 8.3 1.3 4.5 4.8 0.0 3.3 3.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.7 19.0 19.2 52.8 13.4 13.9 0.0 29.2 30.3 LnGrp LOS D B B D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 893 687 295
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.9 15.1 29.5
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.0 58.0 25.0 15.7 49.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 12.4 6.4 11.0 9.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.7 1.3 0.3 4.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.0
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 150 731 93 63 458 107 0 0 91 0 209 149 Future Volume (veh/h) 150 731 93 63 458 107 0 0 91 0 209 149 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 163 795 101 68 498 116 0 0 99 0 227 162 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 203 2629 332 88 2114 480 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4590 580 1781 4160 945 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 163 588 308 68 405 209 0.0 0 227 162 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1766 1781 1702 1700 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.2 13.4 13.5 3.4 6.0 6.2 0.0 4.7 7.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.2 13.4 13.5 3.4 6.0 6.2 0.0 4.7 7.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.33 1.00 0.56 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 203 1950 1011 88 1730 864 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.30 0.30 0.77 0.23 0.24 0.00 0.28 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1950 1011 228 1730 864 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.3 21.0 21.1 42.3 12.4 12.4 0.0 28.7 29.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.6 0.3 0.6 13.2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.9 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.0 9.7 10.1 3.2 4.0 4.3 0.0 3.8 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.9 21.3 21.7 55.5 12.7 13.1 0.0 29.5 33.9 LnGrp LOS D C C E B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1059 682 389
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.5 17.1 31.3
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 56.0 25.0 14.8 50.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 15.5 9.9 10.2 8.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.8 1.4 0.3 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.9
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 119 950 77 42 503 63 0 0 110 0 153 193 Future Volume (veh/h) 119 950 77 42 503 63 0 0 110 0 153 193 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 129 1033 84 46 547 68 0 0 120 0 166 210 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 165 2812 228 68 2440 299 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4813 391 1781 4608 565 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 129 730 387 46 402 213 0.0 0 166 210 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1800 1781 1702 1769 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 16.8 16.8 2.3 5.7 5.8 0.0 3.4 10.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 16.8 16.8 2.3 5.7 5.8 0.0 3.4 10.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.22 1.00 0.32 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 165 1989 1052 68 1802 936 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.37 0.37 0.68 0.22 0.23 0.00 0.21 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1989 1052 228 1802 936 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.76 0.76 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.7 21.9 21.9 42.8 11.3 11.3 0.0 28.1 30.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.0 0.4 0.8 11.3 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.6 6.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 5.8 11.6 12.3 2.2 3.8 4.1 0.0 2.7 8.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.7 22.3 22.6 54.1 11.6 11.9 0.0 28.7 37.6 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1246 661 376
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 14.6 33.7
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 57.1 25.0 12.8 52.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 18.8 12.6 8.5 7.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.1 0.2 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.5
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing Conditions 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 570 82 58 333 53 0 0 48 0 104 137 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 570 82 58 333 53 0 0 48 0 104 137 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 620 89 63 362 58 0 0 52 0 113 149 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 100 2604 369 82 2521 393 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4518 641 1781 4454 695 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 465 244 63 274 146 0.0 0 113 149 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1755 1781 1702 1745 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 10.4 10.6 3.1 3.4 3.6 0.0 2.3 7.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 10.4 10.6 3.1 3.4 3.6 0.0 2.3 7.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.40 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 100 1962 1012 82 1927 988 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.24 0.24 0.77 0.14 0.15 0.00 0.14 0.41 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1962 1012 228 1927 988 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.78 0.78 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.6 19.7 19.7 42.5 9.2 9.2 0.0 27.7 29.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 0.2 0.4 14.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.5 7.8 8.3 3.0 2.2 2.4 0.0 1.8 5.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 52.4 19.9 20.2 56.7 9.4 9.6 0.0 28.1 33.1 LnGrp LOS D B C E A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 785 483 262
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.1 15.6 30.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.6 56.4 25.0 9.6 55.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 12.6 9.2 5.8 5.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.7 0.9 0.1 2.6
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.1
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 472 832 50 187 682 18 0 517 87 0 1072 338 Future Volume (veh/h) 472 832 50 187 682 18 0 517 87 0 1072 338 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 513 904 0 203 741 20 0 562 95 0 1165 367 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 593 1203 235 1000 27 0 1849 825 0 1849 825
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.24 0.00 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.52 0.52 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 5112 138 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 513 904 0 203 493 268 0 562 95 0 1165 367 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1846 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.3 19.7 0.0 13.4 16.3 16.4 0.0 10.8 3.7 0.0 28.1 17.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.3 19.7 0.0 13.4 16.3 16.4 0.0 10.8 3.7 0.0 28.1 17.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 593 1203 235 666 361 0 1849 825 0 1849 825 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.75 0.87 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.30 0.12 0.00 0.63 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 615 0 1849 825 0 1849 825 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.4 42.6 0.0 51.1 45.4 45.4 0.0 16.4 14.7 0.0 20.5 18.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.0 1.2 0.0 9.4 1.6 3.0 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 1.6 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.9 13.3 0.0 10.7 11.4 12.3 0.0 8.0 2.5 0.0 17.4 10.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.4 43.8 0.0 60.5 47.0 48.4 0.0 16.8 15.0 0.0 22.2 19.7 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1417 964 657 1532
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.4 50.2 16.6 21.6
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 66.9 20.3 32.8 66.9 25.1 28.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.8 15.4 21.7 30.1 19.3 18.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.4 0.4 6.4 6.1 1.3 5.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.2
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 446 808 53 177 623 39 0 681 97 0 947 364 Future Volume (veh/h) 446 808 53 177 623 39 0 681 97 0 947 364 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 485 878 0 192 677 42 0 740 105 0 1029 396 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 566 1171 224 940 58 0 1893 844 0 1893 844
Arrive On Green 0.16 0.23 0.00 0.13 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.53 0.53 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4916 303 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 485 878 0 192 468 251 0 740 105 0 1029 396 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1816 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 16.4 19.2 0.0 12.7 15.5 15.6 0.0 14.7 4.0 0.0 22.9 18.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 16.4 19.2 0.0 12.7 15.5 15.6 0.0 14.7 4.0 0.0 22.9 18.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.17 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 566 1171 224 651 347 0 1893 844 0 1893 844 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.75 0.86 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.39 0.12 0.00 0.54 0.47 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 605 0 1893 844 0 1893 844 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.8 43.0 0.0 51.4 45.5 45.6 0.0 16.5 14.0 0.0 18.4 17.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.1 1.1 0.0 9.1 1.5 2.8 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.0 1.1 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.2 13.0 0.0 10.3 10.9 11.7 0.0 10.1 2.7 0.0 14.5 11.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 55.9 44.1 0.0 60.5 47.0 48.4 0.0 17.2 14.3 0.0 19.6 19.3 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1363 911 845 1425
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.3 50.2 16.8 19.5
Approach LOS D D B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 68.4 19.6 32.0 68.4 24.1 27.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 16.7 14.7 21.2 24.9 18.4 17.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.8 0.4 6.3 7.7 1.3 4.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 462 992 28 117 922 48 0 755 79 0 939 503 Future Volume (veh/h) 462 992 28 117 922 48 0 755 79 0 939 503 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 502 1078 0 127 1002 52 0 821 86 0 1021 547 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 582 1727 156 1279 66 0 1640 732 0 1640 732
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.34 0.00 0.09 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.00 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4970 258 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 502 1078 0 127 686 368 0 821 86 0 1021 547 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1824 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.0 21.3 0.0 8.4 22.5 22.5 0.0 19.4 3.7 0.0 26.0 34.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.0 21.3 0.0 8.4 22.5 22.5 0.0 19.4 3.7 0.0 26.0 34.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.14 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 582 1727 156 876 469 0 1640 732 0 1640 732 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.62 0.81 0.78 0.78 0.00 0.50 0.12 0.00 0.62 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1727 401 1135 608 0 1640 732 0 1640 732 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.5 33.3 0.0 53.8 41.4 41.5 0.0 22.6 18.4 0.0 24.4 26.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.6 0.7 0.0 9.4 2.6 4.9 0.0 1.1 0.3 0.0 1.8 6.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 12.6 13.9 0.0 7.5 14.7 16.0 0.0 13.0 2.6 0.0 16.7 20.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.2 34.0 0.0 63.1 44.1 46.3 0.0 23.7 18.7 0.0 26.2 33.4 LnGrp LOS E C E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1580 1181 907 1568
Approach Delay, s/veh 41.1 46.8 23.2 28.7
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 59.9 15.0 45.1 59.9 24.7 35.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.4 10.4 23.3 36.0 19.0 24.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.8 0.3 7.4 2.6 1.3 6.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.6
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 530 726 40 142 643 37 0 706 71 0 955 480 Future Volume (veh/h) 530 726 40 142 643 37 0 706 71 0 955 480 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 576 789 0 154 699 40 0 767 77 0 1038 522 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 652 1414 185 948 54 0 1802 804 0 1802 804
Arrive On Green 0.19 0.28 0.00 0.10 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.51 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4942 282 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 576 789 0 154 480 259 0 767 77 0 1038 522 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1820 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 19.5 15.9 0.0 10.2 15.9 16.1 0.0 16.3 3.0 0.0 24.4 29.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 19.5 15.9 0.0 10.2 15.9 16.1 0.0 16.3 3.0 0.0 24.4 29.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.15 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 652 1414 185 653 349 0 1802 804 0 1802 804 V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.56 0.83 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.43 0.10 0.00 0.58 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 607 0 1802 804 0 1802 804 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.4 37.1 0.0 52.8 45.6 45.7 0.0 18.6 15.3 0.0 20.6 21.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.4 0.3 0.0 9.3 1.6 3.1 0.0 0.7 0.2 0.0 1.3 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 14.4 11.0 0.0 8.7 11.2 12.0 0.0 11.1 2.1 0.0 15.5 17.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 57.7 37.5 0.0 62.1 47.3 48.8 0.0 19.3 15.6 0.0 21.9 25.8 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1365 893 844 1560
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.0 50.2 19.0 23.2
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 65.3 16.9 37.7 65.3 27.1 27.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.3 12.2 17.9 31.0 21.5 18.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.7 0.3 6.0 5.5 1.2 5.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 34.3
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 231 648 51 71 482 52 33 371 137 50 356 365 Future Volume (veh/h) 231 648 51 71 482 52 33 371 137 50 356 365 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 251 704 0 77 524 0 36 403 149 54 387 397 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 354 1014 100 2187 284 1676 748 426 838 748
Arrive On Green 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.11 0.86 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 855 3300 0 1781 5274 0 690 3554 1585 856 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 265 690 0 77 524 0 36 403 149 54 387 397 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 904 1549 0 1781 1702 0 690 1777 1585 856 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 25.3 17.5 0.0 3.8 1.7 0.0 3.5 6.1 4.9 3.6 13.2 15.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 25.3 17.5 0.0 3.8 1.7 0.0 19.4 6.1 4.9 9.7 13.2 15.9 Prop In Lane 0.95 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 369 999 100 2187 284 1676 748 426 838 748 V/C Ratio(X) 0.72 0.69 0.77 0.24 0.13 0.24 0.20 0.13 0.46 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 379 1033 336 2922 284 1676 748 426 838 748 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.71 0.71 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.2 26.6 0.0 39.4 3.8 0.0 23.6 14.2 13.9 17.1 16.1 16.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.5 1.4 0.0 11.9 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.6 1.8 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 9.2 10.0 0.0 3.4 1.0 0.0 1.2 4.5 3.3 1.4 9.5 10.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.8 27.9 0.0 51.3 3.9 0.0 24.5 14.5 14.5 17.7 17.9 19.4 LnGrp LOS C C D A C B B B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 955 601 588 838
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.6 9.9 15.1 18.6
Approach LOS C A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.0 9.5 33.5 47.0 43.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.4 5.8 27.3 17.9 3.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.3 0.1 1.7 4.5 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.7
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 291 635 47 126 570 73 46 504 171 47 259 218 Future Volume (veh/h) 291 635 47 126 570 73 46 504 171 47 259 218 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 316 690 0 137 620 0 50 548 186 51 282 237 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 348 1033 169 2442 358 1499 668 309 784 639
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.19 0.96 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 804 3251 0 1781 5274 0 882 3554 1585 723 1859 1515 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 316 690 0 137 620 0 50 548 186 51 269 250 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 804 1549 0 1781 1702 0 882 1777 1585 723 1777 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 17.2 0.0 6.6 0.6 0.0 3.7 9.5 6.9 4.7 9.3 9.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 17.2 0.0 6.6 0.6 0.0 13.4 9.5 6.9 14.2 9.3 9.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 348 1033 169 2442 358 1499 668 309 749 674 V/C Ratio(X) 0.91 0.67 0.81 0.25 0.14 0.37 0.28 0.17 0.36 0.37 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 348 1033 336 2922 358 1499 668 309 749 674 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.72 0.72 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.3 25.7 0.0 35.7 1.0 0.0 22.4 17.8 17.0 22.6 17.7 17.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 21.0 1.2 0.0 8.9 0.1 0.0 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.3 9.9 0.0 5.5 0.3 0.0 1.5 7.1 4.8 1.6 7.2 6.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 53.2 26.9 0.0 44.6 1.1 0.0 23.2 18.5 18.1 23.8 19.1 19.4 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B C B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1006 757 784 570
Approach Delay, s/veh 35.2 9.0 18.7 19.6
Approach LOS D A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.5 13.0 34.5 42.5 47.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.4 8.6 32.0 16.2 2.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.2 0.2 0.0 3.2 5.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 239 794 18 110 739 45 95 707 196 55 238 287 Future Volume (veh/h) 239 794 18 110 739 45 95 707 196 55 238 287 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 260 863 0 120 803 0 103 768 213 60 259 312 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 305 1034 151 2389 326 1536 685 238 768 685
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.17 0.94 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 676 3256 0 1781 5274 0 841 3554 1585 574 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 262 861 0 120 803 0 103 768 213 60 259 312 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 681 1549 0 1781 1702 0 841 1777 1585 574 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 23.1 0.0 5.8 1.3 0.0 8.9 14.1 7.9 7.6 8.7 12.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 23.1 0.0 5.8 1.3 0.0 21.4 14.1 7.9 21.7 8.7 12.5 Prop In Lane 0.99 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 307 1033 151 2389 326 1536 685 238 768 685 V/C Ratio(X) 0.85 0.83 0.80 0.34 0.32 0.50 0.31 0.25 0.34 0.46 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 307 1033 336 2922 326 1536 685 238 768 685 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.79 0.79 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.0 27.7 0.0 36.7 1.6 0.0 25.6 18.5 16.8 26.4 17.0 18.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 16.7 4.8 0.0 9.2 0.1 0.0 2.3 1.1 1.1 2.5 1.2 2.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 11.2 13.4 0.0 4.9 0.7 0.0 3.6 9.7 5.5 2.2 6.7 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.7 32.5 0.0 45.9 1.7 0.0 28.0 19.6 17.9 28.9 18.2 20.2 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1123 923 1084 631
Approach Delay, s/veh 36.3 7.4 20.1 20.2
Approach LOS D A C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 43.4 12.1 34.5 43.4 46.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 23.4 7.8 32.0 23.7 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.4 0.2 0.0 2.1 7.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 238 552 45 73 437 35 40 378 129 32 200 299 Future Volume (veh/h) 238 552 45 73 437 35 40 378 129 32 200 299 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 259 600 0 79 475 0 43 411 140 35 217 325 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 369 975 102 2155 377 1699 758 431 849 758
Arrive On Green 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.11 0.84 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 919 3251 0 1781 5274 0 864 3554 1585 857 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 259 600 0 79 475 0 43 411 140 35 217 325 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 919 1549 0 1781 1702 0 864 1777 1585 857 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 24.2 14.8 0.0 3.9 1.6 0.0 3.1 6.1 4.6 2.3 6.5 12.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 24.2 14.8 0.0 3.9 1.6 0.0 15.2 6.1 4.6 8.4 6.5 12.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 369 975 102 2155 377 1699 758 431 849 758 V/C Ratio(X) 0.70 0.62 0.77 0.22 0.11 0.24 0.18 0.08 0.26 0.43 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1033 336 2922 377 1699 758 431 849 758 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.82 0.82 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.4 26.2 0.0 39.3 4.2 0.0 20.4 13.9 13.4 16.3 14.0 15.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.8 0.0 11.7 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.7 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 9.2 9.0 0.0 3.5 0.9 0.0 1.2 4.5 3.1 0.9 4.9 8.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.8 27.0 0.0 50.9 4.2 0.0 21.0 14.2 14.0 16.7 14.7 17.2 LnGrp LOS C C D A C B B B B B
Approach Vol, veh/h 859 554 594 577
Approach Delay, s/veh 29.1 10.9 14.6 16.2
Approach LOS CBBB
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 47.5 9.7 32.8 47.5 42.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.2 5.9 26.2 14.1 3.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.9 0.1 2.1 3.5 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 34 39 412 21 46 393
Future Volume (veh/h) 34 39 412 21 46 393
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 37 42 448 23 50 427
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 85 76 2623 134 821 3028
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.76 0.76 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3533 176 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 37 42 231 240 50 427
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1839 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 2.3 3.2 3.2 0.5 1.8
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 2.3 3.2 3.2 0.5 1.8
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 85 76 1355 1402 821 3028
V/C Ratio(X) 0.43 0.55 0.17 0.17 0.06 0.14
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1355 1402 958 3028
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.85
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 41.9 2.9 2.9 1.6 1.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.5 6.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.6 1.9 1.6 1.7 0.1 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.1 48.1 3.2 3.2 1.6 1.2
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 79 471 477
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.7 3.2 1.2
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.1 73.1 81.2 8.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 5.2 3.8 4.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.6
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 41 616 69 49 391
Future Volume (veh/h) 70 41 616 69 49 391
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 45 670 75 53 425
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 113 101 2403 269 638 2973
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.06 0.75 0.75 0.04 0.84
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3316 360 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 45 369 376 53 425
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1806 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 2.5 6.0 6.0 0.5 2.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 2.5 6.0 6.0 0.5 2.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 113 101 1325 1346 638 2973
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.45 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.14
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1325 1346 774 2973
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.91 0.91
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.2 40.6 3.7 3.7 2.1 1.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.7 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.3 1.9 3.2 3.3 0.2 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.0 43.7 4.2 4.2 2.1 1.5
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 121 745 478
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.4 4.2 1.5
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 71.6 79.8 10.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.5 8.0 4.0 5.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.4 3.2 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 7.0
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 56 25 878 92 28 361
Future Volume (veh/h) 56 25 878 92 28 361
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 61 27 954 100 30 392
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 91 81 2497 262 493 3016
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.77 0.77 0.03 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3339 340 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 61 27 522 532 30 392
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1809 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 1.5 8.6 8.6 0.3 1.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 1.5 8.6 8.6 0.3 1.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.19 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 91 81 1367 1392 493 3016
V/C Ratio(X) 0.67 0.33 0.38 0.38 0.06 0.13
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1367 1392 648 3016
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.87 0.87
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.9 41.2 3.4 3.4 2.1 1.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.1 2.4 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 2.7 1.1 4.4 4.5 0.1 0.4
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 50.0 43.6 4.2 4.2 2.2 1.2
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 88 1054 422
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.1 4.2 1.3
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.1 73.7 80.9 9.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.3 10.6 3.7 5.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 8.6 2.9 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 5.9
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 37 37 451 46 39 282
Future Volume (veh/h) 37 37 451 46 39 282
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 40 40 490 50 42 307
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 86 76 2494 254 771 3028
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.77 0.77 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3350 331 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 40 40 267 273 42 307
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1811 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.0 2.2 3.7 3.7 0.4 1.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.0 2.2 3.7 3.7 0.4 1.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.18 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 86 76 1361 1387 771 3028
V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.53 0.20 0.20 0.05 0.10
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1361 1387 915 3028
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 41.8 2.9 2.9 1.6 1.1
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.9 5.5 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 0.1 0.3
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 45.6 47.3 3.2 3.2 1.6 1.1
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 80 540 349
Approach Delay, s/veh 46.5 3.2 1.2
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.8 73.4 81.2 8.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.4 5.7 3.3 4.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 2.2 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.1
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 734 39 1 514 0 176 0 56 54 0 29 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 734 39 1 514 0 176 0 56 54 0 29 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 798 42 1 559 0 191 0 61 59 0 32
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1240 65 41 1239 0 1159 0 0 1159 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5135 261 1 5117 0 1781 191 1781 59
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 546 294 211 349 0 191 6.2 59 5.7 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1823 1868 1549 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 0.0 9.7 0.0 3.8 1.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 14.0 14.1 9.7 9.7 0.0 3.8 1.1 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 849 455 506 773 0 1159 1159
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.64 0.65 0.42 0.45 0.00 0.16 0.05
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 861 919 1463 0 1159 1159
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.4 37.4 35.4 35.4 0.0 6.2 5.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.6 11.4 8.4 7.2 0.0 2.4 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 38.2 39.0 35.9 35.8 0.0 6.2 5.7 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 840 560
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.5 35.9
Approach LOS D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.0 27.0 63.0 27.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.1 16.1 5.8 11.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.4 0.4 4.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 32.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 800 80 0 596 0 156 0 70 91 1 44 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 800 80 0 596 0 156 0 70 91 1 44 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 870 87 0 648 0 170 0 76 99 1 48
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1305 130 0 1412 0 207 0 0 1111 0 725
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4888 470 0 5443 0 1781 170 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 627 330 0 648 0 170 49.6 99 0 48 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1786 0 1702 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.4 15.5 0.0 10.8 0.0 8.4 2.0 0.0 1.5 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.4 15.5 0.0 10.8 0.0 8.4 2.0 0.0 1.5 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 941 494 0 1412 0 207 1111 0 725 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.82 0.09 0.00 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 843 0 2411 0 307 1111 0 725 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.67 0.67 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 32.8 32.8 0.0 34.5 0.0 38.9 6.8 0.0 13.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.0 11.6 0.0 8.5 0.0 7.7 1.3 0.0 1.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 33.6 34.4 0.0 34.7 0.0 49.6 6.8 0.0 13.8 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 957 648 147
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.9 34.7 9.1
Approach LOS C C A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.6 29.4 14.9 45.7 29.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 17.5 10.4 3.5 12.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 7.4 0.2 0.1 5.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 33.7
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 976 54 0 691 0 235 0 60 130 0 63 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 976 54 0 691 0 235 0 60 130 0 63 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1061 59 0 751 0 255 0 65 141 0 68 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1524 85 0 1572 0 1055 0 0 1055 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5118 275 0 5443 0 1781 255 1781 141
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 729 391 0 751 0 255 8.9 141 8.2
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1821 0 1702 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 17.0 17.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 6.1 3.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 17.0 17.0 0.0 12.5 0.0 6.1 3.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1048 560 0 1572 0 1055 1055
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.24 0.13
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 860 0 2411 0 1055 1055
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 27.4 27.5 0.0 33.6 0.0 8.7 8.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.6 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.2 12.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 4.1 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 28.3 29.0 0.0 33.8 0.0 8.9 8.2 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1120 751
Approach Delay, s/veh 28.5 33.8
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 57.8 32.2 57.8 32.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 19.0 8.1 14.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 8.7 0.4 6.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.8
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 589 49 1 483 0 132 0 36 44 1 23 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 589 49 1 483 0 132 0 36 44 1 23 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 640 53 1 525 0 143 0 39 48 1 25
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1014 83 41 1046 0 178 0 0 1228 0 855
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.54 0.54 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4976 395 2 5117 0 1781 143 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 452 241 198 328 0 143 47.8 48 0 25 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1799 1868 1549 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 11.6 11.7 0.0 9.2 0.0 7.1 0.8 0.0 0.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 11.6 11.7 9.2 9.2 0.0 7.1 0.8 0.0 0.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.22 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 718 379 434 653 0 178 1228 0 855 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.63 0.64 0.46 0.50 0.00 0.80 0.04 0.00 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 850 919 1463 0 307 1228 0 855 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 38.5 38.5 37.3 37.3 0.0 39.6 4.5 0.0 9.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.9 1.8 0.7 0.6 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 9.2 9.8 8.1 6.9 0.0 6.3 0.5 0.0 0.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 39.4 40.3 38.1 37.9 0.0 47.8 4.5 0.0 9.8 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A D A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 693 526 73
Approach Delay, s/veh 39.7 38.0 6.3
Approach LOS D D A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 66.5 23.5 13.5 53.0 23.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 13.7 9.1 2.7 11.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.2 0.2 0.0 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 38.2
HCM 6th LOS D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 166 632 38 25 463 154 0 0 59 0 186 87 Future Volume (veh/h) 166 632 38 25 463 154 0 0 59 0 186 87 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 180 687 41 27 503 167 0 0 64 0 202 95 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 222 2933 174 49 1903 612 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4929 293 1781 3823 1230 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 180 473 255 27 446 224 0.0 0 202 95 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1818 1781 1702 1649 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.0 10.5 10.6 1.3 6.8 7.1 0.0 4.2 4.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.0 10.5 10.6 1.3 6.8 7.1 0.0 4.2 4.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.16 1.00 0.75 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 222 2025 1081 49 1695 821 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.23 0.24 0.56 0.26 0.27 0.00 0.25 0.26 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 2025 1081 228 1695 821 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.80 0.80 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.1 18.9 18.9 43.2 13.1 13.1 0.0 28.5 28.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.7 0.2 0.4 9.6 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.7 1.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.7 8.0 8.5 1.3 4.6 4.8 0.0 3.3 3.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.8 19.1 19.3 52.8 13.4 14.0 0.0 29.2 30.3 LnGrp LOS D B B D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 908 697 297
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.9 15.1 29.6
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.0 58.0 25.0 15.7 49.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 12.6 6.4 11.0 9.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 1.3 0.3 4.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.0
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 150 748 93 63 469 107 0 0 91 0 211 149 Future Volume (veh/h) 150 748 93 63 469 107 0 0 91 0 211 149 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 163 813 101 68 510 116 0 0 99 0 229 162 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 203 2636 326 88 2124 472 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4603 569 1781 4179 928 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 163 600 314 68 413 213 0.0 0 229 162 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1768 1781 1702 1703 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.2 13.7 13.8 3.4 6.1 6.3 0.0 4.8 7.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.2 13.7 13.8 3.4 6.1 6.3 0.0 4.8 7.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.32 1.00 0.54 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 203 1950 1013 88 1730 865 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.31 0.31 0.77 0.24 0.25 0.00 0.28 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1950 1013 228 1730 865 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.78 0.78 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.3 21.1 21.2 42.3 12.4 12.4 0.0 28.7 29.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.7 0.3 0.6 13.2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.9 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.0 9.9 10.4 3.2 4.1 4.4 0.0 3.8 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.0 21.5 21.8 55.5 12.7 13.1 0.0 29.6 33.9 LnGrp LOS D C C E B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1077 694 391
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.6 17.0 31.4
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 56.0 25.0 14.8 50.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.4 15.8 9.9 10.2 8.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.9 1.5 0.3 3.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.9
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 119 964 77 42 519 63 0 0 110 0 156 193 Future Volume (veh/h) 119 964 77 42 519 63 0 0 110 0 156 193 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 129 1048 84 46 564 68 0 0 120 0 170 210 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 165 2816 225 68 2449 292 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4819 386 1781 4625 551 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 129 740 392 46 413 219 0.0 0 170 210 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1801 1781 1702 1771 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 17.0 17.0 2.3 5.9 6.0 0.0 3.5 10.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 17.0 17.0 2.3 5.9 6.0 0.0 3.5 10.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.31 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 165 1989 1052 68 1802 938 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.37 0.37 0.68 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.21 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1989 1052 228 1802 938 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.76 0.76 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.7 22.0 22.0 42.8 11.3 11.4 0.0 28.2 30.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.0 0.4 0.8 11.3 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.6 6.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 5.8 11.8 12.5 2.2 3.9 4.3 0.0 2.8 8.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.7 22.4 22.8 54.1 11.6 12.0 0.0 28.8 37.6 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1261 678 380
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.2 14.6 33.7
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 57.1 25.0 12.8 52.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 19.0 12.6 8.5 8.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.1 0.2 3.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.5
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 70 587 82 58 353 53 0 0 48 0 107 137 Future Volume (veh/h) 70 587 82 58 353 53 0 0 48 0 107 137 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 638 89 63 384 58 0 0 52 0 116 149 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 100 2615 361 82 2543 375 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.57 0.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4536 626 1781 4493 663 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 477 250 63 289 153 0.0 0 116 149 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1758 1781 1702 1751 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 10.7 10.9 3.1 3.6 3.7 0.0 2.3 7.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 10.7 10.9 3.1 3.6 3.7 0.0 2.3 7.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.36 1.00 0.38 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 100 1962 1013 82 1927 991 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.24 0.25 0.77 0.15 0.15 0.00 0.14 0.41 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1962 1013 228 1927 991 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.80 0.80 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.6 19.8 19.8 42.5 9.3 9.3 0.0 27.7 29.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.1 0.2 0.5 14.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 3.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.5 8.1 8.5 3.0 2.3 2.6 0.0 1.8 5.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 52.6 20.0 20.3 56.7 9.4 9.6 0.0 28.1 33.1 LnGrp LOS D C C E A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 803 505 265
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 15.4 30.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.6 56.4 25.0 9.6 55.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 12.9 9.2 5.8 5.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.8 0.9 0.1 2.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.0
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 496 899 52 208 714 19 0 580 110 0 1143 358 Future Volume (veh/h) 496 899 52 208 714 19 0 580 110 0 1143 358 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 539 977 0 226 776 21 0 630 120 0 1242 389 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 618 1276 258 1103 30 0 1752 781 0 1752 781
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.25 0.00 0.14 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.49 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 5111 138 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 539 977 0 226 516 281 0 630 120 0 1242 389 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1846 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 18.2 21.3 0.0 14.9 16.8 16.9 0.0 13.1 5.0 0.0 32.7 19.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.2 21.3 0.0 14.9 16.8 16.9 0.0 13.1 5.0 0.0 32.7 19.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1276 258 734 398 0 1752 781 0 1752 781 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.77 0.88 0.70 0.71 0.00 0.36 0.15 0.00 0.71 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 615 0 1752 781 0 1752 781 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.9 41.8 0.0 50.3 43.5 43.5 0.0 18.7 16.7 0.0 23.7 20.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 1.5 0.0 12.6 1.2 2.2 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0 2.5 2.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.5 14.1 0.0 12.0 11.6 12.5 0.0 9.4 3.4 0.0 20.1 12.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.9 43.3 0.0 62.9 44.7 45.8 0.0 19.3 17.1 0.0 26.2 22.7 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1516 1023 750 1631
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.1 49.0 19.0 25.3
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.7 21.9 34.5 63.7 26.0 30.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.1 16.9 23.3 34.7 20.2 18.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.0 0.5 6.7 3.7 1.2 5.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.3
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 476 899 55 222 659 41 0 770 134 0 1041 388 Future Volume (veh/h) 476 899 55 222 659 41 0 770 134 0 1041 388 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 517 977 0 241 716 45 0 837 146 0 1132 422 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 597 1276 273 1131 71 0 1722 768 0 1722 768
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.25 0.00 0.15 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4912 307 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 517 977 0 241 495 266 0 837 146 0 1132 422 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1815 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.5 21.3 0.0 15.9 15.7 15.9 0.0 19.1 6.3 0.0 28.9 22.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.5 21.3 0.0 15.9 15.7 15.9 0.0 19.1 6.3 0.0 28.9 22.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.17 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 597 1276 273 783 418 0 1722 768 0 1722 768 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.77 0.88 0.63 0.64 0.00 0.49 0.19 0.00 0.66 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 605 0 1722 768 0 1722 768 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.3 41.8 0.0 49.8 41.6 41.7 0.0 20.8 17.6 0.0 23.4 21.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.2 1.5 0.0 14.4 0.8 1.6 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 2.0 2.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.0 14.1 0.0 12.8 10.9 11.6 0.0 12.7 0.2 0.0 18.1 13.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.5 43.3 0.0 64.2 42.4 43.2 0.0 21.8 18.1 0.0 25.4 24.5 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1494 1002 983 1554
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.8 47.9 21.3 25.1
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 62.7 22.9 34.5 62.7 25.2 32.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.1 17.9 23.3 30.9 19.5 17.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.2 0.5 6.7 5.7 1.3 5.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.6
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 496 1077 29 198 997 50 0 839 106 0 1090 544 Future Volume (veh/h) 496 1077 29 198 997 50 0 839 106 0 1090 544 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 539 1171 0 215 1084 54 0 912 115 0 1185 591 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 618 1598 247 1358 68 0 1550 691 0 1550 691
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.31 0.00 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.00 0.44 0.44 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4982 248 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 539 1171 0 215 740 398 0 912 115 0 1185 591 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1826 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 18.2 24.5 0.0 14.2 24.3 24.3 0.0 23.4 5.3 0.0 33.9 40.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.2 24.5 0.0 14.2 24.3 24.3 0.0 23.4 5.3 0.0 33.9 40.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.14 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1598 247 928 498 0 1550 691 0 1550 691 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.73 0.87 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.59 0.17 0.00 0.76 0.85 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 609 0 1550 691 0 1550 691 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.9 36.8 0.0 50.6 40.6 40.6 0.0 25.7 20.6 0.0 28.6 30.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 1.6 0.0 10.7 3.2 5.8 0.0 1.6 0.5 0.0 3.6 12.8 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.5 15.8 0.0 11.3 15.7 17.1 0.0 15.3 3.7 0.0 21.3 24.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.9 38.3 0.0 61.4 43.7 46.4 0.0 27.3 21.1 0.0 32.3 43.2 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C C A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1710 1353 1027 1776
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.2 47.3 26.6 35.9
Approach LOS D D C D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 56.8 21.1 42.1 56.8 26.0 37.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.4 16.2 26.5 42.2 20.2 26.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.9 0.4 7.1 0.0 1.2 6.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.3
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 569 813 42 217 707 39 0 802 104 0 1102 521 Future Volume (veh/h) 569 813 42 217 707 39 0 802 104 0 1102 521 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 618 884 0 236 768 42 0 872 113 0 1198 566 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 689 1311 268 1028 56 0 1708 762 0 1708 762
Arrive On Green 0.20 0.26 0.00 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4956 270 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 618 884 0 236 527 283 0 872 113 0 1198 566 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1822 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 20.9 18.7 0.0 15.6 17.4 17.5 0.0 20.3 4.8 0.0 31.7 34.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.9 18.7 0.0 15.6 17.4 17.5 0.0 20.3 4.8 0.0 31.7 34.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.15 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 689 1311 268 706 378 0 1708 762 0 1708 762 V/C Ratio(X) 0.90 0.67 0.88 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.51 0.15 0.00 0.70 0.74 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 607 0 1708 762 0 1708 762 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.8 40.1 0.0 49.9 44.6 44.6 0.0 21.5 17.4 0.0 24.4 25.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.2 0.7 0.0 13.9 1.6 2.9 0.0 1.1 0.4 0.0 2.4 6.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 15.4 12.6 0.0 12.5 11.9 12.9 0.0 13.4 3.3 0.0 19.7 20.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 59.0 40.8 0.0 63.8 46.2 47.6 0.0 22.5 17.8 0.0 26.9 31.6 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1502 1046 985 1764
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.3 50.5 22.0 28.4
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 62.2 22.5 35.3 62.2 28.4 29.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.3 17.6 20.7 36.6 22.9 19.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.2 0.5 6.4 2.3 1.0 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.2
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 242 724 55 75 512 54 35 407 185 52 380 387 Future Volume (veh/h) 242 724 55 75 512 54 35 407 185 52 380 387 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 263 787 0 82 557 0 38 442 201 57 413 421 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 352 1053 106 2261 252 1625 725 379 812 725
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.12 0.89 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 824 3311 0 1781 5274 0 658 3554 1585 787 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 282 768 0 82 557 0 38 442 201 57 413 421 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 885 1549 0 1781 1702 0 658 1777 1585 787 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 28.1 19.8 0.0 4.0 1.4 0.0 4.1 6.9 7.1 4.4 14.8 17.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 28.1 19.8 0.0 4.0 1.4 0.0 21.7 6.9 7.1 11.3 14.8 17.7 Prop In Lane 0.93 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 372 1033 106 2261 252 1625 725 379 812 725 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.74 0.77 0.25 0.15 0.27 0.28 0.15 0.51 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 372 1033 336 2922 252 1625 725 379 812 725 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.70 0.70 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.4 26.6 0.0 39.1 3.0 0.0 26.1 15.1 15.2 18.6 17.3 18.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.2 2.1 0.0 11.3 0.1 0.0 1.2 0.4 0.9 0.8 2.3 3.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 9.9 11.2 0.0 3.6 0.8 0.0 1.3 5.1 4.9 1.6 10.5 11.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 35.6 28.7 0.0 50.4 3.0 0.0 27.3 15.5 16.1 19.5 19.5 21.4 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1050 639 681 891
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.5 9.1 16.4 20.4
Approach LOS C A B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 45.7 9.8 34.5 45.7 44.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 23.7 6.0 30.1 19.7 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.0 0.1 0.0 4.3 4.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.6
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 309 741 53 137 625 76 50 561 243 49 287 242 Future Volume (veh/h) 309 741 53 137 625 76 50 561 243 49 287 242 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 336 805 0 149 679 0 54 610 264 53 312 263 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 334 1033 182 2479 325 1473 657 266 767 631
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.20 0.97 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 761 3251 0 1781 5274 0 838 3554 1585 634 1850 1523 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 336 805 0 149 679 0 54 610 264 53 299 276 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 761 1549 0 1781 1702 0 838 1777 1585 634 1777 1596 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 21.1 0.0 7.2 0.5 0.0 4.4 10.9 10.5 5.8 10.7 11.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 21.1 0.0 7.2 0.5 0.0 15.4 10.9 10.5 16.7 10.7 11.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 334 1033 182 2479 325 1473 657 266 737 662 V/C Ratio(X) 1.01 0.78 0.82 0.27 0.17 0.41 0.40 0.20 0.41 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 334 1033 336 2922 325 1473 657 266 737 662 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.71 0.71 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 33.6 27.0 0.0 35.0 0.7 0.0 24.1 18.6 18.5 24.5 18.5 18.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 43.3 2.8 0.0 8.8 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 16.2 11.9 0.0 5.9 0.3 0.0 1.7 8.0 7.3 1.8 8.2 7.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 76.9 29.8 0.0 43.8 0.7 0.0 25.1 19.4 20.2 26.2 20.2 20.6 LnGrp LOS F C D A C B C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1141 828 928 628
Approach Delay, s/veh 43.7 8.5 20.0 20.9
Approach LOS D A B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 41.8 13.7 34.5 41.8 48.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.4 9.2 32.0 18.7 2.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.5 0.2 0.0 3.2 5.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.1
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 256 882 24 122 852 47 102 774 258 57 280 327 Future Volume (veh/h) 256 882 24 122 852 47 102 774 258 57 280 327 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 278 959 0 133 926 0 111 841 280 62 304 355 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 281 1033 165 2430 280 1507 672 203 754 672
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.19 0.95 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 604 3251 0 1781 5274 0 775 3554 1585 502 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 278 959 0 133 926 0 111 841 280 62 304 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 604 1549 0 1781 1702 0 775 1777 1585 502 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 26.9 0.0 6.4 1.2 0.0 11.2 16.1 11.1 9.6 10.7 15.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 26.9 0.0 6.4 1.2 0.0 26.1 16.1 11.1 25.6 10.7 15.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 281 1033 165 2430 280 1507 672 203 754 672 V/C Ratio(X) 0.99 0.93 0.81 0.38 0.40 0.56 0.42 0.30 0.40 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 281 1033 336 2922 280 1507 672 203 754 672 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.69 0.69 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.1 29.0 0.0 35.9 1.2 0.0 28.9 19.5 18.1 29.2 18.0 19.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 41.3 10.5 0.0 8.9 0.1 0.0 3.6 1.3 1.7 3.8 1.6 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.6 15.8 0.0 5.3 0.6 0.0 4.2 10.7 7.5 2.5 8.2 9.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 75.5 39.5 0.0 44.8 1.3 0.0 32.5 20.9 19.8 33.0 19.6 22.2 LnGrp LOS E D D A C C B C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1237 1059 1232 721
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.6 6.7 21.7 22.0
Approach LOS D A C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.7 12.8 34.5 42.7 47.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.1 8.4 32.0 27.6 3.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.9 8.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.5
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 257 647 53 86 530 36 45 438 204 33 245 339 Future Volume (veh/h) 257 647 53 86 530 36 45 438 204 33 245 339 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 279 703 0 93 576 0 49 476 222 36 266 368 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 359 1033 119 2299 305 1598 713 353 799 713
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.13 0.90 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Sat Flow, veh/h 837 3251 0 1781 5274 0 793 3554 1585 748 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 279 703 0 93 576 0 49 476 222 36 266 368 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 837 1549 0 1781 1702 0 793 1777 1585 748 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 17.6 0.0 4.5 1.3 0.0 4.2 7.7 8.1 2.9 8.7 15.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 17.6 0.0 4.5 1.3 0.0 19.2 7.7 8.1 10.6 8.7 15.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 359 1033 119 2299 305 1598 713 353 799 713 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.68 0.78 0.25 0.16 0.30 0.31 0.10 0.33 0.52 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 359 1033 336 2922 305 1598 713 353 799 713 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.75 0.75 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.0 25.9 0.0 38.3 2.5 0.0 24.6 15.7 15.8 19.1 16.0 17.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 1.4 0.0 10.4 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.5 1.1 0.6 1.1 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 10.3 10.2 0.0 4.0 0.7 0.0 1.6 5.7 5.5 1.0 6.7 9.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 37.9 27.3 0.0 48.8 2.6 0.0 25.7 16.2 17.0 19.7 17.1 20.4 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 982 669 747 670
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.3 9.0 17.0 19.1
Approach LOS C A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 45.0 10.5 34.5 45.0 45.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.2 6.5 32.0 17.0 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.1 0.0 3.7 4.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.0
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 43 46 488 46 57 415
Future Volume (veh/h) 43 46 488 46 57 415
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 47 50 530 50 62 451
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 90 80 2480 233 749 3018
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.76 0.76 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3376 309 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 47 50 286 294 62 451
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1815 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 2.8 4.2 4.2 0.6 2.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 2.8 4.2 4.2 0.6 2.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.17 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 90 80 1343 1371 749 3018
V/C Ratio(X) 0.52 0.62 0.21 0.21 0.08 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1343 1371 879 3018
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.81 0.81
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 41.9 3.2 3.2 1.7 1.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.6 7.7 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.3 0.2 0.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.2 49.5 3.6 3.6 1.8 1.3
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 97 580 513
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.9 3.6 1.3
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 72.5 80.9 9.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 6.2 4.0 4.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.0 3.4 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.2
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 92 55 730 115 68 417
Future Volume (veh/h) 92 55 730 115 68 417
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 100 60 793 125 74 453
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 141 126 2226 351 545 2916
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.82
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3169 485 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 100 60 458 460 74 453
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1783 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.9 3.3 8.6 8.6 0.8 2.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.9 3.3 8.6 8.6 0.8 2.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.27 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 141 126 1286 1291 545 2916
V/C Ratio(X) 0.71 0.48 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.16
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1286 1291 670 2916
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.4 39.6 4.6 4.6 2.7 1.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.4 2.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.3 2.4 5.0 5.0 0.3 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.8 42.4 5.4 5.4 2.8 1.8
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 160 918 527
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.1 5.4 1.9
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 69.6 78.4 11.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 10.6 4.4 6.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.1 3.4 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.2
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 101 40 991 132 51 399
Future Volume (veh/h) 101 40 991 132 51 399
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 110 43 1077 143 55 434
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 150 133 2284 303 420 2899
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.72 0.72 0.04 0.82
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3247 418 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 110 43 606 614 55 434
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1795 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 2.3 12.8 12.9 0.6 2.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 2.3 12.8 12.9 0.6 2.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.23 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 150 133 1287 1300 420 2899
V/C Ratio(X) 0.73 0.32 0.47 0.47 0.13 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1287 1300 554 2899
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.2 38.8 5.2 5.2 3.5 1.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.8 1.4 1.2 1.2 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.7 1.7 7.5 7.6 0.3 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.0 40.2 6.4 6.4 3.6 1.8
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 153 1220 489
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.1 6.4 2.0
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 69.7 77.9 12.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 14.9 4.3 7.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.3 3.3 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.4
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 81 56 567 94 69 319
Future Volume (veh/h) 81 56 567 94 69 319
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 88 61 616 102 75 347
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 129 115 2230 369 650 2942
Arrive On Green 0.07 0.07 0.73 0.73 0.05 0.83
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3146 504 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 88 61 358 360 75 347
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1780 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 3.3 6.1 6.1 0.8 1.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 3.3 6.1 6.1 0.8 1.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 129 115 1298 1300 650 2942
V/C Ratio(X) 0.68 0.53 0.28 0.28 0.12 0.12
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1298 1300 774 2942
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.7 40.3 4.1 4.1 2.3 1.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.3 3.8 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.8 2.5 3.5 3.5 0.3 0.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.0 44.1 4.6 4.6 2.4 1.6
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 149 718 422
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.8 4.6 1.7
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 70.3 79.0 11.0
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 8.1 3.7 6.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.2 2.6 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.4
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 867 41 1 549 0 169 0 44 56 0 30 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 867 41 1 549 0 169 0 44 56 0 30 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 942 45 1 597 0 184 0 48 61 0 33
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1409 67 41 1401 0 1101 0 0 1101 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5162 238 1 5117 0 1781 184 1781 61
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 642 345 225 373 0 184 7.4 61 6.8 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1827 1868 1549 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.7 15.8 0.0 10.2 0.0 4.0 1.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.7 15.8 10.2 10.2 0.0 4.0 1.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 960 516 567 874 0 1101 1101
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.40 0.43 0.00 0.17 0.06
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 863 919 1463 0 1101 1101
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 32.6 32.6 33.9 33.9 0.0 7.3 6.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.2 12.0 8.8 7.5 0.0 2.6 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 33.4 34.1 34.4 34.2 0.0 7.4 6.8 LnGrp LOS A C C C C A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 987 598
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.6 34.3
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.1 29.9 60.1 29.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 17.8 6.0 12.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.6 0.3 4.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.3
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 991 83 0 662 0 145 0 55 95 1 46 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 991 83 0 662 0 145 0 55 95 1 46 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1077 90 0 720 0 158 0 60 103 1 50 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1496 125 0 1591 0 194 0 0 1048 0 681
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4970 401 0 5443 0 1781 158 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 763 404 0 720 0 158 48.0 103 0 50 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1798 0 1702 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 16.8 16.9 0.0 11.9 0.0 7.8 2.3 0.0 1.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 16.8 16.9 0.0 11.9 0.0 7.8 2.3 0.0 1.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1061 560 0 1591 0 194 1048 0 681 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.45 0.00 0.81 0.10 0.00 0.07 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 849 0 2411 0 307 1048 0 681 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.94 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.1 23.1 0.0 33.1 0.0 39.2 8.1 0.0 15.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.9 1.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.2 10.9 0.0 9.2 0.0 7.0 1.5 0.0 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 24.0 24.8 0.0 33.3 0.0 48.0 8.1 0.0 15.3 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1167 720 153
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.3 33.3 10.5
Approach LOS C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 57.5 32.5 14.3 43.2 32.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 18.9 9.8 3.7 13.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 9.2 0.2 0.1 5.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.0
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1145 56 0 805 0 230 0 48 135 0 66 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1145 56 0 805 0 230 0 48 135 0 66 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1245 61 0 875 0 250 0 52 147 0 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1693 83 0 1734 0 998 0 0 998 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5155 244 0 5443 0 1781 250 1781 147
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 850 456 0 875 0 250 10.2 147 9.5 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1826 0 1702 0 1781 B 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 18.5 18.5 0.0 14.5 0.0 6.5 3.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 18.5 18.5 0.0 14.5 0.0 6.5 3.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1156 620 0 1734 0 998 998
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.25 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 862 0 2411 0 998 998
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 21.4 21.4 0.0 32.8 0.0 10.1 9.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.9 11.7 0.0 10.7 0.0 4.4 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 22.5 23.4 0.0 33.0 0.0 10.2 9.5 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1306 875
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.8 33.0
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 54.9 35.1 54.9 35.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 20.5 8.5 16.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 10.1 0.4 7.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.3
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 779 51 1 582 0 120 0 20 46 1 24 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 779 51 1 582 0 120 0 20 46 1 24 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 847 55 1 633 0 130 0 22 50 1 26
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1306 85 40 1324 0 164 0 0 1128 0 779
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.49 0.49 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5068 317 1 5118 0 1781 130 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 588 314 239 395 0 130 48.4 50 0 26 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1813 1868 1549 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.0 15.1 0.0 10.9 0.0 6.4 1.0 0.0 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.0 15.1 10.9 10.9 0.0 6.4 1.0 0.0 0.8 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 908 483 538 826 0 164 1128 0 779 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.44 0.48 0.00 0.79 0.04 0.00 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 856 920 1463 0 307 1128 0 779 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.0 37.0 35.1 35.1 0.0 40.0 6.2 0.0 11.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.6 0.4 0.0 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.3 12.0 9.4 8.1 0.0 5.7 0.6 0.0 0.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 37.7 38.5 35.6 35.5 0.0 48.4 6.2 0.0 11.9 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 902 634 76
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.0 35.6 8.2
Approach LOS D D A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 61.5 28.5 12.8 48.7 28.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 17.1 8.4 2.8 12.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.9 0.2 0.0 4.7
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.6
HCM 6th LOS D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 173 746 40 26 486 160 0 0 61 0 201 93 Future Volume (veh/h) 173 746 40 26 486 160 0 0 61 0 201 93 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 188 811 43 28 528 174 0 0 66 0 218 101 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 230 2950 156 50 1888 604 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.49 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4965 262 1781 3828 1226 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 188 555 299 28 468 234 0.0 0 218 101 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1823 1781 1702 1650 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.4 12.5 12.5 1.4 7.3 7.5 0.0 4.5 4.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.4 12.5 12.5 1.4 7.3 7.5 0.0 4.5 4.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.74 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 230 2023 1083 50 1679 813 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.27 0.28 0.56 0.28 0.29 0.00 0.27 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 2023 1083 228 1679 813 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.0 19.7 19.7 43.2 13.4 13.5 0.0 28.6 28.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.5 0.3 0.5 9.6 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.9 9.1 9.8 1.3 5.0 5.2 0.0 3.6 3.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.5 20.0 20.2 52.8 13.8 14.4 0.0 29.4 30.6 LnGrp LOS D B C D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1042 730 319
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.0 15.5 29.8
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.0 58.0 25.0 16.1 48.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 14.5 6.7 11.4 9.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.5 1.4 0.3 4.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 156 921 97 66 510 111 0 0 95 0 233 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 156 921 97 66 510 111 0 0 95 0 233 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 1001 105 72 554 121 0 0 103 0 253 174 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 211 2675 280 93 2122 454 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4695 491 1781 4211 901 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 725 381 72 446 229 0.0 0 253 174 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1782 1781 1702 1708 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.5 16.7 16.8 3.6 6.7 6.9 0.0 5.3 8.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.5 16.7 16.8 3.6 6.7 6.9 0.0 5.3 8.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.28 1.00 0.53 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 211 1940 1015 93 1715 861 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.37 0.37 0.77 0.26 0.27 0.00 0.31 0.48 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1940 1015 228 1715 861 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.76 0.76 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.2 22.5 22.5 42.1 12.7 12.8 0.0 28.9 30.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.5 0.4 0.8 12.5 0.4 0.8 0.0 1.0 4.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.2 11.6 12.2 3.4 4.5 4.9 0.0 4.2 6.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.7 22.9 23.3 54.6 13.1 13.6 0.0 29.9 34.7 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1276 747 427
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.4 17.3 31.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.2 55.8 25.0 15.2 49.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 18.8 10.6 10.5 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.5 1.6 0.3 4.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.5
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 124 1118 80 44 579 66 0 0 114 0 208 201 Future Volume (veh/h) 124 1118 80 44 579 66 0 0 114 0 208 201 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 135 1215 87 48 629 72 0 0 124 0 226 218 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 172 2837 203 69 2445 277 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4864 348 1781 4652 527 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 135 850 452 48 459 242 0.0 0 226 218 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1808 1781 1702 1775 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.8 19.8 19.8 2.4 6.6 6.8 0.0 4.7 11.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.8 19.8 19.8 2.4 6.6 6.8 0.0 4.7 11.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.30 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 172 1986 1055 69 1789 933 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.43 0.43 0.69 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.28 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1986 1055 228 1789 933 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.74 0.74 0.74 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.6 23.1 23.1 42.7 11.7 11.7 0.0 28.7 31.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.7 0.5 0.9 11.8 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.9 7.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 6.0 13.3 14.1 2.3 4.4 4.8 0.0 3.7 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.4 23.6 24.1 54.5 12.1 12.4 0.0 29.5 38.4 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1437 749 444
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.1 14.9 33.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.0 57.0 25.0 13.2 51.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.4 21.8 13.1 8.8 8.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.3 0.2 4.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.2
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative Baseline 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 73 759 85 60 403 55 0 0 50 0 148 151 Future Volume (veh/h) 73 759 85 60 403 55 0 0 50 0 148 151 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 79 825 92 65 438 60 0 0 54 0 161 164 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 104 2681 298 84 2567 345 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4664 517 1781 4553 612 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 79 601 316 65 325 173 0.0 0 161 164 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1777 1781 1702 1760 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 13.7 13.8 3.2 4.1 4.3 0.0 3.3 8.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 13.7 13.8 3.2 4.1 4.3 0.0 3.3 8.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.35 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 104 1957 1022 84 1919 993 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.31 0.31 0.77 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.20 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1957 1022 228 1919 993 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.76 0.76 0.76 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.5 21.0 21.1 42.4 9.5 9.5 0.0 28.1 29.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.4 0.3 0.6 13.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.6 4.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.6 9.8 10.3 3.1 2.7 3.0 0.0 2.6 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 51.9 21.3 21.7 56.1 9.7 9.9 0.0 28.7 34.0 LnGrp LOS D C C E A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 996 563 325
Approach Delay, s/veh 23.9 15.1 31.4
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 56.2 25.0 9.8 55.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 15.8 10.0 6.0 6.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.9 1.1 0.1 3.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.5
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 496 905 52 212 722 19 0 580 113 0 1143 358 Future Volume (veh/h) 496 905 52 212 722 19 0 580 113 0 1143 358 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 539 984 0 230 785 21 0 630 123 0 1242 389 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 618 1283 262 1122 30 0 1739 776 0 1739 776
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.25 0.00 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.49 0.49 0.00 0.49 0.49 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 5113 137 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 539 984 0 230 522 284 0 630 123 0 1242 389 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1846 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 18.2 21.4 0.0 15.2 17.0 17.0 0.0 13.2 5.2 0.0 32.9 19.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.2 21.4 0.0 15.2 17.0 17.0 0.0 13.2 5.2 0.0 32.9 19.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.07 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1283 262 747 405 0 1739 776 0 1739 776 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.77 0.88 0.70 0.70 0.00 0.36 0.16 0.00 0.71 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 615 0 1739 776 0 1739 776 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.9 41.7 0.0 50.1 43.2 43.2 0.0 19.0 17.0 0.0 24.1 20.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 1.5 0.0 13.1 1.2 2.2 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0 2.5 2.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.5 14.2 0.0 12.2 11.6 12.6 0.0 9.4 3.6 0.0 20.3 12.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.9 43.2 0.0 63.3 44.4 45.4 0.0 19.6 17.4 0.0 26.6 23.0 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1523 1036 753 1631
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.1 48.8 19.2 25.7
Approach LOS D D B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.2 22.1 34.7 63.2 26.0 30.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.2 17.2 23.4 34.9 20.2 19.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.0 0.5 6.7 3.5 1.2 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.5
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 476 906 55 227 669 41 0 770 138 0 1041 388 Future Volume (veh/h) 476 906 55 227 669 41 0 770 138 0 1041 388 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 517 985 0 247 727 45 0 837 150 0 1132 422 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 597 1284 278 1156 71 0 1705 760 0 1705 760
Arrive On Green 0.17 0.25 0.00 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4917 303 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 517 985 0 247 502 270 0 837 150 0 1132 422 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1816 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 17.5 21.5 0.0 16.3 15.9 16.0 0.0 19.2 6.5 0.0 29.2 22.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 17.5 21.5 0.0 16.3 15.9 16.0 0.0 19.2 6.5 0.0 29.2 22.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.17 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 597 1284 278 800 427 0 1705 760 0 1705 760 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.77 0.89 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.49 0.20 0.00 0.66 0.55 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 605 0 1705 760 0 1705 760 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 48.3 41.7 0.0 49.6 41.2 41.2 0.0 21.2 17.9 0.0 23.8 22.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.2 1.5 0.0 15.1 0.8 1.5 0.0 1.0 0.6 0.0 2.1 2.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.0 14.2 0.0 13.1 10.9 11.7 0.0 12.8 4.5 0.0 18.3 13.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.5 43.2 0.0 64.7 42.0 42.7 0.0 22.3 18.5 0.0 25.9 25.0 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1502 1019 987 1554
Approach Delay, s/veh 47.8 47.7 21.7 25.7
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 62.1 23.3 34.7 62.1 25.2 32.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.2 18.3 23.5 31.2 19.5 18.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.2 0.5 6.7 5.6 1.3 5.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 35.9
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 496 1087 29 202 1005 50 0 839 111 0 1090 544 Future Volume (veh/h) 496 1087 29 202 1005 50 0 839 111 0 1090 544 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 539 1182 0 220 1092 54 0 912 121 0 1185 591 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 618 1591 252 1366 67 0 1545 689 0 1545 689
Arrive On Green 0.18 0.31 0.00 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.43 0.43 0.00 0.43 0.43 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4984 246 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 539 1182 0 220 746 400 0 912 121 0 1185 591 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1826 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 18.2 24.9 0.0 14.5 24.4 24.5 0.0 23.4 5.6 0.0 33.9 40.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 18.2 24.9 0.0 14.5 24.4 24.5 0.0 23.4 5.6 0.0 33.9 40.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.13 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1591 252 933 500 0 1545 689 0 1545 689 V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.74 0.87 0.80 0.80 0.00 0.59 0.18 0.00 0.77 0.86 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 609 0 1545 689 0 1545 689 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 47.9 37.0 0.0 50.5 40.5 40.5 0.0 25.8 20.8 0.0 28.8 30.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.9 1.7 0.0 11.3 3.2 5.8 0.0 1.7 0.6 0.0 3.7 13.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.5 16.0 0.0 11.5 15.7 17.2 0.0 15.4 3.9 0.0 21.3 24.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 56.9 38.7 0.0 61.8 43.7 46.3 0.0 27.5 21.3 0.0 32.5 43.6 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C C A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1721 1366 1033 1776
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.4 47.4 26.7 36.2
Approach LOS D D C D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 56.7 21.5 41.9 56.7 26.0 37.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 25.4 16.5 26.9 42.3 20.2 26.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 5.9 0.4 7.0 0.0 1.2 6.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 39.5
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 1: N. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 569 826 42 222 717 39 0 802 111 0 1102 521 Future Volume (veh/h) 569 826 42 222 717 39 0 802 111 0 1102 521 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 618 898 0 241 779 42 0 872 121 0 1198 566 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 689 1309 273 1040 56 0 1699 758 0 1699 758
Arrive On Green 0.20 0.26 0.00 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.48 0.48 0.00 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 5274 0 1781 4960 267 0 3647 1585 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 618 898 0 241 534 287 0 872 121 0 1198 566 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1702 0 1781 1702 1822 0 1777 1585 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 20.9 19.0 0.0 15.9 17.6 17.7 0.0 20.4 5.2 0.0 31.8 34.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 20.9 19.0 0.0 15.9 17.6 17.7 0.0 20.4 5.2 0.0 31.8 34.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.15 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 689 1309 273 714 382 0 1699 758 0 1699 758 V/C Ratio(X) 0.90 0.69 0.88 0.75 0.75 0.00 0.51 0.16 0.00 0.70 0.75 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 778 1702 401 1135 607 0 1699 758 0 1699 758 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 46.8 40.3 0.0 49.8 44.4 44.5 0.0 21.6 17.7 0.0 24.6 25.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.2 0.8 0.0 14.5 1.6 2.9 0.0 1.1 0.5 0.0 2.5 6.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 15.4 12.8 0.0 12.8 12.1 13.0 0.0 13.5 3.6 0.0 19.8 20.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 59.0 41.0 0.0 64.3 46.0 47.4 0.0 22.8 18.1 0.0 27.1 32.0 LnGrp LOS E D E D D A C B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1516 1062 993 1764
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.4 50.5 22.2 28.7
Approach LOS D D C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 61.9 22.9 35.3 61.9 28.4 29.7
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 39.5 27.0 40.0 39.5 27.0 40.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 22.4 17.9 21.0 36.8 22.9 19.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 6.2 0.5 6.5 2.2 1.0 5.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.4
HCM 6th LOS D
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 242 733 55 77 524 54 35 407 187 52 380 387 Future Volume (veh/h) 242 733 55 77 524 54 35 407 187 52 380 387 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 263 797 0 84 570 0 38 442 203 57 413 421 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 349 1053 108 2268 251 1620 723 377 810 723
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.12 0.89 0.00 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 814 3312 0 1781 5274 0 658 3554 1585 785 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 283 777 0 84 570 0 38 442 203 57 413 421 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 876 1549 0 1781 1702 0 658 1777 1585 785 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 28.6 20.1 0.0 4.1 1.4 0.0 4.1 7.0 7.2 4.4 14.8 17.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 28.6 20.1 0.0 4.1 1.4 0.0 21.8 7.0 7.2 11.3 14.8 17.7 Prop In Lane 0.93 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 369 1033 108 2268 251 1620 723 377 810 723 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.75 0.78 0.25 0.15 0.27 0.28 0.15 0.51 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 369 1033 336 2922 251 1620 723 377 810 723 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.70 0.70 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.98 0.98 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.5 26.7 0.0 38.9 2.9 0.0 26.2 15.2 15.3 18.7 17.4 18.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.7 2.2 0.0 11.2 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.4 1.0 0.8 2.3 3.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 10.0 11.3 0.0 3.7 0.8 0.0 1.3 5.1 4.9 1.6 10.5 11.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 36.2 28.9 0.0 50.1 2.9 0.0 27.5 15.6 16.2 19.6 19.6 21.6 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1060 654 683 891
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.9 9.0 16.5 20.5
Approach LOS C A B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 45.5 10.0 34.5 45.5 44.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 23.8 6.1 30.6 19.7 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.0 0.1 0.0 4.3 4.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.7
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 309 752 53 139 639 76 50 561 245 49 287 242 Future Volume (veh/h) 309 752 53 139 639 76 50 561 245 49 287 242 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 336 817 0 151 695 0 54 610 266 53 312 263 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 330 1033 184 2485 324 1469 655 265 765 630
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.21 0.97 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Sat Flow, veh/h 750 3251 0 1781 5274 0 838 3554 1585 633 1850 1523 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 336 817 0 151 695 0 54 610 266 53 299 276 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 750 1549 0 1781 1702 0 838 1777 1585 633 1777 1596 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 21.5 0.0 7.3 0.5 0.0 4.4 10.9 10.6 5.8 10.7 11.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 21.5 0.0 7.3 0.5 0.0 15.4 10.9 10.6 16.8 10.7 11.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 330 1033 184 2485 324 1469 655 265 735 660 V/C Ratio(X) 1.02 0.79 0.82 0.28 0.17 0.42 0.41 0.20 0.41 0.42 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 330 1033 336 2922 324 1469 655 265 735 660 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.70 0.70 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 33.6 27.2 0.0 34.9 0.6 0.0 24.2 18.7 18.6 24.6 18.6 18.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 46.2 3.0 0.0 8.7 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.8 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 16.5 12.1 0.0 5.9 0.2 0.0 1.7 8.0 7.4 1.8 8.2 7.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 79.9 30.2 0.0 43.6 0.7 0.0 25.2 19.5 20.4 26.3 20.3 20.7 LnGrp LOS F C D A C B C C C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1153 846 930 628
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.7 8.4 20.1 21.0
Approach LOS D A C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 41.7 13.8 34.5 41.7 48.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.4 9.3 32.0 18.8 2.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 4.5 0.2 0.0 3.2 6.1
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 25.4
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 256 898 24 124 864 47 102 774 261 57 280 327 Future Volume (veh/h) 256 898 24 124 864 47 102 774 261 57 280 327 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 278 976 0 135 939 0 111 841 284 62 304 355 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 279 1033 167 2436 279 1503 670 202 751 670
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.19 0.95 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 597 3251 0 1781 5274 0 775 3554 1585 501 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 278 976 0 135 939 0 111 841 284 62 304 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 597 1549 0 1781 1702 0 775 1777 1585 501 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 27.6 0.0 6.5 1.2 0.0 11.2 16.1 11.3 9.6 10.7 15.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 27.6 0.0 6.5 1.2 0.0 26.2 16.1 11.3 25.7 10.7 15.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 279 1033 167 2436 279 1503 670 202 751 670 V/C Ratio(X) 1.00 0.95 0.81 0.39 0.40 0.56 0.42 0.31 0.40 0.53 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 279 1033 336 2922 279 1503 670 202 751 670 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.68 0.68 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.87 0.87 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.3 29.2 0.0 35.8 1.1 0.0 29.0 19.6 18.3 29.4 18.1 19.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 43.6 12.4 0.0 8.9 0.1 0.0 3.7 1.3 1.7 3.9 1.6 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 13.8 16.4 0.0 5.4 0.6 0.0 4.2 10.7 7.6 2.5 8.2 9.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 77.8 41.6 0.0 44.7 1.2 0.0 32.7 20.9 20.0 33.2 19.7 22.3 LnGrp LOS E D D A C C B C B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1254 1074 1236 721
Approach Delay, s/veh 49.7 6.7 21.8 22.1
Approach LOS D A C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 42.6 12.9 34.5 42.6 47.4
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 28.2 8.5 32.0 27.7 3.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.9 8.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 26.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 2: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 257 667 53 88 545 36 45 438 207 33 245 339 Future Volume (veh/h) 257 667 53 88 545 36 45 438 207 33 245 339 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 279 725 0 96 592 0 49 476 225 36 266 368 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 355 1033 123 2310 303 1591 710 350 795 710
Arrive On Green 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.14 0.90 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Sat Flow, veh/h 825 3251 0 1781 5274 0 793 3554 1585 745 1777 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 279 725 0 96 592 0 49 476 225 36 266 368 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 825 1549 0 1781 1702 0 793 1777 1585 745 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 30.0 18.3 0.0 4.7 1.3 0.0 4.3 7.7 8.2 2.9 8.8 15.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 30.0 18.3 0.0 4.7 1.3 0.0 19.3 7.7 8.2 10.6 8.8 15.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 355 1033 123 2310 303 1591 710 350 795 710 V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.70 0.78 0.26 0.16 0.30 0.32 0.10 0.33 0.52 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 355 1033 336 2922 303 1591 710 350 795 710 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.74 0.74 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.97 0.97 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.2 26.1 0.0 38.1 2.4 0.0 24.8 15.9 16.0 19.2 16.1 17.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.4 1.6 0.0 10.2 0.1 0.0 1.1 0.5 1.1 0.6 1.1 2.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 10.4 10.5 0.0 4.1 0.7 0.0 1.6 5.7 5.7 1.0 6.7 9.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 38.6 27.7 0.0 48.4 2.5 0.0 25.9 16.3 17.1 19.8 17.3 20.6 LnGrp LOS D C D A C B B B B C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1004 688 750 670
Approach Delay, s/veh 30.7 8.9 17.2 19.2
Approach LOS C A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 44.8 10.7 34.5 44.8 45.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.5 17.0 30.0 29.5 51.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 21.3 6.7 32.0 17.0 3.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.1 0.0 3.7 5.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 20.2
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
Unsignalized Delay for [EBR, WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.

HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 47 46 490 49 57 417
Future Volume (veh/h) 47 46 490 49 57 417
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 51 50 533 53 62 453
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 91 81 2466 245 745 3017
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.76 0.76 0.04 0.85
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3359 324 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 51 50 289 297 62 453
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1812 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 2.8 4.3 4.3 0.6 2.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 2.8 4.3 4.3 0.6 2.0
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.18 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 91 81 1342 1368 745 3017
V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.62 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1342 1368 874 3017
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.7 41.8 3.2 3.2 1.7 1.2
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.3 7.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.3 0.2 0.5
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.0 49.3 3.6 3.6 1.8 1.3
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 101 586 515
Approach Delay, s/veh 48.1 3.6 1.3
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 72.5 80.9 9.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 6.3 4.0 4.8
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 4.0 3.4 0.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.4
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 97 55 732 119 68 419
Future Volume (veh/h) 97 55 732 119 68 419
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 105 60 796 129 74 455
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 147 130 2207 358 540 2906
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.72 0.72 0.05 0.82
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3155 496 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 60 462 463 74 455
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1781 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.2 3.2 8.8 8.8 0.8 2.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.2 3.2 8.8 8.8 0.8 2.4
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.28 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 147 130 1281 1284 540 2906
V/C Ratio(X) 0.72 0.46 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.16
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1281 1284 664 2906
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.86 0.86
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.3 39.4 4.7 4.7 2.8 1.7
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.4 2.5 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.5 2.4 5.1 5.1 0.3 0.9
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.6 41.9 5.5 5.5 2.9 1.8
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 165 925 529
Approach Delay, s/veh 44.9 5.5 2.0
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 69.4 78.1 11.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 10.8 4.4 7.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.2 3.5 0.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.4
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 105 40 994 137 51 401
Future Volume (veh/h) 105 40 994 137 51 401
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 114 43 1080 149 55 436
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 154 137 2265 312 415 2891
Arrive On Green 0.09 0.09 0.72 0.72 0.04 0.81
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3231 432 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 114 43 611 618 55 436
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1793 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 5.6 2.3 13.1 13.2 0.6 2.3
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.6 2.3 13.1 13.2 0.6 2.3
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 154 137 1283 1294 415 2891
V/C Ratio(X) 0.74 0.31 0.48 0.48 0.13 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1283 1294 549 2891
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.1 38.6 5.3 5.3 3.6 1.8
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.8 1.3 1.3 1.3 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.9 1.7 7.6 7.7 0.3 0.8
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.9 39.9 6.6 6.6 3.7 1.9
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 157 1229 491
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.0 6.6 2.1
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.2 69.5 77.7 12.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 15.2 4.3 7.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 10.4 3.3 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.6
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 3: S. Santa Monica Blvd & Charleville Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 86 56 570 101 69 321
Future Volume (veh/h) 86 56 570 101 69 321
Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 93 61 620 110 75 349
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 134 119 2195 389 641 2931
Arrive On Green 0.08 0.08 0.73 0.73 0.05 0.82
Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1585 3110 534 1781 3647
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 93 61 365 365 75 349
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1585 1777 1774 1781 1777
Q Serve(g_s), s 4.6 3.3 6.3 6.4 0.8 1.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.6 3.3 6.3 6.4 0.8 1.7
Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 134 119 1293 1291 641 2931
V/C Ratio(X) 0.69 0.51 0.28 0.28 0.12 0.12
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 406 361 1293 1291 765 2931
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 0.90
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 40.6 40.0 4.2 4.2 2.4 1.5
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 6.3 3.4 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.0 2.5 3.6 3.6 0.3 0.6
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.9 43.4 4.7 4.8 2.4 1.6
LnGrp LOS D D A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 154 730 424
Approach Delay, s/veh 45.5 4.7 1.8
Approach LOS D A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.7 70.0 78.7 11.3
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.5 45.5 60.5 20.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 8.4 3.7 6.6
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.3 2.6 0.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.6
HCM 6th LOS A
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 867 41 1 560 0 183 0 58 56 0 30 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 867 41 1 560 0 183 0 58 56 0 30 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 942 45 1 609 0 199 0 63 61 0 33
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1409 67 40 1401 0 1101 0 0 1101 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5162 238 1 5118 0 1781 199 1781 61
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 642 345 230 380 0 199 7.5 61 6.8 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1827 1868 1549 0 1781 A 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.7 15.8 0.0 10.4 0.0 4.3 1.2
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.7 15.8 10.4 10.4 0.0 4.3 1.2 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 960 516 567 874 0 1101 1101
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.67 0.67 0.40 0.44 0.00 0.18 0.06
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 863 919 1463 0 1101 1101
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.67 0.67 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 32.6 32.6 34.0 34.0 0.0 7.4 6.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.2 12.0 8.9 7.7 0.0 2.8 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 33.4 34.1 34.5 34.4 0.0 7.5 6.8 LnGrp LOS A C C C C A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 987 610
Approach Delay, s/veh 33.6 34.4
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.1 29.9 60.1 29.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 17.8 6.3 12.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 7.6 0.4 4.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 30.2
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 991 83 0 674 0 162 0 72 95 1 46 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 991 83 0 674 0 162 0 72 95 1 46 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1077 90 0 733 0 176 0 78 103 1 50 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1496 125 0 1591 0 213 0 0 1048 0 664
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.42 0.42 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 4970 401 0 5443 0 1781 176 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 763 404 0 733 0 176 50.4 103 0 50 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1798 0 1702 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 16.8 16.9 0.0 12.2 0.0 8.7 2.3 0.0 1.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 16.8 16.9 0.0 12.2 0.0 8.7 2.3 0.0 1.7 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1061 560 0 1591 0 213 1048 0 664 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.72 0.72 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.83 0.10 0.00 0.08 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 849 0 2411 0 307 1048 0 664 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 23.1 23.1 0.0 33.3 0.0 38.7 8.1 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.9 1.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 11.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.2 10.9 0.0 9.3 0.0 7.9 1.5 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 24.0 24.8 0.0 33.4 0.0 50.4 8.1 0.0 15.9 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 1167 733 153
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.3 33.4 10.7
Approach LOS C C B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 57.5 32.5 15.3 42.2 32.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.3 18.9 10.7 3.7 14.2
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 9.2 0.2 0.1 5.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour
129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 1145 56 0 823 0 244 0 62 135 0 66 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 1145 56 0 823 0 244 0 62 135 0 66 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 1245 61 0 895 0 265 0 67 147 0 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1693 83 0 1734 0 998 0 0 998 0 0
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.45 0.45 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5155 244 0 5443 0 1781 265 1781 147
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 850 456 0 895 0 265 10.4 147 9.5 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1826 0 1702 0 1781 B 1781 A Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 18.5 18.5 0.0 14.9 0.0 6.9 3.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 18.5 18.5 0.0 14.9 0.0 6.9 3.6 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 1156 620 0 1734 0 998 998
V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.27 0.15
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 862 0 2411 0 998 998
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.33 1.33 1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.93 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 21.4 21.4 0.0 33.0 0.0 10.2 9.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 2.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 10.9 11.7 0.0 10.9 0.0 4.7 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 22.5 23.4 0.0 33.2 0.0 10.4 9.5 LnGrp LOS A C C A C A B A
Approach Vol, veh/h 1306 895
Approach Delay, s/veh 22.8 33.2
Approach LOS C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 54.9 35.1 54.9 35.1
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 20.5 8.9 16.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 10.1 0.4 7.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 4: Linden Dr & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 0 779 51 1 605 0 137 0 37 46 1 24 Future Volume (veh/h) 0 779 51 1 605 0 137 0 37 46 1 24 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 847 55 1 658 0 149 0 40 50 1 26
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 0 1306 85 40 1324 0 184 0 0 1128 0 761
Arrive On Green 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 0 5068 317 1 5118 0 1781 149 1781 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 588 314 248 411 0 149 47.6 50 0 26 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1702 1813 1868 1549 0 1781 D 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 15.0 15.1 0.0 11.4 0.0 7.4 1.0 0.0 0.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 15.0 15.1 11.4 11.4 0.0 7.4 1.0 0.0 0.8 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 908 483 538 826 0 184 1128 0 761 V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.65 0.65 0.46 0.50 0.00 0.81 0.04 0.00 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 1607 856 920 1463 0 307 1128 0 761 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 37.0 37.0 35.3 35.3 0.0 39.5 6.2 0.0 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 1.5 0.6 0.5 0.0 8.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 11.3 12.0 9.7 8.3 0.0 6.5 0.6 0.0 0.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 37.7 38.5 35.9 35.7 0.0 47.6 6.2 0.0 12.5 LnGrp LOS A D D D D A D A A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 902 659 76
Approach Delay, s/veh 38.0 35.8 8.4
Approach LOS D D A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 4 5 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 61.5 28.5 13.8 47.7 28.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 42.5 15.5 18.5 42.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.0 17.1 9.4 2.8 13.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.9 0.2 0.0 4.9
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 36.7
HCM 6th LOS D
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday AM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 173 760 40 26 495 160 0 0 61 0 203 93 Future Volume (veh/h) 173 760 40 26 495 160 0 0 61 0 203 93 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 188 826 43 28 538 174 0 0 66 0 221 101 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 230 2953 153 50 1897 597 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.49 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4970 258 1781 3846 1210 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 188 565 304 28 474 238 0.0 0 221 101 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1824 1781 1702 1653 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.4 12.7 12.8 1.4 7.4 7.7 0.0 4.6 4.7
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.4 12.7 12.8 1.4 7.4 7.7 0.0 4.6 4.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.14 1.00 0.73 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 230 2023 1084 50 1679 815 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.28 0.28 0.56 0.28 0.29 0.00 0.27 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 2023 1084 228 1679 815 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.78 0.78 0.78 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.0 19.8 19.8 43.2 13.4 13.5 0.0 28.6 28.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.5 0.3 0.5 9.6 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.8 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.9 9.3 10.0 1.3 5.0 5.3 0.0 3.6 3.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.6 20.1 20.3 52.8 13.9 14.4 0.0 29.4 30.6 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1057 740 322
Approach Delay, s/veh 25.0 15.5 29.8
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.0 58.0 25.0 16.1 48.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 14.8 6.7 11.4 9.7
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 5.6 1.4 0.3 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.4
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 156 938 97 66 521 111 0 0 95 0 235 160 Future Volume (veh/h) 156 938 97 66 521 111 0 0 95 0 235 160 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 170 1020 105 72 566 121 0 0 103 0 255 174 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 211 2680 275 93 2130 447 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.04 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.50 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4704 483 1781 4228 887 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 170 738 387 72 454 233 0.0 0 255 174 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1783 1781 1702 1711 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 8.5 17.1 17.1 3.6 6.9 7.1 0.0 5.4 8.6
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.5 17.1 17.1 3.6 6.9 7.1 0.0 5.4 8.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 0.52 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 211 1940 1016 93 1715 862 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.38 0.38 0.77 0.26 0.27 0.00 0.32 0.48 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1940 1016 228 1715 862 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.2 22.6 22.7 42.1 12.8 12.8 0.0 28.9 30.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.6 0.4 0.8 12.5 0.4 0.8 0.0 1.0 4.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.3 11.8 12.5 3.4 4.6 5.0 0.0 4.3 6.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 47.8 23.1 23.5 54.6 13.2 13.6 0.0 29.9 34.7 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1295 759 429
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.4 17.2 31.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.2 55.8 25.0 15.2 49.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.6 19.1 10.6 10.5 9.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.6 1.6 0.3 4.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.6
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Weekday PM Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 124 1132 80 44 595 66 0 0 114 0 211 201 Future Volume (veh/h) 124 1132 80 44 595 66 0 0 114 0 211 201 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 135 1230 87 48 647 72 0 0 124 0 229 218 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 172 2840 201 69 2453 270 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4868 344 1781 4667 515 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 135 860 457 48 470 249 0.0 0 229 218 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1808 1781 1702 1778 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.8 20.0 20.0 2.4 6.8 6.9 0.0 4.8 11.1
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.8 20.0 20.0 2.4 6.8 6.9 0.0 4.8 11.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.29 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 172 1986 1055 69 1789 934 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.43 0.43 0.69 0.26 0.27 0.00 0.28 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1986 1055 228 1789 934 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.75 0.75 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 42.6 23.2 23.2 42.7 11.8 11.8 0.0 28.7 31.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.8 0.5 1.0 11.8 0.4 0.7 0.0 0.9 7.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 6.0 13.5 14.3 2.3 4.6 5.0 0.0 3.8 8.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 48.4 23.7 24.2 54.5 12.1 12.5 0.0 29.6 38.4 LnGrp LOS D C C D B B A C D
Approach Vol, veh/h 1452 767 447
Approach Delay, s/veh 26.2 14.9 33.9
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.0 57.0 25.0 13.2 51.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.4 22.0 13.1 8.8 8.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.3 0.2 4.3
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 24.2
HCM 6th LOS C
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Future Cumulative with Project 5: Roxbury Dr/Brighton Way & Wilshire Blvd Saturday Mid-Day Peak Hour 129 S. Linden Synchro 11 Report
LLG Engineers 07/25/2023
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 73 776 85 60 423 55 0 0 50 0 151 151 Future Volume (veh/h) 73 776 85 60 423 55 0 0 50 0 151 151 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 0 1870 0 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 79 843 92 65 460 60 0 0 54 0 164 164 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2
Cap, veh/h 104 2688 292 84 2583 331 0 0 0 0 809 361
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 4675 508 1781 4582 587 0 0 3647 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 79 613 322 65 340 180 0.0 0 164 164 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1702 1779 1781 1702 1765 0 1777 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 14.0 14.1 3.2 4.4 4.5 0.0 3.4 8.0
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 14.0 14.1 3.2 4.4 4.5 0.0 3.4 8.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.33 0.00 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 104 1957 1023 84 1919 995 0 809 361 V/C Ratio(X) 0.76 0.31 0.32 0.77 0.18 0.18 0.00 0.20 0.45 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 386 1957 1023 228 1919 995 0 809 361 HCM Platoon Ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.77 0.77 0.77 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 43.5 21.2 21.2 42.4 9.5 9.5 0.0 28.1 29.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.5 0.3 0.6 13.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.6 4.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.6 10.0 10.6 3.1 2.8 3.1 0.0 2.7 6.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 52.0 21.5 21.8 56.1 9.7 9.9 0.0 28.7 34.0 LnGrp LOS D C C E A A A C C
Approach Vol, veh/h 1014 585 328
Approach Delay, s/veh 24.0 14.9 31.4
Approach LOS C B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 3 4 6 7 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.8 56.2 25.0 9.8 55.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 33.5 20.5 19.5 25.5
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.2 16.1 10.0 6.0 6.5
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.9 1.1 0.1 3.2
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.5
HCM 6th LOS C

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
125 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE
(AKA 9744 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD)
AND
129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
TRACT: #6648; LOTS: 38, 39 & 40
ASSESSOR ID NO: 4328-009-007
& -021

PREPARED FOR
9300 WILSHIRE, LLC.

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. W1121-06-02
APRIL 8, 2021
Project No. W1121-06-01
April 8, 2021
Mr. Leo Pustilnikov
9300 Wilshire, LLC
9744 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 203
Beverly Hills, California 90212
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
125 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE (AKA 9744 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD)
AND 129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
TRACT: #6648; LOTS: 38, 39 & 40
ASSESSOR ID NO: 4328-009-007 & -021
Reference: Geocon West, Inc, 2020, Fault Rupture Hazard Investigation, 125 South Linden Drive (AKA 9744 Wilshire Boulevard), And 129 South Linden Drive, Beverly Hills, California, Tract: #6648; Lots: 38, 39 & 40, Assessor ID No: 4328-009-007 & -021, dated October 7, 2020, Project No. W1121-06-01.

Dear Mr. Pustilnikov:

In accordance with your authorization of our proposal dated February 2, 2021, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential development located at 125 South Linden Drive (AKA 9744 Wilshire Boulevard) and 129 South Linden Drive in the City of Beverly Hills, California. The accompanying report presents the findings of our study and our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of proposed design and construction. Based on the results of our investigation, it is our opinion that the site can be developed as proposed, provided the recommendations of this report are followed and implemented during design and construction.

If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned.

Very truly yours,
GEOCON WEST,INC.

Joshua Kulas
Staff Engineer
Harry Derkalousdian
PE 79694
Susan F. Kirkgard
CEG 1754
(EMAIL) Addressee
Susan F Kirkgard

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE ................................................................................................................. 1

2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 2

3. GEOLOGIC SETTING .................................................................................................................... 3

4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 4

4.1 Artificial Fill .......................................................................................................................... 4

4.2 Alluvium ................................................................................................................................ 4

5. GROUDWATER ............................................................................................................................. 5

6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................................. 5

6.1 Surface Fault Rupture ............................................................................................................ 5

6.2 Seismicity ............................................................................................................................... 6

6.3 Site-Specific Ground Motion Hazard Analysis ..................................................................... 7

6.3.1 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis ..................................................................... 7

6.3.2 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis .................................................................... 8

6.3.3 Site-Specific Response Spectrum ............................................................................. 9

6.3.4 Mapped Acceleration Parameters ............................................................................. 9

6.3.5 Site-Specific Seismic Design Criteria ..................................................................... 10

6.3.6 Site-Specific Peak Ground Acceleration ................................................................ 10

6.4 Deaggregation of Seismic Design Parameters ..................................................................... 11

6.5 Liquefaction Potential .......................................................................................................... 12

6.6 Slope Stability ...................................................................................................................... 12

6.7 Earthquake-Induced Flooding .............................................................................................. 13

6.8 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding ......................................................................................... 13

6.9 Oil Fields & Methane Potential ........................................................................................... 13

6.10 Subsidence ........................................................................................................................... 14

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 15

7.1 General ................................................................................................................................. 15

7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ..................................................................................... 18

7.3 Minimum Resistivity, pH and Water-Soluble Sulfate ......................................................... 19

7.4 Temporary Dewatering ........................................................................................................ 19

7.5 Grading ................................................................................................................................ 20

7.6 Mat Foundation Design........................................................................................................ 23

7.7 Foundation Settlement ......................................................................................................... 24

7.8 Uplift Resistance .................................................................................................................. 24

7.9 Miscellaneous Foundations .................................................................................................. 25

7.10 Lateral Design ...................................................................................................................... 25

7.11 Exterior Concrete Slabs-on-Grade ....................................................................................... 26

7.12 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations ........................................................................... 27

7.13 Retaining Wall Design ......................................................................................................... 28

7.14 Dynamic (Seismic) Lateral Forces ....................................................................................... 31

7.15 Retaining Wall Drainage ...................................................................................................... 31

7.16 Elevator Pit Design .............................................................................................................. 32

7.17 Elevator Piston ..................................................................................................................... 32

7.18 Temporary Excavations ....................................................................................................... 33

7.19 Shoring – Soldier Pile Design and Installation .................................................................... 33

7.20 Temporary Tieback Anchors ............................................................................................... 39

7.21 Anchor Installation............................................................................................................... 40

7.22 Anchor Testing .................................................................................................................... 40

7.23 Internal Bracing ................................................................................................................... 41

7.24 Surface Drainage .................................................................................................................. 42

7.25 Plan Review ......................................................................................................................... 42 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

LIST OF REFERENCES

MAPS, TABLES, AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1, Vicinity Map
Figure 2, Site Plan
Figure 3, Regional Fault Map
Figure 4, Regional Seismicity Map
Figures 5 through 7, Site-Specific Response Spectra
Figure 8, Retaining Wall Pressure Calculation
Figures 9 and 10, Retaining Wall Drain Detail
Figure 11, Shoring Pressure Calculation

APPENDIX A

FIELD INVESTIGATION
Figure A1, Hollow-Stem Auger Boring Log
Figures LD1 through LD3, Large-Diameter Borings Logs (Prior Fault Investigation) Summary of CPT Data (Prior Fault Investigation)

APPENDIX B

LABORATORY TESTING
Figures B1 through B8, Direct Shear Test Results
Figures B9 through B14, Consolidation Test Results
Figure B15, Maximum Dry Density Test Results
Figure B16, Expansion Index Test Results
Figure B17, Corrosivity Test Results,
Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 1 - April 8, 2021

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential development located at 125 South Linden Drive (AKA 9744 Wilshire Boulevard) and 129 South Linden Drive in the City of Beverly Hills, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate subsurface soil and geologic conditions underlying the site and, based on conditions encountered, to provide conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical aspects of design and construction.

The site is located within a state-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (APEFZ) for surface fault rupture hazards (California Geological Survey [CGS], 2018b). The City of Beverly Hills Policy for Site-Specific Fault Investigations (DSP-003, revised September 2019) indicates a site-specific fault rupture hazard investigation and accompanying subsurface data is required for the proposed development. We have performed a site-specific fault rupture hazard investigation for the proposed development and presented the results in a report dated October 7, 2020 (Geocon West, Inc., 2020).

We observed and documented an approximately 20-foot-wide zone of faulting that impacts the site and potential future development. Specifically, the seismic trenches exposed the upper tips of three discrete faults that displace the top of the Pleistocene Qoa1 unit (13,000 to 36,000 years old) and extend upward into the overlying Holocene Qal2 unit (9,000 to 27,000 years old). The faults do not offset the uppermost sediments of the Qal2 unit or the overlying Qal1 unit (5,000 to 12,500 years old) indicating that last apparent vertical displacement likely took place in early Holocene time. Accordingly, the faults are deemed “active” based on current State of California definition (CGS, 2018a).

Recommendations for a structural setback from the fault zone are presented in our fault investigation report that was reviewed and approved by the City of Beverly Hills on October 23, 2020. The limits of the recommended structural setback are shown on Figure 2.

The scope of this geotechnical investigation included a site reconnaissance, field exploration, laboratory testing, engineering analysis, and the preparation of this report. The site was explored on February 18, 2021 by excavating one 8-inch-diameter boring to depths of approximately 70½ feet below the existing ground surface utilizing a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drilling machine.

The location of the exploratory boring is depicted on the Site Plan (see Figure 2). In addition, the exploratory borings and CPT soundings from the previous fault rupture hazard investigation (Geocon West, Inc., 2020) have been considered for this geotechnical investigation and are included herein.

A detailed discussion of the field investigation, including boring logs and CPT data, is presented in Appendix A.

Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained during the investigation to determine pertinent physical and chemical soil properties. Appendix B presents a summary of the laboratory test results.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 2 - April 8, 2021
The recommendations presented herein are based on analysis of the data obtained during the investigation and our experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. References reviewed to prepare this report are provided in the List of References section.

If project details vary significantly from those described herein, Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report.

2. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The subject site, located at 125 South Linden Drive (AKA 9744 Wilshire Boulevard) and 129 South Linden Drive in the City of Beverly Hills, California. The property consists of three adjacent lots with two designated Assessor Parcel Nos. 4328-009-007 & 4328-009-021. The property is a rectangular-shaped parcel located south of Wilshire Boulevard and north of Charleville Boulevard and is bounded by an alley to the north and west, a two-story multi-family residential structure to the south, and South Linden Drive to the east (see Figure 2, Site Plan). An asphalt-paved surface parking lot occupies the northern two lots (125 South Linden Drive) and the southern lot (129 South Linden Drive) is undeveloped land. Topography at the site and in the immediate area slopes to the southeast at a gradient of less than two degrees (see Figure 1). Elevations vary approximately five (5) vertical feet across the site, ranging from approximately 263 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the northwest corner of the property to approximately 258 feet MSL in the southeast corner of the property.

Vegetation on the northern two lots is limited to small trees and shrubs within localized planters adjacent to the eastern property boundary. The southern vacant lot is covered with low height native grasses.

Due to the location of the Metro tunnels for the Purple Line Extension, it is possible that portions of the proposed structure will be situated within the influence zone defined by Section 4.1-A of the MTA Design Criteria and Standards, Volume III, Adjacent Construction Design Manual Adjacent Construction Design Manual. New construction within or near the MTA influence zone, must not impose a surcharge on the subterranean MTA facilities in excess of what the structure is designed to withstand. If proposed subterranean levels are not sufficiently deep then building loads could exceed the surcharge allowable by MTA; therefore, the new loads will have to be transferred below or outside of the defined MTA Surcharge Influence Zone projection. In order to provide design-level recommendations for a deepened foundation system capable of transferring the building loads below MTA Surcharge Influence Zone, further information is needed pertaining to the dimensions, distances and total depth of the adjacent MTA facilities. If it is deemed the proposed development will be located within the MTA influence zone, recommendation for a deepened foundation system can be provided under separate cover.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 3 - April 8, 2021
Based on information provided to us by the client, we understand that the proposed development consists of one nine-story residential structure over three subterranean parking levels that will extend to depths of approximately 35 feet below ground surface. As previously indicated, an active zone of faulting traverses the southern portion of the subject property (Geocon West, Inc., 2020).

Recommendations for a structural setback from the fault zone are presented in the fault investigation report that was reviewed and approved by the City of Beverly Hills on October 23, 2020. The proposed structure is located outside of the approved structural setback zone (see Figure 2).

Based on the preliminary nature of the design at this time, wall and column loads were not available.

It is anticipated that column loads for the proposed residential structure will be up to 1,350 kips, and wall loads will be up to 14 kips per linear foot.

Once the design phase and foundation loading configuration proceeds to a more finalized plan, the recommendations within this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. Any changes in the design, location or elevation of any structure, as outlined in this report, should be reviewed by this office. Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report.

3. GEOLOGIC SETTING
The site is located on a young alluvial fan surface formed by deposition of sediments originating primarily from Benedict Canyon and to a lesser degree Coldwater Canyon and other smaller drainages along the Santa Monica Mountains southern flank. The alluvial fan surface slopes at approximately 1½ to 2 degrees to the southeast. The site is underlain by the Holocene and Pleistocene alluvial sediments that consist of interbedded debris flows, fluvial (channel and terrace) deposits, and flood plain deposits. The Holocene alluvial deposits have eroded and backfilled the older Pleistocene alluvial deposits.

Regionally, the site is located at the boundary between the Transverse Ranges and Peninsular Ranges geomorphic provinces. In the Beverly Hills area, the boundary between these two geomorphic provinces is formed by the Santa Monica Fault Zone that traverses the southeastern portion of the site (Geocon West, Inc., 2020). The Transverse Ranges geomorphic province is bounded by the Big Pine Fault on the north, the San Andreas Fault Zone on the east, the Pacific Ocean on the west, and Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province on the south. The Transverse Ranges geomorphic province is characterized by east-west trending mountain ranges that include the Santa Ynez, San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and Santa Monica Mountains and associated valleys. The Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province is bounded by the San Jacinto Fault Zone on the east, the Pacific Ocean on the west, the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province on the north, and extends into Mexico on the south.

This geomorphic province is characterized by elongate northwest-trending mountain ridges separated by straight-sided sediment-filled valleys.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 4 - April 8, 2021

4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Based on published geologic maps of the area, the prior site-specific fault investigation explorations (Geocon West, Inc., 2020), and the current geotechnical exploration, the site is underlain by Quaternary age alluvial deposits consisting primarily of sand, silt, and clay (CGS, 2012; Dibblee, 1991). A thin veneer of artificial fill mantles the alluvial sediments. Detailed stratigraphic profiles of the materials encountered at the site are provided on the boring logs in Appendix A.

4.1 Artificial Fill
Artificial fill was encountered in our geotechnical explorations and the prior fault investigation explorations to a maximum depth of 3 feet and 5 feet below the existing ground surface, respectively.

The artificial fill generally consists of dark brown clayey silt with large concrete fragments.

The artificial fill is characterized as moist and firm. The artificial fill is likely the result of past grading or construction activities at the site. Deeper fill may exist elsewhere on the site that was not directly explored.

4.2 Alluvium
Quaternary age alluvium was encountered beneath the fill. The alluvium generally consists of brown to dark brown, reddish brown, or olive brown to gray silty clay, sandy clay, clayey sand, and clayey gravel. Varying amounts of fine to coarse gravel are present in the alluvial deposits throughout the depth explored. The alluvium is characterized as slightly moist to wet and very soft to hard or medium dense to very dense. Based on the geologic data collected as part of the site-specific fault investigation, the young Holocene age alluvium extends to depths of approximately 17 to 21½ feet beneath the existing ground surface and are underlain by Pleistocene age sediments to the maximum depth explored.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 5 - April 8, 2021

5. GROUDWATER
Based on a review of the Seismic Hazard Evaluation Report for the Beverly Hills Quadrangle (California Division of Mines and Geology [CDMG], 1998), the historically highest groundwater level in the area is approximately 30 feet beneath the existing ground surface. Groundwater information presented in this document is generated from data collected in the early 1900’s to the late 1990s. Based on current groundwater basin management practices, it is unlikely that groundwater levels will ever exceed the historic high levels.

Groundwater was encountered in boring B1 at a depth of 35½ feet beneath the existing ground surface.

Additionally, static groundwater levels in the prior fault investigation explorations ranged from approximately 31 feet to 34 feet beneath the existing ground surface (Geocon West, Inc., 2020).

Considering the historic high groundwater level (CDMG, 1998), the depth to groundwater encountered in the onsite explorations, and the depth of the proposed construction, groundwater is anticipated to be encountered in the lower portion of the proposed basement. Also, it is not uncommon for groundwater levels to vary seasonally or for groundwater seepage conditions to develop where none previously existed, especially in impermeable fine-grained soils which are heavily irrigated or after seasonal rainfall. In addition, recent requirements for stormwater infiltration could result in shallower seepage conditions in the immediate site vicinity. Proper surface drainage of irrigation and precipitation will be critical for future performance of the project. Recommendations for drainage are provided in the Surface Drainage section of this report (see Section 7.24).

6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS

6.1 Surface Fault Rupture
The numerous faults in Southern California include Holocene-active, pre-Holocene, and inactive faults.

The criteria for these major groups are based on criteria developed by the California Geological Survey (CGS, formerly known as CDMG) for the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Program (CGS, 2018a). By definition, a Holocene-active fault is one that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,700 years). A pre-Holocene fault has demonstrated surface displacement during Quaternary time (approximately the last 1.6 million years) but has had no known Holocene movement. Faults that have not moved in the last 1.6 million years are considered inactive.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 6 - April 8, 2021
As previously indicated, we recently completed a site-specific fault rupture hazard investigation for the proposed development (Geocon West, Inc., 2020). The results of the fault investigation indicate that Holocene-active faults traverse the southeastern portion of the site. A structural setback has been established at the site that is intended to avoid locating habitable structures within 25 feet of the main trace of the Santa Monica Fault. The proposed structure is located outside of the designated structural setback zone. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring beneath the proposed structure during the design life of the development is considered low. Additionally, the site is located in the seismically active Southern California region and could be subjected to moderate to very strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake on one of the many active faults in Southern California. The faults in the vicinity of the site are shown in Figure 3, Regional Fault Map.

The closest trace of an active fault to the site is the Santa Monica Fault Zone that traverse the southeast portion of the site, approximately 25 feet south of the proposed structure (Geocon West, Inc., 2020).

Other nearby active faults include the Pico Fault of the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone and the Hollywood Fault located approximately 1.3 miles to the east-southeast and 1.5 miles to the north-northeast, respectively (CGS, 2018b). The active San Andreas Fault Zone is located approximately 37 miles northeast of the site (USGS, 2006; Ziony and Jones, 1989).

Several buried thrust faults, commonly referred to as blind thrusts, underlie the Los Angeles Basin at depth. These faults are not exposed at the ground surface and are typically identified at depths greater than 3.0 kilometers. The October 1, 1987, Mw 5.9 Whittier Narrows earthquake and the January 17, 1994, Mw 6.7 Northridge earthquake were a result of movement on the Puente Hills Blind Thrust and the Northridge Thrust, respectively. These thrust faults and others in the Los Angeles area are not exposed at the surface and do not present a potential surface fault rupture hazard at the site; however, these deep thrust faults are considered active features capable of generating future earthquakes that could result in moderate to significant ground shaking at the site.

6.2 Seismicity
As with all of Southern California, the site has experienced historic earthquakes from various regional faults. The seismicity of the region surrounding the site was formulated based on research of an electronic database of earthquake data. The epicenters of recorded earthquakes with magnitudes equal to or greater than 5.0 in the site vicinity are depicted on Figure 4, Regional Seismicity Map. A partial list of moderate to major magnitude earthquakes that have occurred in the Southern California area within the last 100 years is included in the following table.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 7 - April 8, 2021

LIST OF HISTORIC EARTHQUAKES
Earthquake
(Oldest to Youngest) Date of Earthquake Magnitude
Distance to
Epicenter
(Miles)
Direction
to
Epicenter
Near Redlands July 23, 1923 6.3 66 E
Long Beach March 10, 1933 6.4 40 SE
Tehachapi July 21, 1952 7.5 73 NW
San Fernando February 9, 1971 6.6 24 N
Whittier Narrows October 1, 1987 5.9 19 E
Sierra Madre June 28, 1991 5.8 27 ENE
Landers June 28, 1992 7.3 113 E
Big Bear June 28, 1992 6.4 91 E
Northridge January 17, 1994 6.7 13 NW
Hector Mine October 16, 1999 7.1 127 ENE
Ridgecrest July 5, 2019 7.1 126 NNE
The site is located within close proximity to the active Santa Monica Fault. An earthquake originating on a splay of this fault could produce very strong near-field ground motions that should be taken into account in the structural design of the proposed development. The effects of ground shaking can be mitigated if the proposed structures are designed and constructed in conformance with current building codes and engineering practices.

6.3 Site-Specific Ground Motion Hazard Analysis
A site-specific ground motion hazard analyses was performed in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Chapter 21 and Section 1613 of the 2019 CBC using the online applications developed by USGS.

6.3.1 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis
The risk-targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) probabilistic response spectrum consists of the spectral response accelerations which are expected to achieve a 1 percent probability of collapse within a 50-year period, evaluated at 5 percent damping.

The mean spectral response accelerations having a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years were evaluated at 5 percent damping using the USGS Unified Hazard Tool (UHT). The Dynamic:

Conterminous U.S. 2014 (v4.2.0) edition was used within the analysis, which is based on the UCERF-3 fault model. The soil underlying the site was modeled as a Site Class “D” with a corresponding average shear wave velocity (Vs30) of 259 meters per second.

The web application uses the ground motion prediction equations (GMPEs) from the NGA-West 2 project: Abrahamson-et al. (2014) NGA West 2, Boore et al. (2014) NGA West 2, Campbell-Bozorgnia (2014) NGA West 2, and Chiou-Youngs (2014) NGA West 2. Each GMPE was assigned an equal weight and the mean value of the four GMPEs was evaluated. The mean spectral accelerations were rotated to maximum direction using the period specific ratios from Shahi et al. (2013 & 2014).

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 8 - April 8, 2021
The GMPE of Campbell and Borzorgnia requires that the depth to where the shear wave velocity reaches 2.5 kilometers per second (Z2.5) be defined. Additionally, the GMPEs of Abrahamson-et al., Boore et al. and Chiou-Youngs require that the depth to where the shear wave velocity reaches 1 kilometer per second (Z1.0) be defined. The values of Z2.5 and Z1.0 are internally calculated by the Uniform Hazard Tool.

The MCE uniform hazard response spectra was adjusted to risk-targeted spectral accelerations corresponding to a 1 percent chance of collapse in 50 years by using the USGS Risk-Targeted Ground Motion Calculator and following ASCE 7-16 Section 21.2.1.2 Method 2.

The risk-targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) probabilistic response spectrum is provided on Figure 5.

6.3.2 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis
In order to define the deterministic scenario events, deaggregation of the uniform hazard probabilistic response spectrum was performed using the USGS Uniform Hazard Tool. The inversion approach used by UCERF-3 allows for a large number of variations for each source scenario, including multi-fault ruptures. Therefore, deaggregation of UCERF-3 consists of the contributions from multi-fault ruptures rather than individual source contributions. To address this, the USGS Unified Hazard Tool aggregates the contributions on a per-fault-section basis, with rupture contributions only ever counted once.

The Unified Hazard Tool deaggregation contributor list shows the fault sections which contribute most to hazard at a site and report a mean earthquake magnitude for each section identified by a 'parent' fault name and section index. Based on the deaggregation, we have considered scenario events with the greatest contribution to the deterministic ground motions.

The earthquake magnitudes of the deterministic scenario events were based on the BSSC 2014 Scenario Event which includes the parent fault identified in the deaggregation and which has the largest earthquake magnitude. The closest distance (RRUP) from the fault to the site was taken from the Uniform Hazard Tool deaggregation results. Other fault source parameters were defined by the values in the BSSC2014 Scenario Catalog. The values of Z2.5and Z1.0 were estimated using data from the Community Velocity Model (CVM) Version 4, Iteration 26, Basin Depth developed by Southern California Earthquake Data Center (SCEDC) accessed by the OpenSHA Site Data Application (v1.5.0).

Deterministic scenario events on the Hollywood fault, Santa Monica fault, Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone, and Compton fault were considered.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 9 - April 8, 2021
The deterministic median and standard deviation (sigma) for the scenario events were evaluated using the USGS NSHMP-HAZ-WS Response Spectra online application. The deterministic analysis used the same four GMPEs, equally weighted, to generate the median and standard deviation of the ground motion which were then used to calculate the 84th percentile at 5% damping. The geometric median spectral accelerations were rotated to maximum direction using the period specific ratios from Shahi et al. (2013 & 2014).

The deterministic scenarios were compared and a combination of events controls the deterministic spectrum. The fault source resulting in the highest spectral accelerations from 0 to 2 seconds would be a magnitude 7.45 event on the Compton fault and from 3 to 5 seconds would be a magnitude 7.15 event on the Newport-Inglewood fault. The 84th percentile maximum rotated component deterministic response spectra is provided on Figure 6.

6.3.3 Site-Specific Response Spectrum
The lesser of the probabilistic and deterministic MCER response spectrums is the Site-Specific MCER.

Two thirds of the Site-Specific MCER is the Design Earthquake (DE) Response Spectrum, provided the results are not less than 80 percent of the modified General Design Response Spectrum determined by ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.6 with Fa and Fv determined as specified in Section 21.3.

Graphical representations of the analyses are presented on Figures 5 and 6. The Site-Specific Design Earthquake response spectrum at 5 percent damping is presented on Figure 6 and in tabular form on Figure 7.

6.3.4 Mapped Acceleration Parameters
The following table summarizes the mapped acceleration parameters obtained from the 2019 California Building Code (CBC; Based on the 2018 International Building Code [IBC] and ASCE 7-16), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613A Earthquake Loads. The data was calculated using the online application Seismic Design Maps, provided by OSHPD. The short spectral response uses a period of 0.2 second.

MAPPED SPECTRAL ACCELERATIONS
Parameter Value 2019 CBC Reference
MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response
Acceleration – Class B (short), SS

2.104g Figure 1613.3.1(1)
MCER Ground Motion Spectral Response
Acceleration – Class B (1 sec), S1

0.752g Figure 1613.3.1(2)
Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 10 - April 8, 2021

6.3.5 Site-Specific Seismic Design Criteria
Based the site-specific ground motion hazard analysis performed, and in accordance with the ASCE 7-16 Section 21.4, site-specific design acceleration parameters shall be derived using the results of the site-specific ground motion hazard analysis.

The parameter SDS shall be taken as equal to 90 percent of the maximum spectral acceleration obtained from the site-specific analysis at any period within the range from 0.2 to 5 seconds, inclusive.

The parameter SD1 shall be taken as the maximum value of the product of the spectral acceleration and period for periods from 1 to 5 seconds, inclusive. The values of SMS and SM1 shall be taken as 1.5 times the site-specific values of SDS and SD1. The site-specific design acceleration parameters shall not be less than 80 percent of the general seismic design values determined by ASCE 7-16 Section 11.4.

The following table presents the site-specific seismic design parameters based on the site-specific ground motion hazard analysis.

SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN ACCELERATION PARAMETERS
Parameter Value
Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response
Acceleration (short), SMS

2.39g
Site Class Modified MCER Spectral Response
Acceleration – (1 sec), SM1

1.84g
5% Damped Design
Spectral Response Acceleration (short), SDS

1.59g
5% Damped Design
Spectral Response Acceleration (1 sec), SD1

1.23g

6.3.6 Site-Specific Peak Ground Acceleration
The site-specific Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCEG) geometric mean peak ground acceleration was evaluated in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 21.5.

The probabilistic geometric mean peak ground acceleration and the deterministic 84th percentile geometric mean peak ground acceleration were analyzed using the same approaches as described above. The analysis used the same Site Class and scenario earthquake.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 11 - April 8, 2021
The deterministic MCEG shall not be less than 0.5FPGA, where FPGA is determined from ASCE 7-16 Table 11.8-1 with the value of PGA taken as 0.5g. The site-specific MCEG peak ground acceleration is taken as the lesser of the probabilistic and deterministic MCEG, provided the value is not less than 80 percent of the value of PGAM as determined by ASCE 7-16 Equation 11.8.1.

ASCE 7-16 SITE-SPECIFIC PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION
Parameter Value ASCE 7-16 Reference
Site-Specific MCEG Peak Ground
Acceleration, PGAM

0.9g Section 21.5

6.4 Deaggregation of Seismic Design Parameters
The Maximum Considered Earthquake Ground Motion (MCE) is the level of ground motion that has a 2 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, with a statistical return period of 2,475 years. According to the 2019 California Building Code and ASCE 7-16, the MCE is to be utilized for the evaluation of liquefaction, lateral spreading, seismic settlements, and it is our understanding that the intent of the Building code is to maintain “Life Safety” during a MCE event. The Design Earthquake Ground Motion (DE) is the level of ground motion that has a 10 percent chance of exceedance in 50 years, with a statistical return period of 475 years.

Deaggregation of the MCE peak ground acceleration was performed using the USGS online Unified Hazard Tool, 2014 Conterminous U.S. Dynamic edition (v4.2.0). The result of the deaggregation analysis indicates that the predominant earthquake contributing to the MCE peak ground acceleration is characterized as a 6.79 magnitude event occurring at a hypocentral distance of 6.74 kilometers from the site.

Deaggregation was also performed for the Design Earthquake (DE) peak ground acceleration, and the result of the analysis indicates that the predominant earthquake contributing to the DE peak ground acceleration is characterized as a 6.68 magnitude occurring at a hypocentral distance of 10.79 kilometers from the site.

Conformance to the criteria in the above tables for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur if a large earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 12 - April 8, 2021

6.5 Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated, relatively cohesionless soil deposits lose shear strength during strong ground motions. Primary factors controlling liquefaction include intensity and duration of ground motion, gradation characteristics of the subsurface soils, in-situ stress conditions, and the depth to groundwater. Liquefaction is typified by a loss of shear strength in the liquefied layers due to rapid increases in pore water pressure generated by earthquake accelerations.

The current standard of practice, as outlined in the “Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction in California” and “Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California” requires liquefaction analysis to a depth of 50 feet below the lowest portion of the proposed structure. Liquefaction typically occurs in areas where the soils below the water table are composed of poorly consolidated, fine to medium-grained, primarily sandy soil. In addition to the requisite soil conditions, the ground acceleration and duration of the earthquake must also be of a sufficient level to induce liquefaction.

The State of California Seismic Hazard Zone Map for the Beverly Hills Quadrangle (CDMG, 1999; CGS, 2018b) indicates that the site is not located in an area designated as having a potential for liquefaction. In addition, a review of the City of Beverly Hills Hazard Mitigation Action Plan (2010) and the County of Los Angeles Safety Element (Leighton, 1990) indicates that the site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for liquefaction. Based on these considerations, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction and associated ground deformations beneath the site is very low.

6.6 Slope Stability
The topography at the site slopes at less than two degrees to the southeast. According to the County of Los Angeles (Leighton, 1990) and the City of Beverly Hills (2010), the site is not located within an area identified as a “Hillside Area” or an area designated as having a potential for slope stability hazards. Also, the CGS indicates that the site is not located within an area identified as having a potential for seismic slope instability (CDMG, 1999; CGS, 2018b). There are no known landslides near the site, nor is the site in the path of any known or potential landslides. Therefore, the potential for slope stability hazards to adversely affect the proposed development is considered low.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 13 - April 8, 2021

6.7 Earthquake-Induced Flooding
Earthquake-induced flooding is inundation caused by failure of dams or other water-retaining structures due to earthquakes. The Los Angeles County Safety Element (Leighton, 1990) indicates that the site is located within a potential inundation area for the Lower Franklin Dam. However, this reservoir, as well as others in California, are continually monitored by various governmental agencies (such as the State of California Division of Safety of Dams and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) to guard against the threat of dam failure. Current design, construction practices, and ongoing programs of review, modification, or total reconstruction of existing dams are intended to ensure that all dams are capable of withstanding the maximum considered earthquake (MCE) for the site. Therefore, the potential for inundation at the site as a result of an earthquake-induced dam failure is considered low.

6.8 Tsunamis, Seiches, and Flooding
The site is not located within a coastal area. Therefore, tsunamis are not considered a significant hazard at the site.

Seiches are large waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. No major water-retaining structures are located immediately up gradient from the project site. Therefore, flooding resulting from a seismically induced seiche is considered unlikely.

The site is within an area of minimal flooding (Zone X) as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 2021; LACDPW, 2021). Also, the City of Beverly Hills (2010) indicates the site is not located within an area with a high risk for flooding. Therefore, the risk of flooding impacting the proposed development is considered low.

6.9 Oil Fields & Methane Potential
Based on a review of the California Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Well Finder Website, the site is not located within the limits of an oilfield and there are no active or inactive oil or gas wells documented within the immediate vicinity of the site (CalGEM, 2021). However, due to the voluntary nature of record reporting by the oil well drilling companies, wells may be improperly located or not shown on the location map and undocumented wells could be encountered during construction. Any wells encountered will need to be properly abandoned in accordance with the current requirements of the CalGEM.

Since the site is not located within an oil field and there are no documented active or inactive oil or gas wells in the immediate site vicinity, the potential for the presence of methane or other volatile gases to occur at the site is considered low. However, should it be determined that a methane study is required for the proposed development it is recommended that a qualified methane consultant be retained to perform the study and provide mitigation measures as necessary.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 14 - April 8, 2021

6.10 Subsidence
Subsidence occurs when a large portion of land is displaced vertically, usually due to the withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. Soils that are particularly subject to subsidence include those with high silt or clay content. The site is not located within an area of known ground subsidence. No large-scale extraction of groundwater, gas, oil, or geothermal energy is occurring or planned at the site or in the general site vicinity. There appears to be little or no potential for ground subsidence due to withdrawal of fluids or gases at the site.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 15 - April 8, 2021

7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 General

7.1.1 It is our opinion that neither soil nor geologic conditions were encountered during the investigation that would preclude the construction of the proposed development provided the recommendations presented herein are followed and implemented during design and construction. The geotechnical design parameters presented herein should be reviewed and updated as necessary as the design progresses and the structural loads are finalized.

7.1.2 Up to 3 feet of uncertified artificial fill was encountered during site exploration. The existing fill encountered is believed to be the result of past grading and construction activities at the site. Deeper fill may exist in other areas of the site that were not directly explored.

Excavation for the subterranean portion of the structure is anticipated to penetrate through the existing artificial fill and expose undisturbed alluvial soils throughout the excavation bottom.

7.1.3 Due to the construction of MTA Purple Line extension beneath Wilshire Boulevard, the northern and western portions of the proposed structure may be situated within the influence zone defined by Section 4.1-A of the MTA Design Criteria and Standards, Volume III, Adjacent Construction Design Manual Adjacent Construction Design Manual. New construction must not impose a surcharge on the subterranean MTA facilities in excess of what those structures are currently designed to withstand. Surcharge zones are defined as a 1:1 (H:V) projection from the bottom MTA subterranean facilities up to the ground surface (see Figure 2, Site Plan). At this time the locations of the proposed MTA facilities are unknown. If foundations of the proposed structure will be located within an MTA facility surcharge zone, it is recommended that the proposed structure be supported on a deepened foundation system, consisting of drilled cast-in-place reinforced concrete piles. Piles should be deepened as necessary to prevent inducing a surcharge on existing offsite improvements and to achieve the necessary foundation capacity. If necessary, recommendations for the design of a deepened foundation system will be provided under separate cover.

7.1.4 Groundwater was encountered during site explorations at depths between approximately 31 to 35 feet below ground surface. Excavation for the proposed subterranean levels is anticipated to extend to depths of up to approximately 39 feet below the ground surface, including foundation construction and dewatering elements. Due to the depth of the proposed excavation and the potential for seasonal fluctuation in the groundwater level, temporary dewatering measures may be required to mitigate groundwater during excavation and construction. Recommendations for temporary dewatering are discussed in Section 7.4 of this report.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 16 - April 8, 2021

7.1.5 Based on a review of the Seismic Hazard Evaluation Report for the Beverly Hills Quadrangle (California Division of Mines and Geology [CDMG], 1998), the historic high groundwater level beneath the site is between approximately 30 feet below the existing ground surface, and groundwater was encountered during site explorations at depths between approximately 31 to 35 feet below ground surface.. The proposed structure must be designed for hydrostatic pressure for any portion of the structure that extends below a depth of 30 feet.

The hydrostatic design will result in uplift forces on the structure that must be resisted by counterweight or structural design measures. The recommended floor slab uplift pressure to be used in design would be 62.4(H) in units of pounds per square foot (psf), where “H” is the height of the water above the bottom of the foundation in feet.

7.1.6 Based on these considerations, the proposed structure may be supported on a reinforced concrete mat foundation system that derive supports in the undisturbed alluvial soils at and below a depth of 35 feet below the existing ground surface. In order to minimize differential settlement, it is recommended that the ramp and ramp walls for the subterranean parking garage be structurally supported on the mat foundation. A mat foundation is more accommodating to subgrade stabilization, waterproofing, and hydrostatic design. Any soils unintentionally disturbed should be properly compacted. All foundation excavations must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to placement of steel or concrete. Recommendations for the design of a mat foundation system are provided in Section 7.6 of this report.

7.1.7 It is recommended that the soils exposed at the excavation bottom be properly compacted for foundation support. During the compaction procedure, compression and shrinkage should be expected as the soils densify. The soils should be thoroughly densified and the operation should be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). Recommendations for earthwork are provided in the Grading section of this report (see Section 7.6).

7.1.8 It should be noted that implementation of the recommendations presented herein is not intended to completely prevent damage to the structure during the occurrence of strong ground shaking as a result of nearby earthquakes. It is intended that the structure be designed in such a way that the amount of damage incurred as a result of strong ground shaking be minimized.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 17 - April 8, 2021

7.1.9 Excavations up to 39 feet in vertical height are anticipated for construction of the subterranean parking level, including foundation depths and dewatering elements. Due to the depth of the excavation and the proximity to the property lines, city streets and adjacent offsite structures, excavation of the subterranean parking level will require shoring measures in order to provide a stable excavation. Where shoring is required it is recommended that a soldier pile shoring system be utilized. In addition, where the proposed excavation will be deeper than and adjacent to an offsite structure, the proposed retaining wall and shoring systems should be designed to resist the surcharge imposed by the adjacent offsite structure.

Recommendations for Temporary Excavations are provided in Section 7.18 of this report.

7.1.10 Due to the nature of the subterranean design, waterproofing of subterranean walls and slabs is recommended. Particular care should be taken in the design and installation of waterproofing to avoid moisture problems, or actual water seepage into the structure through any normal shrinkage cracks which may develop in the concrete walls, floor slab, foundations and/or construction joints. The design and inspection of the waterproofing is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer. A waterproofing consultant should be retained in order to recommend a product or method, which would provide protection to subterranean walls, floor slabs and foundations.

7.1.11 It is recommended that flexible utility connections be utilized for all rigid utilities to minimize or prevent damage to utilities from minor differential movements.

7.1.12 Foundations for small outlying structures at the ground surface, such as property line block walls up to 6 feet in height, planter walls or trash enclosures, which will not be tied to the proposed structure, may be supported on conventional foundations deriving support on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and compaction cannot be performed or is undesirable, foundations may derive support directly in the competent soils at and below a depth of 24 inches below the ground surface and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a minimum 12-inch embedment into the recommended bearing materials. If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft or loose, compaction of the soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 18 - April 8, 2021

7.1.13 Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill and soft soils be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. The client should be aware that excavation and compaction of all existing fill and soft soils in the area of new paving is not required; however, paving constructed over existing uncertified fill may experience increased settlement and/or cracking, and may therefore have a shorter design life and increased maintenance costs. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil should be scarified and properly compacted for paving support. Paving recommendations are provided in Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (see Section 7.12).

7.1.14 Based on the historic and current groundwater levels, stormwater infiltration is not recommended for this project. It is suggested that stormwater be retained, filtered and discharged in accordance with the requirements of the local governing agency.

7.1.15 Once the design and foundation loading configuration for the proposed structure proceeds to a more finalized plan, the recommendations within this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. Based on the final foundation loading configurations, the potential for settlement should be reevaluated by this office.

7.1.16 Any changes in the design, location or elevation, as outlined in this report, should be reviewed by this office. Geocon should be contacted to determine the necessity for review and possible revision of this report.

7.1.17 The most recent ASTM standards apply to this project and must be utilized, even if older ASTM standards are indicated in this report.

7.2 Soil and Excavation Characteristics

7.2.1 The in-situ soils can be excavated with moderate effort using conventional excavation equipment. Some caving should be anticipated in vertical excavations, especially where granular soils are encountered.

7.2.2 It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that all excavations and trenches are properly shored and maintained in accordance with applicable OSHA rules and regulations to maintain safety and maintain the stability of existing adjacent improvements.

7.2.3 All onsite excavations must be conducted in such a manner that potential surcharges from existing structures, construction equipment, and vehicle loads are resisted. The surcharge area may be defined by a 1:1 projection down and away from the bottom of an existing foundation or vehicle load. Penetrations below this 1:1 projection will require special excavation measures such as sloping and shoring. Excavation recommendations are provided in the Temporary Excavations section of this report (see Section 7.18).

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 19 - April 8, 2021

7.2.4 The existing site soils at foundation level are “expansive” and to have a “medium” (EI = 70) expansive potential in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) Section 1803.5.3.

7.3 Minimum Resistivity, pH and Water-Soluble Sulfate

7.3.1 Potential of Hydrogen (pH) and resistivity testing as well as chloride content testing were previously performed on representative samples of soil to generally evaluate the corrosion potential to surface utilities. The tests were performed in accordance with California Test Method No’s. 643 and 422 and indicate that the soils are considered “corrosive” with respect to corrosion of buried ferrous metals on site. The results are presented in Appendix B (Figure B17) and should be considered for design of underground structures. Due to the corrosive potential of the soils, it is recommended that PVC, ABS or equivalent plastic piping be considered in lieu of cast-iron for subdrains and retaining wall drains in direct contact with the site soils.

7.3.2 Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples of the site materials to measure the percentage of water-soluble sulfate content. Results from the laboratory water-soluble sulfate tests are presented in Appendix B (Figure B17) and indicate that the on-site materials possess a sulfate exposure class of “S0” to concrete structures as defined by 2019 CBC Section 1904 and ACI 318-14 Table 19.3.1.1.

7.3.3 Geocon West, Inc. does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering. If corrosion sensitive improvements are planned, it is recommended that a corrosion engineer be retained to evaluate corrosion test results and incorporate the necessary precautions to avoid premature corrosion on buried metal pipes and concrete structures in direct contact with the soils.

7.4 Temporary Dewatering

7.4.1 Groundwater was encountered during site explorations at depths between approximately 31 to 35 feet below ground surface. Based on the conditions encountered at the time of exploration, groundwater may be encountered during construction activities. The depth to groundwater at the time of construction can be further verified during initial dewatering well or shoring pile installation. If groundwater is present above the depth of the subterranean level, temporary dewatering will be necessary to maintain a safe working environment during excavation and construction activities.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 20 - April 8, 2021

7.4.2 It is recommended that a qualified dewatering consultant be retained to design the dewatering system. Recommendations for design flow rates for the temporary dewatering system should be determined by a qualified contractor or dewatering consultant. Temporary dewatering may consist of perimeter wells with interior well points as well as gravel filled trenches (French drains) placed adjacent to the shoring system and interior of the site.

The number and locations of the wells or French drains can be adjusted during excavation activities as necessary to collect and control any encountered seepage. The French drains will then direct the collected seepage to a sump where it will be pumped out of the excavation.

7.4.3 The embedment of perimeter shoring piles should be deepened as necessary to take into account any required excavations necessary to place an adjacent French drain system, or sub-slab drainage system, should it be deemed necessary. It is not anticipated that a perimeter French drain will be more than 24 inches in depth below the proposed excavation bottom. If a French drain is to remain on a permanent basis, it must be lined with filter fabric to prevent soil migration into the gravel.

7.5 Grading

7.5.1 Grading is anticipated to include excavation of site soils for the subterranean levels, foundations, and utility trenches, as well as placement of backfill for walls and trenches.

7.5.2 A preconstruction conference should be held at the site prior to the beginning of grading operations with the owner, contractor, civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, and building official in attendance. Special soil handling requirements can be discussed at that time.

7.5.3 Earthwork should be observed, and compacted fill tested by representatives of Geocon West, Inc. The existing fill encountered during exploration is suitable for re-use as an engineered fill, provided any encountered oversize material (greater than 6 inches) and any encountered deleterious debris is removed.

7.5.4 Grading should commence with the removal of all existing vegetation and existing improvements from the area to be graded. Deleterious debris such as wood and root structures should be exported from the site and should not be mixed with the fill soils.

Asphalt and concrete should not be mixed with the fill soils unless approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. All existing underground improvements planned for removal should be completely excavated and the resulting depressions properly backfilled in accordance with the procedures described herein. Once a clean excavation bottom has been established it must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.).

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 21 - April 8, 2021

7.5.5 As a minimum, it is recommended that the soils exposed at the excavation bottom be properly compacted for foundation support. During the compaction procedure, compression and shrinkage should be expected as the soils densify. The soils should be thoroughly densified and the operation should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon).

7.5.6 The proposed structure may be supported on a reinforced concrete mat foundation deriving support in competent alluvial soils found at and below a depth of 35 feet below the ground surface. In order to minimize differential settlement between the ramp, ramp walls, and basement level, it is recommended that the ramp and ramp walls for the subterranean parking garage be structurally supported on the mat foundation.

7.5.7 Due to the potential for high-moisture content soils at the excavation bottom, or if construction is performed during the rainy season and the excavation bottom becomes saturated, stabilization measures may have to be implemented to prevent excessive disturbance the excavation bottom. Should this condition exist, rubber tire equipment should not be allowed in the excavation bottom until it is stabilized or extensive soil disturbance could result.

7.5.8 One method of subgrade stabilization would consist of introducing a thin lift of 3 to 6-inch diameter crushed angular rock into the soft excavation bottom. The use of crushed concrete will also be acceptable. The crushed rock should be spread thinly across the excavation bottom and pressed into the soils by track rolling or wheel rolling with heavy equipment. It is very important that voids between the rock fragments are not created so the rock must be thoroughly pressed or blended into the soils. All subgrade soils must be properly compacted and proof-rolled in the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.).

7.5.9 Subgrade stabilization may also be accomplished by placing a 1-foot-thick layer of washed, angular 3/4-inch gravel atop a stabilization fabric (Mirafi 500X or equivalent), subsequent to subgrade approval. This gravel placement procedure should be conducted in sections until the entire excavation bottom has been blanketed by fabric and gravel. Heavy equipment may operate upon the gravel once it has been placed. The gravel should be compacted to a dense state utilizing a vibratory drum roller. The placement of gravel at the subgrade level may be coordinated with the temporary dewatering of the site. The gravel and fabric system will function as both a permeable material for any necessary dewatering procedures as well as a stable material upon which heavy equipment may operate. It is recommended that the contractor meet with the Geotechnical Engineer to discuss this procedure in more detail.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 22 - April 8, 2021

7.5.10 All fill and backfill soils should be placed in horizontal loose layers approximately 6 to 8 inches thick, moisture conditioned to two percent over optimum moisture content, and properly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of their maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM D 1557 (latest edition).

7.5.11 Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill and disturbed alluvium be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. The client should be aware that excavation and compaction of all existing fill and soft soils in the area of new paving is not required; however, paving constructed over existing fill or unsuitable alluvium may experience increased settlement and/or cracking, and may, therefore, have a shorter design life and increased maintenance costs. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of soil should be scarified, moisture conditioned to two percent over optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction for paving support.

Paving recommendations are provided in Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (see Section 7.12).

7.5.12 It is recommended that flexible utility connections be utilized for all rigid utilities to minimize or prevent damage to utilities from minor differential movements. Utility trenches should be properly backfilled in accordance with the requirements of the Green Book (latest edition). The pipe should be bedded with clean sands (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) to a depth of at least 1 foot over the pipe, and the bedding material must be inspected and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon). The use of gravel is not acceptable unless used in conjunction with filter fabric to prevent the gravel from having direct contact with soil. The remainder of the trench backfill may be derived from onsite soil or approved import soil, compacted as necessary, until the required compaction is obtained. The use of minimum 2-sack slurry is also acceptable. Prior to placing any bedding materials or pipes, the excavation bottom must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon).

7.5.13 Although not anticipated for this project, all imported fill shall be observed, tested, and approved by Geocon West, Inc. prior to bringing soil to the site. Rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter shall not be used in the fill. If necessary, import soils used as structural fill should have an expansion index less than 50 and corrosivity properties that are equally or less detrimental to that of the existing onsite soils (see Figure B17).

7.5.14 All trench and foundation excavation bottoms must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon), prior to placing bedding materials, fill, steel, gravel, or concrete.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 23 - April 8, 2021

7.6 Mat Foundation Design

7.6.1 It is recommended that a reinforced concrete mat foundation be utilized for support of the proposed structure. The reinforced concrete mat foundation may derive support in the competent alluvium found at and below a depth of 35 feet below the ground surface.

Foundations should be deepened as necessary to penetrate through soft or unsuitable soils at the direction of the Geotechnical Engineer A mat foundation system is more capable of minimizing the effects of differential settlement and has sufficient rigidity to allow the structure to behave more uniformly. All foundation excavations must be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon), prior to placing steel or concrete.

7.6.2 The recommended maximum allowable bearing value is 5,500 pounds per square foot (psf).

The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads due to wind or seismic forces.

7.6.3 A vertical modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch may be used in the design of mat foundations deriving support in competent alluvial soils found at and below a depth of 35 feet below the ground surface. This value is a unit value for use with a 1-foot square footing. The modulus should be reduced in accordance with the following equation when used with larger foundations:

Kୖ ൌ K ቂ
B൅1
2B ቃ
ଶ

where: KR = reduced subgrade modulus
K = unit subgrade modulus
B = foundation width (in feet)

7.6.4 The thickness of and reinforcement for the mat foundation should be designed by the project structural engineer.

7.6.5 The proposed structure must be designed for hydrostatic pressure based on the historic high groundwater level of 30 feet. The hydrostatic design will result in uplift forces on the structure that must be resisted by counterweight or structural design measures.

The recommended floor slab uplift pressure to be used in design would be 62.4(H) in units of pounds per square foot (psf), where “H” is the height of the water above the bottom of the foundation in feet. If the proposed structure does not provide sufficient dead load to resist the buoyant forces then uplift mitigation will be required. Considerations for uplift resistance are provided in Section 7.8 of this report.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 24 - April 8, 2021

7.6.6 For seismic design purposes, a coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be utilized between the concrete mat and undisturbed alluvial soils without a moisture barrier, and 0.15 for slabs underlain by a moisture barrier.

7.6.7 Foundation excavations should be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that the exposed soil conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

If unanticipated soil conditions are encountered, foundation modifications may be required.

7.6.8 Waterproofing of subterranean walls and slabs is suggested for this project. Particular care should be taken in the design and installation of waterproofing to avoid moisture problems, or actual water seepage into the structure through any normal shrinkage cracks which may develop in the concrete walls, floor slab, foundations and/or construction joints. The design and inspection of the waterproofing is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer.

7.6.9 This office should be provided a copy of the final construction plans so that the recommendations presented herein could be properly reviewed and revised if necessary.

7.7 Foundation Settlement

7.7.1 The maximum expected total settlement for a structure support on a mat foundation system designed with the maximum allowable bearing value of 5,500 psf and deriving support in the recommended bearing materials is estimated to be approximately 1 inch and occur below the heaviest loaded structural element. Settlement of the foundation system is expected to occur on initial application of loading. Differential settlement is expected to be less than ½ inch between the center and corner of the mat foundation.

7.7.2 Once the design and foundation loading configurations for the proposed structure proceeds to a more finalized plan, the estimated settlements presented in this report should be reviewed and revised, if necessary. If the final foundation loading configurations are greater than the assumed loading conditions, the potential for settlement should be reevaluated by this office.

7.8 Uplift Resistance

7.8.1 Foundation uplift may be resisted by the weight of structure, as well as by friction along the sides of foundations. If additional uplift resistance is required, the perimeter shoring piles may be utilized provided the toes of the piles are poured with structural concrete and are designed as permanent piles. Uplift resistance may also be generated by additional piles constructed within the interior of the structure. In order to maximize capacity, it is suggested that post-grouted friction piles be considered. If it is determined that recommendations for uplift resistance are required as a part of this project, the recommendations will be provided under separate cover.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 25 - April 8, 2021

7.9 Miscellaneous Foundations

7.9.1 Foundations for small outlying structures, such as block walls up to 6 feet in height, planter walls or trash enclosures, which will not be structurally supported by the proposed building, may be supported on conventional foundations deriving support on a minimum of 12 inches of newly placed engineered fill which extends laterally at least 12 inches beyond the foundation area. Where excavation and compaction cannot be performed, such as adjacent to property lines, foundations may bear in the undisturbed alluvial soils at and below a depth of 24 inches, and should be deepened as necessary to maintain a 12-inch embedment in to the recommended bearing materials.

7.9.2 If the soils exposed in the excavation bottom are soft, compaction of the soft soils will be required prior to placing steel or concrete. Compaction of the foundation excavation bottom is typically accomplished with a compaction wheel or mechanical whacker and must be observed and approved by a Geocon representative. Miscellaneous foundations may be designed for a bearing value of 1,500 psf and should be a minimum of 12 inches in width, 24 inches in depth below the lowest adjacent grade and 12 inches into the recommended bearing material. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads due to wind or seismic forces.

7.9.3 Foundation excavations should be observed and approved in writing by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), prior to the placement of reinforcing steel and concrete to verify that the excavations and exposed soil conditions are consistent with those anticipated.

7.10 Lateral Design

7.10.1 Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations, slabs and by passive earth pressure. An allowable coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be used with the dead load forces in the competent alluvial soils, properly compacted engineered fill, or stabilized subgrade.

7.10.2 Passive earth pressure for the sides of foundations and slabs poured against competent alluvial soils or properly compacted engineered fill may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 250 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf above the groundwater level, and 150 pcf with a maximum earth pressure of 1,500 psf below the groundwater level (these values have been adjusted for buoyant forces). When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by onethird.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 26 - April 8, 2021

7.11 Exterior Concrete Slabs-on-Grade

7.11.1 Exterior concrete slabs-on-grade at the ground surface subject to vehicle loading should be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the Preliminary Pavement Recommendations section of this report (Section 7.12).

7.11.2 Exterior slabs, not subject to traffic loads, should be at least 4 inches thick and reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions, positioned near the slab midpoint. Prior to construction of slabs, the upper 12 inches of subgrade should be moistened to two percent over optimum moisture content and properly compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition). Crack control joints should be spaced at intervals not greater than 10 feet and should be constructed using saw-cuts or other methods as soon as practical following concrete placement. Crack control joints should extend a minimum depth of ¼ the slab thickness. The project structural engineer should design construction joints as necessary.

7.11.3 Slabs-on-grade at the ground surface that may receive moisture-sensitive floor coverings or may be used to store moisture-sensitive materials should be underlain by a vapor retarder placed directly beneath the slab. The vapor retarder and acceptable permeance should be specified by the project architect or developer based on the type of floor covering that will be installed. The vapor retarder design should be consistent with the guidelines presented in Section 9.3 of the American Concrete Institute’s (ACI) Guide for Concrete Slabs that Receive Moisture-Sensitive Flooring Materials (ACI 302.2R-06) and should be installed in general conformance with ASTM E 1643 (latest edition) and the manufacturer’s recommendations. A minimum thickness of 15 mils extruded polyolefin plastic is recommended; vapor retarders which contain recycled content or woven materials are not recommended. The vapor retarder should have a permeance of less than 0.01 perms demonstrated by testing before and after mandatory conditioning. The vapor retarder should be installed in direct contact with the concrete slab with proper perimeter seal. If the California Green Building Code requirements apply to this project, the vapor retarder should be underlain by 4 inches of clean aggregate. It is important that the vapor retarder be puncture resistant since it will be in direct contact with angular gravel. As an alternative to the clean aggregate suggested in the Green Building Code, it is our opinion that the concrete slab-on-grade may be underlain by a vapor retarder over 4 inches of clean sand (sand equivalent greater than 30), since the sand will serve a capillary break and will minimize the potential for punctures and damage to the vapor barrier.

7.11.4 For seismic design purposes, a coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be utilized between concrete slabs and subgrade soils without a moisture barrier and 0.15 for slabs underlain by a moisture barrier.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 27 - April 8, 2021

7.11.5 The moisture content of the slab subgrade should be maintained and sprinkled as necessary to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any concrete placement.

7.11.6 The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to settlement. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade may exhibit some cracking due to minor soil movement and/or concrete shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entrant slab corners occur.

7.12 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations

7.12.1 Where new paving is to be placed, it is recommended that all existing fill and soft, unsuitable soils be excavated and properly compacted for paving support. The client should be aware that excavation and compaction of all soft, unsuitable soils in the area of new paving is not required, however, paving constructed over existing unsuitable soils may experience increased settlement and/or cracking, and may therefore have a shorter design life and increased maintenance costs. As a minimum, the upper 12 inches of paving subgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned to two percent over optimum moisture content, and properly compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition).

7.12.2 The following pavement sections are based on an assumed R-Value of 20. Once site grading activities are complete, it is recommended that laboratory testing confirm the properties of the soils serving as paving subgrade prior to placing pavement.

7.12.3 The Traffic Indices listed below are estimates. Geocon does not practice in the field of traffic engineering. The actual Traffic Index for each area should be determined by the project civil engineer. If pavement sections for Traffic Indices other than those listed below are required, Geocon should be contacted to provide additional recommendations. Pavement thicknesses were determined following procedures outlined in the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans). It is anticipated that the majority of traffic will consist of automobile and large truck traffic.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 28 - April 8, 2021

PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN SECTIONS
Location Estimated Traffic
Index (TI)
Asphalt Concrete
(inches)
Class 2 Aggregate Base
(inches)
Automobile Parking and
Driveways 4.0 3.0 4.0
Trash Truck &
Fire Lanes 7.0 4.0 12.0

7.12.4 Asphalt concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the “Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction” (Green Book). Class 2 aggregate base materials should conform to Section 26-1.02A of the “Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation” (Caltrans). The use of Crushed Miscellaneous Base in lieu of Class 2 aggregate base is acceptable. Crushed Miscellaneous Base should conform to Section 200-2.4 of the “Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction” (Green Book).

7.12.5 Unless specifically designed and evaluated by the project structural engineer, where exterior concrete paving will be utilized for support of vehicles, it is recommended that the concrete be a minimum of 6 inches thick and be reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars placed 18 inches on center in both horizontal directions. Concrete paving supporting vehicular traffic should be underlain by a minimum of 12 inches properly compacted subgrade soil.

7.12.6 The subgrade and base material should be compacted to 92 and 95 percent relative compaction, respectively, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557 (latest edition).

7.12.7 The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent cracking, subsidence and pavement distress. If planters are planned adjacent to paving, it is recommended that the perimeter curb be extended at least 12 inches below the bottom of the aggregate base to minimize the introduction of water beneath the paving.

7.13 Retaining Wall Design

7.13.1 The recommendations presented below are generally applicable to the design of rigid concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 35 feet. In the event that walls significantly higher than 35 feet are planned, Geocon should be contacted for additional recommendations.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 29 - April 8, 2021

7.13.2 Retaining walls with a level backfill surface that are not restrained at the top should be designed utilizing a triangular distribution of pressure (active pressure). Restrained walls are those that are not allowed to rotate more than 0.001H (where H equals the height of the retaining portion of the wall in feet) at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, walls may be designed utilizing a triangular distribution of pressure (at-rest pressure). The table below presents recommended pressures to be used in retaining wall design, assuming that proper drainage will be maintained. Calculation of the recommended retaining wall pressure is provided on Figure 8.

RETAINING WALL WITH LEVEL BACKFILL SURFACE

HEIGHT OF

RETAINING WALL
(Feet)

ACTIVE PRESSURE

EQUIVALENT FLUID

PRESSURE
(Pounds Per Cubic Foot)

AT-REST PRESSURE

EQUIVALENT FLUID

PRESSURE
(Pounds Per Cubic Foot)
Up to 35 52 58

7.13.3 The wall pressures provided above assume that the retaining wall will be properly drained preventing the buildup of hydrostatic pressure. If retaining wall drainage is not implemented, the equivalent fluid pressure to be used in design of undrained walls is 99 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The value includes hydrostatic pressures plus buoyant lateral earth pressures.

7.13.4 The wall pressures provided above assume that the proposed retaining walls will support relatively undisturbed alluvium. If sloping techniques are to be utilized for construction of proposed walls, which would result in a wedge of engineered fill behind the retaining walls, revised earth pressures may be required to account for the expansive potential of the soil placed as engineered fill. This should be evaluated once the use of sloping measures is established and once the geotechnical characteristics of the engineered backfill soils can be further evaluated.

7.13.5 Additional active pressure should be added for a surcharge condition due to sloping ground, vehicular traffic or adjacent structures and should be designed for each condition as the project progresses.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 30 - April 8, 2021

7.13.6 It is recommended that line-load surcharges from adjacent wall footings, use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2. The governing equations are:

0.4 ൑ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 0.20 ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
൤0.16 ൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଶ ൈ
ܳ௅
ܪ
and

0.4 ൐ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 1.28 ൈ ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
൤ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଶ ൈ
ܳ௅
ܪ
where x is the distance from the face of the excavation or wall to the vertical line-load, H is the distance from the bottom of the footing to the bottom of excavation or wall, z is the depth at which the horizontal pressure is desired, QL is the vertical line-load and ɐHሺzሻ is the horizontal pressure at depth z.

7.13.7 It is recommended that vertical point-loads, from construction equipment outriggers or adjacent building columns use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2.

The governing equations are:

0.4 ൑ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 0.28 ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൤0.16 ൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଷ ൈ
ܳ௉
ܪଶ
and

0.4 ൐ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 1.77 ൈ ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൤ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଷ ൈ
ܳ௉
ܪଶ
then
ߪᇱ
ு ሺݖሻ ൌߪுሺݖሻܿݏ݋ଶሺ1.1ߠሻ

7.13.8 In addition to the recommended earth pressure, the upper 10 feet of the subterranean wall adjacent to the street should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf, acting as a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the walls due to normal street traffic.

If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet from the subterranean walls, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 31 - April 8, 2021

7.13.9 Seismic lateral forces should be incorporated into the design as necessary, and recommendations for seismic lateral forces are presented below.

7.14 Dynamic (Seismic) Lateral Forces

7.14.1 The structural engineer should determine the seismic design category for the project in accordance with Section 1613 of the CBC. If the project possesses a seismic design category of D, E, or F, proposed retaining walls in excess of 6 feet in height should be designed with seismic lateral pressure (Section 1803.5.12 of the 2019 CBC).

7.14.2 A seismic load of 10 pcf should be used for design of walls that support more than 6 feet of backfill in accordance with Section 1803.5.12 of the 2019 CBC. The seismic load is applied as an equivalent fluid pressure along the height of the wall and the calculated loads result in a maximum load exerted at the base of the wall and zero at the top of the wall. This seismic load should be applied in addition to the active earth pressure; it is not necessary to add the seismic load to the at-rest pressure. We used the peak site acceleration, PGAM, of 0.9g calculated from ASCE 7-16 Section 11.8.3 and applied a pseudo-static coefficient of 0.33.

7.15 Retaining Wall Drainage

7.15.1 Retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system. At the base of the drain system, a subdrain covered with a minimum of 12 inches of gravel should be installed, and a compacted fill blanket or other seal placed at the surface (see Figure 9). The clean bottom and subdrain pipe, behind a retaining wall, should be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon), prior to placement of gravel or compacting backfill.

7.15.2 As an alternative, a plastic drainage composite such as Miradrain or equivalent may be installed in continuous, 4-foot wide columns along the entire back face of the wall, at 8 feet on center. The top of these drainage composite columns should terminate approximately 18 inches below the ground surface, where either hardscape or a minimum of 18 inches of relatively cohesive material should be placed as a cap (see Figure 10). These vertical columns of drainage material would then be connected at the bottom of the wall to a collection panel or a 1-cubic-foot rock pocket drained by a 4-inch subdrain pipe.

7.15.3 Subdrainage pipes at the base of the retaining wall drainage system should outlet to an acceptable location via controlled drainage structures.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 32 - April 8, 2021

7.15.4 Moisture affecting below grade walls is one of the most common post-construction complaints. Poorly applied or omitted waterproofing can lead to efflorescence or standing water. Particular care should be taken in the design and installation of waterproofing to avoid moisture problems, or actual water seepage into the structure through any normal shrinkage cracks which may develop in the concrete walls, floor slab, foundations and/or construction joints. The design and inspection of the waterproofing is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer. A waterproofing consultant should be retained in order to recommend a product or method, which would provide protection to subterranean walls, floor slabs and foundations.

7.16 Elevator Pit Design

7.16.1 The elevator pit slab and retaining wall should be designed by the project structural engineer.

Elevator pit walls may be designed in accordance with the recommendations in the Retaining Wall Design section of this report (see Section 7.13).

7.16.2 Additional active pressure should be added for a surcharge condition due to sloping ground, vehicular traffic or adjacent foundations and should be designed for each condition as the project progresses.

7.16.3 If retaining wall drainage is to be provided, the drainage system should be designed in accordance with the Retaining Wall Drainage section of this report (see Section 7.15).

7.16.4 It is suggested that the exterior walls and slab be waterproofed to prevent excessive moisture inside of the elevator pit. Waterproofing design and installation is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer.

7.17 Elevator Piston

7.17.1 If a plunger-type elevator piston is installed for this project, a deep drilled excavation will be required. It is important to verify that the drilled excavation is not situated immediately adjacent to a pile foundation or shoring pile, or the drilled excavation piston could compromise the existing foundation or pile support, especially if the drilling is performed after foundation pile construction.

7.17.2 Casing will be required since groundwater and caving is expected in the drilled excavation.

The contractor should be prepared to use casing and should have it readily available at the commencement of drilling activities. Continuous observation of the drilling and installation of the elevator piston by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.) is required.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 33 - April 8, 2021

7.17.3 The annular space between the piston casing and drilled excavation wall should be filled with a minimum of 1½-sack slurry pumped from the bottom up. As an alternative, pea gravel may be utilized. The use of soil to backfill the annular space is not permitted.

7.18 Temporary Excavations

7.18.1 Excavations on the order of 39 feet in height are anticipated for construction of the proposed subterranean level, including foundation system and dewatering system. The excavations are expected to expose artificial fill and alluvium, which are suitable for vertical excavations up to 5 feet in height where loose soils or caving sands are not present, and where not surcharged by adjacent traffic or structures.

7.18.2 Vertical excavations, greater than 5 feet or where surcharged by existing structures, will require sloping or shoring measures in order to provide a stable excavation. Where sufficient space is available, temporary unsurcharged embankments could be sloped back at a uniform 1:1 slope gradient or flatter up to maximum height of 12 feet. A uniform slope does not have a vertical portion. Unsurcharged excavations greater than 12 feet in height will require shoring. Recommendations for Shoring are provided in Section 7.19.

7.18.3 Where temporary construction slopes are utilized, the top of the slope should be barricaded to prevent vehicles and storage loads at the top of the slope within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the slope. If the temporary construction slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are suggested along the tops of the slopes where necessary to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. Geocon personnel should inspect the soils exposed in the cut slopes during excavation so that modifications of the slopes can be made if variations in the soil conditions occur.

All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation.

7.19 Shoring – Soldier Pile Design and Installation

7.19.1 The following information on the design and installation of shoring is preliminary. Review of the final shoring plans and specifications should be made by this office prior to bidding or negotiating with a shoring contractor.

7.19.2 One method of shoring would consist of steel soldier piles, placed in drilled holes and backfilled with concrete. The steel soldier piles may also be installed utilizing high frequency vibration. Where maximum excavation heights are less than 12 feet the soldier piles are typically designed as cantilevers. Where excavations exceed 12 feet or are surcharged, soldier piles may require lateral bracing utilizing drilled tie-back anchors or raker braces to maintain an economical steel beam size and prevent excessive deflection.

The size of the steel beam, the need for lateral bracing, and the acceptable shoring deflection should be determined by the project shoring engineer.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 34 - April 8, 2021

7.19.3 The design embedment of the shoring pile toes must be maintained during excavation activities. The toes of the perimeter shoring piles should be deepened to take into account any required excavations necessary for foundations and/or subgrade stabilization activities, foundations and/or adjacent drainage systems.

7.19.4 The proposed soldier piles may be utilized to provide both axial capacity as well as uplift resistance; however, if utilized in this capacity the soldier piles must be designed as permanent piles including proper corrosion resistance. The uplift capacity may be taken as Ҁ of the downward frictional capacity. The required pile depths, dimensions, and spacing should be determined and designed by the project structural and shoring engineers. All piles utilized for shoring can also be incorporated into a permanent retaining wall system (shotcrete wall) and should be designed in accordance with the earth pressure provided in the Retaining Wall Design section of this report (see Section 7.13).

7.19.5 Drilled cast-in-place soldier piles should be placed no closer than three diameters on center.

The minimum diameter of the piles is 18 inches. Structural concrete should be used for the soldier piles below the excavation; lean-mix concrete may be employed above that level.

As an alternative, lean-mix concrete may be used throughout the pile where the reinforcing consists of a wideflange section. The slurry must be of sufficient strength to impart the lateral bearing pressure developed by the wideflange section to the soil. For design purposes, an allowable passive value for the soils below the bottom plane of excavation may be assumed to be 120 pounds per square foot (value has been adjusted for buoyant forces).

Where piles are installed by vibration techniques, the passive pressure may be assumed to mobilize across a width equal to two times the dimension of the beam flange. The allowable passive value may be doubled for isolated piles spaced a minimum of three the pile diameter.

To develop the full lateral value, provisions should be implemented to assure firm contact between the soldier piles and the undisturbed soils.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 35 - April 8, 2021

7.19.6 Groundwater was encountered during exploration at depths between approximately 31 and 35 feet below the ground surface and the contractor should be prepared for groundwater during pile installation. Piles placed below the water level require the use of a tremie to place the concrete into the bottom of the hole. If more than 6 inches of water is present in the bottom of the excavation, a tremie is required to place the concrete into the bottom of the hole.

A tremie should consist of a rigid, water-tight tube having a diameter of not less than 6 inches with a hopper at the top. The tube should be equipped with a device that will close the discharge end and prevent water from entering the tube while it is being charged with concrete.

The tremie should be supported so as to permit free movement of the discharge end over the entire top surface of the work and to permit rapid lowering when necessary to retard or stop the flow of concrete. The discharge end should be closed at the start of the work to prevent water entering the tube and should be entirely sealed at all times, except when the concrete is being placed. The tremie tube should be kept full of concrete. The flow should be continuous until the work is completed and the resulting concrete seal should be monolithic and homogeneous.

The tip of the tremie tube should always be kept about 5 feet below the surface of the concrete and definite steps and safeguards should be taken to insure that the tip of the tremie tube is never raised above the surface of the concrete.

7.19.7 A special concrete mix should be used for concrete to be placed below water. The design should provide for concrete with an unconfined compressive strength psi of 1,000 pounds per square inch (psi) over the initial job specification. An admixture that reduces the problem of segregation of paste/aggregates and dilution of paste should be included. The slump should be commensurate to any research report for the admixture, provided that it should also be the minimum for a reasonable consistency for placing when water is present.

7.19.8 Casing will likely be required since groundwater and caving are expected, and the contractor should have casing available prior to commencement of drilling activities. When casing is used, extreme care should be employed so that the pile is not pulled apart as the casing is withdrawn. At no time should the distance between the surface of the concrete and the bottom of the casing be less than 5 feet. Continuous observation of the drilling and pouring of the piles by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), is required.

7.19.9 As an alternative, piles may be vibrated into place; however, there is always a risk that excessive vibrations in sandy soils could induce settlements and distress to adjacent offsite improvements. Continuous observation of the drilling and pouring of the piles by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), is required.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 36 - April 8, 2021

7.19.10 If a vibratory method of solider pile installation is utilized, predrilling may be performed prior to installation of the steel beams. If predrilling is performed, it is recommended that the bore diameter be at least 2 inches smaller than the largest dimension of the pile to prevent excessive loss in the frictional component of the pile capacity. Predrilling should not be conducted below the proposed excavation bottom.

7.19.11 If a vibratory method is utilized, the owner should be aware of the potential risks associated with vibratory efforts, which typically involve inducing settlement within the vicinity of the pile which could result in a potential for damage to existing improvements in the area.

7.19.12 The level of vibration that results from the installation of the piles should not exceed a threshold where occupants of nearby structures are disturbed, despite higher vibration tolerances that a building may endure without deformation or damage. The main parameter used for vibration assessment is peak particle velocity in units of inch per second (in/sec).

The acceptable range of peak particle velocity should be evaluated based on the age and condition of adjacent structures, as well as the tolerance of human response to vibration.

7.19.13 Based on Table 19 of the Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans 2013), a continuous source of vibrations (ex. vibratory pile driving) which generates a maximum peak particle velocity of 0.5 in/sec is considered tolerable for modern industrial/commercial buildings and new residential structures. The Client should be aware that a lower value may be necessary if older or fragile structures are in the immediate vicinity of the site.

7.19.14 Vibrations should be monitored and record with seismographs during pile installation to detect the magnitude of vibration and oscillation experienced by adjacent structures. If the vibrations exceed the acceptable range during installation, the shoring contractor should modify the installation procedure to reduce the values to within the acceptable range.

Vibration monitoring is not the responsibility of the Geotechnical Engineer.

7.19.15 Geocon does not practice in the field of vibration monitoring. If construction techniques will be implemented, it is recommended that qualified consultant be retained to provide site specific recommendations for vibration thresholds and monitoring.

7.19.16 The frictional resistance between the soldier piles and retained soil may be used to resist the vertical component of the anchor load. The coefficient of friction may be taken as 0.30 based on uniform contact between the steel beam and lean-mix concrete and retained earth.

The portion of soldier piles below the plane of excavation may also be employed to resist the downward loads. The downward capacity may be determined using a frictional resistance of 480 psf per foot (value has been reduced for buoyant forces).

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 37 - April 8, 2021

7.19.17 Due to the nature of the site soils, it is expected that continuous lagging between soldier piles will be required. However, it is recommended that the exposed soils be observed by the Geotechnical Engineer (a representative of Geocon West, Inc.), to verify the presence of any competent, cohesive soils and the areas where lagging may be omitted.

7.19.18 The time between lagging excavation and lagging placement should be as short as possible soldier piles should be designed for the full-anticipated pressures. Due to arching in the soils, the pressure on the lagging will be less. It is recommended that the lagging be designed for the full design pressure but be limited to a maximum of 400 pounds per square foot.

7.19.19 For the design of shoring, it is recommended that an equivalent fluid pressure based on the following table, be utilized for design. A trapezoidal distribution of lateral earth pressure may be used where shoring will be restrained by bracing or tie backs. The recommended active and trapezoidal pressure are provided in the following table. A diagram depicting the trapezoidal pressure distribution of lateral earth pressure is provided below the table.

Calculation of the recommended shoring pressure is provided on Figure 11.

HEIGHT OF

SHORING
(FEET)

EQUIVALENT FLUID

PRESSURE
(Pounds Per Cubic Foot)
(ACTIVE PRESSURE)

EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE
(Pounds Per Square Foot per Foot)
Active Trapezoidal
(Where H is the height of the shoring in feet)
Up to 39 feet 44 28H

7.19.20 Where a combination of sloped embankment and shoring is utilized, the pressure will be greater and must be determined for each combination. Additional active pressure should be added for a surcharge condition due to slopes, vehicular traffic or adjacent structures and should be designed for each condition.

Trapezoidal Distribution of Pressure
H

0.2H

0.2H

0.6H
Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 38 - April 8, 2021

7.19.21 It is recommended that line-load surcharges from adjacent wall footings, use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2. The governing equations are:

0.4 ൑ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 0.20 ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
൤0.16 ൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଶ ൈ
ܳ௅
ܪ
and

0.4 ൐ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 1.28 ൈ ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
൤ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଶ ൈ
ܳ௅
ܪ
where x is the distance from the face of the excavation to the vertical line-load, H is the distance from the bottom of the footing to the bottom of excavation, z is the depth at which the horizontal pressure is desired, QL is the vertical line-load and ıH is the horizontal pressure at depth z.

7.19.22 It is recommended that vertical point-loads, from construction equipment outriggers or adjacent building columns use horizontal pressures generated from NAV-FAC DM 7.2.

The governing equations are:

0.4 ൑ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 0.28 ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൤0.16 ൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଷ ൈ
ܳ௉
ܪଶ
and

0.4 ൐ ܪൗݔ ݎ݋ܨ
ߪுሺݖሻ ൌ 1.77 ൈ ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
ൈ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൤ቀݔ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൅ ቀ ݖ
ܪቁ
ଶ
൨ ଷ ൈ
ܳ௉
ܪଶ
then
ߪᇱ
ு ሺݖሻ ൌߪுሺݖሻܿݏ݋ଶሺ1.1ߠሻ
where x is the distance from the face of the excavation to the vertical point-load, H is distance from the outrigger/bottom of column footing to the bottom of excavation, z is the depth at which the horizontal pressure is desired, Qp is the vertical point-load, ı is the vertical pressure at depth z, ࣄ is the angle between a line perpendicular to the bulkhead and a line from the point-load to half the pile spacing at the bulkhead, and ıH is the horizontal pressure at depth z.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 39 - April 8, 2021

7.19.23 In addition to the recommended earth pressure, the upper 10 feet of the shoring adjacent to the street or driveway areas should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf, acting as a result of an assumed 300 psf surcharge behind the shoring due to normal street traffic. If the traffic is kept back at least 10 feet from the shoring, the traffic surcharge may be neglected.

7.19.24 It is difficult to accurately predict the amount of deflection of a shored embankment.

It should be realized that some deflection will occur. It is recommended that the deflection be minimized to prevent damage to existing structures and adjacent improvements.

Where public right-of-ways are present or adjacent offsite structures do not surcharge the shoring excavation, the shoring deflection should be limited to less than 1 inch at the top of the shored embankment. Where offsite structures are within the shoring surcharge area it is recommended that the beam deflection be limited to less than ½ inch at the elevation of the adjacent offsite foundation, and no deflection at all if deflections will damage existing structures. The allowable deflection is dependent on many factors, such as the presence of structures and utilities near the top of the embankment, and will be assessed and designed by the project shoring engineer.

7.19.25 Based on the depth of the excavation and presence of offsite improvements, some means of monitoring the performance of the shoring system is suggested. The monitoring should consist of periodic surveying of the lateral and vertical locations of the tops of all soldier piles and the lateral movement along the entire lengths of selected soldier piles.

7.19.26 Due to the depth of the excavation and proximity to adjacent structures, it is suggested that prior to excavation the existing improvements be inspected and their present condition be documented. For documentation purposes, photographs should be taken of preconstruction distress conditions and level surveys of adjacent grade and pavement should be considered.

During excavation activities, the adjacent structures and pavement should be periodically inspected for signs of distress. In the event that distress or settlement is observed, an investigation should be performed and corrective measures taken so that continued or worsened distress or settlement is mitigated. Documentation and monitoring of the offsite structures and improvements is not the responsibility of the geotechnical engineer.

7.20 Temporary Tieback Anchors

7.20.1 Tie-back anchors may be used with the soldier pile wall system to resist lateral loads.

Post-grouted friction anchors are recommended. For design purposes, it may be assumed that the active wedge adjacent to the shoring is defined by a plane drawn 35 degrees with the vertical through the bottom plane of the excavation. Friction anchors should extend a minimum of 20 feet beyond the potentially active wedge and to greater lengths if necessary to develop the desired capacities. The locations and depths of all offsite utilities should be thoroughly checked and incorporated into the drilling angle design for the tie-back anchors.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 40 - April 8, 2021

7.20.2 The capacities of the anchors should be determined by testing of the initial anchors as outlined in a following section. Only the frictional resistance developed beyond the active wedge would be effective in resisting lateral loads. Anchors should be placed at least 6 feet on center to be considered isolated. For preliminary design purposes, it is estimated that drilled friction anchors constructed without utilizing post-grouting techniques will develop average skin frictions as follows:
x 7 feet below the top of the excavation – 1,000 pounds per square foot x 15 feet below the top of the excavation – 1,400 pounds per square foot x 25 feet below the top of the excavation – 1,000 pounds per square foot (value has been reduced for buoyant forces).

7.20.3 Depending on the techniques utilized and the experience of the contractor performing the installation, a maximum allowable friction capacity of 2.0 kips per linear foot for post-grouted anchors (for a minimum 20-foot length beyond the active wedge) may be assumed for design purposes. Only the frictional resistance developed beyond the active wedge should be utilized in resisting lateral loads.

7.21 Anchor Installation

7.21.1 Tied-back anchors are typically installed between 20 and 40 degrees below the horizontal; however, occasionally alternative angles are necessary to avoid existing improvements and utilities. The locations and depths of all offsite utilities should be thoroughly checked prior to design and installation of the tie-back anchors. Caving of the anchor shafts, particularly within sand and gravel deposits or seepage zones, should be anticipated during installation and provisions should be implemented in order to minimize such caving. It is suggested that hollow-stem auger drilling equipment be used to install the anchors. The anchor shafts should be filled with concrete by pumping from the tip out, and the concrete should extend from the tip of the anchor to the active wedge. In order to minimize the chances of caving, it is recommended that the portion of the anchor shaft within the active wedge be backfilled with sand before testing the anchor. This portion of the shaft should be filled tightly and flush with the face of the excavation. The sand backfill should be placed by pumping; the sand may contain a small amount of cement to facilitate pumping.

7.22 Anchor Testing

7.22.1 All of the anchors should be tested to at least 150 percent of design load. The total deflection during this test should not exceed 12 inches. The rate of creep under the 150 percent test load should not exceed 0.1 inch over a 15-minute period in order for the anchor to be approved for the design loading.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 41 - April 8, 2021

7.22.2 At least 10 percent of the anchors should be selected for "quick" 200 percent tests and three additional anchors should be selected for 24-hour 200 percent tests. The purpose of the 200 percent tests is to verify the friction value assumed in design. The anchors should be tested to develop twice the assumed friction value. These tests should be performed prior to installation of additional tiebacks. Where satisfactory tests are not achieved on the initial anchors, the anchor diameter and/or length should be increased until satisfactory test results are obtained.

7.22.3 The total deflection during the 24-hour 200 percent test should not exceed 12 inches.

During the 24-hour tests, the anchor deflection should not exceed 0.75 inches measured after the 200 percent test load is applied.

7.22.4 For the "quick" 200 percent tests, the 200 percent test load should be maintained for 30 minutes. The total deflection of the anchor during the 200 percent quick tests should not exceed 12 inches; the deflection after the 200 percent load has been applied should not exceed 0.25 inch during the 30-minute period.

7.22.5 After a satisfactory test, each anchor should be locked-off at the design load. This should be verified by rechecking the load in the anchor. The load should be within 10 percent of the design load. The installation and testing of the anchors should be observed by a representative of this firm.

7.23 Internal Bracing

7.23.1 Rakers may be utilized to brace the soldier piles in lieu of tieback anchors. The raker bracing could be supported laterally by temporary concrete footings (deadmen) or by the permanent, interior footings. For design of such temporary footings or deadmen, poured with the bearing surface normal to rakers inclined at 45 degrees, a bearing value of 2,000 psf in competent alluvial deposits may be used, provided the shallowest point of the footing is at least 1 foot below the lowest adjacent grade. The client should be aware that the utilization of rakers could significantly impact the construction schedule due to their intrusion into the construction site and potential interference with equipment. In addition, the raker footing plan should be checked by the project structural engineer to verify if there are any conflicts with the proposed structural foundations, and resolve any issues prior to commencement of construction activities.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 - 42 - April 8, 2021

7.24 Surface Drainage

7.24.1 Proper surface drainage is critical to the future performance of the project. Uncontrolled infiltration of irrigation excess and storm runoff into the soils can adversely affect the performance of the planned improvements. Saturation of a soil can cause it to lose internal shear strength and increase its compressibility, resulting in a change in the original designed engineering properties. Proper drainage should be maintained at all times.

7.24.2 All site drainage should be collected and controlled in non-erosive drainage devices.

Drainage should not be allowed to pond anywhere on the site, and especially not against any foundation or retaining wall. The site should be graded and maintained such that surface drainage is directed away from structures in accordance with 2019 CBC 1804.4 or other applicable standards. In addition, drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Discharge from downspouts, roof drains and scuppers are not recommended onto unprotected soils within 5 feet of the building perimeter. Planters which are located adjacent to foundations should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the soils providing foundation support. Landscape irrigation is not recommended within 5 feet of the building perimeter footings except when enclosed in protected planters.

7.24.3 Positive site drainage should be provided away from structures, pavement, and the tops of slopes to swales or other controlled drainage structures. The building pad and pavement areas should be fine graded such that water is not allowed to pond.

7.24.4 Landscaping planters immediately adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course.

Either a subdrain, which collects excess irrigation water and transmits it to drainage structures, or an impervious above-grade planter boxes should be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, it is recommended that consideration be given to providing a cutoff wall along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 12 inches below the base material.

7.25 Plan Review

7.25.1 Grading, foundation, and shoring plans should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to finalization to verify that the plans have been prepared in substantial conformance with the recommendations of this report and to provide additional analyses or recommendations, if necessary.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 April 8, 2021

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation.

If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon West, Inc. should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon West, Inc.

2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.

3. The findings of this report are valid as of the date of this report. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years.

4. The firm that performed the geotechnical investigation for the project should be retained to provide testing and observation services during construction to provide continuity of geotechnical interpretation and to check that the recommendations presented for geotechnical aspects of site development are incorporated during site grading, construction of improvements, and excavation of foundations. If another geotechnical firm is selected to perform the testing and observation services during construction operations, that firm should prepare a letter indicating their intent to assume the responsibilities of project geotechnical engineer of record. A copy of the letter should be provided to the regulatory agency for their records. In addition, that firm should provide revised recommendations concerning the geotechnical aspects of the proposed development, or a written acknowledgement of their concurrence with the recommendations presented in our report. They should also perform additional analyses deemed necessary to assume the role of Geotechnical Engineer of Record.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 April 8, 2021

LIST OF REFERENCES
Abrahamson, N.A, Silva, W.J, and Kamai, R., 2014, Summary of the ASK14 Ground Motion Relation for Active Crustal Regions, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 30, No. 3, pages 1025-1055, August 2014.

Beverly Hills, City of, 2019, Guidelines for Evaluating Potential Surface-Fault Rupture Within the City of Beverly Hills (Revised September 3, 2019).

Beverly Hills, City of, 2019, The City Policy for Site Specific Seismic Fault Investigation, Community Development Department Policy and Procedure, Policy No. DSP-003, Revised September 3, 2019.

Beverly Hills, City of, 2010, City of Beverly Hills Hazard Mitigation Action Plan 2010-2015, Adopted August 17, 2010.

Boore, D.M., Stewart, J.P., Seyhan, E., and Atkinson, G.M., 2014, NGA-West2 Equations for Predicting PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped PSA for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 30, No. 3, pages 1057-1085, August 2014.

California Department of Water Resources, 2021, Groundwater Level Data by Township, Range, and Section, Web Site Address: http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/groundwater/ hydrographs/index_trs.cfm.

California Department of Water Resources, 1961, Planned Utilization of Groundwater Basins of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles County, Bulletin 104, Appendix A.

California Division of Mines and Geology, 1999, State of California Seismic Hazard Zones, Beverly Hills Quadrangle, Official Map, Released: March 25, 1999.

California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the Beverly Hills 7.5- Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Open File Report 98-14.

California Geologic Energy Management Division, 2021, Geologic Energy Management Division Well Finder, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov.doggr/index.html#close.

California Geological Survey, 2021a, CGS Information Warehouse, Regulatory Map Portal, http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatorymaps.

California Geological Survey, 2021b, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/.

California Geological Survey, 2018a, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners/Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 2018.

California Geological Survey, 2018b, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Beverly Hills Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, dated January 11, 2018.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 April 8, 2021
LIST OF REFERENCES (Continued)
California Geological Survey, 2012, Geologic Compilation of Quaternary Surficial Deposits in Southern California, Los Angeles 30’ X 60’ Quadrangle, A Project for the Department of Water Resources by the California Geological Survey, Compiled from existing sources by Trinda L.

Bedrossian, CEG and Peter D. Roffers, CGS Special Report 217, Plate 9, Scale 1:100,000.

Campbell, K.W. and Bozorgnia, Y., 2014, NGA-West2 Ground Motion Model for the Average Horizontal Components of PGA, PGV, and 5% Damped Linear Acceleration Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 30, No. 3, pages 1087-1115, August 2014.

Chiou, B. S.-J., and Youngs, R.R., 2014, Update of the Chiou and Youngs NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 30, No. 3, pages 1117-1153, August 2014.

Dibblee, T. W., Jr., 1991, Geologic Map of the Beverly Hills and Van Nuys Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Dibblee Foundation Map # DF-31.

FEMA, 2021, Online Flood Hazard Maps, http://www.esri.com/hazards/index.html.

Geocon West, Inc., 2020, Fault Rupture Hazard Investigation, 125 South Linden Drive (AKA 9744 Wilshire Boulevard), And 129 South Linden Drive, Beverly Hills, California, Tract: #6648; Lots: 38, 39 & 40, Assessor ID No: 4328-009-007 & -021, dated October 7, 2020, Project No.

W1121-06-01.

Jennings, C. W. and Bryant, W. A., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6.

Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1990, Technical Appendix to the Safety Element of the Los Angeles County General Plan, Hazard Reduction in Los Angeles County.

Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 2021, Flood Zone Determination Website, http://dpw.lacounty.gov/apps/wmd/floodzone/map.htm.

OpenSha, Site Data Application, Version 1.5.0, http://opensha.org/apps, accessed March 2021.

OSHPD Seismic Design Maps Web Application, https://seismicmaps.org/, accessed March 2021.

Shahi, S.K., Baker, J.W., 2013, NGA-West2 Models for Ground-Motion Directionality, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, PEER 2013/10.

Shahi, S.K., Baker, J.W., 2014, NGA-West2 Models for Ground-Motion Directionality, Earthquake Spectra, Volume 30, o.3, paged 1285-1300, August 2014.

Toppozada, T., Branum, D., Petersen, M, Hallstrom, C., and Reichle, M., 2000, Epicenters and Areas Damaged by M> 5 California Earthquakes, 1800 – 1999, California Geological Survey, Map Sheet 49.

Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 April 8, 2021
LIST OF REFERENCES (Continued)
USGS, BSSC2014 (Scenario Catalog), https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/catalog/bssc2014/, accessed March 2021.

USGS, NSHMP_HAZ Response Spectral Application, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/nshmp-hazws/apps/spectra-plot.html/, accessed March 2021.

USGS, Unified Hazard Tool, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/, accessed March 2021.

United States Geological Survey, 2020, Seismic Design Maps, Web Application http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php.

United States Geological Survey, 2006, Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1972, Beverly Hills 7.5-Minute Topographic Map.

Ziony, J. I., and Jones, L. M., 1989, Map Showing Late Quaternary Faults and 1978–1984 Seismicity of the Los Angeles Region, California, U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1964.
),*
86*67232*5$3+,&0$360,187(6(5,(6%(9(5/<+,//6&$48$'5$1*/( 9,&,1,7<0$3
3+21(

)$;


16$1)(51$1'2%/9'68,7(%85%$1.&$

(19,5210(17$/*(27(&+1,&$/0$7(5,$/6
&+(&.('%<
6). $35 352-(&712:
%(9(5/<+,//6&$/,)251,$
'5$)7('%<
&%

6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
6,7(

SITE PLAN
$352021 PROJECT NO: W1121-06-02 FIG. 2
PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704
3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS
DRAFTED BY: JJK CHECKED BY:NB
B1 Boring Location
Legend
125-129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
0 20' 40'
CPT-8
CPT-6
CPT-5
CPT-1
CPT-10
CPT-9
CPT-7
CPT-4
CPT-2
CPT-3
LD-1
LD-2
LD-3
B1
T-2
CPT-17 Cone Penetration Test Locations*
LD-3 Large Diameter Boring Locations*
T-2 Exploratory Trench Locations*
* Excavation Locations from Prior Fault Investigation
CPT-14 T-1
CPT-15
CPT-17
CPT-12
CPT-13
CPT-16
CPT-11
Area of Structural Setback
Proposed 9-Story Residential Development
over 3-Subterranean Parking Levels
A A'
B
B'
Section A - A'
Section B - B'
Not to Scale. For Illustration Purposes Only
S. LINDEN DRIVE
ALLEY
ALLE
Y
ALLEY
PL PL
S. LINDEN DRIVE
ALLEY
Parking Levels
over 3-Subterranean
PL PL
35'
35'
Not to Scale. For Illustration Purposes Only
Proposed 9-Story
Residential Development
Parking Levels
over 3-Subterranean
Proposed 9-Story
Residential Development
Limit of First Floor
Limit of Subterranean Parking Levels
Property Limits
6,7(
  0LOHV
5HIHUHQFH
-HQQLQJV&:DQG%U\DQW:$)DXOW$FWLYLW\0DSRI&DOLIRUQLD&DOLIRUQLD*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\*HRORJLF'DWD0DS1R 5(*,21$/)$8/70$3
%(9(5/<+,//6&$/,)251,$
$35 352-(&712: ),*

6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
3+21(

)$;


16$1)(51$1'2%/9'68,7(%85%$1.&$

(19,5210(17$/*(27(&+1,&$/0$7(5,$/6
'5$)7('%<
&% &+(&.('%<
6).
6,7(
'5$)7('%<
&% &+(&.('%<
6).
3+21(

)$;


16$1)(51$1'2%/9'68,7(%85%$1.&$

(19,5210(17$/*(27(&+1,&$/0$7(5,$/6
5(*,21$/6(,60,&,7<0$3
),*
   0LOHV
5HIHUHQFH
7RSSR]DGD7%UDQXP'3HWHUVHQ0+DOOVWURP&&UDPHU&DQG5HLFKOH0(SLFHQWHUVDQG$UHDV'DPDJHGE\0!&DOLIRUQLD(DUWKTXDNHV

&DOLIRUQLD*HRORJLFDO6XUYH\0DS6KHHW

%(9(5/<+,//6&$/,)251,$
$35 352-(&712:

6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
Project No.: W1121-06-02
Checked by: JJK
DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM 125-129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
$35 2021 Figure 5

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Acceleration, g's
Period, s
Deterministic Scenario 1:

Hollywood
Deterministic Scenario 2:

Santa Monica
Deterministic Scenario 3:

Newport Inglewood
Deterministic Scenario 4:

Compton

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

3.00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Acceleration, g's
Period, s
Maximum Rotated Component,
Risk-Targeted MCER
Probabilistic, Risk-Targeted MCER
Probabilistic, Uniform-Hazard MCE
Project No.: W1121-06-02
DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM 125-129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
Checked by: JJK $35 2021 Figure 6

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

3.00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Acceleration, g's
Period, s
Maximum Rotated Component, RiskTargeted MCER
84th Percentile, Maximum Rotated
Component Deterministic Spectrum

0.00 0.50

1.00 1.50

2.00 2.50

3.00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Spectral Acceleration, g's
Period, s
Site-Specific, Maximum Considered
Earthquake Response Spectrum
Site-Specific, Design Response Spectrum
80% modified General Response
Spectrum
SMS = g
SM1 = g
SDS = g
SD1 = g
Project No.: W1121-06-02

0.334 0.578

0.826

1.122

1.122

1.122

1.122

1.122

1.122

1.003

1.002 0.501

0.597

1.042

1.360

1.446

1.770

1.701

2.169

2.656

1.270
--

0.613

1.250

1.738
--

2.361

2.658

2.552

2.107
--

1.756

0.920

0.578

1.171

1.405

0.385
Risk Factor,
Cr

0.952

0.970
MaximumRotated
Componet
Scale Factor

1.190

0.513

1.461
--

1.935

2.161

1.506
--

1.976

2.275

2.251

1.859

2.075

1.699
--

1.416

0.742

0.462

0.10 Spectral
Period
(seconds)

0.00 Probabilistic
UniformHazard

0.912
RiskTargeted,
Probabilistic
--

1.568

0.824

0.867

3.00 1.00

2.00 0.75

0.89 0.30

0.50 0.18

0.20 DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM 125-129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
Checked by: JJK $35 2021 Figure 7

0.900

0.901

1.190
--

1.220

1.230

1.230

1.240
--

0.979

0.950

0.922

0.914
--

0.903
--

1.240

1.240
MRC, RiskTargeted
Probablistic

1.032
84th
Percentile,
Deterministic

1.071

1.563

1.756

0.920
Site-Specific
Maximum
Considered
Earthquake

1.032

1.563

2.040

2.169

2.656

2.552

2.107

1.906
Site-Specific
Design
Earthquake

0.688
80% Modifed
General
Response
Spectrum

0.449

2.817

2.422
--

2.005

2.390

1.840

1.593

1.227

4.00 4.38

5.00 0.343
--

0.249

0.309
--

0.224

0.902
--

0.901

1.260
--

1.260

0.390
--

0.283

0.397
--

0.279
"--" Indicates that spectral period was not used at that calculation step

0.390

0.347

0.301

0.251

0.232

0.201

0.260

0.232

0.201
Reference: ASCE 7-16 21.4 DESIGN ACCELERATION PARAMETERS Where the site-specific procedure is used to determine the design ground motion in accordance with Section 21.3, the parameter SDS shall be taken as 90% of the maximum spectral acceleration, Sa, obtained from the site-specific spectrum, at any period within the range from 0.2 to 5 s, inclusive. The parameter SD1 shall be taken as the maximum value of the product, TSa, for periods from 1 to 2 s for sites with vs,30 > 1,200 ft/s (vs,30 > 365.76 m/s) and for periods from 1 to 5 s for sites with vs,30 чϭ͕ϮϬϬĨƚͬсƐ;vs,30 чϯϲϱ͘ϳϲŵͬƐͿ͘dŚĞ parameters SMS and SM1 shall be taken as 1.5 times SDS and SD1, respectively. The values so obtained shall not be less than 80% of the values determined in accordance with Section 11.4.3 for SMS and SM1 and Section 11.4.5 for SDS and SD1.

PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704
3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS
DRAFTED BY: JJK CHECKED BY: NDB $35 2021 PROJECT NO. W1121-06-02 FIG. 8 
6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
%(9(5/<+,//6, CALIFORNIA

RETAINING WALL PRESSURE CALCULATION

RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
DRAFTED BY: --. CHECKED BY: NDB $35 20 PROJECT NO. :-06-0 FIG.

6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
%(9(5/<+,//6&$/,)251,$
3"
H
3/4" CRUSHED
ROCK
MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT

FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE
4" DIA. PERFORATED ABS

OR ADS PIPE - EXTEND TO

RETAINING
WALL

DRAINAGE SYSTEM

WATERPROOF
WALL

PROPERLY

COMPACTED

BACKFILL

GROUND SURFACE

MAT FOUNDATION
3/4" CRUSHED ROCK (DENSIFIED)
MIRAFI 500X OR EQUIVALENT

FILTER FABRIC LAYER

OPTIONAL

NO SCALE
PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704
3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS

RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
DRAFTED BY: --. CHECKED BY: NDB $35 PROJECT NO. :-06-0 FIG.  6287+/,1'(1'5,9(
%(9(5/<+,//6&$/,)251,$

PROPERLY

COMPACTED

BACKFILL

GROUND SURFACE

BASEMENT

RETAINING WALL
18"

WATER PROOFING

BY ARCHITECT
DRAINAGE PANEL (J-DRAIN 1000

OR EQUIVALENT)
NOTE: TOP OF DRAINAGE PANEL NOT MORE THAN
18 INCHES FROM GROUND SURFACE
4" DIA. SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED

PVC PIPE EXTENDED TO APPROVED
OUTLET
(1 CU. FT./FT.)

FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE
3/4" CRUSHED ROCK
MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT MAT FOUNDATION
3/4" CRUSHED ROCK (DENSIFIED)
MIRAFI 500X OR EQUIVALENT

FILTER FABRIC LAYER

OPTIONAL

TO SUBDRAIN

NO SCALE
PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704
3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS
PHONE (818) 841-8388 - FAX (818) 841-1704
3303 N. SAN FERNANDO BLVD. - SUITE 100 - BURBANK, CA 91504

ENVIRONMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS
DRAFTED BY: JJK CHECKED BY: NDB $35 2021 PROJECT NO. W1121-06-02 FIG. 11

BEVERLY HILLS, CALIFORNIA
125-129 SOUTH LINDEN DRIVE

SHORING PRESSURE CALCULATION

APPENDIX A
Geocon Project No. W1121-06-02 April 8, 2021

APPENDIX A

FIELD INVESTIGATION
The site was explored on February 18, 2021 by excavating one 8-inch-diameter boring to a depth of approximately 70½ feet below the existing ground surface utilizing a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger drilling machine. Representative and relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch, O. D., California Modified Sampler into the “undisturbed” soil mass with blows from a 140-pound auto-hammer falling 30 inches. The California Modified Sampler was equipped with 1-inch by 23/8-inch diameter brass sampler rings to facilitate soil removal and testing. A bulk sample was obtained.

The soil conditions encountered in the boring were visually examined, classified and logged in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The log of the boring is presented on Figure A1. The log depicts the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depth at which samples were obtained. The log also includes our interpretation of the conditions between sampling intervals. Therefore, the log contains both observed and interpreted data. We determined the lines designating the interface between soil materials on the log using visual observations, penetration rates, excavation characteristics and other factors. The transition between materials may be abrupt or gradual.

Where applicable, the log was revised based on subsequent laboratory testing. The location of the boring is shown on Figure 2.

In addition, CPTs and large-diameter borings from Fault Rupture Hazard Investigation are included herein and are depicted on the Site Plan (see Figure 2). The CPTs were performed by Kehoe Testing & Engineering at seventeen locations along the exploration transect. CPT-1 and CPT-17 were performed with the full-size 30-ton CPT rig. The CPTs were advanced to depths of approximately 80 feet beneath the existing ground surface. Three 30-inch diameter borings were drilled to approximately 30 feet beneath the existing ground surface by Tri-Valley Drilling using a bucket auger drilling machine.

The large-dimeter borings were downhole logged and photographed by both Mr. John Helms, CEG and Ms. Susan Kirkgard, CEG.


















 















 
















 


 


 








 


















 





 






















































!"

"


#
#
#
#

#
$
%
&
$
%'&
$
%(&
$
%
"&
$
% &
$
% "&

!

)



"

*

!































































 





!




! 



!!








 
!
!







 
! 


"

!#




 



 


!

$
%



!

 

  







 




&&


 
' 


 
!

"

#$


!
%



'!




 


!
! 
 



 







!!



!
 !
 







!






















!
! 
 





 !
 





&&























+
























































































































'(

(!

)

((
'"

*(

'
#
+
#

#
$
%
&
$
%
"&
$,#-

"
)&
$
%
!"&
$
%*&
$
%*"&
$
%"&
$
%""&

)

"
.'/0

'

'

)

(!

(

!'
()(
)"

*"





























(
(
(
(
(







)
)
)
)
)












 





!




! 



!!








 
!
!







 
! 


"

!#




 



 


!

$
%



!

 

  







 




&&


 
' 


 
!

"

#$


!
%



'!




 


!
! 
 



 







!!



!
 !
 







!






















!
! 
 





 !
 





&&















 














1 
 



2
!"


3




 
+

 


 



""

 
$

 



45
 

 




*
















67182
1

 
 


 







9
 



 


:


 






)

'

((
#

$
%'&
$
%'"&
$
%!&
*
"(

(

(

!*

(



































*











 





!




! 



!!








 
!
!







 
! 


"

!#




 



 


!

$
%



!

 

  







 




&&


 
' 


 
!

"

#$

%
!
%



'!




 


!
! 
 



 







!!



!
 !
 







!






















!
! 
 





 !
 





&&














 

  




 
















 

!"
#$%



 







 
 


& 

&  
 

&
' 
 &(
&





 

 





) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
2




 

!"
3#
%


& 
& 





&

 
&



& 


  





'4
(  
&  
 


 
& &


+'HSRVLW
75(1&+81,7








 

!"
#$%







& 


) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
5#
6
5




 











































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%
,"-./
0.1,



 

!"
#
%

 

&&





 

&
& 



 
&  

&




%
&












. 
 
 
& &

*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
$
7



 



 

!"
#


3#
%


& 
 
&
 


& 



& 
& 






&

 







 
& &


+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
3








 

!"
#$%

&&

 
&





 






'4
&
&





5 
& &
 



+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,



 

 

2 !"
#$%



 

!"
3#
%



&&





&
&

 


'4


 
& &


/

8%


(
 

 

2 !"

#$%

&&

 
&

 





'4





5
5
6
6
6




 






















%
%
%
%
%

















 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%
6
. 
 
 
& &


/
$8%




 

!"
3#
%



&&


 


'4


 
& &


/
$8%


 
 

!"
#3%











 



 &
&

. 
 
 
& &


/
8%


 

 

2 !"
#$%

 
&








 


 
& &


/
8%








 
 

!"
#3%


& 











 
'4

) 
 
& &


/
38%




 

!"
3#
%


& 
 
&









& 




 
& &


/
38%


 
 

!"
#3%

 &4
 '








 
& &


/
8%
9&
+

$
:

.
) 
-& 
* 

5 

;

/

<(



8(
8&(


 


,

=&



9


6
6

6

6
5




 












































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%



2 






 

 



 
 













(
 

 

2 !"

#$%


 




 



 
& &

/
%





 

!"
#$%



 







 
 


& 

&  
 

&
' 
 &(
&





 

 





) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
2




 

!"
3#
%


& 
& 





&

 
&



& 


  





'4
(  
&  
 


 
& &


+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
>






6
5&
6




 











































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%


 

!"
#$%







& 


) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,



 

!"
#
%

 

&&





 

&
& 



 
&  

&




%
&












. 
 
 
& &

*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
$
7



 



 

!"
#


3#
%


& 
 
&
 


& 



& 
& 






&

 







 
& &


+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
3








 

!"
#$%

&&

 
&





 






'4
&
&





5 
& &
 



+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,



 

 

2 !"
#$%

&&


 


'4


 
& &


/

8%
5
5
6
6
6




 






















%
%
%
%
%

















 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%


(
 

 

2 !"

#$%

&&

 
&

 





'4





. 
 
 
& &


/
$8%




 

!"
3#
%

&&


 


'4







 




 
& &

/
$8%





(
 

 

2 !"

#$%

 
 

!"
#3%




 



 &
&

. 
 
 
& &


/
8%


 

 

2 !"
#$%

 
&



 
&








 
& &


/
8%








 
 

!"
#3%


& 










 
'4

) 
 
& &


/
38%




 

!"
3#
%

 
&



&





& 




 
& &


/
38%


 
 

!"
#3%

 &4
 '








 
& &


/
8%


(
 

!"

#$%


 


&






5 
& &
 


/
:98%
9&
+

$
3

) 



8  

8 
* 

5 

;

/

<(



8(
8&(


 


,

&
" 
6
6
56&
6

6
5
5




 












































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%














 

  




 















 

2 !"
3#
%


 


 



 
& &


/
%





 

!"
#$%



 







 
 


& 

&  
 

&
' 
 &(
&





 

 





) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
2
6
56&




 











































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%




 

!"
3#
%


& 
& 





&

 
&



& 


  





'4
(  
&  
 


 
& &


+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
>








 

!"
#$%







& 


) 
 
& &


*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,



 

!"
#
%

 

&&





 

&
& 



 
&  

&




%
&












. 
 
 
& &

*
+ 
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
$
7



 



 

!"
#


3#
%


& 
 
&
 


& 



& 
& 






&

 







 
& &


+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,
3
6
5
5
6




 






















%
%
%
%
%

















 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%








 

!"
#$%

&&

 
&





 






'4
&
&





5 
& &
 



+
*
%
,"-./
0.1,



 

 

2 !"
#$%

&&








'4







 
& &

/

8%


(
 

 

2 !"

#$%

 
&
&&




'4





. 
 
 
& &


/
$8%




 

!"
3#
%



&&


 


'4


 
& &


/
$8%


(
 

 

2 !"

#$%



 
&



 
(

 



 &
&


 
& &


/
8# 8%








 
 

!"
#3%


& 








 '4

5 
& &
 


/
38%
9&
+

$
:

.
) 
-& 
* 

5 

;

/

<(



8(
8&(


 


,

&
" 
6
6
6
6
6
6&




 












































 














 








 

 







 



!

"




 %



 


 

#
$





 

  







 



%%%&&%


 
' 

/'


!

"


#$


!




'




 


 

 



 







 



 
 
 







 






















 

 





 
 




%%%&&%

SUMMARY
OF

CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA
Prepared by:

KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING
5415 Industrial Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1518
Office (714) 901-7270 / Fax (714) 901-7289
www.kehoetesting.com
Project:
125, 129 & 133 S. Linden Drive
Beverly Hills, CA
February 20-21, 24, 27-28 & March 2, 2020
Prepared for:

Ms. Susan Kirkgard
Geocon West, Inc.
3303 N. San Fernando Blvd., Ste 100
Burbank, CA 91504
Office (818) 841-8388 / Fax (818) 841-1704

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK

3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES

4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION

APPENDIX
x CPT Plots
x CPT Classification/Soil Behavior Chart
x Pore Pressure Dissipation Graphs
x CPT Data Files (sent via email)

SUMMARY
OF

CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA

1. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a Cone Penetration Test (CPT) program carried out for the project located at 125, 129 & 133 S. Linden Drive in Beverly Hills, California. The work was performed by Kehoe Testing & Engineering (KTE) on February 20-21, 24, 27-28 & March 2, 2020. The scope of work was performed as directed by Geocon West, Inc. personnel.

2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK
The fieldwork consisted of performing CPT soundings at 17 locations to determine the soil lithology. A summary is provided in TABLE 2.1.

LOCATION

DEPTH OF
CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES:

CPT-1 80
CPT-2 80
CPT-3 80
CPT-4 80
CPT-5 80
CPT-6 80
CPT-7 80
CPT-8 80
CPT-9 80
CPT-10 80
CPT-11 80
CPT-12 80
CPT-13 80
CPT-14 80
CPT-15 80
CPT-16 80
CPT-17 80
CPT-18 80

LOCATION

DEPTH OF
CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES:

CPT-19 80
CPT-20 80
CPT-21 80
CPT-22 80
CPT-23 80
CPT-24 80
CPT-25 80
CPT-26 80
CPT-27 80
CPT-28 80
CPT-29 80
CPT-30 80
TABLE 2.1 - Summary of CPT Soundings

3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES
The CPT soundings were carried out by KTE using an integrated electronic cone system manufactured by Vertek. The CPT soundings were performed in accordance with ASTM standards (D5778). The cone penetrometers were pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig. The cone used during the program was a 15 cm^2 cone and recorded the following parameters at approximately 2.5 cm depth intervals:
x Cone Resistance (qc) x Inclination
x Sleeve Friction (fs) x Penetration Speed
x Dynamic Pore Pressure (u) x Pore Pressure Dissipation (at selected depths) The above parameters were recorded and viewed in real time using a laptop computer. Data is stored at the KTE office for up to 2 years for future analysis and reference. A complete set of baseline readings was taken prior to each sounding to determine temperature shifts and any zero load offsets. Monitoring base line readings ensures that the cone electronics are operating properly.

4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION
The Cone Penetration Test data is presented in graphical form in the attached Appendix. These plots were generated using the CPeT-IT program. Penetration depths are referenced to ground surface. The soil behavior type on the CPT plots is derived from the attached CPT SBT plot (Robertson, “Interpretation of Cone Penetration Test…”, 2009) and presents major soil lithologic changes. The stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone resistance (qc), sleeve friction (fs), and penetration pore pressure (u). The friction ratio (Rf), which is sleeve friction divided by cone resistance, is a calculated parameter that is used along with cone resistance to infer soil behavior type. Generally, cohesive soils (clays) have high friction ratios, low cone resistance and generate excess pore water pressures. Cohesionless soils (sands) have lower friction ratios, high cone bearing and generate little (or negative) excess pore water pressures.

The CPT data files have also been provided. These files can be imported in CPeT-IT (software by GeoLogismiki) and other programs to calculate various geotechnical parameters.

It should be noted that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based on qc, fs and u. In these situations, experience, judgement and an assessment of the pore pressure data should be used to infer the soil behavior type.

If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to call our office at (714) 901-7270.

Sincerely,

KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING
Steven P. Kehoe
President
03/04/20-wt-1350

APPENDIX

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



 !

""

&

(













     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 































































































 







 
 
 











#$
%
&
#$' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


"" 
+
$, 
$(-
 

#
.#$$(-
 ! ./
0

(12.#$*

( .$ 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



 !

""

&

(












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 

     
 
 
 
     
 
     
 
 
     
 


   

 
 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
 
     
 
     
 
     
 


   

  

 

 
     
 
     
 
 
  

 

 
  

 

 
  

 

 
  

 

 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
     
 


   



   

  

 

 
     
  

 
     
 
     
 
     
  

  

 
  

 

 
#$
%
&
#$' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


"" 
+
$, 
$(-
 

#
.#$$(-
 ! ./
0

(12.#$*

( .$ 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



  !" 

##

&

(












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 

     
 
     
 
 
     
 
  

 

 
 
     
 
     
 


   

     
 
 
  

 

 
     
 
  

 

 
 
 
 
     
 
 


   

     
 


   

     
 
 
     
 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
 


   

     
 
  

 

 
  

 

 
     
 
  

 

   

 
     
 
     
 
  

 

   

  

 
     
 
  

 
  

 

 
$%
&
 
$% ' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


##!
+

% , 
% (-
  

$
.$% % (-
 "  ./
0

(12.$% *

( .%  

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



 !"

##

&

()












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 

     
 
     
 
 
     
 
     
 
 
     
 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
  

 

 
     
 


   

 
     
 
     
 
     
 
  

 

 
 
     
 
     
 
 
     
 
     
 
  

 

 
     
 
  

 

 
 
  

 

 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
     
 


   



   

     
 
     
 
     
  

 
     
 
 
     
  

 
$%
&

$%' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


##!


%+ 
%(,
  

$
-$%%(,
 " -.
/

(01-$%*

( -% 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



  !" 

##

&

(












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 













































































 














 













$%
&
'
$% (  
)

  *
)
)
  )
+

) )


##!


% , 
%)-
  

$
.$% % )-
 "  ./
0

)12.$% +

) .%  

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  




 !"

##

&

()












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 




























































































 














 











$%
&

$%' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


##!


%+ 
%(,
  

$
-$%%(,
 " -.
/

(01-$%*

( -% 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



 !

""

&

()












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 














































































































 
 










#$
%
&
#$' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


"" 

$+ 
$(,
 

#
-#$$(,
 ! -.
/

(01-#$*

( -$ 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  



 !"

##

&

()












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 

     
 
  

 

 
 
     
 
 
     
 
 
     
 
 
  

 

 
  

 

 


   

     
 
 
 
     
 
 
     
 
 
     
 
 
     
 
     
 
 
     
 


   

     
 
  

 

 
 
  

 

 
     
 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
  

  

 
     
 
  

 
$%
&

$%' 
(

  )
(
(
  (
*

( (


##!

%+ 
%(,
  

$
-$%%(,
 " -.
/

(01-$%*

( -% 

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'  




 !" 

##

&

(












     



 

 










     



 

 
 






   



 
 





        



 





 
!"

#
$
         



 



 

     
 
     
 
 
     
 
 
  

 

 
     
 
     
 
  

 

 
  

 

 


   

     
 
 
 
 
  

 

 
  

 

 
     
 
 
     
 
 
     
 
 


   

     
 
  

 

 
 
     
 
  

 
 
     
  

 
     
 
  

 

 
$%
&
'
$% (  
)

  *
)
)
  )
+

) )


##!
'

% , 
%)-
  

$
.$% % )-
 "  ./
0

)12.$% +

) .%  

 




























 


 
!"#$
%##

&'