City Council Meeting Agenda
February 9, 2026

SILICON BEACH HOTEL PROJECT
Addendum to the Certified MND for 11469 Jefferson
Boulevard Project MND
Prepared for February 2025
City of Culver City

Attachment 9

SILICON BEACH HOTEL PROJECT
Addendum to the Certified MND for 11469 Jefferson
Boulevard Project MND
Prepared for February 2025
City of Culver City

626 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
213.599.4300
esassoc.com

Atlanta
Bend
Irvine
Los Angeles
Mobile
Oakland
Orlando
Palm Beach County
Pasadena
Pensacola
Petaluma
Portland
Rancho Cucamonga
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Santa Barbara
Sarasota
Seattle
Tampa
Thousand Oaks

OUR COMMITMENT TO SUSTAINABILITY | ESA helps a variety of public and private sector clients plan and prepare for climate change and emerging regulations that limit GHG emissions. ESA is a registered assessor with the California Climate Action Registry, a Climate Leader, and founding reporter for the Climate Registry. ESA is also a corporate member of the U.S. Green Building Council and the Business Council on Climate Change (BC3). Internally, ESA has adopted a Sustainability Vision and Policy Statement and a plan to reduce waste and energy within our operations. This document was produced using recycled paper.

Silicon Beach Hotel Project iii City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

CONTENTS
Addendum to the Certified MND
Page
Environmental Checklist ..................................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 2

1.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 CEQA Authority for an Addendum ...................................................................................... 2

2. Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 4

3. Environmental Impact Analysis .............................................................................................. 13

3.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 16

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................. 20

3.3 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 22

3.4 Biological Resources ......................................................................................................... 30

3.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................ 34

3.6 Energy ............................................................................................................................... 38

3.7 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................. 40

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................. 46

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................... 48

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................ 54

3.11 Land Use and Planning ..................................................................................................... 56

3.12 Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................ 58

3.13 Noise.. ............................................................................................................................... 60

3.14 Population and Housing .................................................................................................... 65

3.15 Public Services .................................................................................................................. 67

3.16 Recreation ......................................................................................................................... 72

3.17 Transportation ................................................................................................................... 74

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................. 79

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................ 80

3.20 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................... 83

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................................................. 85

4. Addendum Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 87

Attachments
A. Supplemental Traffic Study for Silicon Beach Hotel Project

Contents
Silicon Beach Hotel Project iv City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Figures
Figure 1, Conceptual Site Plan – Modified Project ................................................................................ 6 Figure 2, East and South Elevations ..................................................................................................... 8 Figure 3, Level 1 Landscape Plan ......................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4, Level 2 Landscape Plan ....................................................................................................... 10 Figure 5, Northerly Rendering View from Slauson Avenue ................................................................. 11 Figure 6, Northerly Aerial Rendering View .......................................................................................... 12 Tables
Table 1 Comparison of Modified Project to the Approved Project ................................................... 5

Silicon Beach Hotel Project 1 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

SILICON BEACH HOTEL PROJECT
Addendum to the Certified MND
Environmental Checklist
Project Title: Silicon Beach Hotel Project
Previous CEQA Document State
Clearinghouse Number:

SCH No. 2021010247 – 11469 Jefferson Boulevard Project
Lead Agency Name and
Address:

City of Culver City
Planning Division
9770 Culver Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90232
Contact Person and Phone
Number:

William Kavadas
(310) 253-5706
Project Location: The Project is located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, CA 90230. The Project Site is bounded by the intersection at Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue with commercial uses directly north of the Project Site and public alley adjacent to the western Project boundary with residential uses just beyond the alley.

Project Sponsor’s Name and
Address:

Greens Development
16530 Bake Parkway, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
General Plan Designation(s): Mixed-Use Corridor (MU-2)
Zoning: Mixed-Use Corridor (MU-2)
Description of Project: The Modified Project proposes to construct a five-story boutique hotel development with one level of subterranean parking within the Project Site.

The building would contain 147 hotel rooms and 600-square foot coffee shop with up to 106 parking spaces, and associated amenities. For a detailed project description, refer to Section 2, Project Description, below.

Surrounding Land Use and
Setting:

The following describes each land use surrounding the Project Site:
• North – Mixed Use Corridor 2: Commercial uses and a public alley • East – Mixed Use Corridor 2: Commercial uses across Jefferson Blvd. • South –Mixed Use Industrial: Public storage
• West – Mixed Use Corridor 2: Commercial uses
Public Agencies Whose Approval
Is Required:

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Toxic Substances Control, California Department of Transportation, and other agencies as needed.

1. Introduction
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 2 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

1. Introduction
This document is an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the 11469 Jefferson Boulevard Project (Case No s. P2019-0194-SPR/CUP/AUP, State Clearinghouse No. 2021010247), which was certified by the City of Culver City (City) in July 2021 (Certified MND). In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this Addendum to the MND analyzes proposed modifications (Modified Project) to the 11469 Jefferson Boulevard Project (Approved Project) and demonstrates that the proposed modifications to the Approved Project do not meet the standards for a Supplemental or Subsequent MND pursuant to Public Resources Code, Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and 15163.

1.1 Background
The City, serving as the Lead Agency, prepared a draft MND for the Approved Project and circulated for public review and comment between January 21, 2021, and February 19, 2021. The MND, along with the Project and its requested approvals, were approved by the City’s Planning Commission on April 28, 2021 and on July 12, 2021 by the City Council following appeals to the Project. The City determined that the Final MND environmental analysis was sufficient to meet CEQA requirements and no substantive deficiencies were identified by the appellants that require d preparation of any further CEQA documentation.

The MND concluded that, with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, all of the Approved Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level and no significant and unavoidable impacts would occur.

Subsequent to approval of the Approved Project, Greens Development (Project Applicant) has proposed revisions to the Project (Modified Project). Subsequent to the MND’s certification, the Project Applicant evaluated further ways in which the Project could enhance the physical character and economic well-being along the Jefferson Boulevard commercial corridor, while maintaining a financially viable Project . To achieve these goals, the Project Applicant is proposing design modifications to the Approved Project. The primary differences between the Approved Project and Modified Project are that the Modified Project is proposing a decrease in hotel rooms, addition of a 600 square foot (sf) local -serving coffee shop, and removing one of the prior two subterranean parking levels. Further comparison of the Approved Project and the Modified Project are discussed in Section 2, Project Description, below.

Both the Approved Project (as analyzed in the Certified MND) and the Modified Project (analyzed in this Addendum) are discussed further below.

1.2 CEQA Authority for an Addendum
CEQA establishes the type of environmental documentation required when changes to a project occur after an EIR or Negative Declaration (ND) is certified. Specifically, Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that:

1. Introduction
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 3 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requires the preparation of a Subsequent EIR when an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration has been adopted for a project and one or more of the following circumstances exist:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which, will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substanti al increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Likewise, California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21166 states that unless one or more of the following events occur, no Supplemental or Subsequent EIR shall be required by the lead agency or by any responsible agency:
a) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the environmental impact report;
b) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which will require major revisions in the environmental impact report; or c) New information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time the environmental impact report was certified as complete, becomes available.

2. Project Description
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 4 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
As demonstrated by the analysis in this document, the Modified Project would not result in any new significant impacts, nor would it increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts. Rather, all of the impacts associated with the Modified Project are within the envelope of impacts addressed in the Certified MND and do not constitute a new or increased significant impact. Therefore, the modifications resulting from the Modified Project do not meet the criteria for a Supplemental or Subseque nt MND pursuant to Public Resources Code, Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163.

2. Project Description

2.1 Environmental Setting

2.1.1 Project Location
The Project Site’s Assessor Parcel Number is 4216-028-023. The Project Site is located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard in the southern part of the City. The Project Site is located at the south -end of the commercial corridor that runs along Jefferson Boulevard perpendicular to Interstate 405 (I-405) freeway within the Fox Hills area of Culver City. The Project Site location for the Modified Project is the same as the Approved Project.

2.1.2 Existing Conditions
The 33,813 sf (0.78-acre) Project Site is currently improved with an approximately 13,000 sf single-story, wood-framed commercial shopping center which includes both retail and restaurant uses. The remainder of the Project Site consists of an asphalt -paved surface parking lot and ornamental landscaped areas.

Ingress/egress to the Project Site is available via a driveway from Jefferson Boulevard and a driveway from Slauson Avenue. The existing conditions of the Project Site applicable to the Modified Project are the same as analyzed under the Approved Project as part of the Certified MND.

2.1.3 Surrounding Land Uses
The Project Site is bounded by the intersection at Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue with commercial uses directly north of the Project Site and a public alley adjacent to the western Project boundary with residential uses just beyond the alley. Commercial uses are also located east and south of the Project Site across Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue. Both the I-405 and State Route 90 (SR-90) freeways are located less than 400 feet west and south of the Project Site. The surrounding land uses of the Project Site applicable to the Modified Project are the same as analyzed under the Approved Project as part of the Certified MND.

2.2 Project Summary

2.2.1 Overview of Approved Project
The Approved Project proposed the development of a new, five -story, 175-room boutique hotel building over two levels of subterranean parking. The hotel ground floor lobby would include food and beverage amenities, including a destination bar and restaurant, a business tech center, and meeting spaces. The fifth level would include a roof deck area with a swimming pool, and food and beverage amenities, including a destination sky bar. The second floor guest rooms and meetings rooms would be organized around t he landscaped courtyard. The third through fifth floors would feature a fitness center and guest rooms

2. Project Description
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 5 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
overlooking the courtyard, surrounding cityscape and landscaped terraces. The 175 hotel rooms proposed under the Approved Project would include a mix of king rooms, double queen rooms, and suites . The Approved Project would provide a total of approximately 67,030 sf in 175 hotel rooms, 8,536 sf of back of house, 14,783 sf of hotel amenities, 630 sf of bicycle parking (62 bicycle spaces) and 18,842 sf of circulation (138 parking spaces), and 1,119 sf of loading area for a total building area of 111,000 gross sf. In addition, 15,450 sf of open space area would be provided, as well as 56,300 sf of parking area, inclusive of two levels of subterranean parking.

2.2.2 Modifications to Approved Project
The Modified Project also consists of a hotel development with a generally similar massing and scale compared to the Approved Project. Figure 1 , Conceptual Site Plan – Modified Project, provides the conceptual site plan for the Modified Project. The Modified Project would result in the development of 147 hotel rooms, as opposed to 175 hotel rooms under the Approved Project, for a decrease of 28 hotel rooms.

The total developed floor area on the Project Site would decrease from 111,000 sf to 109,825 sf under the Modified Project, resulting in a decrease of 1,175 sf. The components of the Modified Project are compared to those of the Approved Project in Table 1, Comparison of Modified Project to the Approved Project.

TABLE 1

COMPARISON OF MODIFIED PROJECT TO THE APPROVED PROJECT
Land Use Approved Project Modified Project Difference
Hotel
Guestrooms 175 rms 147 rms -28 rms
Back-Of-House
Back-Of-House 8,536 sf 3,423 sf -5,113 sf
Hotel Amenities
Restaurant 2,900 sf 1,966 sf -934 sf
Rooftop Bar 413 sf -- -413 sf
Meeting Rooms 4,570 sf 0 sf -4,570 sf
Lounge/Lobby 6,200 sf 4,779 sf -1,421 sf
Fitness Room 700 sf 805 sf +105 sf
Coffee Shop -- 600 sf +600 sf
Subtotal Hotel Amenities 14,783 sf 8,150 sf -6,663 sf
Total Building Square Footage
111,000 sf 109,825 sf -1,175 sf
Parking
Vehicular Parking Spaces 138 spaces 106 spaces -32 spaces Bicycle Parking Spaces 62 spaces 6 spaces -56 spaces
Open Space
Private Hotel Open Space 7,900 sf 0 sf -7,900 sf
Public Hotel Open Space 7,550 sf 4,615 sf (pool deck – L2) -2,935 sf Total Open Space Provided 15,540 sf 4,615 sf -10,835 sf rms = rooms; sf = square feet
SOURCE: ESA, 2025.
1257+
6LWHVWDWLVWLFV
$GGUHVV

$31

6LWHDUHD
VI
DFUHV
5HVLGHQFH,QQKRWHO
6WRU\
*XHVWURRPV
7RWDO URRPV
%XLOGLQJ
%DVHPHQW 
VI
)LUVWIORRUVI
OREE\

VI
FRIIHHVKRS

6HFRQGIORRUVI
7KLUGIORRUVI
)RXUWKIORRUVI
)LIWKIORRUVI
7RWDOEOGJIRRWDJHVI
3DUNLQJ
%DVHPHQW VWDOOV
)LUVW)ORRUVWDOOV
7RWDO VWDOOV
%XLOGLQJKHLJKWIHHWWRURRI
IHHWWRWRSRISDUDSHW
-HIIHUVRQ%RXOHYDUG
6ODXVRQ$YHQXH
DOOH\
5$03
72
*$5$*(
(175<(;,7
3$5.,1*21*5$'(
67$//6


(;,7
(175<
35 23(57<
/,1(
3523(57</,1(
3523(57</,1(














FRIIHHVKRS
+27(/
6725<











VWRU

 










$
 
$
 6LWH$
5HVLGHQFH,QQ*XHVW5RRP
1DPH &RXQW /HYHO 'HSDUWPHQW
'46WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR 
/HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR%  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR&  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR'  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR(  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR)  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
/HYHO 
'46WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR%  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR&  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR'  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR(  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR)  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
/HYHO 
'46WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR%  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR&  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR'  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR(  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR)  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
/HYHO 
'46WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR%
/HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR(  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
.6WXGLR)  /HYHO *XHVWURRP
/HYHO 
*UDQGWRWDO 
Silicon Beach Hotel Project Addendum
Figure 1
Conceptual Site Plan- Modified Project
SOURCE: Robert F. Tuttle Architects, Inc., 2024D202401515.00 - Silicon Beach Hotel_Culver City_MND Addendum\05 Graphics-GIS-Modeling-USE AZURE\Addendum N 04 0
Feet

2. Project Description
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 7 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
The Modified Project would include a total of 8,150 sf of hotel amenities inclusive of a 1,966 sf restaurant and a 600 sf coffee shop located on ground floor . The Modified Project would be five -stories with a maximum height of 55 feet to the top of the roof (60 feet to the top of parapet) , largely similar to the Approved Project that was proposed to be 56 feet tall at the top of its roof. As with the Approved` Project, the hotel rooms would be distributed from the second through the fifth floors.. The Modified Project would provide 106 parking spaces within one subterranean parking level and the ground floor, as opposed to the Approved Project that provided 138 parking spaces within two subterranean parking levels. The Modified Project would provide six (6) bicycle parking spaces as opposed to the Approved Project that provided 62 bicycle parking spaces. Figure 2, East and South Elevations, provides views of the Modified Project’s east and south elevations from surrounding vantages.

Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would provide direct vehicular access to the parking area from an inbound-only driveway on Slauson Avenue in the western portion of the Project Site, which would include two entry drive aisles. The drive aisle closer to the hotel would serve as a passenger drop- off and pick-up area. The second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the subterranean parking level. Access to the subterranean parking garage would not be gate controlled.

There would be two driveway exits onto the adjacent unnamed alley to egress onto the surrounding roadway system. One exit driveway would be provided directly off of the dual drive aisles (which would merge into a single aisle approaching the alley) adjacent to the drop-off and pick up area, while the second exit would provide egress for vehicles exiting the subterranean parking garage. Exiting vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the public alley toward Berryman Avenue or Slauson Avenue, respectively.

Refer to Figure 1.

The Modified Project would provide 4,615 sf open space, as opposed to the Approved Project that proposed a total of 15,450 sf of open space. Figure 3, Level 1 Landscape Plan , and Figure 4, Level 2 Landscape Plan, illustrate the opens space and landscape features on Levels 1 and 2 of the Modified Project, respectively.

Figure 5, Northerly Rendering View from Slauson Avenue, and Figure 6, Northerly Aerial Rendering View, illustrate the Project’s scale and architectural design from different vantages. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project has been designed with zero setbacks along Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue.

The Approved Project’s south and west elevations included a glass facade 1 that wrapped the length of the
south-facing corner of the proposed building at the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue.

The glass facade was designed as a sculptural skin composed of steel and glass. The north elevation that faces the residential uses (the Sunkist Park neighborhood) provided a softer visual aesthetic as compared to the south elevation. The north elevation feature d landscaped terraces with vertical gardens that step back from the neighborhood and provide a greater distance from the hotel. Along with the stepped terraces, high planters were placed at the edge of each floor-slab to cut-off any possible sight-lines to and from the hotel guest rooms. The proposed building was also designed with a slight bend such that all openings on the guest room floors were diverted away from the residences. This bend would passively direct all views away from the neighborhood to further reduce any possible sightlines to and from the hotel rooms.

1 Glass used for the curtain-wall would be low-reflective glass, consistent with City requirements.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 13 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s design would feature a curved façade at the corner of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue. However, the Modified Project’s design has revised to include a contemporary architectural design defined by simple lines, along with a neutral and unified color palette.

Construction of the Modified Project would commence as early as Spring 2026 and be completed in approximately 24 months. In comparison, the Approved Project was anticipated to be constructed within 30 months. Construction of the Modified Project would require excavation for one subterranean parking level at a maximum excavation depth of approximately 17 feet below ground surface (bgs), as opposed to the Approved Project that proposed excavation for two subterranean parking levels at a maximum excavation depth of 35 feet bgs. As with the Approved Project, construction staging woul d be entirely internal to the Project Site under the Modified Project. The same haul routes and construction management features provided under the Approved Project would be utilized and implemented by the Modified Project.

2.2.3 Necessary Approvals
The discretionary entitlements, reviews, permits and approvals required to implement the Modified Project would be the same as the Approved Project, and include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
• City of Culver City - Demolition Permits to remove the existing on -site structure to allow for construction of the proposed building.
• City of Culver City - Construction Permits, including building, grading, excavation, foundation, and associated permits.
• City of Culver City - Haul Route Permit, as may be required by Culver City. • City of Culver City - Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, Administrative Use Permit, and/or other permits as needed, including, but not limited, permits associated with the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages and outdoor dining.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District- Construction-related permits, as applicable • Los Angles Regional Water Quality Control Board - Construction-related permits, as applicable (i.e., Stormwater/Water Quality Mitigation Plan, Dewatering Plan/Permit, Soil Management and Remediation Plan)
• California Department of Toxic Substances Control - Soil Management and Remediation Plan • California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) - Encroachment Permit • Other approvals as needed.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
This section provides an impact assessment of the Silicon Beach Hotel Project (Modified Project). The information below addresses each of the environmental issues that were previously analyzed within the scope of the Certified MND for the 11469 Jefferson Boulevard Project (Approved Project) and the most current Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The conclusions of the Certified MND are provided as a reference for each environmental issue area for purpose of describing how the proposed changes would not

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 14 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
result in any new significant impacts and would not increase the severity of the significant impacts identified in the Certified MND.

This Addendum includes analys es for all topics covered in the Certified MND, including but not limited to: aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.

The Certified MND concluded that the Approved Project’s impacts related to biological resources (migratory wildlife corridors) , cultural resources ( archeological resources and human remains ), geology and soils ( ground shaking, liquefaction, unstable soils, expansion soil, and paleontological resources ), hazards and hazardous materials ( upset and accident conditions, hazardous emissions within one -quarter mile of a school, and list of hazardous materials ), hydrology and water quality (water quality standards), public services (fire and police protection), transportation (conflict with a program, plan, or ordinance), and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The remainder of the environmental issue areas analyzed were concluded to have a less than significant impact or no impact.

A Modified Environmental Checklist Form was used to compare the anticipated environmental effects of the Modified Project with those disclosed in the Certified MND and to review whether any of the conditions set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and PRC Section 21166, requiring preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND, have been triggered.

The checklist and evaluation below provides the following information for each of these environmental impact categories: The checklist and evaluation below provides the following information for each of these environmental impact categories:
1 IMPACT DETERMINATION IN THE CERTIFIED EIR
This section lists the impact determination made in the Certified MND for each impact category. 2 DO PROPOSED CHANGES INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OR SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SEVERE IMPACTS?
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(1), this section indicates whether the Modified Project would result in new significant impacts that have not already been considered and mitigated by the prior environmental review or would result in a substant ial increase in the severity of a previously identified impact.
3 ANY NEW CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVING NEW IMPACTS OR SUBSTANTIALLY MORE SEVERE IMPACTS?
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(2), this section indicates whether there have been changes to the Project Site or the vicinity (circumstances under which the project is undertaken) which have occurred subsequent to the prior environmental documents, which would result in the Modified

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 15 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Project having new significant environmental impacts that were not considered in the prior environmental documents or that substantially increase the severity of a previously identified impact. 4 ANY NEW INFORMATION REQUIRING NEW ANALYSIS OR VERIFICATION? Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3)(A -D) , this section indicates whether new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous environment al documents were certified as complete is available, requiring an update to the analysis of the previous environmental documents to verify that the environmental conclusions and mitigations remain valid. If the new information shows that:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the prior environmental documents;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the prior environmental documents;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the prior environmental documents would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mit igation measure or alternative;
then the question would be answered “Yes,” requiring the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND. However, if the additional analysis completed as part of this environmental review finds that the conclusions of the prior environmental documents remain unchanged and no new significant impacts are identified, or identified environmental impacts are not found to be more severe, or there are no additional mitigation measures or alternatives now available or feasible but declined for adoption by the project proponent, then the question would be answered ”No” and no Supplemental or Subsequent MND is required. New studies completed as part of this environmental review are attached to this Addendum or are on file with the Planning Department.
5 MITIGATION MEASURES ADDRESSING IMPACTS
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), this section indicates whether the prior environmental document provides PDFs or mitigation measures to address effects in the related impact category. If so, a “Yes” response will be provided. In some cases , the previously adopted PDFs or mitigation measures have already been implemented or are not applicable to the Modified Project, or a significant impact was not identified, and mitigation was not required. In either instance, a “No”

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 16 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
response will be indicated. References to the “Project” within the mitigation measures listed below shall also apply to the Modified Project.
6 CONCLUSION
For each environmental topic, a discussion of the conclusion relating to the analysis is provided.

3.1 Aesthetics
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
AESTHETICS: Would the project:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
No Impact No No No No
(c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are experienced
from publicly accessible vantage point.) If the
project is an urbanized ar ea, would the project
conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic qualit y?
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No No Yes No
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.1.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to aesthetics, thresholds (a), (c), and (d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts regarding scenic vistas, visual character, and light and glare would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

With regards to scenic resources, threshold (b), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts would occur under the Approved Project.

3.1.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City, with a mix of commercial and residential uses in the Project vicinity. The topography of the Project Site is flat with no notable scenic vistas that would be affected by the development of the Project. Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would reach a maximum height of 55 feet (60 feet to the top of the parapet) and would be consistent with the surrounding areas that consist of low - to mid -rise buildings. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not obstruct views not already obscured or blocked by other buildings in the vicinity. Thus, impacts would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 17 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Threshold (b). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is located in a highly urbanized area of the City and the Project Site currently consists of a single-story commercial (retail) building and associated asphalt-paved surface parking lot. According to the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans), California State Scenic Highway System Map, the Project Site is not located within or along a State scenic highway.2 The closest eligible State scenic highway is Route 1 in the neighborhood of Venic e within the westside region of the City of Los Angeles, located approximately 3.3 miles west of the Project Site. The Project Site is also not eligible for the National Register, California Register, or Local designation because the existing building does not have a historical, architectural, cultural, or archeological significance and thus, no damage to historical resources would occur with implementation of the Project. The Project Site contains ornamental landscaping, which would be removed as part of the Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would remove two street trees and would comply with the applicable provisions pertaining to the removal and replacement of street trees in the Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC) within Title 9: General Regulations, Chapter 9.08: Streets and Sidewalks- Tree Removal Section

9.08.220: Removal of Trees in Parkways Related to Private Improvement or Development Project.

Furthermore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would plant two new street right-of-way trees or parkway trees for each tree that is removed from the Project Site, in which location and size of the replacement trees would be determined by the Public Works Director. As with the Approved Pr oject, the Modified Project would not impact scenic resources and no impacts would occur.

Threshold (c). The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City and the existing buildings on the Project Site have low aesthetic value. As such, the analysis herein analyzes whether the Project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. The Culver City General Plan (General Plan) and CCMC include goals, objectives, and policies, that govern scenic quality.

The Modified Project would be consistent with the applicable goals, objectives and policies of the former General Plan for the same reasons as evaluated in the Certified MND given the Approved Project and the Modified both propose a hotel development of relatively similar size and scale on a redevelopment site within an urbanized area of the City. Thus, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be consistent with applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to visual character and quality of public view under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). In regard to lighting, the Project vicinity exhibits considerable ambient nighttime illumination levels due to the developed nature of the area, existing on-site building and surface parking lot, as well as adjacent commercial properties located north, east, and south of the Project Site. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would include low to moderate levels of interior and exterior lighting for security, signa ge, and architectural enhancement. Soft accent lighting used for s ignage and architectural enhancement would be directed to permit visibility of the architectural elements of the building and would not be bright as to cause substantial light spillover to adjacent properties. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be subject to applicable regulations contained within the CCMC.

In regard to glare, glare-sensitive receptors include motorists on the roadways surrounding the Project Site.

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate low-reflective glass material on the

2 Caltrans, 2025. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Available online at:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 18 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
building which would minimize off-site glare and be consistent with City requirements. Overall, light and glare impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

In regard to shade and shadow, the Modified Project would be five-stories with a maximum height of 55 feet to the top of the roof (60 feet to the top of parapet), largely similar to the Approved Project that was proposed to be 56 feet tall at the top of its roof. In addition, building setbacks would be similar between the Approved Project and the Modified Project. As such, shadows cast by the Approved Project would be similar to the Modified Project. Based on the Shade/Shadow Report prepared for the Approved Project in the Certified MND, the report concluded that no shadow-sensitive uses would be subject to significant new shading by the Approved Project based on the thresholds utilized in the Certified MND . Therefore, it follows that the Modified Project would also have less than significant shadow impacts, similar to the Approved Project.

3.1.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would constitute changed circumstances for undertaki ng the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.1.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? With regard to Threshold (d) and new plans, the Culver City General Plan 2045 was approved on August 26, 2024, and went into effect on October 9, 2024. The General Plan 2045 is intended as a long- range planning document that serves as a roadmap for future decisions concerning a variety of issues, including land use, economic growth, transportation, housing, climate change, and more.

With regards to aesthetic resources, the Modified Project would be consistent with the applicable policies in Culver City General Plan 2045, including those within the Land Use and Community Design Element.

Policy LU-14.2: Create an attractive pedestrian environment, seeks to facilitate a diverse and attractive pedestrian environment through the provision of street furniture, lighting, and other amenities. Consistent with this policy, the Project would incor porate public -facing ground floor landscaping along Slauson Avenue. Accent lighting and buildings entrances along the street frontage, along with a primarily glass first- level building façade, would help activate the pedestrian environment. Consistent with Policy LU -14.8, Improved street tree canopy , the Modified Project would incorporate street trees along Slauson Avenue, inclusive of three pink trumpet trees and five date palms in accordance with City requirements to improve the overall streetscape.
3 Policy LU-15.1: Walkable and inviting buildings and spaces, requires building design that creates walkable and inviting spaces, such as locating parking behind buildings, allowing for outdoor plazas and dining, and locating building frontages in close proximity to the sidewalk edge, where appropriate. The Project would include ground floor coffee shop and a hotel entrance along the public street frontages. Parking would be located interior to the buildings or in a subterranean level out of view from the

3 City of Culver City, 2024a. Culver City General Plan 2045, Land Use and Community Design Element. Available online at:
culvercity.org/files/content/public/v/14/services/building-development/general-plan/land-use-and-community-design.pdf, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 19 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
public. Additionally, vehicular ingress/egress is limited to two driveways on Slauson Avenue, thereby emphasizing the pedestrian environment and activating the streetscape near the Project Site.

Also, Policy LU -15.3: Architectural and visual interest in new development, encourages distinctive architecture and elements that add visual interest to buildings to enhance people’s perceptions of Culver City as an interesting and inviting place. As shown in renderings of the future buildings (see Figures 5 and 6), the Modified Project would change the character and quality of the existing commercial buildings and parking lot site with a new, contemporary, high-quality architecturally designed building. The design concept includes a blend of colors and materials on the various building components with a unified design scheme.

The use of warm and cool colors, as well as upper level setbacks on the norther side of the building help break up the building massing.

In addition, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Proiect would comply with applicable provisions of the current Culver CCMC pertaining to height, setbacks, screening of utilities that are relevant to scenic quality.

Otherwise, there is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to aesthetics that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.1.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.1.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 20 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment of and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurements methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Would the project:
(a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact No No No No
(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact No No No No (c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code Section 1220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
No Impact No No No No
(d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? No Impact No No No No
(e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
No Impact No No No No

3.2.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to agriculture and forestry resources, thresholds (a)-(e), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts to agricultural or forest resources would occur under the Approved Project given the site and surrounding area’s existing urban nature.

3.2.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a)-(e). The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City and is currently developed with a single-story commercial (retail) building and an associated asphalt-paved surface parking lot. Based on a review of the Culver City General Plan Land Use Map, the Project Site is not zoned for

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 21 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
agricultural uses or forestry land or timberland and related operations do not exist on the Project Site. 4,5 According to the California Department of Conservation (DOC), California Important Farmland Finder, the Project Site is designated as Urban and Built -Up Land.6 Additionally, based on a review of the DOC , Williamson Act Enrollment Finder, the Project Site is not within a Williamson Act Contract. 7 Since the Project Site is not zoned for agricultural, forest land, or timberland, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s proposed uses would not conflict with existing zoning, cause rezoning of, or convert agricultural land or forest land timberland to non- agricultural or non- forest land. Thus, similar to the Approved Project, no impacts would occur under the Modified Project.

3.2.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.2.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to agriculture and forestry resources that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.2.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

4 Culver City, 2024. General Plan Land Use Map. Available online at:
https://www.culvercity.org/files/content/public/v/84/services/building-development/b-planning-documents/general-plan-land- use-map.pdf, accessed January 2025.
5 Culver City, 2024. Zoning Map (October 9, 2024). Available online at:
https://www.culvercity.org/files/content/public/v/84/services/building-development/b-planning-documents/culver-city- zoning-map_091224.pdf, accessed January 2025.
6 DOC, 2025a. California Important Farmland Finder. Available online at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/, accessed January 2025.
7 DOC, 2025b. California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 22 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.2.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.3 Air Quality
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
AIR QUALITY: Would the project:
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than
Significant No No Yes No
(b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.3.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to air quality T hresholds (a) -(d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts regarding conflicts with an applicable air quality management plan, cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, and other emissions adversely affecting a substantial number of people would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.3.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a).

Construction
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in an increase in short-term employment compared to existing conditions. Although the Modified Project w ould require workers over the construction process, these jobs are temporary in nature. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s construction jobs do not conflict with the long-term employment projections upon which the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP ) is based.

Control strategies in the AQMP with potential applicability to short- term emissions from construction activities include strategies denoted in the AQMP as MOB- 08 and MOB-10, which are intended to reduce emissions from on- road and off-road heavy-duty vehicles and equipment by accelerating replacement of older, emissions-prone engines with newer engines meeting more stringent emission standards. As with the

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 23 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Approved Project, under the Modified Project , construction trucks and other vehicles in loading and unloading queues would be parked with engines off to reduce vehicle emissions during construction activities. Furthermore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would utilize off -road diesel equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) that meet the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 Final off- road emission standards, as per PDF -AIR-1. Furthermore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirements to minimize short -term emissions from on -road and off-road diesel equipment. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would also comply with the SCAQMD regulations for controlling fugitive dust pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 403. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be in compliance and consistent with and meet or exceed the AQMP requirements for control strategies intended to reduce emissions from construction equipment and activities. Thus, impacts regarding conflicts with or obstructing implementation of an applicable air quality plan during construction under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Operation
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project ’s proposed hotel uses would be consistent with the underlying zoning designation. The Modified Project would concentrate uses and employment growth in an area well served by alternative transit facilities (local bus lines) . As such, similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not conflict with the Southern California Associated of Governments’ (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy policies for the concentration of growth in proximity to transit.

In addition, the Modified Project would generate a relatively similar number of employees as the Approved Project. The Certified MND concluded that the Approved Project would be within the Southern California Associated of Governments (SCAG’s) employment growth assumptions for the City. As such, similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not generate growth beyond the range of development anticipated within the established SCAG regional forecast for the City. Furthermore, as with the Approved Project, t he Modified Project would not increase or induce residential density growth not otherwise anticipated. Any indirect population growth by the Modified Project within the City and/or neighboring cities would be nominal and would not materially affect forecasted SCAG growth assumptions.

Accordingly, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not contribute additional growth other than that already anticipated for the City. Therefore, impacts regarding conflicts with or obstruct implementation of an applicable air quality plan during operation under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b).

Construction
As with the Approved Project, construction of the Modified Project has the potential to create regional air quality impacts through the use of heavy-duty construction equipment and through vehicle trips generated by construction workers and haul trips traveling to and from the Project Site . In addition, fugitive dust emissions would result from construction activities. During the finishing phase, the application of architectural coatings (i.e., paints) and other building materials would release volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Construction emissions can vary from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation and, for dust, the prevailing weather conditions.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 24 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Based on criteria and thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD, the Certified MND included a quantitative analysis of worse -case daily regional construction emissions for the Approved Project. The analysis showed that the maximum daily regional construction emissions would be below SCAQMD significance thresholds. Therefore, impacts related to regional construction emissions for the Approved Project would be less than significant.

The overall maximum daily use and extent of construction equipment to be utilized under the Modified Project and the Approved Project would be similar. Thus, maximum daily emissions under Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project because emission levels are based on a single day in which maximum construction activity would occur. Accordingly, s imilar to the Approved Project , with incorporation of PDF-AIR-1, maximum daily construction regional emissions under the Modified Project would not exceed SCAQMD numerical regional construction emissions significance thresholds .

Furthermore, with a reduction of one-level of subterranean parking and associated excavation/construction activities compared to the Approved Project, the overall extent of regional construction emissions during construction would be expected to be less under the Modified Project compared to the Approved Project.

In addition, construction contractors are required to comply with the applicable provision of SCAQMD Rule 403 for controlling fugitive dust emissions. Applicable fugitive dust control measures are incorporated into the construction emissions modeling within the SCAQMD-approved CalEEMod software and include the application of water (or non- toxic soil stabilizer) to disturbed areas and unpaved road surfaces and limiting vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour on unpaved surfaces.

Based on the above, impacts related to regional construction emissions would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project. Furthermore, the Modified Project’s incremental contribution to long-term emissions of non-attainment pollutants and ozone precursors, considered together with cumulative projects, would not be cumulatively considerable, similar to the Approved Project.

Operation
Regional air pollutant emissions associated with operation al activities would be generated by the consumption of electricity and natural gas, and by the operation of on-road vehicles. However, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be designed to meet the standards for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver level by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) through the incorporation of green building techniques and other sustainability features (see PDF-AIR-3). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would also be designed and operated to meet or exceed the applicable requirements of the State of California Green Building Standards Code and the Culver City Green Building Program (as required by the City’s standard conditions of approval) (see PDF-AIR-2). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate “green building measures” as part of its design to reduce Project -related criteria pollutant emissions includ ing HVAC systems, installation of low-flow water fixtures, and solar PV power systems equivalent to at l east one percent of the Project’s electricity demand and at least 1 kilowatt (kW) of solar photovoltaics per 10,000 SF of new development (see PDF-AIR-2 and PDF-AIR-3).

Based on criteria and thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD, the Certified MND included a quantitative analysis of worse-case daily regional operational emissions for the Approved Project. The analysis showed that the maximum daily regional operational emissions would be below SCAQMD significance thresholds.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 25 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
The Certified MND concluded that the Approved Project’s incremental contribution to long-term emissions of non-attainment pollutants and ozone precursors, considered together with cumulative projects, would not be cumulatively considerable. Impacts for the Approved Project would be less than significant.

As discussed under Section 3.17, Transportation, the trip generation and vehicles miles travelled under the Modified Project would be less than the Approved Project. Thus, mobile -source source emissions would be reduced under the Modified Project. F urthermore, given the Modified Project would implement the same project design features, r educe the number of hotel rooms , and have an otherwise similar scale of development as compared to the Approved Project, the maximum daily regional operational emissions under the Modified Project would also be below SCAQMD significance thresholds, similar to the Approved Project.

Based on the above, impacts related to regional operational emissions would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project. Furthermore, t he Modified Project’s incremental contribution to long -term emissions of non-attainment pollutants and ozone precursors, considered together with cumulative projects, would not be cumulatively considerable, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (c). Certain population groups are especially sensitive to air pollution and should be given special consideration when evaluating potential air quality impacts. These population groups include children, the elderly, persons with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise. As defined in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, a sensitive receptor to air quality is defined as any of the following land use categories: (1) long- term health care facilities; (2) rehabilitation centers; (3) convalescent centers; (4) retirement homes; (5) residences; (6) schools; (7) parks and playgrounds; (8) child care centers; and (9) athletic fields. The nearest off-site air quality sensitive receptors are residential uses located within 25 meters to the north/west of the Project Site along Segrell Way.

Localized-Construction
As analyzed in the Certified MND, based on criteria and thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD, the Certified MND included a quantitative analysis of worse -case daily localized construction emissions for the Approved Project. The analysis showed that the maximum daily localized construction emissions would be below SCAQMD significance thresholds. Therefore, impacts related to localized construction emissions for the Approved Project would be less than significant.

The overall maximum daily use and extent of construction equipment to be utilized under the Modified Project and the Approved Project would be similar. Thus, maximum daily emissions under Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project because emission levels are based on a single day in which maximum construction activity would occur. Accordingly, s imilar to the Approved Project , with incorporation of PDF -AIR-1, maximum daily construction localized emissions under the Modified Alternative 2 would not exceed SCAQMD numerical localized construction emissions significance thresholds. Furthermore, with a reduction of one -level of subterranean parking and associated excavation/construction activities compared to the Approved Project, the overall extent of localized construction emissions during construction would be expected to be les s under the Modified Project compared to the Approved Project. Overall, impacts related to localized construction emissions on sensitive receptors under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 26 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Localized-Operation
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be designed to meet the standards for LEED Silver level by the USGBC through the incorporation of green building techniques and other sustainability features (see PDF-AIR-3). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would also be designed and operated to meet or exceed the applicable requirements of the State of California Green Building Standards Code and the Culver City Green Building Program (as required by the C ity’s standard conditions of approval) (see PDF-AIR-2). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate “green building measures” as part of its design to reduce Project -related criteria pollutant emissions includ ing HVAC systems, installation of low-flow water fixtures, and solar PV power systems equivalent to at least one percent of the Project’s electricity demand and at least 1 kilowatt (kW) of solar photovoltaics per 10,000 SF of new development (see PDF-AIR-2 and PDF-AIR-3).

Based on criteria and thresholds set forth by the SCAQMD, the Certified MND included a quantitative analysis of worse-case daily localized operational emissions for the Approved Project. The analysis showed that the maximum daily localized operational emissions would be below SCAQMD significance thresholds.

Given the Modified Project would implement the same project design features, reduce the number of hotel rooms, and have an otherwise similar scale of development as compared to the Approved Project, the maximum daily localized operational emissions under the Modified Project would also be below SCAQMD significance thresholds, similar to the Approved Project. Thus, impacts related to localized operational emissions would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not cause or contribute to the formation of carbon monoxide ( CO) hotspots and CO concentrations at Project impacted intersections would remain well below the ambient air quality standards. As analyzed in the Certified MND, no exceedances of CO have been recorded at monitoring stations in the Air Basin and the Air Basin is currently designated as a CO attainment area for both the California Ambient Air Quality Standards ( CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS). As such, it is not expected that CO levels at Project -impacted intersections would rise to the level of an exceedance of these standards.

As analyzed in the Certified MND, based on the Approved Project’s Traffic Study, under future operational year plus Project conditions, the intersection of Centinela Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard had the highest peak traffic volume with approximately 77,460 per day.8 As a result, CO concentrations are expected to be less than those estimated in the 2003 AQMP, which would not exceed the thresholds. Thus, this comparison demonstrates that the Approved Project would not contribute considerably to the formation of CO hotspots and no further CO analysis is required. The Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to CO hotspots.

Since the Modified Project would generate less traffic than the Approved Project, the Modified Project would also not include traffic levels substantially contributing to the creation CO hotspots. Therefore, impacts related to the contribution or formation of CO hotspots under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

8 Crain & Associates, Jefferson Hotel Project Traffic Study, 2020.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 27 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Toxic Air Contaminants – Construction
The greatest potential for toxic air contaminants (TAC) emissions would be related to diesel particulate emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during grading and excavation activities. Incidental amounts of toxic substances such as oils, solvents, and paints would be used. As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Approved Project would not exceeded the cancer and health risk thresholds for the nearest sensitive receptor (residential uses to the north/west). The Approved Project’s short-term emissions would not substantially contribute to a significant construction health risk. No residual emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk are anticipated after Approved Project construction. Therefore, the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact related to construction TAC emissions.

As discussed above, the overall extent of Modified Project’s construction- related emission would be less than the Approved Project with a reduction of one -level of subterranean parking and associated excavation/construction activities compared to the Approved Project. Therefore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in a less than significant impact related to construction TAC emissions.

Toxic Air Contaminants – Operation
SCAQMD recommends that health risk assessments be conducted for substantial sources of DPM emissions (e.g., truck stops and warehouse distribution facilities) and has provided guidance for analyzing mobile source diesel emissions. The Certified MND indicated that the Approved Project is not anticipated to generate a substantial number of daily truck trips, which would also be the case the Modified Project. Under existing conditions, trucks currently make deliveries from the service alley to the northwest of the Project Site. With implementation of the Approved Project or the Modified Project , delivery truck loading and unloading would be moved to the interior of the Project Site in dedicated loading areas, creating greater separation between trucks and off-site sensitive receptors. Furthermore, typical sources of hazardous TACs include industrial manufacturing processes and automotive repair facilities. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not include any of these potential sources, although minimal emissions may result from the use of consumer products (e.g., aerosol sprays). Based on this, the Modified Project is not expected to release substantial amounts of TACs and impacts would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, construction equipment is not a typical source of odors. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would minimize odors from the combustion of diesel fuel by complying with the CARB airborne toxic control measures (ATCM) that limits diesel-fueled commercial vehicle idling to five minutes at any given location, which was adopted in 2004. In addition, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would compl y with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), which prohibits the emissions of nuisance air contaminants or odorous compounds. Through adherence with mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules and State measures, construction activities and materials would not create objectionable odors and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to nuisance odors at nearby sensitive receptors during construction under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Additionally, results of the operational related criteria pollutant calculations above show that emissions would be below applicable SCAQMD significance thresholds for the both the Approved Project and the

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 28 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Modified Project. Since implementation of the Approved Project or the Modified Project would not exceed the regional or local significance thresholds for attainment or non- attainment pollutants, neither is anticipated to contribute to health impacts related to these pollutants specifically because these thresholds were established at levels considered safe to protect public health, including the health of sensitive populations. Therefore, impacts related to other emissions (such as those leading to odors) a dversely affecting a substantial number of people under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

3.3.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.2.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? With regard to consistency with applicable air quality plans, the 2022 AQMP has been adopted by the SCAQMD. The 2022 AQMP builds upon measures already in place from previous AQMPs and includes a variety of additional strategies such as regulation, accelerated deployment of available cleaner technologies (e.g., zero emissions technologies, when cost -effective and feasible, and low NOx technologies in other applications), best management practices, co -benefits from existing programs (e.g., climate and energy efficiency), incentives, and other CAA measures to achieve the 2015 8-hour ozone standard. Additionally, since the time the analysis was conducted for the certified MND, SCAG’s 2020 -2045 RTP/SCS was adopted, which is an update to the previous 2016-2040 RTP/SCS. This document is used in the preparation of the air quality forecasts and consistency analysis included in the 2022 AQMP. Both the RTP/SCS and the AQMP are based, in part, on growth projections originating with county and city general plans.

Based on the air quality analysis of the Modified Project (see section Threshold (b) above), the Modified Project’s short-term construction impacts would not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD regional and local thresholds of significance. The Modified Project would also not result in significant long- term operation impacts based on the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance. Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be generally consistent with the AQMP in its incorpora tion of applicable control strategies for emissions reduction during construction and operation of the Modified Project. Therefore, the Modified Project would not increase the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the 2022 AQMP. Additionally, the employment and indirect population increases as a result of the Modified Project would represent a small fraction of and would be well within the 2045 growth projections of the 2020 -2045 RTP/SCS. Further, the Modified Project’s redevelopment of the Project Site would continue an infill growth pattern near transit facilities that is encouraged locally in the City’s plans and regionally by SCAG policies; thus, reducing VMTs associated with travel by single-occupancy vehicles. Therefore, the Modified Project would not conflict with SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals and emission projections in the 2022 AQMP.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 29 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Otherwise, there is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to air quality that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation mea sures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.3.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following PDFs set forth in the Certified MND for the Approved Project to address air quality impacts would also be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No new mitigation measures are required, as no new significant air quality impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

PDF-AIR-1: Construction Features: Construction equipment operating at the Project Site shall be subject to a number of requirements. These requirements shall be included in applicable bid documents and successful contractor(s) must demonstrate the ability to supply such equipment. Construction measures would include, but are not limited to the following:

The Project shall require all off -road diesel construction equipment greater than 50 horsepower (hp) that will be used an aggregate of 40 or more hours to meet the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. A copy of each unit’s certified tier specification or model year specification and California Air Resources Board or South Coast Air Quality Management District operating permit (if applicable) shall be available upon request at the time of mobilization of each applica ble unit of equipment. This construction feature would allow for a reduction in diesel particulate matter and NOX emissions during construction activities.

PDF-AIR-2: Design Elements: In accordance with CALGreen Building Standards, the Project shall incorporate the following mandatory energy and emission saving features:

The Project shall recycle and/or salvage at least 65 percent of non–hazardous construction and demolition debris.

The Project shall include easily accessible recycling areas dedicated to the collection and storage of non- hazardous materials such as paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastics, metals, and landscaping debris (trimmings).

The Project shall include efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems.

The Project shall install low -flow water fixtures that are consistent with U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency specifications.

PDF-AIR-3: Voluntary Design Elements: The Project shall incorporate many operational energy and emission saving features including the following:

The Project design would meet criteria for the LEED Silver or equivalent certification level.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 30 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
The Project shall install a solar photovoltaic power system equivalent to at least 1 percent of the Project’s electricity demand and at least 1 kilowatt (kW) of solar photovoltaics per 10,000 square feet of new development.

3.3.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.4 Biological Resources
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact No No No No
(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
No Impact No No No No
(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact No No No No
(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native nursery sites?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than
Significant No No Yes No
(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
No Impact No No No No

3.4.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to biological resources, Thresholds (a)-(c), and (f), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts to candidate, sensitive, or spe cial status species, riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, state or federally protected wetlands, and conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 31 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan would occur under the Approved Project. With regards to Threshold (d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridor would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1. Lastly, with regards to Threshold (e), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to conflicted with a local policy or ordinance protecting biological resources would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.4.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a) -(c). The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City and is currently developed with a single-story commercial (retail) building and an associated asphalt-paved surface parking lot. Since the Project Site and Project vicinity are fully developed, the Project Site does not contain suitable habitat for candidate, sensitive, or special status species , nor does it include riparian habitat or wetlands Therefore, no impacts to biological resources in these regards would occur under the Modified Project, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). Since the Project Site and Project vicinity are located in a highly urbanized area of the City, no wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites currently exist on the Project Site. Due to the urbanized nature of the area and high human activity, the potential for native resident or migratory wildlife species movement to occur on the Project Site is negligible. However, the Project Site does contain ornamental landscaping and two street trees (African fern pine) located along Slauson Avenue that coul d support nesting bird habitat. Since the Project Site is bounded by Slauson Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard, the Project Site and Project vicinity contain high levels of ambient noise and human disturbance generated by pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Species tolerant of human disturba nce have the potential to nest within these ornamental trees or shrubs contain ed within or adjacent to the Project Site. A s with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (50 C.F.R. Section 10.13). Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code prohibit take of all birds and their active nests including raptors and other migratory nongame birds (as listed under the Federal MBTA). The removal of vegetation with nesting birds during the breeding season is considered a potentially significant impact. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project proposes to remove and/or relocate the existing trees on -site as part of the development. The street trees removal would have the potential to impact a native resident or migratory wildlife species movement through the Project Site thus, impacts would be potentially significant. Both the Approved Project and the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1, which would be consistent with the Federal MBTA to reduce potential impacts to protected nesting birds is required. Thus, the Modified Project’s impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (e). The Project Site does not support protected tree species. Vegetation within the Project area is largely confined to ornamental landscaping. All vegetation on the Project Site would be removed as part of the Approved Project or the Modified Project , including the removal of two street trees (African fern pine). Both the Approved Project and the Modified Project would comply with the applicable provisions pertaining to the removal and replacement of street trees in the CCMC within Title 9: General Regulations, Chapter 9.08: Streets and Sidewalks – Tree Removal, Section 9.08.215: Removal of Trees in Parkways Related to Private Improvement or Development Project. Per the CCMC, as with the Approved project, the

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 32 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Modified Project would be required to plant two new street right -of-way trees or parkway trees for each street tree that is removed in the public right-of-way. The size and location of replacement trees would be determined by the Public Works Director based on the street or parkway. With compliance to the applicable street tree removal and replacement provisions of the CCMC, impacts on street trees under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (f). As discussed in Thresholds (a)-(c), the Project Site does not contain any designated riparian habitat or natural communities. Additionally, there is no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan in place for the Project Site or the City. No impacts would occur under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project.

3.4.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.4.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to biological resources that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.4.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measures set forth in the Certified MND to address biological resources impacts would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant biological resources impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-BIO-1: The Applicant shall be responsible for the implementation of mitigation to reduce impacts to migratory and/or nesting bird species to below a level of significance through one of two ways. Either:
(1) Vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled outside the nesting season which runs from February 15 to August 31 to avoid potential impacts to nesting birds. This would insure that no active nests are disturbed; or
(2) If avoidance of the avian breeding season (February 15 through August 31) is not feasible, then:

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 33 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
(a) A qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey within 15 days and again within 72 hours prior to any ground disturbing activities (staging, grading, vegetation removal or clearing, grubbing, etc.). The survey shall be conducted to ensure that impacts to birds, including raptors, protected by the MBTA and/or the California Fish and Game Code are avoided. Survey areas shall include suitable nesting habitat within 200 feet of construction site boundaries.

This two-tiered survey method is intended to provide the Applicant with time to understand the potential issue and evaluate solutions if nests are present, prior to mobilizing resources. If active nests are not identified, no further action is necessary.
(b) If active nests are identified during pre- construction surveys, an avoidance buffer shall be demarcated for avoidance using flagging, staking, fencing, or another appropriate barrier to delineate construction avoidance until the nest is determined to no longer be active by a qualified biologist (i.e., young have fledged or no longer alive within the nest). An active nest is defined as a structure or site under construction or preparation, constructed or prepared, or being used by a bird for the purpose of incubating eggs or rearing young. Perching sites and screening vegetation are not part of the nest. Given the high disturbance level, general avoidance buffers include a minimum 100-foot avoidance (for smaller birds more tolerant of human disturbance) to a 250-foot avoidance buffer for passerine and a 500-foot avoidance buffer from active raptor nests, or reduced buffer distances determined at the discretion of a qualified biologist familiar with local nesting birds and breeding bird behavior within the Project area.

Construction personnel shall be informed of the active nest and avoidance requirements. A biological monitor shall review the site, at a minimum of one - week intervals, during all construction activities occurring near active nests to ensure that no inadvertent impacts to active nests occur. Pre- construction nesting bird surveys and monitoring results shall be submitted to the Culver City Planning Division via email or memorandum upon completion of the pre -construction surveys and/or construction monitoring to document compliance with applicable state and federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds.

3.4.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 34 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.5 Cultural Resources
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
in §15064.5?
No Impact No No No No
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(c) Disturb any human remails, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes

3.5.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to cultural resources Threshold (a), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts to historical resources would not occur under the Approved Project. With regard to Thresholds (b) and (c), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to archeological resources and human remains would be less than significant with mitigation under the Approved Project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-4 would reduce impacts to archeological resources to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5 would reduce impacts to human remains to a less than significant level.

3.5.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a) . The historic resources analysis included in the Certified MND found that the current building on the Project Site is not a historic resource, and as such, the Approved Project would have no direct impact on historical resources. Furthermore, the Approved Project would result in no indirect impacts to historical resources in the vicinity of the Project Site as the historic setting in the area around the Project Site is already eroded by contemporary development. Pursuant to CEQA, the Approved Project would not result in direct or indirect impacts to historical resources. This same impact analysis applies to the Modified Project since the Project Site is the same. Accordingly, the Modified Project would also have no impacts regarding historic resources.

Threshold (b) . As discussed in the Certified MND , no cultural resources (including archeological resources) have been previously identified within the Project Site. However, the records search included in the Certified MND indicated that eight archeological resources have been recorded within a 1-mile radius, which included six prehistoric archeological sites and two multicomponent archeological sites. The Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the Certified MND concluded that the Project Site has the potential to contain prehistoric archaeological resources. The Approved Project proposed excavations would reach a maximum depth of 35 feet below ground surface (bgs) for the two subterranean parking levels and building foundations. Since the Modified Project would include one subterranean parking level, the proposed excavation depth would be less than the Approved Project. Nonetheless, based on the high potential for

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 35 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
archeological resources to have been preserved underneath the asphalt-paved surface parking lot, there is a high to moderate possibility to encounter intact prehistoric or Native American archeological resources during ground disturbance activities in the Project Site. Thus, impacts would be potentially significant under the Modified Project and the Approved Project . Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-4 would reduce impacts on archeological resources under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts to archaeological resources under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (c). As discussed in the Certified MND, the Project Site has a high to moderate possibility to encounter prehistoric archaeological resources or human remains during ground-disturbing activities in the west and south portions of the Project Site. Thus, impacts would be potentially significant under the Modified Project, similar to the Approved Project . Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM -CUL-5 would similarly reduce impacts on human remains under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project to a less than significant level.

3.5.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.5.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to cultural resources that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be fe asible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.5.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measures set forth in the Certified MND to address cultural resource impacts would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant cultural resource impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-CUL-1: Prior to issuance of demolition permit, the Applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology (Qualified Archaeologist) to oversee an archaeological monitor who shall be present during construction excavations such as demolition, clearing/grubbing, grading, trenching, or any other construction excavation

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 36 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
activity associated with the Project. Full- time monitoring shall be conducted in areas of high to moderate potential (as shown on Figure 14 of the Cultural Resources Assessment) to a depth of 10 feet (depth at which archaeological sensitivity decreases). Full-time monitoring of initial ground disturbance in areas of moderate to low sensitivity (also as shown on Figure 14) shall be conducted to determine if full- time or periodic monitoring is warranted in these areas, as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist. Full -time monitoring in any area can be reduced to part-time inspections or ceased entirely if determined appropriate by the Qualified Archaeologist, based on field observations. Prior to commencement of excavation activities, an Archaeological and C ultural Resources Sensitivity Training shall be given for construction personnel. The training session shall be carried out by the Qualified Archaeologist and shall focus on how to identify archaeological resources that may be encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures to be followed in such an event.

MM-CUL-2: Prior to issuance of demolition permit, the Applicant shall retain a Native American tribal monitor from the Gabrieleno Tribe. The appropriate Native American monitor shall be selected based on ongoing consultation under AB 52 and shall be identified on t he most recent contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission. The Native American Monitor shall be present during construction excavations such as demolition, clearing/grubbing, grading, trenching, or any other construction excavation activity associated with the Project.

The frequency of monitoring shall take into account the rate of excavation and grading activities, proximity to known archaeological resources, the materials being excavated (younger alluvium vs. older alluvium) , and the depth of excavation, and if found, the abundance and type of prehistoric archaeological resources encountered. Full -time field observation can be reduced to part -time inspections or ceased entirely if determined appropriate by the Gabrielino Tribe.

MM-CUL-3: In the event that archaeological resources (e.g., Native American artifacts or features, etc.) are unearthed, ground-disturbing activities shall be halted or diverted away from the vicinity of the find so that the find can be evaluated. An appropriate buffer area shall be established by the Qualified Archaeologist around the find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. All prehistoric or Native American archaeological resources unearthed by Project construction activities shall be evaluated by the Qualified Archaeologist and a Gabrielino Tribe. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrielino Tribe shall consult with the City and Qualified Archaeologist regarding the treatment and curation of any prehistoric archaeological resources to ensure cultural values ascribed to the resources, beyond those that are scientifically important, are considered. If a resource is determined by the Qualified Archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a) or a “unique archaeological resource” pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g), the Qualified Archaeologist, preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) shall be the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, the Qualified Archaeologist shall coordinate with the Applicant and the City to develop a formal treatment plan that would serve to reduce impacts to the resources and that p rovides for the adequate recovery of the scientifically consequential information contained in the resources along with subsequent laboratory processing, analysis, evaluation, and reporting. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in acco rdance

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 37 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code Sections 21083.2(b) for unique archaeological resources, and shall incorporate the Gabrielino Tribe’s treatment and curation recommendations.

The treatment plan shall include measures regarding the curation of the recovered resources that may include curation at a public, non- profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material, and/or the Gabrielino Tribe. If no institution nor the Gabrielino Tribe accept the resources, they may be donated to a local school or historical society in the area (such as the Culver City Historical Society) for educational purposes.

MM-CUL-4: Prior to the release of the grading bond, the Qualified Archaeologist shall prepare a final report and appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation Site Forms at the conclusion of archaeological monitoring. The report shall include a description of resources unearthed, if any, treatment of the resources, results of the artifact processing, analysis, and research, and evaluation of the resources with respect to the California Register of Historical Resources and CEQA. The report and t he Site Forms shall be submitted by the Applicant to the City, the South Central Coastal Information Center, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the Project and required mitigation measures.

MM-CUL-5: If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during implementation of the Project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD may, with the permission of the land owner, or his or her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The MLD shall complete their inspection and make their recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access by the land owner to inspect the discovery. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Upon the discovery of the Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that t he immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this mitigation measure, with the MLD regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment.

If the NAHC is unable to identify an MLD, or the MLD identified fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner rejects the recommendation of the MLD and the mediation provided for in Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide measur es acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 38 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
authorized representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with Native American human remains with appropriate dignity on the facility property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance.

3.5.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.6 Energy
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
ENERGY: Would the project:
(a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?; or
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.6.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to energy Thresholds (a) and (b), the Certified MND concluded that energy impacts regarding the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflicts with or obstructing a State or local plan would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.6.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a).

Construction
The Certified MND found that construction of the Approved Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy and would not increase the need for new energy infrastructure. Impacts under the Approved Project would be less than significant. The overall daily use and extent of construction equipment to be utilized under the Modified Project and the Approved Project would be similar. However, with a reduction of one -level of subterranean parking and associated excavation/construction activities compared to the Approved Project, the overall extent of construction activities and associated energy use would be expected to be less under the Modified Project compared to the Approved Project. As the Modified Project would include the use of similar equipment and implement similar construction methods as the Approved Project, it would similarly not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy and would not increase the need for new energy infrastructure. Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 39 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Operation
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project operations would consume energy in the form of electricity for lighting, and water conveyance, natural gas for heating, and fossil fuels during vehicle fuel usage. Operation of the Modified Project would require energy in the form of electricity and natural gas for building heating, cooling, cooking, lighting, water demand and wastewater treatment, consumer electronics, and other energy needs; transportation- fuels, primarily gasoline, for vehicles traveling to and from the Project; and diesel for the maintenance and testing of emergency generators.

The Certified MND found that construction of the Modified Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy and would not increase the need for new energy infrastructure. Impacts under the Approved Project would be less than significant. As discussed under Section 3.17, Transportation, the trip generation and vehicles miles travelled under the Modified Project would be less than the Approved Project. Thus, transportation- related fuel would be reduced under the Modified Project. Furthermore, given the Modified Project would implement the same project design features, reduce the number of hotel rooms, and have an otherwise similar scale of development as compared to the Approved Project, the extent of operational energy usage under the Modified Project would also would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy and would not increase the need for new energy infrastructure, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b) . As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate green building design features such as solar PV systems consistent with the energy efficiency standards in the City’s Green Building Code and CALGreen Code. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would promote the use of bicycles as it is located close to many Culver City bike paths and would comply with the CALGreen Code required number of bicycle parking spaces, which have the potential to reduce fuel consumption, as well as criteria pollutant and GHG emissions. In addition, the Project Site is also within a short distance of existing transit stops. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be designed to meet criteria for the LEED Silver Certification level which would meet or exceed the current Title 24 Energy standards. Lastly, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate PDF-AIR-2 and PDF -AIR-3, which provide opportunities for improved energy efficiency that would exceed the regulatory standards. Based on the above, the Modified Project’s features would support and promote the use of renewable energy and energy efficiency and would not conflict with or obstruct any applicable renewable energy or energy efficiency plan, which emphasize energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. Thus, impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts related to conflicts with or obstructing a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency under the Modified Pr oject would be similar to the Approved Project.

3.6.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate any changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 40 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.6.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to energy that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and w ould substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.6.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.6.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.7 Geology and Soils
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
(a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:

(i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Spec ial
Publication 42.

Less Than
Significant No No No No
(ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(iv) Landslides? No Impact No No No No
(b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 41 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
(c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off- site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact No No No No
(f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site of unique
geologic feature.

Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes

3.7.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regard to geology and soils Thresholds (a.i) and (b), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to fault rupture and soil erosion or loss of topsoil impacts would be less than significant under the Approved Project. With regard to Thresholds (a.ii)-(a.iii), (c)-(d), and (f), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, unstable soils, expansive soils, and paleontological resources would be potentially significant under the Approved Project . Implementation of Mitig ation Measure MM-GEO-1 would reduce impacts related to seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, unstable soils, and expansive soils to a less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM- GEO-2 through MM-GEO-5 would reduce paleontological resources impacts to a level less than significant level.

Lastly, no impacts would occur in Thresholds (a.iv) and (d) in regard to landslides or soils capable of supporting septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems.

3.7.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a.i). As indicated in the Certified MND, t he Project Site is located in the seismically active Southern California region and could be subject to moderate to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake on one of the many active Southern California faults. Based on a review of the California Geological Survey (CGS), Alquist-Priolo Investigation Report Map, and as analyzed in the Certified MND, no known active or potentially active surface faults traverse the Project Site, and the Project Site is not located within a designated Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone .9 The nearest fault zone to the Project Site is the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone , located approximately 1.6 miles east of the Project Site. In addition, the Overland Avenue Fault is located approximately 2,000 f eet east of the Project Site, along Overland Avenue. No Special Studies Zones have been delineated by the State of California along any

9 CGS, 2024. Alquist-Priolo Site Investigation Reports. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/apreports/, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 42 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
portion of the Overland Avenue Fault. The potential for surface rupture due to faulting occurring on the Project Site is considered low. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the Culver City Building Code and the most recent California Building Code. Thus, impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (a.ii). As discussed above in Threshold (a.i), the Project Site is located in the seismically active Southern California region and could be subject to moderate to strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake on one of the many active Southern California faults . As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with the Culver City Building Code and the latest standards of the 2019 California Building Code for construction which requires structural design that can accommodate maximum ground accelerations expected from known faults. In addition, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would also comply with the CGS Special Publications 117, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, which provides guidance for evaluation and mitigation of earthquake-related hazards. Furthermore, t he Modified Project would also be required to comply with applicable seismic -related regulatory requirements. Since the Project Site is subject to strong seismic ground shaking, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be subject to potentially significant impacts resulting from strong seismic ground shaking. Compliance with local, regional, and state requirements and i mplementation of Mitigation Measure MM- GEO-1 under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project would reduce impacts to a less than significant level by incorporating site- specific structural and seismic design parameters and recommendations for foundations, retaining walls/shoring, and excavation in a Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation . Thus, impacts in this regard would be similar under the Approved Project and the Modified Project.

Threshold (a.iii). As stated in the Certified MND, a ccording to the DOC, Seismic Hazards Program:

Liquefaction Zones Map, the Project Site is located within a liquefaction hazard zone. 10 Furthermore, site-
specific testing performed as part of the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared for the Certified MND indicated that soils on the Project Site are potentially liquefiable. Thus, impacts related to liquefaction would be potentially significant.

Thus, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-GEO- 1, which would provide site-specific design parameters and recommendations to mitigate the effects of liquefaction. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate ground improvement methods, such as stone columns, to improve the underlying soft and saturated soils for support of the proposed foundation system. In addition, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be required to comply with applicable seismic -related regulatory requirements of the Culver City Building Code and the 2019 California Building Code. Compliance of the regulatory require ments as well as implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-1 to be implemented during construction, would reduce liquefaction impacts to a less than significant level under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project. Thus, impacts in this regard would be similar under the Approved Project and the Modified Project.

Threshold (a.iv). As analyzed in the Certified MND, t he Project Site is flat and is approximately 15 feet above sea level across the property. According to the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared for

10 DOC, 2022. Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction Zones. Available online: https://maps-cnra- cadoc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/cadoc::cgs-seismic-hazards-program-liquefaction-zones/explore, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 43 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
the Approved Project in the Certified MND, the probability of seismically induced landslide occurring on the Project Site is considered to be low due to the general lack of elevation difference slope geometry across or adjacent to the Project Site. Thus, the Certified MND concluded that Approved Project would not be subject to, or result in, landslides. No impacts would occur. Accordingly, no impacts would also occur under the Modified Project.

Threshold (b). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project construction would result in ground surface disruption during excavation and grading that would create the potential for erosion to occur. Wind erosion would be minimized through soil stabilization measures required by the SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), such as daily watering. Potential for water erosion would be reduced by implementation of standard erosion control measures imposed during site preparation and grading activities. As discuss ed in more detail under Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be subject to all existing regulations associated with the protection of water quality.

Construction activities would be carried out in accordance with applicable City standard erosion control practices required pursuant to the most recent California Building Code and the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit issued by t he LARWQCB, as applicable. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control water erosion during the Project’s construction period. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s c ompliance with applicable regulatory requirements would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil , thus impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (c). Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed under Thresholds (a.iii) and (a.iv) above. As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Project Site's fill materials are sandy to silty clays, with a fill thickness of approximately three feet. Below this, younger alluvial deposits, primarily sandy to silty clays, are found up to depths of 30 to 35 ft, while older alluvium, consisting of sands to gravelly sands, is found below 35 feet. Based on the geologic deposits underlying the Project Site, the Project Site soils are considered potentially liquefiable. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project construction and design would be required to comply with the most recent California Building Code, which is designed to assure safe construction, and implement the site -specific design measures in a Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation per Mitigation Measure MM- GEO-1 to ensure that ground and soil stability hazards would not become unstable during construction or operation activities. Thus, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Therefore, impacts related to unstable soils under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the Approved Project concluded that the on-site geologic materials are in the moderate to high expansion range.

The Expansion Index was found to be between 58 and 90, thus, impacts would be potentially significant .

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would incorporate reinforcement for the proposed slabs and site-specific design measures as outlined in a Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation per Mitigation Measure MM- GEO-1, which would reduce impacts to a level less than significant level.

Therefore, impacts regarding expansive soils under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 44 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Threshold (e). The Project Site is located in an urbanized area where municipal wastewater infrastructure already exists. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would connect to the existing infrastructure and would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, thus impacts would not occur. Therefore, impacts under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (f). As discussed in the Certified MND, no vertebrate fossil localities have been documented within the Project Site, but localities do occur nearby in sedimentary deposits similar to those found within the Project Site. As analyzed in the Certified MND, the paleontological sensitivity for the Project Site is considered to be low-to-high within the younger alluvium soils and the sensitivity increases with depth .

There is a potential to encounter significant paleontological resources below a dept h of 10 feet within the Project Site and impacts would be potentially significant. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure s MM-GEO-2 through MM- GEO-5 to reduce potential impacts to previously unknown paleontological resources to a level less than significant level. Therefore, impacts to paleontological resources under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project.

3.7.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.7.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to geology and soils that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be fea sible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.7.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measures set forth in the Certified MND to address geology and soils impacts would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-GEO-1: Site-specific structural and seismic design parameters and recommendations for foundations, retaining walls/shoring, and excavation shall be implemented per the Project’s Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, subject to review and approval by the Culver City Building Safety Division.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 45 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
MM-GEO-2: Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall retain a Qualified Paleontologist to develop and implement a paleontological monitoring program for construction excavations that exceed 10 feet in depth. A Qualified Paleontologist is defined as a paleontologist meeting the criteria established by the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP). The Qualified Paleontologist shall supervise a paleontological monitor who shall be present at such times as required by the Qualified Paleontologist during construction excavations exceeding 10 feet in depth.

Paleontological resources monitoring shall be conducted for all ground disturbing activities that exceed 10 feet in depth in previously undisturbed sediments, and are therefore likely to i mpact high sensitivity alluvial sediments. Monitoring shall consist of visually inspecting fresh exposures of rock for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate, collecting wet or dry screened sediment samples of promising horizons for smaller fossil remains. The frequency of monitoring inspections shall be determined by the Qualified Paleontologist and shall be based on the rate of excavation and grading activities, proximity to known paleontological resources or fossiliferous geologic formations (i.e., older alluvium deposits), the materials being excavated (i.e., native sediments versus artificial fill), and the depth of excavation, and if found, the abundance and type of fossils encountered. Full-time monitoring can be reduced to part-time inspections, or ceased entirely, if determined adequate by the Qualified Paleontologist.

MM-GEO-3: Prior to commencement of demolition or excavation activities, the Qualified Paleontologist shall attend a pre-grade/construction meeting to conduct construction worker paleontological resources sensitivity training for construction personnel. The training session, shall be carried out by the Qualified Paleontologist and shall focus on how to identify paleontological resources that may be encountered during earthmoving activities and the procedures to be followed in such an event. In the event construction crews are phased, additional trainings shall be conducted for new construction personnel. Documentation shall be retained demonstrating that construction personnel attended the training.

MM-GEO-4: If a potential fossil is found, the paleontological monitor shall be allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading and excavation activities in the area of the exposed fossil to facilitate evaluation of the discovery. An appropriate buffer area (usually 50 feet) shall be established around the find where construction activities shall not be allowed to continue. Work shall be allowed to continue outside of the buffer area. At the Qualified Paleontologist’s discretion, and to reduce any construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock/sediment samples for initial processing and evaluation. If the fossil is determined to be significant, the Qualified Paleontologist shall implement a paleontological salvage program to remove the resources from their location, following the guidelines of the SVP. Any fossils encountered and recovered shall be prepared to the point of identification and catalogued before they are submitted to their final repository. Any fossils collected shall be curated at a public, non - profit institution with a research interest in the material and with retrievable storage, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, if such an institution agrees to accept the fossils. If no institution accepts the fossil collection, they shall be donated to a local school in the area for educational purposes.

Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs shall also be filed at the repository and/or school.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 46 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
If construction personnel discover any potential fossils during construction while the paleontological monitor is not present, regardless of the depth of work or location, work at the discovery location shall cease in a 50- foot radius of the discovery until the Qualified Paleontologist has assessed the discovery and recommended and implemented appropriate treatment as described earlier in this measure.

MM-GEO-5: Prior to the release of the grading bond, the Qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a report summarizing the results of the monitoring and salvaging efforts, the methodology used in these efforts, as well as a description of the fossils collected and their significance. The report shall be submitted by the Applicant to the City, the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned agencies to signify the satisfactory completion of the Project and required mitigation measures.

3.7.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS: Would the
project:
(a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?; or

Less Than
Significant
No No No No
(b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Less Than
Significant
No No No No

3.8.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Thresholds (a) and (b) , the Certified MND concluded that impacts would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.8.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a)-(b). The Certified MND found that construction of the Approved Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, such that the Approved Project would have a significant impact on the environment. Impacts in this regard under the Approved Project would be less than significant. The overall daily use and extent of construction equipment to be utilized under the Modified Project and the Approved Project would be similar. However, with a reduction of one -level of subterranean parking and associated excavation/construction activities compared to the Approved Project,

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 47 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
the overall extent of construction activities and associated GHG emissions would be expected to be less under the Modified Project compared to the Approved Project. As the Modified Project would include the use of similar equipment and implement similar c onstruction methods as the Approved Project, it would similarly not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, such that the Modified Project would have a significant impact on the environment . Impacts in this regard under the Modifi ed Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Also, as discussed under Section 3.17, Transportation, the trip generation and VMT under the Modified Project would be less than the Approved Project. Thus, transportation- related GHG emissions would be reduced under the Modified Project. Furthermore, given the Modified Project would implement the same project design features, reduce the number of hotel rooms, and have an otherwise similar scale of development as compared to the Approved Project, the extent of operational GHG emissions under the Modified Project would also would not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that have a significant impact on the environment, similar to the Approved Project.

Given that the Modified Project remains highly similar to the Approved Project, but with fewer hotel rooms, the Modified Project would be consistent with the applicable plans, policies, and regulations to reduce GHG emissions as outlined in the Certified MND for the Approved Project. That is, the Modified Project would be consistent with CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan, SCAG’s RTP/SCS, Culver City Green Building Program Requirements (see Table B-10, Project Consistency with Applicable Culver City Green Building Program Requirements, of the Certified MND), statewide GHG emission reduction strategies (see Table B -11, Project Consistency with Applicable Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies , of the Certified MND), and Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-30-15, for the reasons as evaluated for the Approved Project in the Certified MND. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would induce growth in a Transit Priority Area (TPA), which is near existing transit facilities. Based on the analysis in Section VIII, Greenho use Gas Emissions, of the Certified MND, similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be consistent with, and would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations to reduce GHG emissions.

As the Modified Project would implement the same Project Design Features as the Original Project and the Original Alternative 2, greenhouse gas emission impacts under Modified Alternative 2 would be similar to the Original Alternative 2, which were found to be similar to the Original Project and the Original Project with the Deck Concept in the Draft EIR.

3.8.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.8.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? SCAG adopted the Connect SoCal 2024 (2024- 2050 RTP/SCS) in April 2024, which is an update to the previous Connect SoCal 2020 (2020–2045 RTP/SCS); however, Connect SoCal 2024 has not yet been

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 48 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
certified by CARB as being capable of achieving CARB’s identified GHG reduction targets. Therefore, there is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to geology and soils that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.8.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.8.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS:

Would the project:
(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where s uch a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
No Impact No No No No

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 49 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
(f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
No Impact No No No No

3.9.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to hazards and hazardous materials Thresholds (a) and (f), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and impairment or interference with an emergency response plan would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

Regarding Thresholds (b)-(d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to hazardous materials would be Less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-HAZ-1 and MM-HAZ-

2. Lastly, regarding Thresholds (e) and (g), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts would occur under the Approved Project.

3.9.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project ’s construction activities would use hazardous materials such fuels, paints, adhesives, herbicides and pesticides. These materials would be used, stored, and disposed of in consumer quantities and in accordance with applicable laws and regulations .

Also, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would adhere to all regulatory requirements concerning source hazardous waste reduction measures and applicable City ordinances to ensure that potential human health risk impacts would be less than significant.

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project hotel and restaurant operations would involve small amounts of hazardous materials, such as cleaning solvents and pesticides , however these materials would be used in small amounts in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and manufacturers’ instructions. Further, due to the similarity of the hotel uses that are proposed under the Modified Project and the Approved Project, impacts with respect to the routine transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials would be similar. As such, impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b). As analyzed and documented in the Certified MND, a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) was prepared to address potential hazardous materials conditions as a result of former historic land uses (i.e., gas station and automotive facilities) on the Project Site. The RAP, prepared by Stantec, dated July 15, 2014, is available for review at the Culver City Planning Division. The RAP summarizes previous environmental site assessments dating back to 2007. As detailed in the Certified MND, wells and borings confirmed that soils and groundwater beneath the site were adversely affected by petroleum hydrocarbons, as well as chlorinated hydrocarbons. Because of the site contamination, the LARWQCB required a RAP in 2014 to evaluate alternatives to clean-up or remediate such that petroleum hydrocarbon are reduced to a

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 50 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
point where concentrations meet the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Low -Threat UST Tank Closure Policy (LTCP) criteria or are decreasing such that applicable LTCP criteria are met within a reasonable timeframe. The 2014 RAP identified a preferred remedial alternative involving a series of total fluids extraction (TFE) events that would directly remove, treat and dispose of contaminated soils and groundwater, and in some cases soil vapor. Since 2014, while monitoring at the site has continued, soils and groundwater beneath the site have yet to be fully remediated and the site remains an active remediation site with the LARWQCB.

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM -HAZ-1, which requires preparation of a Soils Management and Remediation Plan (SMRP) for the entire Project Site. The SMRP would establish policy and requirements for the management and disposal of soils and groundwater, as well as for any steel structures, including underground storage tanks ( USTs), should they be encountered, during soil -disturbing activities performed at the Project Site (i.e., excavation, grading, trenching, utility installation or repair, and other human activities) that may disturb potentially contaminated soils or groundwater. The SMRP would describe specific soil -, groundwater- and UST-handing controls required to comply with local, State, and Fe deral overseeing agencies; prevent unacceptable exposure to contaminated soils, groundwater or vapors during construction or operation; and prevent the improper disposal of contaminated soils, groundwater or steel structures. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce soil contamination-related impacts to a less than significant level under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project.

In addition, it is possible that asbestos containing materials (ACM) are present in the existing on- site building, as ACM was not banned until 1989. If released into the environment, ACM could pose a significant hazard to construction workers or the public. Both the Approved project and the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-HAZ-2, which would require a comprehensive survey of the existing building prior to demolition in accordance with applicable regulations —including the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants standards, SCAQMD Rule 1403, and California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) —to verify the presence or a bsence of ACM. If ACM is encountered, MM-HAZ-2 requires remediation or abatement of these materials in accordance with all applicable regulations and standards before building demolition commences. Adherence with this mitigation measure would reduce risks associated with ACM to acceptable levels and associated impacts would be less than significant.

As discussed under Threshold (a), operation of the Modified Project would not create a significant risk of exposure to hazardous materials towards the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Types of hazardous materials to be used in association with the Modified Project such as small quantities of potentially hazardous materials in the form of cleaning solvents, painting supplies, and pesticides for landscaping would be contained, stored, and used i n accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations. The potential for creation of a significant hazard through routine transport of hazardous materials or the release of hazardous materials into the environment is considered less than significant.

Overall, implementation of MM -HAZ-1 and MM-HAZ-2 and compliance with applicable standards and regulations would ensure that potentially significant construction-related impacts associated with hazardous materials releases or accident conditions would be reduced to a less than significant level under both the Approved Project and the Modified Project, with impacts being similar.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 51 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Threshold (c). El Marino Elementary School is located approximately 0.17 miles from the Project Site. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s construction activities would use typical construction - related hazardous materials such as paint, adhesives, and fuels , all of which would be used, stored, and disposed of in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and manufacturers’ instructions. discussed in Threshold (b), remediation at the former gasoline and service station/automotive repair facility would be necessary to clean-up impacted soils and groundwater. Under both he Approved Project and the Modified Project, all remediation would occur in adherence with MM -HAZ-1. Also, project demolition activities could involve the removal of ACM. However, any such removal would occur in adherence with MM - HAZ-2 under both he Approved Project and the Modified Project. The remediation activities and demolition activities would be implemented pursuant to strict regulatory requirements, would be localized to the Project Site, and existing schools are sufficient distance from the Project Site to preclude impacts from the remediation and demolition activities. Under both he Approved Project and the Modified Project, implementation of the prescribed mitigation measures would reduce risks associated with remediation activities and LBPs and ACMs to acceptable levels and associated impacts would be less than significant Furthermore, operation of the Approved Project or the Modified Project would not create a significant risk of exposure to hazardous materials for the public or the environment, including the schools. Occupancy of the proposed hotel and restaurant uses would not cause hazardous substance emissions or generate hazardous waste. Types of hazardous materials to be used in association with the Modified Project such as small quantities of potentially hazardous materials in the form of cleaning solvents, painting supplies, and pesticides for landscaping would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations. As with the Approved Project, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazards or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within a quarter -mile of an existing or proposed school. Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). As analyzed in the Certified MND, t he Project Site is on the list of Open Active Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites from GeoTracker due to its past use as a gasoline and service station , which could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment during construction and operation of the Project. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HAZ-1, potentially significant impacts regarding hazardous materials with the existing Project Site would be reduced to a less than significant level. Further, no off-site facilities were listed on the databases reviewed that would appear to present an environmental concern for the Project Site. Therefore, while the Project Site is located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, development of the Approved Project or the Modified Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (e). The Project Site is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of any airport. The closest airports are Santa Monica Municipal Airport and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), situated approximately 3.4 miles northwest and 2.5 miles south of the site, respectively. Based on the Project Site’s distance to nearby airports, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not cause any airport-related safety hazards or excessive noise, thus no impacts would occur.

Threshold (f). As with the Approved Project, while it is expected that the majority of construction activities for the Modified roject would be confined on-site, construction activities may temporarily affect access on

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 52 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
portions of adjacent streets during certain periods of the day. However, through-access for drivers, including emergency personnel, along all roads would still be provided. In these instances, the Modified Project would implement traffic control measures (e.g., construction flagmen, signage, etc.) to maintain flow and access. Furthermore, in accordance with Culver City requirements, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would develop a Construction Traffic Management Plan (see Mitigation Measur e MM- PS-1), which includes designation of a haul route, to ensure that adequate emergency access is maintained during construction. Therefore, construction is not expected to result in inadequate emergency access under either the Approved Project or the Modified Project.

During operation, both the Approved Project and the Modified Project would generate traffic, however, emergency access to the Project Site and surrounding area would continue to be provided similar to existing conditions.. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project design and access would comply with applicable fire code requirements for emergency evacuation, including proper emergency exits for employees and visitors. Subject to review and approval of Project Site access and circulation plans by the Culver City Fire Department (CCFD), neither the Approved Project nor the Modified Project would impair implementation or physically interfere with adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plans .

As such, impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (g). As documented in the Certified MND, the Project Site is not located in an area subject to wildland fire hazards. Thus, no impacts would occur under the Approved Project or the Modified Project.

3.9.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.9.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to hazards and hazardous materials that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 53 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.9.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measures set forth in the Certified MND to address hazards and hazardous materials impacts would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant hazardous materials impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-HAZ-1: The Applicant shall retain a qualified environmental consultant to prepare a Soil Management and Remediation Plan (SMRP) for review and approval by the Culver City Building Safety Division, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB), as necessary, prior to the commencement of excavation and grading activities. The plan would include measures to remove and/or treat/remediate the impacted soils and groundwater to a level determined by the LAR WQCB to be protective of human health and the environment and compatible with commercial use, in compliance with all applicable regulatory standards, under supervision of a certified environmental consultant licensed to oversee such remediation. The SMRP shall describe measures for (i) excavation of soils, (ii) characterization of soils to determine whether they qualify as hazardous waste under regulations such as 22 C.C.R. § 66262.11 or other regulations identified in the SMRP or otherwise identified by DTSC and/or LARWQCB, and (iii) disposal of excavated soils in compliance with all applicable regulations. The SMRP sh all also describe measures for sampling, treatment and disposal of groundwater generated during construction as discussed in MM-HYD-1. The SMRP shall also provide measures for the evaluation of vapor intrusion risk at the Project site, and if necessary, modification of the Project design and/or installation of a vapor intrusion mitigation system consistent with the procedures and performance standards set forth in DTSC’s October 2011 Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Advisory or as otherwise determined applicable by DTSC at the time of construction. Upon completion of the Soil Management and Remediation Plan, the Applicant shall contact the LARWQCB and DTSC, as necessary, to obtain a closure letter that states no further soils testing or remediation is required on the Project Site.

MM-HAZ-2: Prior to the issuance of any permit for the demolition or alteration of the existing on-site buildings, a comprehensive ACMs survey of the buildings shall be performed. If no ACMs are found, the Applicant shall provide a letter to the Culver City Building Safety Division from a qualified asbestos abatement consultant indicating that no ACMs are present in the on- site buildings. If ACMs are found to be present, they shall be abated in compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 1403 as well as all other applicable State and Federal rules and regulations.

3.9.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 54 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the
project:
(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or groundwater
quality?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surface in a
manner which would:

(i) result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(iii) create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.10.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to hydrology and water quality Threshold (a), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant under the Approved Project with i mplementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HYD-1. In regard to T hresholds (b)-(e), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to groundwater supplies, drainage patterns, flooding , and conflicts with a water quality control or sustainable groundwater management plan would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 55 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.10.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a) –(e). With one less subterranean parking level, t he Modified Project would require less excavation for the hotel building than the Approved Project, but would have a generally similar building footprint as the Approved Project. If any removed groundwater contains contaminates that exceed acceptable water quality regulatory standards of the LARWQCB or other appropriate agencies, this could be a potentially significant impact. As such, both the Approved Project and the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM- HYD-1 to address this potential impact, which requires implementation and completion of a dewatering plan that would dispose of contaminated groundwater in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HYD-1, along with Mitigation Measure MM -HAZ-1, would ensure that potentially significant impacts regarding groundwater contamination during dewatering activities on the Project Site are reduced to a less than significant level.

With regard to long -term water quality and hydrology impacts, per the applicable requirements of Chapter 5.05, Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control, Section 5.05.040, Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) Requirements for New Development and Redevelopment Projects, of the CCMC, the Approved Project and the Modified Project would require a stormwater mitigation plan that complies with the most recent LARWQCB approved SUSMP. Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not increase runoff compared to existing conditions such that off -site erosion , siltation, flooding, or pollution occurs following redevelopment of the Project Site. As with the Approved Project, impacts related to hydrology and water quality under the Modified Project would be less than significant after mitigation, as applicable (Threshold (a)), and would be similar to the Approved Project. Other impacts under the Modified Project related to groundwater recharge and conflicts with water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans would also be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

3.10.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.10.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to hydrology and water quality that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 56 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.10.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measure set forth in the Certified MND to address hydrology and water quality would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant hydrology or water quality impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-HYD-1: If dewatering activities occur on -site during future redevelopment, samples shall be obtained from the water and analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxygenates to ensure that they do not exceed applicable discharge requirements. Should the samples exceed any applicable discharge requirement, a dewatering plan shall be prepared by the Project applicant for submittal to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (LARWQCB), Los Angeles County, and othe r appropriate agencies determined appropriate in consultation with the LARWQCB for review and approval. The plan shall include but not be limited to sampling of groundwater generated during construction that may be contaminated; and treatment and disposal of contaminated groundwater generated during construction in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Written verification from the LARWQC B of approval of a dewatering plan completion shall be submitted to the Culver City Planning Division, Building Safety Division, and Department of Public Works prior to issuance of grading permit.

3.10.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.11 Land Use and Planning
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
(a) Physically divide an established community?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than
Significant No No Yes No

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 57 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.11.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to land use and planning Thresholds (a) and (b), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to the division of an established community and conflicts with a land use plan, policy, or regulation would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.11.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is considered an infill development providing in keeping with the commercial character of the surrounding area. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project does not propose uses that would physically separate or otherwise disrupt an existing residential use on or adjacent to the Project Site . Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b). At the time of the Certified MND, the Project Site had a General Plan Land Use designation of General Corridor and was zoned Commercial General (CG). The General Corridor Land Use designation and CG zone allowed small - to medium-scale commercial uses, emp hasizing community-serving retail, office, and service uses, which were consistent with the General Corridor Land Use designation. As discussed in the Certified MND, the Approved Project would be consistent with the applicable (former) General Plan and Zoning provisions of the City. As demonstrated in the Certified MND analysis, with implementation of the Project’s design features and prescribed mitigation measures, all identified potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed uses and land use designations would be reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in conflicts with the applicable General Plan or Zoning Code or any other applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation such that significant physical impacts on the environment would occur. Impacts for the Approved Project would be less than significant.

The Modified Project is proposing a similar hotel building with associated retail use and would also result in less than significant impacts, with mitigation as applicable, as demonstrated in this Addendum. The Modified Project would also be consistent wi th the site’s current General Plan land use and zoning designation “Mixed Use Corridor 2” (MU-2). Thus, as with the Approved Project, The Modified Project would not result in conflicts with the applicable General Plan or Zoning Code or any other applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation such that significant physical impacts on the environment would occur.

Impacts for the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

3.11.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 58 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.11.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? With regard to new plans, the City of Culver City General Plan 2045 was approved on August 26, 2024, and went into effect on October 9, 2024. The General Plan 2045 is intended as a long- range planning document that serves as a roadmap for future decisions concerning a variety of issues, including land use, economic growth, transportation, housing, climate change, and more. As indicated above, the Project Site’s new land use and zoning designation is “Mixed Use Corridor 2” (MU-2). The Modified Project’s proposed uses ar e allowed under these designations. The Modified would also be developed per the applicable development standards of the updated Zoning Code. Thus, the Modified Project would not result in conflicts with the applicable General Plan or Zoning Code or any other applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation such that significant physical impacts on the environment would occur. Impacts for the Modified Project would be less than significant. Otherwise, there is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to land use and planning that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more si gnificant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.11.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.11.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.12 Mineral Resources
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
(a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
No Impact No No No No
(b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan?
No Impact No No No No

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 59 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.12.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to mineral resources Thresholds (a) and (b), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locally-important mineral resource would occur under the Approved Project.

3.12.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a)-(b). As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City and is currently developed with a single-story commercial (retail) building and associated asphalt-paved surface parking lot. As such, the potential of uncovering mineral resources during construction activities is considered low. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan as there are no known mineral resources or mineral resource recovery sites on or near the Project Site.

Since the Approved Project and Modified Project are located within the same Project Site, no impacts related to mineral resources would occur under the Approved Project or the Modified Project.

3.12.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.12.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to mineral resources that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be fea sible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.12.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.12.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 60 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.13 Noise
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
NOISE: Would the project:
(a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(c) For a project located within a private air strip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact No No No No

3.13.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to noise Thresholds (a)-(c), the C ertified MND concluded that impacts to the generation of permanent increase of ambient noise levels, generation of excessive groundborne vibration, and proximity to a private airstrip/airport would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.13.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As discussed in the Certified MND, e xisting noise sensitive uses within 500 f eet of the Project Site include the existing one- and two-story single-family residences located across the service alley to the north and west of the Project Site.

On-Site Construction Noise
Construction activities and equipment associated with the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be constructed using typical construction techniques, no impact pile driving would be used. Project construction would require the use of mobile heavy equipment with high noise -level characteristics. Individual pieces of construction equipment expected to be used during Modified Project construction could produce maximum noise levels of 74 A-weighted decibels (dBA) to 90 dBA at a reference distance of 50 feet from the noise source.

The Modified Project would result in potentially significant impacts if Project construction occurred outside of the allowable CCMC permitted hours of 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM Monday through Friday; 7:00 PM and 9:00 AM Saturdays; and 7:00 PM and 10:00 AM Sundays; or, if Project -related operations would cause ambient noise levels to increase by 5 dBA Leq or more. However, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would install a temporary sound barrier during construction that blocks the line -of-sight between the Project Site and the residential uses to the west and northwest achieving a minimum 10 dBA reduction in noise. With the temporary sound barrier, as with the Approved Project, construction noise

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 61 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
levels are estimated to reach a maximum of 70 dBA at the nearest residential uses to the north and west of the Project Site. Thus, impacts related to on-site construction noise would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Off-Site Construction Activities
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would require the use of delivery and haul truck trips during various phases of construction, although no truck trips would occur between 8:00 PM and 8:00 AM Monday Through Friday, before 9:00 AM or after 7:00 PM on Saturday, or before 10:00 AM and 7:00 PM on Sunday. Haul trucks would be anticipated to access the Project Site from Slauson Avenue to remove demolition materials and provide deliveries to the Project Site during construction activities. The Modified Project’s maximum number of daily haul truck trips would be similar to the Approved Project, but with only one level of subterranean parking, the Modified Project’s use of haul trucks would occur over a shorter duration than the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s truck trips per day would result in a negligible noise level increase and would not increase noise levels by a “clearly noticeable” increase of 5 dBA over the ambient condition. As with the Approved Proje ct, the Modified Project’s off-site construction noise impacts would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Operation On-Site Noise
The existing noise environment in the Project vicinity is dominated by traffic noise from nearby roadways, as well as nearby commercial and residential activities. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s long-term operation of the Project would have a minimal effect on the noise environment in proximity to the Project Site. Noise generated by the Modified Project would result primarily from normal operation of the building mechanical equipment, outdoor/open space activities, parking garage, loading docks and refuse collection, and off-site traffic.

Fixed Mechanical Equipment
As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s operation of mechanical equipment such as air conditioning equipment may generate audible noise levels. However, mechanical equipment would be shielded from nearby noise sensitive uses to attenuate noise and avoid conflicts with adjacent uses. It is not anticipated that the mechanical equipment would be significantly different under the Modified Project compared to the mechanical equipment proposed under the Approved Project. In addition, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with the City’s noise standards, which establish maximum permitted noise levels from mechanical equipment. As such, compliance with the City’s noise standards would ensure that operational noise impacts are minimal. Therefore, noise impacts from fixed mechanical equipment during operation under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Outdoor/Open Space Activities
Under the Approved Project, there would be an outdoor deck on the rooftop and outdoor courtyard spaces (ground floor, second and third floors) provided for the use of the hotel guests and visitors. As analyzed in the Certified MND, these spaces were all found to result in likely imperceptible noise levels at nearby noise sensitive rectors due to their distance, elevation, and/or shielding by the building envelope. The Modified Project would remove the Approved Project’s outdoor rooftop areas, but would include an interior courtyard on level 2, similar to the Approved Project. Because of its internal location, noise occurring within this internal space would be shielded by the 5- story building and likely imperceptible at the nearby sensitive

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 62 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
receptors. Furthermore, all on -site activities would be subject to compliance with applicable Culver City operational noise regulations and requirements, such as those included in the CCMC. Therefore, noise impacts from outdoor/open space activities under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Parking Garage
The Modified Project would consist of one subterranean parking level, as opposed to the Approved Project that consisted of two subterranean parking levels. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s access to the subterranean parking level would be adjacent to the alleyway but would include a barrier extending along its ramp length to minimize noise from vehicles entering the parking garage . All cars visiting the Project Site would enter from the southwest corner driveway on Slauson Avenue. As analyzed in the Certified MND, the noise generated by vehicles entering/exiting the subterranean parking garage would be less than the measured daytime and nighttime ambient noise levels for the nearby residential uses.

Therefore, impacts related to noise generated by the parking garage under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Loading Dock and Refuse Collection
As with the Approved Project, loading and refuse collection for the Modified Project would be located at the northern end of the Project Site along the service alley. Loading activities would be enclosed and shielded from surrounding sensitive uses. Based on a noise survey that was conducted at a loading dock and trash collection facilities by E nvironmental Science Associates (ESA), loading dock activity (namely idling semi- trucks and backup alarm beeps) and trash compactors could generate noise levels of approximately 70 dBA equivalent continuous sound level ( Leq) and 66 dBA Leq, respectively, at a reference distance of 50 feet. As analyzed in the Certified MND, loading dock/trash collection noise levels from the Approved Project were calculated to be less than 50 dBA Leq at the nearest noise sensitive receptors. The Modified Project would result in similar noise level, which would not surpass the 5 dBA increase over ambient conditions significant noise im pact threshold. As such, impacts related to noise generated by loading and refuse collection activities under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Operation Off-site (traffic noise)
As analyzed in the Certified MND, operational traffic noise levels from the Approved Project concluded that the maximum increase in Project-related traffic noise levels over existing traffic noise levels would be

0.3 dBA, CNEL (community noise equivalent level), which would occur along Slauson Avenue, west of Jefferson Boulevard. The maximum cumulative noise increase from the Project plus related Project traffic would be 1.1 dBA CNEL, which would occur along Sepulveda Boulevard, between Slauson Avenue and Centinela Avenue. These increases in noise levels would be well below a “clearly noticeable” increase of

5.0 dBA CNEL in an area characterized by normally acceptable noise levels, and the increase in sound level would be lower at the remaining roadway segments analyzed. As discussed under Section 3.17, Transportation, the trip generation and vehicles miles travelled under the Modified Project would be less than the Approved Project. Thus, mobile-source source noise levels would be reduced under the Modified Project and any traffic noise increase would be well below a “clearly noticeable” increase of 5.0 dBA. As such, impacts related to traffic noise generated under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 63 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Threshold (b).

Construction
The Certified MND included the below listed significance thresholds evaluate potential vibration impacts Project construction activities. A potentially significant impact would occur under the following circumstances:
• Potential building damage – Project construction activities cause ground-borne vibration levels to exceed 0.2 inch-per-section PPV at the nearest buildings. • Potential human perception - Project construction activities cause ground-borne vibration levels to exceed 0.035 inch-per-second PPV at the nearest residential buildings.

Construction activities and equipment associated with the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be constructed using typical construction techniques, no impact pile driving would be used. Project construction would require the use of mobile heavy equipment,.

As with the Approved Project, i ndividual pieces of construction equipment expected to be used during Modified Project construction could produce vibration velocities from operation of construction equipment in the range of approximately 0.001 to 0.031 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 50 feet from the source of activity.. The nearest single-family residential buildings across the service alley are located approximately 50 feet from the Project Site. These structures could be exposed to vibra tion levels from construction activities that would range from approximately from 0.001 to 0.031 inch per second PPV during construction, when construction activities occur near the property line. Th e vibration levels would not exceed the 0.2 inch per second PPV significance threshold for potential residential building damage or the 0.035 inch-per-second PPV human annoyance threshold. In addition, the Modified Project would result in similar vibration levels as the Approved Project at the oil pipeline that runs below the service alley, which were determined to be approximately 0.146 inches per second PPV under the Approved Project . As analyzed in the Certified MND, the existing oil pipeline, which is 18 f eet from the Project Site, would experience vibrations from construction activities, reaching up to 0.146 inches per second PPV . The Certified MND concluded that the Approved Project’s construction would not cause any damage or rupture the existing oil line .

Based on the above, vibration impacts during Modified Project construction activities would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s operations would include typical commercial-grade stationary mechanical and electrical equipment, such as air handling units, condenser units, and exhaust fans, which would produce vibration. In addition, the primary sources of transient vibration would include passenger vehicle circulation within the proposed parking area. Groundborne vibration generated by each of the above-mentioned activities would generate up to 0.005 inches per second PPV adjacent to the Project Site. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s potential vibration levels from all operational sources at the closest existing sensitive receptor locations would be less than the significance threshold of

0.2 inch per second PPV significance threshold for potential residential building damage and 0.04 inch per

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 64 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
second PPV for perceptibility. Thus, operational vibration impacts would be less than significant , similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (c). As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Project Site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport . The nearest airports are the Santa Monica Municipal Airport and LAX, located approximately 3.4 miles northwest and 2.5 miles to the south of the Project Site, respectively.

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not expose people in the Project vicinity to excessive noise levels from airport use and no impact would occur. Therefore, no impacts related to airstrips/airports would occur under the Approved Project or the Modified Project.

3.13.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.13.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to noise and vibration that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be f easible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure..

3.13.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.13.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 65 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.14 Population and Housing
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
(a) Induce substantial population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than
Significant No No Yes No
(b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact No No No No

3.14.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to population and housing Threshold (a), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to substantial population growth would be less than significant. With regards to displacement under Threshold (b), the Certified MND concluded that no impacts would occur.

3.14.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As with the Approved Project, t he Modified Project does not include any residential uses that would directly increase the population growth in the area. Any indirect population growth by the Project within the City and/or neighboring cities would be nominal and would not materially affect forecasted City or SCAG growth assumptions.

In addition, the Modified Project would generate a relatively similar number of employees as the Approved Project. The Certified MND concluded that the Approved Project would be within SCAG’s employment growth assumptions for the City. As such, similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not generate growth beyond the range of development anticipated within the established SCAG regional forecast for the City. Thus, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not induce substantial population growth in the area either directly or indirectly and impacts would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b). Existing uses on the Project Site include a single-story commercial (retail) building and an asphalt-paved surface parking lot along Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue, all of which would be demolished and removed to support development of the Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing local populations or housing such that construction of replacement housing would be necessary. Thus, no impacts would occur.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 66 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.14.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.14.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? The 2024–2050 RTP/SCS, known as Connect SoCal, includes SCAG’s updated population, households and employment projections for the region as well as local jurisdictions up through 2050.11 As with the Certified MND’s analysis of SCAG’s growth projections, the Modified Project’s contribution of population would be a small fraction compared to projected population estimates. Further, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s contribution to population growth would continue an infill growth pattern near transit facilities that is encouraged locally in the City’s plans and regionally by SCAG policies. Lastly, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not generate a substantial permanent popul ation growth in the Project area and City. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

Otherwise, t here is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to population and housing that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.14.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.14.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

11 SCAG, 2024. Connect SoCal 2024, April 2024. Available online at: https://scag.ca.gov/connect-socal, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 67 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.15 Public Services
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project:
(a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the
following public services:

i) Fire protection?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
ii) Police protection?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
iii) Schools? Less Than
Significant No No No No
iv) Parks? Less Than
Significant No No No No
v) Other public facilities? Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.15.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to public services Thresholds (a.i)-(a.ii), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to fire protection and police protection would be less than significant under the Approved Project with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM -PS-1. With regards to schools, parks, and other public facilities, Thresholds (a.iii)-(a.v), the Certified MND concluded that impacts would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.15.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a.i). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would involve construction activities and intensify the use of the Project Site so that it would increase demand on fire protection, response times, emergency access, and water infrastructure. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be subject to compliance with the Culver City Fire Code (CCFC) requirements (including Chapter 33 of the 2019 CFC, Fire Safety During Construction and Demolition) which includes requirements to avoid substantial fire risk during construction activities. Regarding emergency access and response times during construction activities, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-PS-1, which requires a Construction Traffic Management Plan to minimize disruptions to through traffic flow, maintain emergency vehicle access to the Project Site and neighborhood land uses, and schedule worker and construction equipment delivery to avoid peak traffic hours. Thus, impacts under the Modified Project during construction would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 68 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
During operation, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would increase the amount of development at the Project Site and generate an increase of employees and visitors necessitating and incremental increase the demand for fire protection and emergency medical services . Regarding response times, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be well served by alternative surrounding roadways with multiple alternative routes for emergency access and be located in close proximity to multiple fire stations. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be subject to compliance with fire protection design standards, as necessary, per the California Building Code, California Fire Code, the CCMC, and the CCFD, to ensure adequate fire protection. Culver City’s standard conditions of approval generally require that plans for building construction, fire flow requirements, fire protection devices (e.g., sprinklers and alarms), fire hydrants and spacing, and fire access including ingres s/egress, turning radii, driveway width, and grading would be prepared for review and approval by the CCFD . As the Modified Project proposed a similar hotel development as the Approved Project, albeit with fewer hotel rooms, it would not result in the physical expansion of an existing fire station or a new fire station or require additional staffing to the fire protection facilities servicing the Project Site. Therefore, impacts to fire services during operation under the Modified Project would be less t han significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (a.ii). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in construction activities that could affect emergency access and increase demand for police protection services. As with the Approved Project, the construction of the Modified Project could increase potential demand for Culver City P olice Department (CCPD) services related to theft or vandalism and increased worker activity, as well as construction traffic that could affect emergency response times. To minimize disruptions to through traffic flow, maintain emergency vehicle access to the Project Site and neighboring land uses, and schedule worker and construction equipment delivery to avoid peak traffic hours, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM -PS-1, which requires a Final Construction Traffic Management Given the visibility of the Project Site from adjacent roadways and surrounding properties, existing police presence in Culver City, maintained emergency access, and construction fencing, the Modified Project is not expected to increase demand on existing police services to a meaningful extent.

Therefore, with the incorporation of the Modified Project’s Construction Traffic Management Plan (MM- PS-1), the Modified Project would have a less than significant temporary impact with mitigation on police protection during the construction phases, similar to the Approved project. .

During operation, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would increase the amount of development at the Project Site and generate an increase of employees and visitors necessitating and incremental increase the demand for police protection services. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would include site security features such as building design to assist in crime prevention efforts and to reduce the demand for police protection services. The Modified P roject design would include lighting on entry-ways and public areas to help reduce the potential for on-site crimes, including loitering, theft, and burglaries, and reduce demand for CCPD services. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with CCMC Section 17.560 to ensure that the site design incorporates required security and crime reduction features. Given the Modified Project's planned on- site security measures, emergency access, and compliance with applicable local regulations, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is not expected to be beyond the scope of available police services . N o new or expanded police facilities would be constructed as a result of the Modified Project. Thus, operational impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 69 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Threshold (a.iii) . As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project operation would incrementally increase demand for school services due to nominal indirect population growth. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project impacts related to schools would be addressed through payment of required Senate Bill 50 (SB 50) development fees pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, as applicable. In accordance with SB 50, the payment of these fees are deemed to provide full and complete mitigation for impacts to school facilities. As with the Appr oved Project, the Modified Project is not anticipated to result in substantial adverse physical impacts to schools that would alter existing school facilities or result in the need for new facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, thus impacts would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (a.iv). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s operation would incrementally increase demand for park services. The Approved Project and Modified Project would not generate a new direct residential population as no residential uses are proposed. Despite the incremental indirect population increase, most hotel and restaurant employees are not expected to use local parks given limited lunch time hours, and to the extent they do use local parks it would likely be for passive recreation (walking or eating lunch) on weekdays when use of these parks is not considered at peak (i.e., peak usage of parks often occurs on weekends when the office uses are not in operation). In addition, although there is the possibility that hotel guests may utilize local parks and recreational facilities, the demand is also expected to be negligible since hotel guests would utilize the recreation amenities provided within the hotel, including the courtyards, fitness center, and pool uses that would be provided o n-site. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is not anticipated to result in substantial adverse physical impacts to parks that would alter existing park facilities or result in the need for new facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, thus impacts would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (a.v). As analyzed in the Certified MND, the Project Site is located in close proximity to various libraries in the City that would serve the Approved Project and Modified Project during operation. As with the Approved Project, introduction of new daytime employees and a nominal indirect population increase under the Modified Project would not affect the provision of library services. The Project’s employees and visitors would utilize and , to some extent, impact the maintenance of public facilities, including roads.

However, implementation of the Project would result in a minimal indirect population increase. Therefore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not significantly increase the use of government services compared to existing conditions. Construction activities would result in a temporary increased use of the surrounding roads. However, the use of such facilities would not require maintenance beyond normal requirements. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s applicant would need to pay all applicable impact fees of Culver City. Based on the above, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is not anticipated to result in substantial adverse physical impacts to other public facilities that would alter existing public facilities or result in the need for new facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts; thus, impacts would be less than significant, and similar to the Approved Project.

3.15.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 70 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
major changes have occurred that would constitute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate any changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.15.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to public services that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasi ble and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.15.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measure set forth in the Certified MND to address public services impacts would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant cultural resource impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project.

MM-PS-1: Construction Traffic Management Plan – A Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be developed by the Project contractor in consultation with the Project’s traffic and/or civil engineer and approved by Culver City’s Building Official, Engineer and/or Planning Manager, as applicable, prior to issuance of any Project demolition, grading or excavation permit. The Final Plan shall also be reviewed and approved by Culver City’s Fire and Police Departments. The Culver City’s Building Official, City Engineer and/or Planning Manager, as applicable reserve the right to reject any engineer at any time and to require that the Plan be prepared by a different engineer.

Prior to commencement of construction, the contractor shall advise the Public Works Inspector and Building Inspector (“Inspectors”) of the construction schedule and shall meet with the Inspectors. Also, biweekly construction management meetings with City Staff and other surrounding developments that will potentially be under construction at around the same time as the Project shall be required, as determined appropriate by City Staff, to ensure concurrent construction projects are managed in collaboration with one another.

The Construction Traffic Management Plan shall identify, at a minimum, the following to the satisfaction of the City:
 The name and telephone number of a contact person who can be reached 24 hours a day regarding construction traffic complaints or emergency situations.  An up-to-date list of local police, fire, and emergency response organizations and procedures for the continuous coordination of construction activity, potential delays, and any alerts related to unanticipated road conditions or delays, with local police, fire, and emergency response agencies. Coordination shall include the assessment of any alternative access routes that might be

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 71 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
required through the site, and maps showing access to and within the site and to adjacent properties.
 Procedures for the training and certification of the flag persons.  The location, times, and estimated duration of any roadway closures, traffic detours, use of protective devices, warning signs, and staging or queuing areas.  The location and travel routes of off-site staging and parking locations.  The location of temporary power, portable toilet and trash and materials storage locations.
 The timing and duration of all street and/or lane closures and shall be made available to the City in digital format for posting on the City's website and distribution via email alerts on the City's "Gov Delivery" system. The Plans shall be updated weekly during the duration of Project construction, as determined necessary by the City Department of Public Works or designee determined appropriate by Public Works.
 Prior to approval of the Plan, the applicant shall conduct one (1) Community Meeting pursuant to the notification requirements of the City's Community Meeting guidelines, to discuss and provide the following information to the surrounding community:
1) Construction schedule and hours.
2) Framework for construction phases.
3) Identify traffic diversion plan by phase and activity. 4) Potential location of construction parking and office trailers. 5) Truck hauling routes and material deliveries ( i.e., identify the potential routes and restrictions. Discuss the types and number of trucks anticipated and for what construction activity).
6) Emergency access plan.
7) Demolition plan.
8) Staging plan for the concrete pours, material loading and removal. 9) Crane location(s).
10) Accessible applicant and contractor contacts during construction activity and during off hours (relevant email address and phone numbers).

3.15.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 72 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.16 Recreation
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
RECREATION: Would the project:
(a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that s ubstantial
physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.16.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to recreation Thresholds (a) and (b), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to recreational facilities would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.16.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a)-(b). As discussed in Section 3.15, Public Services, Threshold (a.iv) above, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s use of existing parks is not expected to increase as a result of the Project, given limited lunch time hours and minimal number of hotel and restaurant employees. In addition, although there is the possibility that hotel guests may utilize local parks and recreational facilities, the demand is also expected to be negligible since hotel guests would utilize the recreation amenities provided within the hotel, including the courtyards, fitness center, and pool uses that would be provided on- site.

Thus, recreational i mpacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant , similar to the Approved Project.

3.16.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would constitute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.16.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to recreation that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 73 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.16.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.16.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 74 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.17 Transportation
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
TRANSPORTATION: Would the project:
(a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.17.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to transportation Threshold (a), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-TRANS-1 and MM-TRANS-2. In regard to Thresholds (b)-(d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts related to conflict s with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), hazards due to geometric design features, and inadequate emergency access would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.17.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As discussed in the Certified MND, a traffic analysis was performed for the Approved Project based on the Traffic Study for the Jeff Hotel Project Proposed at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City (herein referred to as the “Traffic Study”), prepared by Crain & Associates, 2020. The Traffic Study evaluated impacts for a variety issues areas including: transit facilities, bicycle facilities, pedestrian facilities, roadway facilities, freeway ramp queuing, freeway mainline segments , residential street segments, project site queuing and parking (for informational purposes). As discussed in the Traffic Study, two mitigation measures were identified to address the potentially significant impact at Intersection No. 3 (Jefferson Boulevard & I-405 Freeway Northbound Ramps). Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 requires the Approved Project to develop a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM Plan). The TDM Plan would include measures that would prioritize, to the extent possible, the reduction of Project vehicle trips, which would align with the requirements of the CCMC and the goals of the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Although the implementation of the above-mentioned TDM plan would result in a reduction in Approved Project vehicle trips, no percent decrease in Project vehicle trips was assumed in the Traffic Study to provide a more conservative mitigation analysis. Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-2 requires the Approved Project to contribute funding to support the installation of closed -circuit television ( CCTV) cameras at Intersection No. 3 ( Jefferson Boulevard & I -405 Freeway Northbound Ramps) in order to observe traffic operations and respond rapidly to traffic incidents that can interrupt vehicle flow and transit

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 75 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
service. With implementation of the mitigation measures, the Project’s impacts at Intersection No. 3 (Jefferson Boulevard & I -405 Freeway Northbound Ramps) would be reduced to a less -than-significant level. The remaining issues were all found to result in less than significant impacts.

Based on the Supplemental Traffic Impact Study prepared for the Modified Project (see Attachment A to this document), the Modified Project is expected to result in a net increase of 252 daily weekday trips including 67 AM peak hour trips (26 inbound and 41 outbound) and -7 PM peak hour trips (-1 inbound and -6 outbound). When compared to the Approved Project’s trip generation estimates that were based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual (10 th Edition), the Modified Project would experience reductions in vehicle trips by 835 daily trips (a 77% reduction), 5 AM peak hour (a 7% reduction), and 74 PM peak hour (a 110% reduction) trips. Therefore, traffic -related impacts would be reduced when compared to the Approved Project.

Furthermore, as analyzed in the Supplement al Traffic Study, vehicular access for the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project. As is the case under both projects, site access would be via dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue and from the public alley that connects to Slaus on Avenue.

Vehicles are expected to enter from Slauson Avenue, either drop passengers in the drop-off zone, or drive down to the subterranean parking garage, or drive to the ground floor parking area off the public alley. The Approved Project determined that spillover is not anticipated at the site driveways based on the proposed design and parking operations. As the Modified Project would generate fewer vehicle trips, the queuing at the site driveways would be reduced.

Additionally, the intersection of Slauson Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard was evaluated for queuing conditions for the Approved Project. Based on the analysis, it was determined that vehicle queues at the northeastbound left -turn lane, which would already experience spillover conditions, would experience worse queues with the addition of the Approved Project trips. Multiple alternatives were developed for City consideration that would provide additional capacity to the northeastbound left-turn lane. The City reviewed the design alternatives but did not provide final approval of the design. Given that the Modified Project would produce fewer vehicle trips than the Approved Project, it is assumed that the Modified Project would not exceed the queues of the Approved Project and therefore the design alternatives are assumed to remain appropriate.

Overall, the conclusion of the Supplemental Traffic Study was that the traffic impacts associated with the Modified Project would not exceed those of the Approved Project and there would not be any new potentially significant impacts. The Modified Project would also conform to the Condition of Approval set forth under Resolution No. 2021- P003 for the Approved Project, including the v oluntary neighborhood traffic intrusion and parking measures discussed in the Certified MND.

Threshold (b). As discussed in the Certified MND, the Project Site is in proximity to the Westfield-Culver City Transit Center, which is a City -designated TPA. Since the Project Site is within a TPA, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.

Threshold (c). As discussed in the Certified MND, there are no existing hazardous design features such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections on-site or within the Project vicinity. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in restriping along S lauson Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard, however, the restriping would decrease the potential for vehicle conflicts and improve traffic conditions. As with the

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 76 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Approved Project, the Modified Project would involve changes to access points, such as new driveways along Slauson Avenue and two drive aisles separated by a concrete column near the back-of-sidewalk. One aisle w ould be used for passenger drop- offs and pick -ups, and the other for access to the subterranean parking level. There would be two exits onto an alley: one for both drive aisles and one for the subterranean parking level. Vehicles would travel north or south along the alley and all access improvements would be in compliance with City standards, Therefore, impacts related to hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project may temporarily affect access on portions of adjacent streets during certain periods of the day, including during construction or potential off- site infrastructure upgrades/improvements. Nonetheless, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement traffic control measures to maintain flow and access. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM -PS-1, which includes designation of a haul route, to ensure that adequate emergency access is maintained during construction activities (See Section

3.15, Public Services).

During operation, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in improvements to access as discussed in Threshold (c) above. Emergency access to the Project Site and Project vicinity would continue to be served by the surrounding roadway network. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would comply with applicable fire code requirements for emergency evacuation and provide adequate emergency exits for employees and visitors. Thus, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in less than significant impacts, similar to the Approved Project.

3.17.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.17.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? With regard to new plans, the City of Culver City General Plan 2045 was approved on August 26, 2024, and went into effect on October 9, 2024. The General Plan 2045 update to the previous General Plan is intended as a long- range planning document that serve s as a roadmap for future decisions concerning a variety of issues, including land use, economic growth, transportation, housing, climate change, and more.

Additionally, the 2024–2050 RTP/SCS, known as Connect SoCal, includes SCAG’s updated mobility projections for the region as well as local jurisdictions up through 2050.

Culver City Mobility Element
The Culver City Mobility Element underwent significant updates as part of the General Plan 2045 including a focus on multimodal transportation, downtown corridor improvements, enhanced safety measures, community engagement, and environmental considerations . The Mobility Element identifies existing

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 77 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
community mobility-related concerns and opportunities, and establishe s goals, policies, and guidance to address these concerns for the future improvement of the transportation network, considering emerging technologies and innovations. The Modified Project would be consistent with the Mobility Element’s goals including Goal M-1: a transportation network that is safe and accessible for all ages, physical abilities, and financial means; Goal M-4: a transportation system that provides affordable or free, equitable, and efficient access to employment centers, residential communities, schools, and other essential services; and Goal M- 8: an active transportation network that supports healthy living and expands access to social determinants of health.
12 As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is located in an urbanized area of the City with existing roadway infrastructure. The Modified Project would contribute to a safe and accessible transportation network by providing a pedestrian-friendly design and bicycle parking that promotes active transportation to improve pedestrian safety and accessibility throughout the Project Site and Project vicinity. The Modified Project would not conflict with the Culver City General Plan 2045 Mobility Element such that any adverse physical impacts to the environment would occur.

SCAG’s 2024-2050 RTP/SCS
The 2024- 2050 RTP/SCS includes several updates compared to the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS including enhanced focus on equity, climate resilience, updated project priorities, and new technology and innovation.13 Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project would develop an infill development that would further connect and sustain communities in the City by providing alternative and active transportation through the implementation of bicycle parking and improved pedestrian access in the Project vicinity. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.14, Population and Housing, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s contribution to population growth would continue an infill growth pattern near transit facilities that is encouraged locally in the City’s plans and regionally by SCAG policies . The Modified Project would not generate a substantial permanent population in the Project area or City and would be consistent with SCAG’s growth projections . Therefore, impacts related to conflict s with a program, plan., ordinance, or policy addressing transportation under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Otherwise, t here is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to transportation that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation mea sures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more

12 Culver City, 2024. Culver City General Plan 2045, Mobility Element. Available online at:
https://www.culvercity.org/files/content/public/v/14/services/building-development/general-plan/mobility.pdf, accessed January 2025.
13 SCAG, 2024. Connect SoCal 2024, April 2024. Available online at: https://scag.ca.gov/connect-socal, accessed January 2025.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 78 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.17.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact The following mitigation measures set forth in the Certified MND addresses transportation-related impacts and would be implemented as part of the Modified Project. No additional mitigation measures are required, as no new significant noise impacts would result from implementation of the Modified Project MM-TRANS-1: The Project shall implement a TDM Plan to encourage the use of non- auto modes of transportation and reduce vehicle trips. The TDM Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Planning Division, Public Works/Engineering, and Transportation Staff for review prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. The TDM Plan shall include, at a minimum, measures required by the CCMC. In addition, as recommended by the Project’s Traffic Study, the TDM Plan shall also include, but not be limited to measures and strategies to reduce vehicle trips via amenity Improvements supporting alternative modes of transportation and a trip reduction program.

MM-TRANS-2: To enhance the traffic signal system in the Project study area and in response to the forecast significant Project impacts, the Applicant shall contribute a fixed-fee financial contribution toward funding traffic signal upgrades, including installation of closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras at Intersection No. 3 (Jefferson Boulevard & 1- 405 Northbound Ramps). The funding contributions toward Intersection No. 3 (Jefferson Boulevard & 1- 405 Northbound Ramps) shall be based on coordination with Culver City’s Planning Division and Public Works/Engineering Staff, as well as LADOT, as necessary. This, and any other required financial fair -share contributions, must be guaranteed prior to the issuance of the Project’s building permit and completed prior to the issuance of the Project’s certificate of occupancy.

Temporary certificates of occupancy may be granted in the events of any delay through no fault of the applicant, provided that, in each case, the applicant has demonstrated reasonable effor ts and due diligence to the satisfaction of the Culver City’s Planning Division and Public Works/Engineering Staff, as well as LADOT, as necessary.

3.17.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 79 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is :
(i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k),
or)?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in
its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code § 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource
to a California Native American tribe?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes

3.18.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to tribal cultural resources Thresholds (i) and (ii), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM- CUL-2 under the Approved Project.

3.18.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (i)-(ii). As indicated in the Certified MND, the Project Site has a high potential to encounter tribal cultural resources during construction given the Project Site’s location near sacred villages (including the village of Suangna), water courses, major traditional trade routes, and its location within a cultural landscape. As a result, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2, which includes provisions for the Applicant to retain a Native Ame rican representative to monitor construction excavations associated with implementing the Project. In the event that unknown tribal cultural resources are encountered during construction activities, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2 would ensure that the Approved Project or the Modified Project would not cause a significant impact to tribal cultural resources and thus impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts to tribal cultural resources under the Modified Project would be similar to the Approved Project..

3.18.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would constitute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 80 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate any changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.18.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to tribal cultural resources that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fac t be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.18.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2 is required. See Section 3.5, Cultural Resources.

3.18.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the
project:
(a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry, and
multiple dry years?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project's projected demand in
addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 81 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
(d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than
Significant No No No No
(e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than
Significant No No No No

3.19.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to utilities and service systems Thresholds (a)-(e), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to require or result in the relocation or water, wastewater, stormwater, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities; sufficient water supplies; adequate wastewater treatment capacity; solid waste capacity; and comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations would be less than significant under the Approved Project.

3.19.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a).

As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s construction activities would require temporary and intermittent utility demands , all of which would be accommodated by the existing utility services. As construction activities would be similar under the Approved P roject and the Modified P rojects, impacts would be less than significant and similar.

As analyzed in the certified MND, existing water, wastewater, stormwater, electric, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities would accommodate operation of the Approved P roject.. The Approved Project included the development of 175 hotel rooms and 2 ,900 square feet of restaurant space. The Modified Project includes a reduced number of hotel rooms and overall restaurant space. As such, the Modified Project’s proposed uses would generate incrementally less demand on utilities than the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, all connections and infrastructure improvements, including the proposed fire system designed for the Modified Project, would be provided by the Project in consultation with the applicable utility service providers, including the Golden State Water Company (GSWC), Southern California Edison (SCE), and SoCalGas, as well as CCFD, when required. Therefore, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility-related facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (b). As analyzed in the certified MND, water supplies ava ilable to the GSWC would accommodate development of the Approved Project.. The Approved Project included the development of 175 hotel rooms and 2,900 square feet of restaurant space. The Modified Project includes a reduced number of hotel rooms and overall restaurant space. As such, the Modified Project’s proposed uses would generate

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 82 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
incrementally less water demand than the Approved Project. Accordingly, the GSWC would also have the ability to supply water to the Modified Project. Thus, water supply impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (c). As discussed in Threshold (a) above, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would generate less wastewater than the Approved Project. As such, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not exceed wastewater treatment capacity of the Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant (HWRP), which was determined in the Certified MND to have ample capacity to treat wastewater from the Approved P roject. Thus, wastewater treatment impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant, similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (d). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project construction activities would generate debris like metal scrap, lumber, and concrete, which would be recycled or disposed of in compliance with local, state, and federal regulations. As analyzed in the certified MND, the Approved Project included the development of 175 hotel rooms and 2,900 square feet of restaurant space. The Modified Project includes a reduced number of hotel rooms and overall restaurant space. As such, the Modified Proje ct’s proposed uses would generate incrementally less solid waste than the Approved Project. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would adhere to the City’s standard conditions for recycling and reusing materials. In addition, as with the Approved Project, solid waste generated by the Modified Project would be managed by the existing regional landfills, with no need for new facilities. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not cause any significant impacts from conflicting with statutes or regulations related to solid waste during operation. Impacts would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

Threshold (e). As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would integrate its waste into the City's waste stream, with diversion rates not being substantially altered. In accordance with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would divert at least 65% of construction waste, complying with state laws and local requirements. As with the Approved Project, the Modified Project does not include any component that would conflict with state laws governing construction or operational solid waste diversion and would comply pursuant to local implementation requirements. Impacts under the Modified Project would be less than significant and similar to the Approved Project.

3.19.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.19.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to utilities that would show that: (1)

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 83 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerabl y different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.19.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.19.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3.20 Wildfire
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
WILDFIRE: Would the project:
(a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact No No No No (b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose Project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of wildfire?
No Impact No No No No
(c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk
or that may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
No Impact No No No No
(d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire
slope instability, or drainage changes?
No Impact No No No No

3.20.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to wildfire Thresholds (a)-(d), the Certified MND concluded that impacts to wildfire would not occur under the Approved Project.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 84 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.20.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Thresholds (a)-(d). As documented in the Certified MND, the Project Site is not located in an area subject to wildland fire hazards. Thus, no impacts would occur under the Approved Project or the Modified Project.

3.20.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.20.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project relative to wildfire that would show that: (1) the Modified Project would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined w ould be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.20.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.20.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 85 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025

3.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Thresholds (and Supporting Information
Sources)
Impact
Determination
in the Certified
MND
Do Proposed
Changes
Involve New
Significant
Impacts or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Circumstances
Involving New
Significant
Impact or
Substantially
More Severe
Impacts?
Any New
Information
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Certified
MND’s
Mitigation
Measures
Addressing
Impacts
(a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self -sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes
(c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
No No No Yes

3.21.1 Impact Determination in the Certified MND
With regards to mandatory findings of significance Thresholds (a)-(c), the Certified MND concluded that impacts would be less than significant with mitigation under the Approved Project.

3.21.2 Do Proposed Changes Involve New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
Threshold (a). As discussed in the sections above, as with the Approved Project, the Modified P roject would not cause significant unmitigable environmental impacts. The Project Site is currently developed with a single-story commercial (retail) building and asphalt-paved surface parking lot. As discussed above in Section 3.5, Threshold (a), no impacts regarding historical resources would occur with Modified Project implementation. As with the Approved Project, t he Modified Project would not substantially impact any scenic vistas, scenic resources, or the visual character of the area, as discussed in Section 3.1 , and would not result in excessive light or glare. The Project Site is located within an urbanized area with no natural habitat. As with the Approved Project, t he Modified Project would not significantly impact any sensitive plants, plant communities, fish, wildlife or habitat for any sensitive species, as discussed in Section 3.4.

Potentially significant impacts to nesting birds would be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1. Adverse impacts to archaeological and human remains resources could occur. However, as with the Approved Project, construction- phase procedures would be implemented by the Modified Project in the event any important archaeological resources or human remains are discovered during grading and excavation activities, consistent with MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-4.

Adverse impacts to paleontological resources could also occur as well. M itigation Measures MM-GEO-2

3. Environmental Impact Analysis
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 86 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
through MM-GEO-5 provide construction-phase procedures that would be implemented in the event any important paleontological resources are discovered during grading and excavation activities.

This Project Site is not known to have any association with an important example of California's history or prehistory. The environmental analysis provided in Section 3.3 and 3.8 concludes that impacts related to emissions of criteria pollutants, other air quality impacts, and impacts related to climate change will be less than significant. Section 3.10 concludes that impacts related to hydrology and water quality will be less than significant after implementation of the prescribed mitigation measures, wher e applicable. Based on the preceding analysis of potential impacts in the responses to items 3.1 thru 3.20, no evidence is presented that this Modified Project would degrade the quality of the environment. The City hereby finds that impacts related to degradation of the environment, biological resources, and cultural resources will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, as necessary. Impacts would be similar or less than the Approved Project.

Threshold (b). A significant impact may occur if a proposed project, in conjunction with related projects, would result in impacts that are less than significant when viewed separately, but would be significant when viewed together. As discussed in Sections 3.1, Aesthetics, through 3.20, Wildfire, above, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable Project -specific with implementation of Project-specific mitigation measures. All project-level impacts under the Modified Project were found to be less than or similar to the Approved Project. As such, consistent with the findings in the Certified MND, the Modified Project would also not have any impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.

Threshold (c). Based on the analysis above, as with the Approved Project, the re is no indication that th e Modified Project could result in substantial adverse effects on human beings . While there would be a variety of effects during construction related to air quality, noise, and traffic, these impacts would be less than significant based on compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and established impact thresholds. Long-term effects would include increased vehicular traffic, traffic-related noise, periodic on- site operational noise, minor changes to on- site drainage, and changing of the visual character of the site, with a majority of these impacts affecting adjacent roadway segments and intersections. The analysis herein concludes that direct an d indirect environmental effects would be less than significant. Based on the analysis in this Addendum, the City finds that direct and indirect impacts under the Modified Project to human beings will be less than significant with mitigation incorporated, as necessary.

3.21.3 Any New Circumstances Involving New Significant Impact or Substantially More Severe Impacts?
No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project would be undertaken. Since the MND was certified in 2021, no new major development has occurred around the Project Site. Land use patterns in the vicinity of the Project Site have remained the same and no major changes have occurred that would cons titute changed circumstances for undertaking the Modified Project. Thus, no new circumstances in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site would necessitate an y changes to the conclusions presented in the Certified MND.

3.21.4 Any New Information Requiring New Analysis or Verification? There is no new information such as new cumulative projects, studies, plans, policies or regulations of substantial importance associated with the Modified Project that would show that: (1) the Modified Project

4. Addendum Conclusion
Silicon Beach Hotel Project 87 City of Culver City
Addendum to the Certified MND February 2025
would have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified MND; (2) significant effects previously examined would be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified MND; (3) mitigation measures previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Modified Project, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure; or (4) mitigation measures which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified MND would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the Modified Project proponents declined to adopt the mitigation measure.

3.21.5 Certified MND’s Mitigation Measures Addressing Impact None required.

3.21.6 Conclusion
Based on the above, the Modified Project would not result in any of the conditions set forth in PRC Section 21166(c) or CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 or 15163 that would require the preparation of a Supplemental or Subsequent MND.

4. Addendum Conclusion
As demonstrated by the discussion above, impacts associated with the Modified Project would be similar or less than the impacts addressed in the Certified MND for the Approved Project. No substantial changes would occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Modified Project is undertaken that would require major revisions of the C ertified MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects . In addition, no new information of substantial importance has become available relative to any of the environmental topic categories that would result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts . In addition, the applicable mitigation measures included as part of the C ertified MND of the Approved Project would continue to be implemented under the Modified Project. As all of the impacts of the Modified Project would be within the envelope of impacts analyzed in the Certified MND, none of the conditions described in PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163 requiring a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR would occur. Additionally, there are no known mitigation measures that were previously considered infeasible but are now considered feasible that would reduce one or more significant effects on the environment identified in the Certified MND. Therefore, the Modified Project would not create any potential adverse impacts beyond those evaluated in the C ertified MND. As such, the preparation of an addendum that amends the Project Description in the Certified MND to include the Modified Project is appropriate and fully complies with the requirements of PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, and 15164.

Attachment A
Supplemental Traffic Study for
Silicon Beach Hotel Project

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Page 1

To: Adam Corral, Verdant Culver City, LLC

From: Hilary Mau, Senior Planner, KOA/Lochner
Subject: Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, City of Culver City

KOA Corporation (KOA) has prepared this supplemental Traffic Impact Study (TIS) for the proposed Silicon Beach Hotel (the “Project”) located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard in the City of Culver City (the “City”). This Project is replacing the previously entitled Jeff Hotel project (the “Approved Project”) which KOA evaluated in the Traffic Impact Study for the Jeff Hotel Proposed at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City dated October 19, 2020, that is included as Attachment A. The Approved Project consisted of the development of a boutique hotel with 175 rooms, 3,400 square feet of supporting restaurant space (including 500 square feet of outdoor dining area), a 7,000 square‐foot lounge, a 5,100 square‐foot rooftop bar, and 4,800 square feet of conference/meeting room space, for a total floor area of approximately 111,000 square feet. The Project under new ownership proposes the development of a residence inn hotel with 147 rooms and an approximately 13,355 square foot of lobby space that includes dining and restaurant uses, and a 600 square foot standalone coffee shop. This technical memorandum has been prepared to provide comparative trip generation, queuing, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analyses to determine if the Project traffic and VMT conditions would be consistent with or less intense than the Approved Project. No operational analyses were conducted in this comparative analysis.

PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Approved Project’s Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was adopted by the City Council on July 12, 2021. Since approval of the Approved Project, a new developer has taken over the Project development (the “Applicant”) and redesigned the Approved Project to its current form. The land use components and changes for the Approved Project and the current Project are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1: Project Land Use Changes
Land Use Approved Project Project Project vs. Approved
Project
Boutique Hotel 175 guest rooms 0 guest rooms - 175 guest rooms Business Hotel 0 guest rooms 147 guest rooms + 147 guest rooms Coffee Shop Without Drive-Through 0 square feet 600 square feet + 600 square feet

The TIS for the Approved Project analyzed a total of seven (7) intersections. Of these, one (1) intersection resulted in a significant impact -- the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & I-405 Freeway Northbound Ramps. This significant impact was mitigated through a combination of mitigation measures that included voluntary improvement measures to deal with existing neighborhood traffic intrusion problems and Transportation Demand management (TDM) plan measures which are outlined in the Mitigation Measures section of the TIS.

1100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201, Monterey Park, CA 91754 T: (323) 260-4703 | www.koacorp.com

MONTEREY PARK ORANGE ONTARIO SAN DIEGO

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Page 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project site is located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, which is situated at the northwest corner of the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue. The Project site is generally bounded by Jefferson Boulevard to the east, an unnamed service alley to the west, low‐density commercial development to the north, and Slauson Avenue to the south.

The Project site vicinity map is provided in Attachment B.

The Project includes the development of a residence inn hotel with 147 rooms and an approximately 13,355 square foot of lobby space that includes dining and restaurant uses, and a 600 square foot standalone coffee shop. The Project will replace an existing 13,301 square foot strip retail center. Access to the hotel will be via a driveway on Slauson Avenue and the unnamed public alley that borders the site to the north. The Project site would be accessed by dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue. The drive aisle closer to the hotel would serve as a passenger drop‐off and pick‐up area. The second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the one subterranean parking level or to access the ground floor parking area off of the unnamed public alley. There would be two Project driveway exits onto the adjacent unnamed alley to egress onto the surrounding roadway system. One exit driveway would be provided directly off of the dual drive aisles (which would merge into a single aisle approaching the a lley), while the second exit would provide egress for vehicles exiting the ground floor parking. Exiting vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the unnamed alley toward Berryman Avenue or Slauson Avenue, respectively. The Project ’s parking will be provided with 30 spaces provided on the ground floor and one subterranean parking level with approximately 76 spaces for a total of 106 parking spaces. The Project parking supply would be designed with a reduced parking supply as permissible by t he City Municipal Code. Attachment C illustrates the Project Site Plan.

TRANSPORTATION STUDY GUIDELINE REVISIONS
The operational analyses of the Approved Project were based on the Traffic Study Criteria for the Review of Proposed Development Projects within the City of Culver City (July 2012) which were in effect at the time of the beginning of the Approved Project entitlement process and approval period. The Approved Project’s traffic study evaluated a total of seven (7) study intersections. The City adopted the Transportation Study Criteria and Guidelines (the “TS Guidelines”) on July 13, 2020 to conform to the requirements guided by SB 743. SB74 shifted the performance metric from level of service (LOS) to VMT for evaluating transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) including for studies of projects within the City. Per the July 13, 2020 guidelines, a TS is required when a development project is likely to add 250 or more net daily vehicle trips to the local street system. The Approved Project’s October 19, 2020 TIS was determined to meet this requirement. The July 13, 2020 TS Guidelines are currently in effect and the Original Project’s TIS, if found to be applicable to the Project, serves as the Project’s TS.

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Attachments

PROJECT TRIP GENERATION ASSESSMENT
Since the Approved Project, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual has gone through an update. The current trip generation rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) include rates that are more reflective of current traffic conditions (especially in more densely developed areas such as the Project site).

Therefore, the Project trip generation was calculated using the 11th Edition as a source instead of the 10th Edition. The ITE trip rates are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 - Trip Generation Rates

It is expected that there will be some internal trips between t he hotel and coffee shop uses. An internal trip discount was determined based on internal trip capture rates from the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 684. The internal trip capture rates are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 – Internal Trip Capture Rates

Based on the ITE trip rates and internal trip capture rates above, the Project trip generation was calculated and is shown in Table 4. As shown in this table, the Project is expected to result in a net increase of 252 daily weekday trips including 67 AM peak hour trips (26 inbound and 41 outbound) and -7 PM peak hour trips (-1 inbound and -6 outbound). When compared to the Approved Project’s trip generation estimates that was based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition), the Project would experience reductions in vehicle trips by 835 daily trips (a 77% reduction), 5 AM peak hour (a 7% reduction), and 74 PM peak hour (a 110% reduction) trips.

Daily
(2-Way) In Out Total In Out Total
312 Business Hotel 4.02 39% 61% 0.36 55% 45% 0.31
936 Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window [2] 535.71 51% 49% 93.08 50% 50% 32.29 822 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k sq. ft.) 54.45 60% 40% 2.36 50% 50% 6.59 [1] Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 11th Edition [2]
ITE Land Use
Code (LUC)
ITE does not provide a daily rate for LUC 936; therefore, the daily trips were calculated based on a similar land use type LUC 931 Coffee/Dount Shop with Drive- Through Window. They were estimated by developing a Daily to (AM+PM peak hour) factor using the land use's baseline vehicle trips and then applying this factor to the combined (AM+PM) peak-hour trips.

AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ITE Trip Rate [1]
Trips/1000 Sq. Ft.

Trips/1000 Sq. Ft.

Trips/Room
In Out In Out
312 Business Hotel Coffee Shop 4% 8% 41% 51%
936 Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window Hotel 6% 2% 5% 5% [3]
From
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ITE Land Use [3] To
Source: NCHRP Report 684: Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments (based on the average of the unconstrained internal capture rates between hotel and retail land uses presented in Tables 94-97)

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Attachments
Table 4 – Project Trip Generation

QUEUING ASSESSMENT
Vehicular access for the Project will be similar to the Approved Project. As is the case under both projects, site access will be via dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue and from the unnamed public alley that connects to Slauson Avenue. Vehicles are expected to enter from Slauson Avenue, either drop passengers in the drop-off zone, or drive down to the subterranean parking garage, or drive to the ground floor parking area off the unnamed public alley. The Approved Project determined that spillover is not anticipated at the site driveways based on the proposed design and parking operations. As the Project would generate fewer vehicle trips, the queuing at the site driveways would be reduced.

Additionally, the intersection of Slauson Avenue & Jefferson Boulevard was evaluated for queuing conditions for the Approved Project. Based on the analysis, it was determined that vehicle queues at the northeastbound left-turn lane, which would already experience spillover conditions, would experience worse queues with the addition of the Approved Project trips. Multiple alternatives were developed for City consideration that would provide additional capacity to the northeastbound left-turn lane. The City reviewed the design alternatives but did not provide final approval of the design.

Given that the Project will produce fewer vehicle trips than the Approved Project, it is assumed that the current Project would not exceed the queues of the Approved Project and therefore the design alternatives are assumed to remain appropriate.

VMT ASSESSMENT
A VMT assessment for both the Approved Project and the Project were conducted to further compare the two projects based on the City’s current VMT guidelines. The City has updated the T S and provided a VMT Tool calculator to ensure compliance with Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, which asks if a development project would In Out Total In Out Total
147 Rooms 591 21 32 53 25 21 46 Internal Capture [4] (24) (1) (2) (3) - (1) (1) Sub-Total (including Internal Capture) 567 20 30 50 25 20 45 600 sq. ft. 321 29 27 56 10 9 19 Internal Capture [4] (17) (2) (1) (3) (1) - (1) Sub-Total (including Internal Capture) 304 27 26 53 9 9 18 25% Pass-By Adjustment [5] (76) (7) (7) (14) (2) (2) (4) Sub-Total (including Pass-By Adjustment) 228 20 20 39 7 7 14 Project Land Use Vehicle Trips 795 40 50 89 32 27 59 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k sq. ft.) 13,301 sq. ft. 724 19 12 31 44 44 88 25% Pass-By Adjustment [5] (181) (5) (3) (8) (11) (11) (22) Sub-Total (including Pass-By Adjustment) 543 14 9 23 33 33 66 Existing Land Use Vehicle Trips 543 14 9 23 33 33 66 Net Project Total Trip Generation 252 26 41 67 (1) (6) (7) Approved Project Total Trip Generation [6] 1,087 42 30 72 36 31 67 Difference in Trips (Project - Approved Project) (835) (16) 11 (5) (37) (37) (74) [4]
[5] Maximium pass-by adjustment permitted by the City.
[6] Approved Project total trip generation based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition For Internal Capture, the average unconstrained internal capture rates derived from the NCHRP Report 684 were applied to the entering and exiting trip totals for the hotel and retail land uses. The lower internal trip total from the separate trip origin and trip destination calculations was utilized for each pair of uses sharing trips with each other.

Coffee/Donut Shop without Drive-Through Window
Business Hotel Baseline Vehicle Trips
PM Peak Hour
Project Land Uses
Existing Land Uses (To Be Removed)
Land Use Size Average
Weekday
AM Peak Hour

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Attachments
result in a substantial increase in VMT. Consistent with the findings for the Approved Project, the Project site is located in Transit Priority Area (TPA) as designated by the City, see Attachment D. Therefore, per the TS Guidelines and VMT Tool calculator and consistent with Approved Project’s TIS, the Project is presumed to have less-than-significant VMT impacts and further VMT analysis is not required.

CONCLUSIONS
As detailed in the preceding sections, the Project has been modified since the Approved Project was approved by the City in October 2020. These modifications include changes to the hotel land use type from a boutique hotel to a business hotel, which produces less vehicle trips, along with a reduced guest room count, from 175 rooms to 147 rooms.

Additionally, the Project is planning on incorporating a coffee shop without drive-through that will serve both hotel guests and the local community. Based on the comparative trip generation analysis using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition for the Project versus the Approved Project trip generation, which utilized the 10th Edition, the Project would reduce daily vehicle trips by 77% when compared to the Approved Project, with the peak hour trip reductions of 7% in the AM peak hour and 110% in the PM peak hour.

For intersection and driveway queuing comparison, since the Project will produce fewer vehicle trips than the Approved Project, and given that site access is similar, it is assumed that vehicle queues would be reduced.

The VMT assessment determined that the Project, like the Approved Project, is expected to have a less-than-significant VMT impact given the Project’s proximity (approximately one block) to the Westfield‐Culver City Transit Center, the City considers the Project site to be in a key TPA. Therefore, no further VMT analysis is required.

The conclusion of the evaluation was that the traffic impacts associated with the current Project would not exceed those of the Approved Project and there would not be any new potentially significant impacts. The Project is planning to conform to the Condition of Approval set forth under Resolution No. 2021-P003.

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Attachments

ATTACHMENTS

Supplemental Traffic Impact Study for the Silicon Beach Hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard 2/5/2025 City of Culver City Attachments

Attachment A – Approved Project TIS

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FOR THE JEFF HOTEL PROJECT PROPOSED AT
11469 JEFFERSON BOULEVARD, CULVER CITY

Prepared for:

CITY OF CULVER CITY
AND
SANDSTONE PROPERTIES, INC.

Prepared by:

Crain & Associates
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California  90230
(310) 473‐6508

October 19, 2020

i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sandstone Properties Incorporated is proposing the development of a boutique hotel located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard in the City of Culver City (the “Project”).   Situated at the northwest corner of the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue, the Project consists of a hotel,  with  a  maximum  of  175  rooms  as  well  as  3,400  square  feet  of  supporting  restaurant space (including 500 square feet of outdoor dining area), a 7,000 square‐foot lounge, a 5,100 square‐foot rooftop bar, and 4,800 square feet of conference/meeting room space, for a total floor  area  of  approximately  111,000  square  feet.   The  restaurant,  lounge,  rooftop  bar,  and meeting  room  space  would  primarily  serve  hotel  patrons,  and  would  exist  as  internal components of the hotel, not as independent establishments.

Located  at  the  northwest  corner  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  Slauson  Avenue,  the  Project  is situated  within  the  Sunkist  Park  community  of  Culver  City.   The  Project  site  is  generally bounded by Jefferson Boulevard to the east, an unnamed service alley to the west, low‐density commercial development to the north, and Slauson Avenue to the south.

The Project is anticipated to be completed in 2024.  Upon completion, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 1,087 net daily trips, including 72 net AM peak‐hour trips and 67 net PM peak‐hour trips.

Parking for the Project would be provided on two subterranean parking levels, with a total of 138  parking  spaces  that  would  be  accommodated  through  a  combination  of  standard,  ADA accessible,  and  tandem  spaces.   The  Project  site  would  include  valet‐assist  parking  on  both subterranean parking levels in order to maintain safe and efficient use of the tandem spaces.

The Project site would be accessed by dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue.   The drive  aisle  closer  to  the  hotel  would  serve  as  a  passenger  drop‐off  and  pick‐up  area.   The

ii
second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the two subterranean  parking  levels.   Access  to  the  subterranean  parking  garage  would  not  be  gate controlled.   There  would  be  two  Project  driveway  exits  onto  the  adjacent  unnamed  alley  to egress onto the surrounding roadway system.  One exit driveway would be provided directly off of the dual drive aisles (which would merge into a single aisle approaching the alley), while the second exit would provide egress for vehicles exiting the subterranean parking garage.   Exiting vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the unnamed alley toward Berryman Avenue or Slauson Avenue, respectively.

The traffic study presented herein analyzes existing (2018) and future (2024) AM and PM peak‐ hour  traffic  conditions  at  seven  critical  intersections  and  three  residential  street  segments  in the  vicinity  of  the  Project  site.   The  analysis  of  cumulative  traffic  conditions  accounts  for  the development of 32 potential related projects in the surrounding area.   The Project is expected to have one significant traffic impact at the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound  Ramps  under  the  existing  and  future  conditions.   There  would  be  no  significant residential street segment impacts.  Mitigation measures have been identified and approved by the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) that will reduce the significant traffic  impact  at  Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Northbound  Ramps  to  a  less‐than‐ significant  level.   These  mitigation  measures  include  the  implementation  of  a  Transportation Demand  Management  (TDM)  plan  for  the  Project  to  promote  alternative  travel  mode  usage and the installation of a traffic signal system upgrade at the significantly impacted intersection (low‐mounted,  CCTV  camera  to  improve  signal  operations).   Finally,  in  order  to  address concerns  that  the  Sunkist  Park  neighborhood  residents  have  regarding  existing  cut‐through traffic  and  parking  issues,  the  incorporation  of  Project  features  such  as  weekday  peak‐period

iii
turn restrictions and/or the potential expansion of the residential permit parking program have been considered.

Project  traffic  impacts  were  also  analyzed  at  Congestion  Management  Program  (CMP) monitoring  locations.   No  significant  regional  traffic  impacts  were  determined  for  the  CMP monitoring intersections or freeway locations.   In addition, the Project’s impacts on the public transit system were analyzed based on existing available transit capacity.  No significant transit impacts were identified.

The  Project’s  potential  impact  on  bicycle  access  was  also  evaluated.   Bicycle  access  impact evaluation is a recent requirement of the City of Culver City.  It was determined that the Project would neither affect the ability of the City of Culver City or the adjacent jurisdiction, the City of Los Angeles, to implement their bicycle plans nor result in bicycle access impacts.

Queuing analyses were conducted to supplement the traffic impact analysis at the request of the City and based on community concerns.  There are existing queuing concerns on eastbound Slauson  Avenue,  approaching  Jefferson  Boulevard,  and  for  the  northeastbound  Jefferson Boulevard  left‐turn  lane  at  Slauson  Avenue,  to  which  the  Project  is  anticipated  to  contribute inbound vehicle trips.   The City of Culver City has requested that the northeastbound left‐turn lane at Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue be redesigned to provide dual left‐turn lanes to reduce potential spillover into the adjacent northeastbound through lane.  A conceptual design has  been  developed  in  coordination  with  the  City.   Queuing  associated  with  inbound  Project traffic  at  the  dual  entry  lanes  from  Slauson  Avenue  was  also  evaluated,  and  no  potential spillover impacts are anticipated on westbound Slauson Avenue.

Finally,  per  the  requirements  of  Senate  Bill  (SB)  743,  all  California  Environmental  Quality  Act (CEQA)  lead  agencies  must  analyze  a  land  use  development  project's  transportation  impacts

iv
using the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) performance metric starting on July 1, 2020.  Therefore, a  VMT  analysis  has  been  prepared  for  the  Project,  per  the  guidance  in  City’s  Transportation Study  Criteria  and  Guidelines  (adopted  by  the  City  Council  on  July  13,  2020).   Given  that  the Project is located within a key Transit Priority Area within the City, the Project is presumed to have a less‐than‐significant VMT impact and no further VMT analysis is required.

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 5 Environmental Setting ......................................................................................................... 8 Existing Freeways ........................................................................................................ 9 Existing Highways and Streets .................................................................................... 9 Existing (2018) Traffic Volumes .................................................................................. 12 Existing Public Transportation .................................................................................... 13 Analysis of Existing (2018) Traffic Conditions ............................................................. 19 Project Traffic ....................................................................................................................... 25 Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................. 25 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment .................................................................. 29 Project Parking and Access ......................................................................................... 30 Project Bicycle Access ................................................................................................. 38 Existing With Project Traffic Conditions .............................................................................. 42 Future Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................................... 45 Ambient Traffic Growth .............................................................................................. 45 Related Projects .......................................................................................................... 45 Future Highway System Improvements ..................................................................... 53 Analysis of Future (2024) Traffic Conditions .............................................................. 54 Significant Traffic Impact Criteria ............................................................................... 62 Queuing Analyses........................................................................................................ 63 Congestion Management Program (CMP) Impact Analysis ....................................... 70 Transit Impact Analysis ........................................................................................................ 72 VMT Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 74 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................ 77 Transportation Demand Management Plan ............................................................... 77 City of Los Angeles Traffic Signal System Upgrades ................................................... 84 Other Design Improvements ...................................................................................... 85 Analysis of Future (2024) With Project Plus Mitigation Traffic Conditions ................ 86 Voluntary Neighborhood Traffic Intrusion and Parking Mitigation Measures ........... 88

vi

Appendix A  –  Traffic Count Data Sheets
Appendix B  –  Study Intersection Geometrics & Traffic Control Conditions Appendix C  –  CMA LOS Calculation Worksheets
Appendix D  –  Traffic Study Memorandum of Understanding (signed on March 26, 2019) Appendix E  –  Project Parking Demand Analysis
Appendix F  –  Conceptual Striping Plan – Slauson Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard (in vicinity of Project Site)
Appendix G  –  Project Loading Area Truck Turn Analysis (WB‐50 Design Vehicle) Appendix H  –  Waste Management Plan
Appendix I  –  Related Project Trip Generation Rates and Equations Appendix J  –  Synchro Calculation Worksheets

vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure                                                                                                                                                     Page 1  Project Site Vicinity and Study Intersections and Residential Street Segments .   2 2  Conceptual Project Site Plan ...............................................................................   7 3  Existing (2018) Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes .........................................................   14 4  Project Area Transit Routes ................................................................................   16 5  Project Trip Distribution Percentages .................................................................   31 6  Net Project Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes ..............................................................   33 7  City of Culver City Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan – Recommended Bicycle Facilities ...............................................................................................................   39 8  City of Los Angeles Mobility Plan 2035 – Bicycle Enhanced Network ................   41 9  Existing (2018) With Project Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes ...................................   43 10  Related Projects Location Map ...........................................................................   47 11  Total Related Project Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes ..............................................   51 12  Future (2024) Without Project Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes ...............................   55 13  Future (2024) With Project Peak‐Hour Traffic Volumes .....................................   58 14  City of Culver City – Transit Priority Areas ..........................................................   76

viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table                                                                                                                                                   Page 1  Critical Movement Volume Ranges for Determining LOS ................................. 21 2  Level of Service as a Function of CMA V/C Ratios ............................................. 22 3  CMA and LOS Summary: Existing (2018) Traffic Conditions ............................. 24 4  Project Trip Generation Rates ........................................................................... 26 5  Project Trip Generation Summary .................................................................... 28 6  Project Directional Trip Distribution Percentages ............................................ 29 7  Related Project Locations, Descriptions, and Trip Generations........................ 48 8  CMA and LOS Summary: Existing (2018) and Future (2024) Without and With Project Conditions ....................................................................................

60 9  Residential Street Analysis: Existing (2018) and Future (2024) Conditions ...... 61 10  Culver City’s Significant Impact Thresholds at Residential Streets ................... 62 11  Jefferson Boulevard – Northeastbound Left‐Turn Queuing Summary ............. 65 12  Southbound Approaches of Unnamed Alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive Queuing/Delay Summary .........................................................................

69 13  Weekday Peak‐Hour Transit Services within Project Area ............................... 72 14  CMA and LOS Summary: Future (2024) With Project Plus Mitigation Conditions ..........................................................................................................

88 1

INTRODUCTION
Crain & Associates has prepared this Traffic Impact Study to assess the potential traffic impacts of  the  proposed  The  Jeff  Hotel  project  (the  “Project”)  to  be  located  at  11469  Jefferson Boulevard in the City of Culver City.   The Project would consist of a five‐story, boutique hotel with a maximum of 175 rooms.  The Project would also include approximately 3,400 square feet of ancillary restaurant space (including 500 square feet of outdoor dining area), a 7,000 square‐ foot  lounge,  a  5,100  square‐foot  rooftop  bar  area,  and  4,800  square  feet  of conference/meeting room space, which would serve primarily as amenities for patrons of the hotel.   The Project site is presently occupied by the Jefferson Plaza strip mall, which contains approximately 13,301 square feet of retail space which would be demolished to accommodate the Project.

Located  at  the  northwest  corner  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  Slauson  Avenue,  the  Project  is situated  within  the  Sunkist  Park  community  of  Culver  City.   The  Project  site  is  generally bounded  by  Jefferson  Boulevard  to  the  east,  an  unnamed  alley  to  the  west,  low‐density commercial development to the north, and Slauson Avenue to the south.   The location of the Project  site  is  shown  in  Figure  1,  Project  Site  Vicinity  and  Study  Intersections  and  Residential Street Segments.

Parking  for  the  Project  would  be  provided  on  two  subterranean  parking  levels  that  would accommodate  a  total  of  138  vehicles.   The  Project  site  would  include  valet‐assist  parking  in order to maintain safe and efficient use of the tandem spaces.

The Project site would be accessed by dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue.   The drive  aisle  closer  to  the  hotel  would  serve  as  a  hotel  patron  drop‐off  and  pick‐up  area.   The second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the two

INTERSTATE
405
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

BLVD.

SLAUSON

SAN DIEGO
MESMER

SEGRELL
WY.

CULVER PARK
DR.

HANNUM
MARINA

JEFFERSON
FRWY.

CENTINELA
AVE.

AVE.

SEPULVEDA
AVE.

FRWY.

AVE.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

BRISTOL
PKWY.

GREEN
VALLEY
CIRCLE

PROJECT SITE
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 3
12 FIGURE 1
2 4/3/2020
FN: JEFFERSON HOTEL CULVER\STUDY-INTS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering

PROJECT SITE VICINITY AND STUDY INTERSECTIONS

AND RESIDENTIAL STREET SEGMENTS
NORTH

STUDY INTERSECTION

RESIDENTIAL STREET SEGMENT

3 subterranean  parking  levels.   Access  to  the  subterranean  parking  garage  would  not  be  gate controlled.  There would be two Project driveway exits onto the adjacent unnamed alley to egress onto the surrounding roadway system.   One exit driveway would be provided directly off of the dual drive aisles (which would merge into a single aisle approaching the alley), while the second exit  would  provide  egress  for  vehicles  exiting  the  subterranean  parking  garage.   Exiting  vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the unnamed alley toward Berryman Avenue or Slauson Avenue, respectively.

This  analysis  was  prepared  in  accordance  with  the  assumptions,  methodologies,  and procedures outlined by the City of Culver City and the City of Los Angeles.   The analysis is also consistent with the guidelines in the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Los Angeles County.  A total of seven intersections and three residential street segments were analyzed for existing  (2018)  and  future  (2024)  traffic  conditions.   These  study  analysis  locations,  which comprise the Project study area, are also depicted in Figure 1:

Study Intersections

1. Jefferson Boulevard & Mesmer Avenue

2. Jefferson Boulevard & San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) Southbound Ramps

3. Jefferson Boulevard & San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) Northbound Ramps

4. Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue

5. Slauson Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard

6. Slauson Avenue & Marina Freeway (State Route 90)

7. Centinela Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard
Study Residential Street Segments

1. Segrell Way, north of Slauson Avenue

2. Culver Park Drive, north of Slauson Avenue

3. Slauson Avenue, west of Segrell Way

4 The  following  traffic  conditions  have  been  analyzed:   Existing  (2018)  traffic  volumes,  Existing (2018) Plus Project traffic volumes, Future (2024) Without Project traffic volumes, and Future (2024)  With  Project  traffic  volumes.   The  analyses  of  future  (2024)  conditions  include cumulative traffic attributable to ambient growth and related projects within the Project study area.

5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The  Project  under  consideration  is  a  boutique  hotel,  with  a  maximum  of  175  rooms  and approximately  3,400  square  feet  of  ancillary  restaurant  space  (including  500  square  feet  of outdoor dining), a 7,000 square‐foot lounge, a 5,100 square‐foot rooftop bar, and 4,800 square feet of conference/meeting room space, that encompasses a total floor area of approximately 111,000 square feet.  The restaurant, lounge, rooftop bar, and conference/meeting room space would primarily serve hotel patrons.  The Project would employ approximately 80 full‐time and 40 part‐time employees.  The Project site is located at 11469 Jefferson Boulevard, immediately northwest  of  the  intersection  of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue.   The  Project site is bordered roughly by Slauson Avenue to the south, an unnamed alley to the west, low‐density commercial development to the north, and Jefferson Boulevard to the east.

The  Jefferson  Plaza  strip  mall  currently  occupies  the  Project  site.   This  one‐floor  commercial building  houses  roughly  a  dozen  establishments  with  an  approximate  combined  total  retail floor area of 13,301 gross square feet.   Jefferson Plaza would be demolished to make way for the Project.

Parking for the Project would be provided within two subterranean parking levels, with a total proposed supply of 138 parking spaces.  The subterranean parking is designed to accommodate 138  vehicles  through  a  combination  of  standard,  ADA  accessible,  and  tandem  spaces.   This parking  supply  would  be  sufficient  to  meet  the  anticipated  peak  parking  demands  of  the Project.   The  Project  site  would  include  valet‐assist  parking  in  order  to  maintain  safe  and efficient use of the tandem spaces.

The Project site would be accessed by dual entry lanes from westbound Slauson Avenue.   The drive  aisle  closer  to  the  hotel  would  serve  as  a  hotel  patron  drop‐off  and  pick‐up  area.   The

6 second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the two subterranean  parking  levels.   Access  to  the  subterranean  parking  garage  would  not  be  gate controlled.    There  would  be  two  Project  driveway  exits  onto  the  adjacent  unnamed  alley  to egress onto the surrounding roadway system.  One exit driveway would be provided directly off of the dual drive aisles (which merge into a single aisle approaching the alley), while the second exit would provide egress for vehicles exiting the subterranean parking garage.  Exiting vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the unnamed alley toward Berryman Avenue or Slauson Avenue, respectively.  The Conceptual Project Site Plan is shown in Figure 2.

FIGURE 2
7 4/3/2020FN: JEFFERSON HOTEL CULVER\SITE PLAN
ASSOCIATESCRAIN&www.crainandassociates.comPH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771 300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470Culver City, California 90230Transportation PlanningTraffic Engineering NORTH

CONCEPTUAL PROJECT SITE PLAN

8 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located at the northwest corner of Jefferson Boulevard and Slauson Avenue.

Situated at the eastern edge of the Sunkist Park neighborhood of Culver City, the Project site is generally  bounded  by  Jefferson  Boulevard  to  the  east,  an  unnamed  alley  to  the  west,  low‐ density commercial development to the north, and Slauson Avenue to the south.

The Project site is located in an urban environment, surrounded by an assortment of land uses.

Local‐  and  regional‐serving  commercial  developments,  as  well  as  a  modicum  of  industrial buildings, line the major arterials in the study area.   The Sunkist Park neighborhood, primarily consisting  of  single‐family  housing,  is  directly  north  and  west  of  the  Project.   Prominent developments in the greater area include the Westfield Culver City mall, the Corporate Pointe office  complex  (currently  being  rebranded  to  Culver  Pointe),  and  the  Playa  Vista  community, located approximately one‐third mile southeast, two‐thirds mile east, and one mile southwest of the Project site, respectively.

The Project site and surrounding area in the Sunkist Park neighborhood of Culver City are well‐ served  by  freeways  and  surface  streets  of  various  classifications.   Two  Freeways  are  located near the Project site and provide convenient access to the larger, regional roadway network.  In the  Project  study  area,  Jefferson  Boulevard,  Slauson  Avenue,  Sepulveda  Boulevard,  and Centinela  Avenue  are  classified  as  Primary  Arteries  per  the  Circulation  Element  of  the  Culver City General Plan.   In the City of Los Angeles jurisdiction immediately west of the Project site, Sepulveda  Boulevard  is  classified  as  a  Boulevard  I,  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  Centinela  Avenue are classified as Boulevard II roadways, and Mesmer Avenue is classified as a Collector Street per the City of Los Angeles Mobility Plan 2035.  The Project study area freeways and roadways, depicted previously in Figure 1, are described below in more detail.

9 Two  freeways,  described  below,  provide  regional  access  for  the  Project  site  and  the surrounding community.

The San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405 [I‐405]) is a north‐south oriented freeway located less than 1,000 feet west of the Project site.   This facility has four to five mainline travel lanes and one HOV lane in each direction.  Additional auxiliary lanes are also present between some sets of  on‐  and  off‐ramps.   The  San  Diego  Freeway  provides  a  Westside  alternative  route  to  the Harbor  Freeway  (Interstate  110)  and  Golden  State  Freeway  (Interstate  5),  which  traverse through  Downtown  Los  Angeles  approximately  six  to  ten  miles  to  the  east.   The  San  Diego Freeway  has  on‐  and  off‐ramps  in  both  northbound  and  southbound  directions  at  Jefferson Boulevard, and a northbound off‐ramp at Sepulveda Boulevard.

The Marina Freeway/Expressway (State Route 90 [SR‐90]) is located less than 1,000 feet south of the Project site.  This east‐west freeway/expressway extends from Culver City to Marina Del Rey.  This route is designated as a freeway from its eastern terminus at Slauson Avenue to west of Culver Boulevard.  From west of Culver Boulevard to its intersection with Lincoln Boulevard, this facility is classified as an expressway.   The Marina Freeway/Expressway is generally a six‐ lane facility between Slauson Avenue and the San Diego Freeway, an eight‐lane facility between the  San  Diego  Freeway  and  Centinela  Avenue,  and  a  four‐lane  facility  between  Centinela Avenue  and  Lincoln  Boulevard.   Access  to  the  Marina  Freeway/Expressway  is  provided  at Slauson Avenue, Centinela Avenue, Culver Boulevard, Mindanao Way, and Lincoln Boulevard.

Existing Highways and Streets
In addition to the freeways discussed above, there are a number of surface streets and arterials that serve the Project site.  The routes and functionality of these streets are described below.

10 Sepulveda Boulevard runs north‐south, generally paralleling the San Diego Freeway.  Just south of Westchester Parkway, Sepulveda Boulevard becomes Pacific Coast Highway (State Route 1), south  to  Artesia  Boulevard  in  Manhattan  Beach.   This  roadway  traverses  underneath  Los Angeles  International  Airport  (“LAX”)  and  continues  north  through  Culver  City  and  West  Los Angeles.   Farther north, it crosses the Santa Monica Mountains and the San Fernando Valley, where it terminates at Rinaldi Street.  In the segments extending north of Machado Road (near Sawtelle/Jefferson  Boulevards),  Sepulveda  Boulevard  is  a  four‐lane  facility  with  left‐turn channelization at most intersections.  South of Machado Road, at its intersection with Jefferson Boulevard/Playa  Street,  Sepulveda  Boulevard  provides  three  northbound  and  three southbound through lanes, with full left‐turn channelization and a southbound right‐turn‐only lane.   Continuing  south  of  Jefferson  Boulevard,  Sepulveda  Boulevard  generally  maintains  six through  lanes  and  has  dual  left‐turn  channelization  at  both  study  intersections  (and northbound and southbound right‐turn‐only lanes at Centinela Avenue).

Slauson  Avenue  generally  provides  east‐west  service  with  four  to  six  travel  lanes.   Slauson Avenue begins as a Local Street at Culver Boulevard, about one‐third mile west of the San Diego Freeway.  Slauson Avenue does not bridge Ballona Creek but resumes just to the south, again as a Local Street.  After Slauson Avenue crosses Jefferson Boulevard, it becomes a more prominent roadway, designated as a Primary Artery by the City of Culver City.  East of Culver City, Slauson Avenue continues as an Avenue II roadway in the City of Los Angeles, traveling continuously to its  eastern  terminus  in  Whittier.   Slauson  Avenue  features  left‐turn  channelization  at  major intersections, and right‐turn channelization at select locations.  Near the Project site, parking is generally permitted on Slauson Avenue west of Jefferson Boulevard, and generally prohibited east of Jefferson Boulevard.

Mesmer Avenue runs from Culver Drive near Ballona Creek to Centinela Avenue.  Designated a

11 Collector  Street  within the  City  of  Los  Angeles,  Mesmer  Avenue  is  relatively  short,  measuring roughly  one  mile  from  end  to  end.   Between  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  Centinela  Avenue, Mesmer  Avenue  generally  has  two  lanes  in  each  direction.   This  roadway  is  traffic  signal‐ controlled at its intersection with Jefferson Boulevard.

Jefferson  Boulevard  begins  at  Culver  Boulevard  in  the  Playa  Del  Rey  area  of  the  City  of  Los Angeles,  becomes  discontinuous  through  Culver  City  at  Sepulveda  Boulevard  opposite  Playa Street,  and  resumes  approximately  2,000  feet  to  the  north,  near  Sawtelle  Boulevard.   At National  Boulevard,  just  beyond  the  Culver  City  boundary,  the  directionality  of  Jefferson Boulevard  changes  from  northeasterly  to  easterly.   Jefferson  Boulevard  terminates  south  of Downtown Los Angeles at Central Avenue.  Within the Project study area, Jefferson Boulevard is designated a Boulevard II in Los Angeles and a Primary Artery in Culver City.   It generally has two to three lanes in each direction, plus left‐turn channelization at intersections.   Right‐turn‐ only lanes and raised medians are also featured at select locations along Jefferson Boulevard.

Some  portions  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  provide  bicycle  lanes;  however,  there  is  no  bicycle infrastructure  along  on  this  roadway  near  the  Project  site.   On‐street  parking  is  generally prohibited on Jefferson Boulevard in the Project vicinity.

Centinela Avenue generally extends in an east‐west direction from Florence Avenue in the City of Inglewood north to its intersection with Jefferson Boulevard.  The roadway then continues in a  north‐south  alignment  to  Stanwood  Drive  in  the  City  of  Los  Angeles.   Centinela  Avenue resumes  from  south  of  Ocean  Park Boulevard  and  extends  discontinuously  north  to  Montana Avenue.   Within  the  Project  vicinity,  Centinela  Avenue  is  designated  both  a  Boulevard  II  and Avenue I in Los Angeles, a Primary Artery in Culver City, and a Major Arterial in Inglewood.  East of  Sepulveda  Boulevard,  Centinela  Avenue  generally  provides  two  through  lanes  in  each direction  with  left‐  and  right‐turn  channelization  at  some  intersections.   West  of  Sepulveda

12 Boulevard,  Centinela  Avenue  provides  three  westbound  and  four  eastbound  lanes,  a  raised median, and left‐turn channelization at intersections.   North of Jefferson Boulevard, Centinela Avenue  generally  has  two  to  three  lanes  in  each  direction,  along  with  two‐way  left‐turn channelization.

Segrell Way is a north‐south roadway located entirely within the Sunkist Park neighborhood for roughly  one‐half  mile  between  Sawtelle  Boulevard  to  the  north  and  Slauson  Avenue  to  the south.   Designed as a Neighborhood Feeder, the roadway provides one lane in each direction with  speed  humps,  and  stop  controls  at  all  intersections.   The  roadway  is  located  one  block west of the Project site.

Culver Park Drive is a north‐south roadway located one block west of Segrell Way in the Sunkist Park neighborhood.   This roughly one‐half mile Neighborhood Feeder roadway has one lane in each direction between Sawtelle Boulevard to the north and Slauson Avenue to the south, with speed humps, and stop controls at all intersections.

An  Unnamed  Alley  forms  the  western  boundary  of  the  Project  site.   The  alley  provides secondary access to many commercial businesses that front Jefferson Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard between Slauson Avenue and Machado Road.   The alley provides one lane in each direction  and  is  stop‐controlled  at  Slauson  Avenue,  Berryman  Avenue,  and  northbound  at Sawtelle  Boulevard.   The  alley  terminates  south  of  Machado  Road.   The  two‐way  alley  has carries  an  existing  (2018)  average  daily  traffic  (ADT)  volume  of  1,305  vehicles  (566  vehicles northbound, 739 southbound), north of Slauson Avenue.

Existing (2018) Traffic Volumes
The  intersection  traffic  volumes  used  in  the  following  analyses  were  based  on  new  traffic counts conducted in November 2018.   The traffic counts were conducted on weekdays during

13 the peak commute traffic periods of 7:00 to 10:00 AM and 3:00 to 6:00 PM.  Existing (2018) AM and  PM  peak‐hour  volumes  at  the  study  intersections  are  depicted  in  Figures  3(a)  and  3(b), respectively.   The  traffic  count  data  summary  sheets  for  each  of  the  study  intersections  are provided in Appendix A.

Daily  machine  traffic  counts  were  also  conducted  in  November  2018  for  the  three  study residential street segments.  The ADT volumes for the residential street segments are provided in  Table  9  on  page  61.   The  daily  traffic  count  data  summary  sheets  are  also  contained  in Appendix A.

Existing Public Transportation
Culver  CityBus  and  the  Los  Angeles  County  Metropolitan  Transportation  Authority  (“Metro”) provide bus service in the Sunkist Park neighborhood.   Most of these lines rendezvous at the Culver City Transit Center, which is located less than 1,000 feet east of the Project site, adjacent to  the  Westfield  Culver  City  mall.   Below  is  an  overview  of  the  current  transit  service  and facilities available within a “reasonable walking distance” (approximately one‐quarter mile) of the Project site.  Figure 4 shows the Project area transit routes.

CULVER CITYBUS
Line 2 operates northwest‐southeast, traveling between Venice and Fox Hills.  Near the Project site, Line 2 provides service in both directions with stops at the corner of Slauson Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard.  Line 2 operates on weekdays only, with headways of approximately 60 minutes throughout the day, including AM and PM peak hours.

Line  3  provides  north‐south  service  between  Century  City,  Rancho  Park,  Palms,  and Culver City.  Northbound and southbound passengers can access Line 3 from the Project 257
354
101
34 1384108
16171515
24 201
45 3748545
53911
21 467105998
81 50
22 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
0 213
251
141809105
1769957
26 100
120
136
882
388265195
539
725
804
365
90 944
1026334

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
66 794
237
313
1187
1052
66 713
189
79 307
497
10 1051
2329
1413
0 253
0 0
3 4
350
484
3 FIGURE 3(a)
14 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AM2018

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

AM PEAK HOUR
EXISTING (2018) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
218
266
198
78 1065100
252140624
43 273
99 2975559
531108
15 20075353
172
131
16 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
0 89
292
23491379
5461232
25 181
217
102
1082
3643395
307
816
912
497
65180
1090541

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
106
302
349
349
878
411
209
1459
94 105
690
1140
1 688
809
1417
0 383
0 3
0 2
682
394
FIGURE 3(b)
15 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PM2018

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PM PEAK HOUR
EXISTING (2018) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

PROJECT
SITE
FIGURE 4
16 9/3/2019
FN: JEFFERSON HOTEL CULVER\TRANSIT

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering

PROJECT AREA TRANSIT ROUTES
NORTH

17 site via the Culver City Transit Center.  Line 3 runs on headways of approximately 20 to 25  minutes  during  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours.   Saturday,  Sunday,  and  holiday service is provided roughly every 30 minutes.

Line 4 travels east‐west, providing service between West Adams, Downtown Culver City, West Los Angeles College, Fox Hills, and Playa Vista.  Near the Project site, Line 4 offers eastbound  and  westbound  stops  at  the  Culver  City  Transit  Center.   Line  4  runs  with headways of approximately 40 to 45 minutes during weekday AM and PM peak hours.

Saturday service operates on headways of approximately 40 to 50 minutes.  Line 4 does not operate on Sundays or holidays.

Lines  6  and  Rapid  6  provide  north‐south  service  between  UCLA,  Westwood,  West  Los Angeles, Culver City, and LAX.  Line 6 and Rapid 6 both follow the same route; however, Rapid  6  features  limited  stops  at  major  intersections  to  provide  faster,  more  express service.   From the Project site, Line 6 can be accessed for service in either direction at the Culver City Transit Center.   Rapid 6 does not stop at the Culver City Transit Center, but provides stops at the northwest corner of Sepulveda Boulevard and Slauson Avenue, and  north  of  Slauson  Avenue  at  Playa  Street.   Line  6  runs  daily,  with  headways  of approximately 10 to 25 minutes during the weekday AM and PM peak hours.  Saturday, Sunday,  and  holiday  service  is  provided  roughly  every  20  to  25  minutes.   Rapid  6 operates  weekdays  only,  with  headways  of  approximately  15  to  20  minutes  during weekday AM and PM peak hours.

METRO
Lines  108  and  358  provide  east‐west  service  between  Pico  Rivera,  Maywood, Huntington  Park,  South  Los  Angeles,  Ladera  Heights,  Fox  Hills,  and  Marina  Del  Rey.

18 Lines 108 and 358 follow the same route, but Line 358 makes limited stops in the middle of  the  route,  providing  faster  service.   Eastbound  and  westbound  service  is  provided near the Project site with stops  on  Jefferson Boulevard, just south  of Slauson Avenue.

Line  108  operates  daily  with  headways  of  approximately  eight  to  15  minutes  during weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours.   Saturday,  Sunday,  and  holiday  service  operates  on headways of approximately 14 to 60 minutes.   Line 358 operates weekdays only, with headways of approximately 10 to 20 minutes during weekday AM and PM peak hours.

Line  110  provides  east‐west  service  between  Bell  Gardens,  Bell,  Huntington  Park, Florence‐Graham,  Inglewood,  Fox  Hills,  and  Playa  Vista.   Eastbound  and  westbound service  is  provided  near  the  Project  site  at  stops  on  Jefferson  Boulevard,  just  south  of Slauson  Avenue.   Line  110  operates  daily,  with  headways  of  approximately  10  to  20 minutes  during  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours.   Saturday  service  is  provided approximately  every  20  to  30  minutes.   Sunday  and  holiday  service  operates  on headways of approximately 30 to 35 minutes.

Line  217  runs  predominantly  north‐south,  between  Culver  City,  Ladera  Heights,  Pico‐ Robertson, West Hollywood, and Hollywood.   Line 217 stops at the Culver City Transit Center, which is the nearest boarding and alighting location for patrons and employees of  the  Project.   Line  217  operates  24  hours  a  day,  seven  days  a  week,  with  relatively frequent  service;  however,  evening  and  early  hour  service  terminates  at  the  La Cienega/Jefferson Expo Rail Station (approximately three miles northeast of the Project site).  Line 217 service to the Culver City Transit Center is provided weekdays only, with AM and PM peak‐hour headways of roughly 30 to 60 minutes.

As  evidenced  by  the  above  information,  the  Project  site  and  surrounding  area  are  fairly  well

19 served  by  public  transit.   When  transfer  opportunities  are considered, public  transit  connects the site with the greater Los Angeles region.  Thus, it is expected that some of the person trips generated  by  the  Project  would  have  public  transit  as  the  primary  travel  mode  instead  of private vehicles.

Analysis of Existing (2018) Traffic Conditions
The seven study intersections listed below were analyzed for existing traffic conditions.   They were selected in consultation with staff from the Cities of Culver City and Los Angeles for the analysis of potential Project traffic impacts.  The intersection jurisdictions are also noted.

1. Jefferson Boulevard & Mesmer Avenue [Culver City/Los Angeles]

2. Jefferson Boulevard & San Diego Freeway (I‐405) Southbound Ramps [Culver City/Los Angeles/Caltrans]

3. Jefferson Boulevard & San Diego Freeway (I‐405) Northbound Ramps [Culver City/Los Angeles/Caltrans]

4. Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue [Culver City]

5. Slauson Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard [Culver City]

6. Slauson Avenue & Marina Freeway (SR‐90) [Culver City/Caltrans]

7. Centinela Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard [Culver City/Los Angeles] All of these intersections are signalized.  Per the current traffic study guidelines of the involved jurisdictions,  the  traffic  analysis  was  performed  through  the  use  of  the  Critical  Movement Analysis (CMA) methodology.   The traffic counts discussed earlier were used, along with other data  pertaining  to  intersection  geometrics,  on‐street  parking  conditions,  and  traffic  signal operations.   The  existing  traffic  lane  configurations  and  traffic  controls  at  each  study intersection  are  shown  in  Appendix  B.   These  configurations  and  controls  were  reviewed  and updated, as appropriate, for the analysis.

The analysis and evaluation of traffic operations at each signalized study intersection is based

20 on procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board Circular 212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity.1   In the discussion of the CMA for signalized intersections, procedures were developed for determining operating characteristics of an intersection in terms of the "Level of Service"  (LOS)  provided  for  different  levels  of  traffic  volume  and  other  variables,  such  as  the number of traffic signal phases.  The CMA methodology is also consistent with the Los Angeles County  Congestion  Management  Program  (CMP)  procedures  for  transportation  impact analyses.

Level  of  Service  describes  the  quality  of  traffic  flow.   In  general,  the  Level  of  Service  closely correlates with the average amount of delay that motorists will experience at an intersection under prevailing or projected traffic conditions.  LOS A through C are indicative of excellent‐to‐ good  traffic  flow  conditions,  with  no  interruptions  in  flow  due  to  traffic  volumes.   LOS  D corresponds with fair conditions that may experience substantial delay during portions of the peak hours, but without excessive backups.  LOS E represents poor conditions, with volumes at or near the capacity of the intersection and long lines of vehicles that may have to wait through several  signal  cycles.   LOS  F  is  characteristic  of  failure  (i.e.,  the  intersection  is  overloaded, vehicular  movements  may  be  restricted  or  prevented,  and  delays  and  queue  lengths  become increasingly longer).

A  determination  of  the  LOS  at  an  intersection  can  be  obtained  through  a  summation  of  the critical  movement  volumes,  on  a  per  lane  basis,  at  that  intersection.   Critical  movement volumes are the highest total conflicting traffic volumes for each signal phase.  Once the sum of the  critical  movement  volumes  has  been  obtained,  the  values  in  Table  1  can  be  used  to determine the appropriate LOS.

1   Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Circular Number 212, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1980.

21 Table 1
Critical Movement Volume Ranges*
For Determining Levels of Service
Level of Two Three Four  or
Service Phase Phase More Phases
A 900 855 825
B 1,050 1,000 965
C 1,200 1,140 1,100
D 1,350 1,275 1,225
E 1,500 1,425 1,375
F
* For planning applications only (i.e., not appropriate for operations and design applications).

Maximum Sum of Critical Volumes
(Vehicles Per Hour)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Not Applicable ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Capacity is the total maximum hourly volume of vehicles in the intersection critical lanes that has a reasonable expectation of passing through the intersection under the prevailing roadway and traffic conditions.   For planning purposes, the capacity for signalized intersections equates to the maximum critical movement value at LOS E, as indicated in Table 1.

The CMA volume‐to‐capacity (V/C) ratios used in this study were calculated by dividing the sum of  the  critical  movement  volumes  by  the  appropriate  capacity  value  for  the  type  of  signal control present or proposed at the subject intersections.  A description of the different LOS and their corresponding V/C values is shown in Table 2.

These  standard  CMA  calculations  are  also  adjusted  to  account  for  signal  enhancements  not considered in the CMA methodology, including the effects of intersections operating under the City  of  Los  Angeles’s  Automated  Traffic  Surveillance  and  Control  (ATSAC)  system  or  the upgraded Adaptive Traffic Control System (ATCS), as well as the City of Culver City’s ATSAC‐like system.

22 Table 2
Level of Service
As a Function of CMA V/C Ratios

ATSAC  (ATSAC‐like)  and  ATCS  are  highly  sophisticated  computerized  systems  that  continually monitor traffic demands at signalized intersections within the system and modify signal timing in  real  time  to  maximize  capacity  and  decrease  overall  delay.   The  ATSAC  and  ATSAC‐like systems  have  been  recognized  to  increase  intersection  capacity  by  approximately  seven percent.   The  upgrade  to  ATCS  is  able  to  increase  capacity  by  an  additional  three  percent, resulting in a total 10 percent increase in intersection capacity.   Therefore, per City of Culver

23 City  and  LADOT  policies,  the  standard  V/C  ratios  were  decreased  by  0.070  where  only  the ATSAC or ATSAC‐like systems are in effect and by 0.100 where the ATCS is in effect.

Per  discussions  with  LADOT  staff,  all  three  study  intersections  operated  by  the  City  of  Los Angeles  currently  function  under  the  upgraded  ATCS  system  (Jefferson  Boulevard  &  Mesmer Avenue, Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Southbound Ramps, and Jefferson Boulevard & I‐ 405  Freeway  Northbound  Ramps).   The  Culver  City‐operated  study  intersections  (Jefferson Boulevard  &  Slauson  Avenue,  Slauson  Avenue  &  Sepulveda  Boulevard,  Slauson  Avenue  & Marina  Freeway,  and  Centinela  Avenue  &  Sepulveda  Boulevard)  all  operate  under  the  City’s ATSAC‐like system.

Although both Project study area jurisdictions (Cities of Culver City and Los Angeles) utilize the CMA  methodology  for  intersection  LOS  analyses,  the  City  of  Los  Angeles  maintains  its  own proprietary  analysis  spreadsheet,  with  adjustment  factors  and  assumption  override  options unique  to  the  City  of  Los  Angeles.   Further,  Los  Angeles  development  review  staff recommended  the  implementation  of  additional  capacity‐constraining  techniques  when analyzing  the  intersections  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  the  I‐405  Freeway  southbound  and northbound ramps.  These techniques included reducing the capacity of the ramp intersections, considering two of the Jefferson Boulevard eastbound through travel lanes at the southbound ramps as pre‐left turn lanes for the northbound on‐ramp, and considering one of the Jefferson Boulevard westbound through travel lanes at the northbound ramps as a pre‐left turn lane for the  southbound  on‐ramp.   Therefore,  a  supplemental  analysis,  using  the  proprietary spreadsheet  and  all  staff‐recommended  adjustments,  was  also  made  for  the  four  study intersections  located  partially  within  the  City  of  Los  Angeles  system  (Jefferson  Boulevard  & Mesmer Avenue, Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Southbound Ramps, Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps, and Centinela Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard).

24 Applying the above‐mentioned analysis procedures, the CMA V/C ratios and corresponding LOS can be calculated for each study intersection for Existing (2018) traffic conditions.  These results are provided in Table 3.  For intersections located in more than one jurisdiction, the worse V/C ratios  and  LOS  results  have  been  shown.   As  summarized  in  Table  3,  four  of  the  seven  study intersections would operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours.  Two study intersections (Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Southbound Ramps and Centinela Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard)  would  operation  at  LOS  D  or  better  during  both  peak  hours.   The  intersection  of Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps was found to operate at LOS F and E during  the  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours,  respectively.   The  LOS  analysis  worksheets  for existing traffic conditions are provided in Appendix C.

Table 3
Critical Movement Analysis and Levels of Service Summary:

Existing (2018) Traffic Conditions
Peak V/C
No. Intersection Hour Ratio LOS
1 Jefferson  Boulevard &A M 0 . 5 6 9 A
Mesmer Avenue 1 PM 0.501 A
2 Jefferson  Boulevard &A M 0 . 8 7 7 D
I‐405 Freeway Southbound Ramps 1 PM 0.653 B
3 Jefferson  Boulevard &A M 1 . 0 5 1 F
I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps 1 PM 0.972 E
4 Jefferson  Boulevard &A M 0 . 3 6 8 A
Slauson Avenue 2 PM 0.439 A
5 Slauson  Avenue &A M 0 . 4 8 5 A
Sepulveda Boulevard 2 PM 0.495 A
6 Slauson  Avenue &A M 0 . 7 2 9 C
Marina Freeway 2 PM 0.613 B
7C e n t i n e l a Avenue &A M 0 . 8 9 4 D
Sepulveda Boulevard 1 PM 0.879 D
Notes
1 Analysis results based on City of Los Angeles CMA methodology and assumptions.
2 Analysis results based on City of Culver City CMA methodology.

25 PROJECT TRAFFIC
The  following  section  describes  the  methodology  and  procedures  used  to  determine  the  trip generation,  distribution,  and  assignment  of  traffic  resulting  from  the  Project.   The  Project consists  of  a  boutique  hotel  with  a  maximum  of  175  rooms,  which  would  also  include approximately  3,400  square  feet  of  ancillary  restaurant  space,  a  7,000  square‐foot  lounge,  a 5,100  square‐foot  rooftop  bar,  and  4,800  square  feet  of  conference/meeting  room  space.

These auxiliary uses would primarily serve as amenities for patrons  of  the hotel.   The Project site is presently occupied by the Jefferson Plaza strip mall, which contains approximately 13,301 gross  square  feet  of  retail  space  that  would  be  demolished  to  accommodate  the  Project.

Project vehicular access/egress and parking are described at the end of this section.

Project Trip Generation
The  latest  version  of  the  Institute  of  Transportation  Engineers  (ITE)  Trip  Generation  Manual (10th  Edition,  2017)  was  used  to  develop  the  traffic  characteristics  of  the  Project.   The  trip generation equations and rates in the ITE manual are nationally recognized and are used as the basis for most traffic impact studies conducted in the Cities of Culver City and Los Angeles, as well as the surrounding region.  Information was obtained from the Trip Generation Manual for ITE  Land  Use  Code  (LUC)  310:  Hotel  and  LUC  820:  Shopping  Center  (used  to  calculate  the existing  retail  use  trip  generation).   The  trip  rates  for  weekday  daily,  AM  peak‐hour,  and  PM peak‐hour trip generations, along with directional “split” percentages (inbound vs. outbound), are based on the General Urban/Suburban setting since the trip rates for the Dense Multi‐Use Urban setting are based on a limited number of studies.  The rates are listed in Table 4.

26 Table 4
Project Trip Generation Rates
Hotel, ITE LUC 310 (trips per room)
Daily:  T = 8.36 (RM)
AM Peak Hour:  T = 0.47 (RM); IB = 59%, OB = 41%
PM Peak Hour:  T = 0.60 (RM); IB = 51%, OB = 49%

Shopping Center, ITE LUC 820 (trips per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area) Daily:  T = 37.75 (A)
AM Peak Hour:  T = 0.94 (A); IB = 62%, OB = 38%
PM Peak Hour:  T = 3.81 (A); IB = 48%, OB = 52%
Notes
Source:  Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017).

T = Trip Ends; RM = Rooms; A = Gross Floor Area in Thousands of Square Feet; IB = Inbound; OB = Outbound.

By applying the trip rates provided in Table 4, baseline weekday daily, AM peak‐hour, and PM peak‐hour trips were calculated for the Project’s proposed and existing uses.  As these rates do not  account  for  such  trip‐reducing  factors  as  significant  transit  usage  or  pass‐by  trips,  the baseline  trip  estimates  reflect  a  conservative  condition.   Such  trip‐reducing  factors  are important  considerations  in  determining  the  actual  traffic‐generating  characteristics  of  a project  and,  therefore,  adjustments  were  made  to  the  Project’s  baseline  trip  generation estimates.

The use of public transportation is an important consideration in the evaluation of a project’s trip‐generating potential.   As noted previously in the Existing Public Transportation section of this report, the Project is well served by bus lines of multiple transit operators.   These transit operators provide both local and regional routes that are readily accessible to Project patrons and employees.   Significant transit use is not accounted for in the ITE Trip Generation Manual General  Urban/Suburban  trip  rates  and  equations.   Because  the  trip  rates  for  the  General Urban/Suburban  setting  do  not  consider  significant  transit  connectivity,  adjustments  can  be made to the Project trip generation to account for transit usage associated with the proposed

27 and  existing  land  uses.   Additionally,  “walk‐in”  trips  to  and  from  the  Project  site  are  also expected.  Given the mix of nearby land uses within/adjacent to the Sunkist Park neighborhood, it is expected that people staying and working at the Project would consider walking between the Project and nearby developments.   Situated at the southerly end of a community‐serving commercial corridor with a diverse mix of commercial, industrial, residential, office, and retail land  uses  nearby,  the  Project  site  is  expected  to  be  attractive  and  conducive  to  pedestrian traffic.   This  walk‐in  patronage  would  reduce  the  number  of  vehicle  trips  generated  by  the Project.   However,  even  with  the  abundance  of  available  transit  options  and  walking opportunities  within  the  general  Project  vicinity,  no  transit  or  walk‐in  adjustment  factor  was assumed  for  the  Project’s  proposed  and  existing  land  uses  in  order  to  provide  a  more conservative analysis.

Trip reduction factors for the Project also account for the presence of “pass‐by” trips.  As some motorists pass by the Project’s existing uses, the specific convenient facilities provided by these uses (or other factors) produce a stop at the site.   Such activity is considered to be an interim stop along a trip which existed irrespective of the presence of these existing uses, and therefore vehicles  making  these  stops  are  not  considered  to  be  newly  generated  existing  use‐related traffic.   The  ITE  Trip  Generation  Manual  contains  a  series  of  average  observed  pass‐by  trip reduction  percentages  for  various  land  use  types,  and  the  City  of  Culver  City  traffic  study guidelines includes advice and City‐recommended maximums for these percentages.  Based on this guidance, a pass‐by trip adjustment of 25 percent was applied to the Project’s existing use baseline trips.   This pass‐by trip adjustment factor has been approved by Culver City staff in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed on March 26, 2019 and included as Appendix D.

Based  on  the  trip  generation  rates  and  aforementioned  trip  reduction  factors,  projections  of the amount of traffic to be generated for the Project were derived.  Table 5 summarizes the trip

28 generation for the Project.   As shown in Table 5, once completed and occupied, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 1,087 net trips per day, with 72 net trips during the AM peak hour  and  67  net  trips  during  the  PM  peak  hour.   These  peak‐hour  trips  were  distributed  to analyze Project impacts at all seven study intersections.

Table 5
Project Trip Generation Summary
In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Generation Rates
Hotel 310 1 rm 8.36 59% 41% 0.47 51% 49% 0.60
Shopping Center 820 1 ksf 37.75 62% 38% 0.94 48% 52% 3.81 Trip Generation Summary
In Out Total In Out Total
PROPOSED USES
Hotel 175 rm 1 , 4 6 34 83 48 25 45 1 1 0 5
Proposed Project Trips 1,463 48 34 82 54 51 105
EXISTING USE
Shopping Center 13.301 ksf 502 8 5 13 24 27 51
25% Pass‐By Adjustment (126) (2) (1) (3) (6) (7) (13)
Existing Project Driveway Trips (including Pass‐By Trips) 502 8 5 13 24 27 51 Existing Project Trips 376 6 4 10 18 20 38
Net Project Driveway Trips (including Pass‐By Trips) 961 40 29 69 30 24 54 Net Project Trips 1,087 42 30 72 36 31 67
Notes:
1) ITE Trip Generation Manual  (10th Edition, 2017) trip generation rates and directional distributions for Land Use Codes 310 (Hotel) and 820 (Shopping Center) applied for the weekday daily, AM peak‐hour, and PM peak‐hour time periods.  Rates for the general urban/suburban setting were used, as the rates for the Dense Multi‐Use Urban setting are based on a limited number of studies. 2) rm  = Rooms; ksf = Thousands of Square Feet of Gross Leasable Area.

PM Peak Hour
Description Size
Average
Weekday
AM Peak Hour PM  Peak Hour
Land Use
ITE
Code Intensity 2
Average
Weekday
AM Peak Hour

In  order  to  reflect  appropriately  Project  trips  in  the  direct  site  vicinity,  trip  reductions  for existing  commercial  use  pass‐by  activity  were  not  be  applied  to  the  Project’s  driveways  and appropriate  site‐adjacent  intersections,  since  pass‐by  trips,  while  not  new  to  the  area roadways, would be included in the number of vehicles that enter and exit the site’s driveways and  appropriate  site‐adjacent  intersection  turning  movements  required  for  Project access/egress.   The total Project traffic volumes at the Project driveways and appropriate site‐ adjacent intersections were also calculated.  These calculations indicate that approximately 961

29 net  trips  per  day,  with  69  net  trips  during  the  AM  peak  hour  and  54  net  trips  during  the  PM peak  hour,  would  access  the  Project  driveways.   These  net  traffic  volumes  were  used  to estimate Project traffic impacts at the site‐adjacent study intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue.

Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Estimation  of  the  geographic  distribution  of  Project  trips  was  the  next  step  in  the  analytical process.   The  primary  factors  affecting  the  trip  distribution  patterns  are  the  nature  of  the Project  uses,  existing  traffic  patterns,  characteristics  of  the  surrounding  roadway  system, geographic  location  of  the  Project  site  and  its  proximity  to  freeways  and  major  travel  routes, economic  and  entertainment  centers  to  which  hotel  patrons  would  likely  be  attracted, residential  areas  from  which  hotel  employees  would  likely  be  drawn,  and  the  various  nearby land  uses  that  would  interact  with  the  existing  on‐site  commercial  uses.   Based  on  the abovementioned  factors,  the  overall  trip  distribution  percentages  for  the  Project’s  proposed and existing uses were determined and are summarized in Table 6.   The City of Culver City has approved  these  trip  distribution  assumptions  in  an  MOU  signed  on  March  26,  2019  and included as Appendix D.

Table 6
Project Directional Trip Distribution Percentages
Proposed Use Existing  Use
Direction Percentage Percentage
North 20% 22%
South 40% 34%
East  12% 17%
West 28% 27%
Total 100% 100%

30 The  general  distribution  percentages  for  the  Project  land  uses  shown  in  Table  6  were  then disaggregated and assigned to specific routes and intersections that are expected to be used for Project access/egress.  The estimated Project trip assignment percentages for the proposed and existing uses at the study intersections were reviewed and approved by the Culver City staff in an MOU signed on March 26, 2019 and included as Appendix D.   It should be noted that the nearby  intersection  of  Jefferson  Boulevard/Playa  Street  &  Sepulveda  Boulevard  was  not reviewed as part of the traffic impact study given that the net Project trip contributions to this intersection  would  be  minimal  (6  AM  peak‐hour  trips,  3  PM  peak‐hour  trips)  and  therefore would be insufficient to create a significant traffic impact.  The Project’s proposed and existing land use trip distribution percentages are presented in Figures 5(a) and 5(b), respectively.

Applying  these  inbound  and  outbound  percentages  to  the  proposed  and  existing  Project  use trip generation estimates, the traffic volumes for the proposed and existing Project uses were determined for the seven study intersections and three study residential street segments.   By subtracting the total existing Project‐only traffic volumes from the total proposed Project‐only traffic volumes at the study intersections, the net Project traffic volumes were determined for the  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours.   These  net  Project‐only  AM  and  PM  peak‐hour  traffic volumes are depicted in Figures 6(a) and 6(b), respectively.

Project Parking and Access
A parking demand analysis was conducted for the Project in order to determine the anticipated overall peak parking demand and verify if the proposed parking supply would be sufficient to meet  the  peak  demand.   The  parking  demand  analysis  was  prepared  in  accordance  with  the Alternative  Parking  Provisions  of  the  Culver  City  Municipal  Code  (“CCMC”),  which  include  a shared parking option for developments with multiple non‐residential land uses.   The parking (3%)
8%
(5%)
20%
20%
(20%)
(20%)
18%
(18%)

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.
10%
10%
(10%)
(10%)
FRWY.

MARINA
8%
(3%)
40%
50%
10%
(5%)
(40%)
(50%)
(12%)
(38%)
20%
30%
(18%)
(20%)12%
18%

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE
(5%)(95%)
(95%)
100%

PROJECT SITE VICINITY
(95%)
2%
(2%)
20%
28%
40%
12%

CENTINELA
AVE.
(18%)(2%)
2%
18%
FIGURE 5(a)
31 4/3/2020
FN: JEFFERSON HOTEL CULVER\PROJ-DISTRIBUTION

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
LEGEND:
(XX%)
XX%

OUTBOUND PERCENTAGE

INBOUND PERCENTAGE
(4%)
10%
(6%)
20%
20%
(20%)
(20%)
2%
15%
(2%)(15%)

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.
12%
8%
(12%)
(8%)
FRWY.

MARINA
5%10%
(4%)
(5%)
40%
41%
(5%)(36%)
(9%)
(35%)
(5%)
(12%)(29%)
12%
29%
(17%)
(12%)12%
17%

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE
2%
81%

PROJECT SITE VICINITY
2%
(49%)(10%)
(41%)
15%
4%
22%
27%
17%
34%

CENTINELA
AVE.
(18%)(2%)
2%
18%
ATTACHMENT 5(b)
32 ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

EXISTING PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
LEGEND:
(XX%)
XX%

OUTBOUND PERCENTAGE

INBOUND PERCENTAGE
9/3/2019
FN: JEFFERSON & SLAUSON HOTEL\201606\PROJ-DISTRIBUTION
8 8
6 6
8 6

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
16 21
-25
1 12
17 4
12 9
13 5
6 5
8 BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
1 8
1 5
44 3
3 FIGURE 6(a)
33 4/3/2020
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AMPRJVOLS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

NET PROJECT PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AM PEAK HOUR
7 7
6 6
7 6

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
12 17
-1-105
11 24
4 14
9 11
6 8
4 7

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
17 1
6 34
3 4
FIGURE 6(b)
34 4/3/2020
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PMPRJVOLS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

NET PROJECT PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES

PM PEAK HOUR

35 demand  analysis  was  coordinated  with  the  City.   The  analysis  evaluated  the  Project’s  peak parking demands based on three approaches:  a shared parking analysis of the Project land use components  for  which  adequate  parking  must  be  provided  based  on  CCMC  parking  ratios,  a shared parking analysis of the Project land use components based on Urban Land Institute (ULI) recommended base parking ratios, and an empirically based parking demand analysis utilizing recently collected parking utilization data from three similar, nearby Culver City hotels.

The  parking  utilization  surveys  were  conducted  at  the  DoubleTree  by  Hilton  Hotel  at  6161 Centinela Avenue, the Courtyard by Marriott at 6333 Bristol Parkway, and the Four Points by Sheraton  at  5990  Green  Valley  Circle.   Occupied  parking  space  data  were  collected  at  these three hotel locations, and the overall parking supply was verified for each site.   Based on the peak parking demand rates developed conservatively using these parking utilization data, the Project’s expected peak weekday and weekend parking demands were calculated.  The Project is  expected  to  have  a  maximum  parking  demand  of  138  parking  spaces,  which  would  occur midday  on  a  weekday.   The  Project’s  parking  supply  of  138  parking  spaces  would,  therefore, accommodate  the  maximum  parking  demands  of  the  Project,  and  no  off‐site  Project  parking impacts are expected.  The Project parking demand analysis has been included as Appendix E.

Parking  for  the  Project  would  be  provided  underneath  the  building,  in  two  subterranean parking  levels  that  are  designed  to  accommodate  138  vehicles  through  a  combination  of standard,  ADA  accessible,  and  tandem  spaces.   The  Project  site  would  include  valet‐assist parking in order to maintain safe and efficient use of the tandem spaces.

The  Project  site  would  be  accessed  by  dual  entry  lanes  from  westbound  Slauson  Avenue, separated physically by a concrete column near the back‐of‐sidewalk.   The drive aisle closer to the hotel (the inner aisle) would serve as a passenger drop‐off and pick‐up area.   The second

36 drive  aisle  would  allow  entering  vehicles  to  access  the  parking  ramp  down  to  the  two subterranean  parking  levels.   Access  to  the  subterranean  parking  garage  would  not  be  gate controlled.   A  striped  median  would  extend  from  the  concrete  column  to  delineate  the  two entry lanes of traffic; however, vehicles in the inner aisle would be able to maneuver around stopped  vehicles  dropping  off/picking  up  when  necessary.   All  motorists  using  the  inner  aisle would have to merge with outer drive aisle traffic in order to exit the site.

There would be two Project driveway exits onto the adjacent unnamed alley to egress onto the surrounding  roadway  system.   One  exit  driveway  would  be  provided  directly  off  of  the  dual drive  aisles  (which  would  merge  into  a  single  drive  aisle  approaching  the  alley),  while  the second exit would provide egress for vehicles exiting the subterranean parking garage.   Exiting vehicles would be allowed to travel north or south along the unnamed alley toward Berryman Avenue  or  Slauson  Avenue,  respectively.   It  is  anticipated  that  the  Project  would  increase vehicular traffic on the unnamed alley since all outbound Project trips would exit the site onto the alley.

The  Project  would  remove  existing  on‐street  parking  on  Slauson  Avenue,  adjacent  to  the Project  site  and  between  the  unnamed  alley  and  Jefferson  Boulevard.   There  are  a  total  of approximately  six  existing  parking  spaces  (three  on  either  side  of  the  existing  site  driveway).

Although  these  existing  parking  spaces  are  currently  unmetered,  the  City  of  Culver  City  has plans to install meters in the near future.  Therefore, in order to accommodate the Project’s site plan design, up to six parking spaces may be removed at a loss of $1,000 per meter per year (based on the City‐wide parking meter revenue average).  The Project shall pay the City a total of  $30,000  for  five  years  of  lost  parking  revenue  for  six  lost  parking  spaces  along  Slauson Avenue caused by the Project.

37 A conceptual striping plan of Slauson Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard, adjacent to the Project site and illustrating the Project site in relation to these roadways, is provided in Appendix F.  As recommended  by  City  staff,  the  plan  indicates  the  maintenance  of  an  18‐foot  sidewalk  on Slauson Avenue, adjacent to the Project site, striping a crosswalk across the alley, and providing signage  that  will  be  installed  at  the  inbound  driveway  to  advise  arriving  hotel  guests  of  the parking options and locations (e.g., drop‐off/pick‐up on ground floor  via the inner drive aisle, self‐park on two subterranean parking levels with valet assist via the outer drive aisle).

Per City request, a truck turn analysis was conducted based on the largest size truck expected to serve the Project site  ‐‐ a WB‐50 truck type with an overall length of 55 feet, width of 8.5 feet, and height of 13.5 feet (see Appendix G).  This truck size largely conforms to the City Code restrictions, with the exception of the width.   Trucks with widths greater than 8 feet require a permit.   Accordingly,  the  Project  would  obtain  a  permit  if  it  became  necessary  to  operate  a vehicle  wider  than  8  feet  to  serve  the  site.   It  should  be  noted  that  the  larger,  55‐foot  long delivery trucks would serve the site infrequently (no more than two times per month) and prior to  the  start  of  the  weekday  AM  peak  period.   A  flagger  would  be  available  to  assist  all  truck deliveries  with  access  to/from  the  loading  area,  thereby  ensuring  that  all  delivery  trucks maneuver  safely  and  efficiently  into  and  out  of  the  loading  area.   Protective  devices  such  as bollards shall be installed on the west side of the alley in front of the loading area, if they can be accommodated.

As  shown  in  Appendix  G,  for  the  inbound  trip,  the  WB‐50  truck  would  be  capable  of  backing into  the  loading  area  by  traveling  north  on  the  public  alley  from  Slauson  Avenue.   For  the outbound trip, the truck would exit the site by turning right and traveling northbound on the public alley towards Berryman Avenue.

38 Finally,  the  Project  waste  management  plan  describing  how  waste  and  recyclable  materials would be handled for the site has been included in Appendix H.

Project Bicycle Access
Figure  7  is  an  exhibit  showing  the  recommended  bicycle  facilities  per  the  City  of  Culver  City Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan, as adopted by the City Council in June 2020.  Currently, there are no existing bicycle facilities within the City of Culver City near the Project site, except for short  bicycle  lane  segments  along  the  west  and  east  sides  of  Sepulveda  Boulevard,  south  of Centinela  Avenue.   These  short  sections  are  located  in  the  City  of  Los  Angeles  and  join  the existing bicycle lanes to the south along Sepulveda Boulevard.

In the future, the City’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan [shown in Figure 7] proposes to install Class II bicycle lanes on the following segments in the general Project study area:
 Berryman Avenue, between Hayter Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard;  Centinela Avenue, between Mesmer Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard; and  Hannum Avenue, between Playa Street and Slauson Avenue.

Class IV separated bikeways are proposed on the following roadway segments:
 Centinela Avenue, between Sepulveda Boulevard and Green Valley Circle;  Jefferson Boulevard, between the City limit and Sepulveda Boulevard; and  Sepulveda Boulevard, between the Ballona Creek Bike Path and Centinela Avenue.

A Class III bicycle roadway is proposed on the following roadway segment:
 Hannum Avenue, between Sawtelle Boulevard and Playa Street.

FIGURE 7
39 10/19/2020
FN: JEFFERSON & SLAUSON HOTEL\REPORT GRAPHICS20201019\CCBIKEMP SOURCE: CULVER CITY BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN (JUNE 2020)

CITY OF CULVER CITY

BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN

RECOMMENDED BICYCLE FACILITIES ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering

40 The  City  of  Los  Angeles  Mobility  Plan  2035  identifies  facilities  as  part  of  its  Bicycle  Enhanced Network (BEN), including bicycle paths and protected bicycle lanes, to be completed by 2035.

As  part  of  these  BEN  facilities  and  as  shown  in  Figure  8,  Sepulveda  Boulevard  is  a  Tier  1 Protected  Bicycle  Lane  facility,  south  of  Centinela  Avenue  to  Manchester  Avenue.   Centinela Avenue is identified for a Tier 1 Protected Bicycle Lane improvement, from Mesmer Avenue to its  intersection  with  Jefferson  Boulevard  which  transitions  to  Inglewood  Boulevard  until  it terminates at the Ballona Creek Bike Path.

The  Project  access  driveway  on  Slauson  Avenue  would  be  required  to  conform  to  Culver  City standards, and would be designed to provide adequate sight distance.   Street trees and other potential impediments to adequate visibility would be minimal.  The Project entrance‐only and exit‐only  driveway  connections  to  Slauson  Avenue  and  the  site‐adjacent  unnamed  alley, respectively, would provide the most direct connection to and from the bicycle parking located on the Project’s ground floor.  The one‐way operation of the Project’s internal drive would have less  potential  for  vehicle‐bicycle  conflicts  than  a  two‐way  internal  drive,  providing  enhanced safety for bicyclists accessing/egressing the Project.

It  should  be  noted  that  the  Project  will  implement  a  TDM  plan  with  measures  designed  to promote  alternative  modes  of  travel  to/from  the  Project,  including  by  bicycle.   The  bicycle‐ related  TDM  measures  include:   providing  employees  with  bicycle  route  and  facility information, including bicycle maps and bicycle safety information, via bulletin board/website; bike‐bicycle  parking  (short‐term  and  long‐term)  in  excess  of  City  requirements;  a  self‐serve bicycle  tool  and  repair  stand;  free  on‐site  shared  bicycles;  bike‐to‐work  promotions;  and  a shower/changing room for employees who bike to work.

Based on these considerations, the Project would not affect the ability of the City of Culver City or the City of Los Angeles to implement their bicycle plans or result in bicycle access impacts.

FIGURE 8
41 4/3/2020
FN: JEFFERSON & SLAUSON HOTEL\LABIKEMP

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH
(SOURCE: LA MOBILITY PLAN 2035)
CITY OF LOS ANGELES MOBILITY PLAN 2035

BICYCLE ENHANCED NETWORK

42 EXISTING WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The “Existing With Project” traffic conditions are defined by the traffic volumes, roadways, and intersection configurations/controls that exist in the year 2018, and the addition of traffic that would be generated by the Project.  The net Project traffic volumes, determined in the previous section  and  presented  in  Figures  6(a)  and  6(b),  were  added  to  the  Existing  traffic  volumes shown  in  Figures  3(a)  and  3(b).   This  produced  the  Existing  With  Project  peak‐hour  traffic volumes shown in Figures 9(a) and 9(b).  Ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic, and any future roadways or infrastructure improvements, were not included in this analysis, as this analysis is of the Existing condition for the year 2018.

The Existing With Project volumes in Figures 9(a) and 9(b) were analyzed using the previously discussed CMA procedures.  These volumes were used to determine the impacts attributable to the Project relative to Existing volumes, the results of which are presented in Table 8, page 60.

As shown in Table 8, following the addition of Project traffic to existing conditions and based on the CMA methodology, four of the seven study intersections would continue to operate at LOS C  or  better  during  both  peak  hours.   Two  study  intersections  (Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405 Southbound Ramps and Centinela Avenue & Sepulveda Boulevard) would continue to operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours.   Lastly, the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & I‐ 405 Northbound Ramps would continue to operate at LOS F and LOS E during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.   However, the Project caused a significant impact at this intersection in the City of Los Angeles.

The  LOS  analysis  worksheets  for  Existing  With  Project  traffic  conditions  are  provided  in Appendix C.
257
362
101
34 1384116
16171515
24 207
51 3748545
53919
21 467106598
81 50
22 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
0 229
251
141809126
1769762
27 112
137
140
894
397265195
539
738
809
371
95 944
1034334

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
67 794
237
313
1195
1052
67 718
189
79 307
497
10 1055
2329
1413
0 257
0 0
3 4
353
487
3 FIGURE 9(a)
43 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AM2018WP

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

AM PEAK HOUR

WITH PROJECT
EXISTING (2018) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
218
273
198
78 1065107
252140624
43 279
105
2975559
531115
15 20075953
172
131
16 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
0 101
292
23491396
5360237
25 192
241
106
1096
3733395
307
827
918
505
69180
1097541

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
107
302
349
349
885
411
210
1465
94 105
690
1140
1 691
809
1417
0 387
0 3
0 2
685
398
FIGURE 9(b)
44 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PM2018WP

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PM PEAK HOUR

WITH PROJECT
EXISTING (2018) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

45 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Other projects just completed, under construction, or planned for development in the Project study area – referred to as related projects – could add substantial traffic volumes to the study intersections.  For this reason, the analysis of future traffic conditions was expanded to include potential traffic generated by these related projects.

The  methodology  for  estimating  future  traffic  volumes  can  be  summarized  as  follows:   First, existing  traffic  volumes  at  the  study  intersections  were  determined  through  traffic  counts,  as described previously.  Next, an average annual traffic growth factor of 1.0 percent was applied to the existing volumes to develop “baseline” volumes for the future study year.   In this case, the year 2024 was selected as the future study year, which is when the Project is expected to be completed and occupied.   Traffic volumes that may be generated by related projects were then overlayed on the future baseline volumes.   Finally, net Project traffic was analyzed as an incremental addition to the projected future volumes.

Ambient Traffic Growth
An  annual  traffic  growth  factor  of  1.0  percent  was  applied  to  account  for  ambient  traffic growth.   This  growth  is  attributable  to  smaller  sized  potential  development  projects,  traffic generators outside the Project study area, and general growth in through traffic volumes.   The

1.0 percent factor was compounded annually and applied to the existing (2018) traffic volumes to develop year future (2024) baseline volumes.

Related Projects
In addition to ambient traffic growth, related projects in the study area could also contribute to traffic  volume  increases  on  the  local  roadway  system.   Listings  of  potential  related  projects

46 were  obtained  from  the  Cities  of  Culver  City  and  Los  Angeles.   Research  was  also  conducted regarding recent traffic studies in the study area for additional related project information.

A review of the collective information found that traffic from 32 potential related projects could add  traffic  to  the  study  intersections.   The  locations  of  these  related  projects  are  shown  in Figure 10.  Included in the list of related projects are the Howard Hughes Center development, Entrada  creative  office  project,  and  the  Jefferson  &  La  Cienega  Project.   Per  discussion  with LADOT staff, it was determined that the since the overall Playa Vista development (Playa Vista Phase I and The Village at Playa Vista [Phase II]) has been completed and occupied to a large degree, the development should not be included as a related project.

The  current  related  projects  addresses  and  descriptions,  along  with  their  estimated  trip generations, are presented in Table 7.   These trips were distributed and assigned using similar assumptions  and  rationale  as  applied  to  Project  traffic.   In  the  case  where  environmental documentations  were  available,  the  potential  related  projects  trips  were  directly  taken  from those sources, as noted.   In the absence of other available data, related project trip estimates were determined by applying the  appropriate trip rates and/or directional splits from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017).  The relevant ITE rates and formulas are provided in  Appendix  I.   Summing  the  individual  related  project  traffic  volume  assignments,  the  total related  project  traffic  volumes  at  the  study  intersections  were  calculated  and  are  shown  in Figures 11(a) and 11(b) for the weekday AM and PM peak hours, respectively.

BALLONA CREEK

CORP LIMITRADLOCK AV

BALDWIN HILLS RESERV
26 18
28 27
22 13
20 32
4 30
1 9
7 23
3 8
24 17
31 2
5 2119
6 25
29 15
16 1210
14 INTERSTATE
405

INTERSTATE
405

INTERSTATE
10 BLVD.

SANTA MONICA

OVERLAND

SAN DIEGOSAWTELLE

SEPULVEDA
VENICE
MARINA
CULVER
FRWY.

BLVD.

BLVD.

AVE.

BLVD.

FRWY. BLVD.

BLVD.

JEFFERSON

SLAUSON
AVE.

LA CIENEGA
FRWY.

LA TIJERA BLVD.

FLORENCEAVE.

AVE.

MANCHESTER
11 PROJECT
SITE
FIGURE 10
47 9/3/2019
FN: JEFFERSON HOTEL CULVER\RELPROJS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering

RELATED PROJECTS LOCATION MAP
NORTH

48 Table 7
Related Project Locations, Descriptions, and Trip Generations PROJECT NAME ADDRESS PROJECT  DESCRIPTION DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL CITY OF CULVER CITY

1. West  Los Angeles College Master Plan 9000  Overland Avenue 11,675 stu Enrollment  Increase 2,186        119      34        153      70        59        129

2. Office  & Retail Building 700 ‐701 Corporate Pointe 281,400 sf General  Office 1,440        188      31        219      32        165      197

3. Entrada  Creative Office 6161  W. Centinela Avenue 281,209 sf General  Office 2,880        385      53        438      67        326      393

4. Culver  West Mixed Use Washington/Inglewood 11924  Washington Boulevard 3,750 sf Restaurant 1,087        (8)         40        32        65        26        91 11,250 sf Retail
98 du Apartment
(26,445) sf General  Office (to be removed)

5. 4 ‐Story Commercial 5645  Sepulveda Boulevard 3,193 sf Retail 1,410        59        21        80        43        96        139 38,712 sf Medical  Office
(5,000) sf General  Office (to be removed)

6. Office  Building 11259  Washington Boulevard 4,022 sf General Office 47            26        4          30        1          4          5

7. Vista  Del Sol ‐ Assisted Living Expansion 11620  Washington Boulevard 72 bd Assisted  Living 187           9          5          14        7          12        19

8. Bristol  Parkway Mixed Use 6201  Bristol Parkway 20,767         sf Retail 3,731        52        240      292      180      69        249 662             du Apartment
50                du Live/Work
(60,000)      sf Retail  (to be removed)

9. Shell  Gas Station 11224  Venice Boulevard 3,150           sf Gas  Station With Convenience Market 4,536        122      117      239      142      136      278

10. Parcel  B ‐ Culver Steps 9300  Culver Boulevard 45,000         sf Retail/Restaurant 2,398        102      28        130      94        153      247 65,000        sf General  Office
10,000        sf Public  Plaza

11. Ivy  Station Washington/National TOD  8824 National Boulevard 10,000         sf High‐Turnover Restaurant 4,124       173      83        256      127      174      301 10,000        sf Quality Restaurant
200             du Mid‐Rise Apartment
148             rm Hotel
201,000      sf General Office
24,000        sf Specialty Retail
(300)           sp LRT Station parking (to be removed)
(10,000)      sf Automobile Care Center (to be removed) (8,000)        sf Retail (to be removed)
(12,000)      sf Furniture Store (to be removed)

12. Synapse  Office and Retail/Restaurant (ICC Site) 8888  Washington Boulevard  59,324        sf General  Office 1,146        82        18        100      33        91        124 2,878          sf Retail
3,184          sf High ‐Turnover Restaurant
(9,992)        sf Automobile  Repair Shop (to be removed)

13. Market  Hall ‐ Washington Centinela 12403  Washington Boulevard 21,605 sf Dining Hall 7,006       33        17        50        178      147      325 5,230 sf Retail

14. Culver  City Innovation Plan Comprehensive Plan 9336  Washington Boulevard 345,007 sf Production  Space 3,527        302      49        351      59        310      369

15. ECF  Mixed‐Use TOD 8700  Washington Boulevard 199 du Apartment 2,881       97        105      202      136      113      249 17,250 sf Commercial Live/Work
5,000 sf Restaurant
17,750 sf Retail

16. Federal  Express Mixed‐Use TOD 3710  Robertson Boulevard 141 du Apartment 2,856       107      73        180      80        188      268 64,200 sf Creative Office
30,042 sf Retail/Restaurant
CITY OF CULVER CITY TOTAL 41,442 1,848 918 2,766 1,314 2,069 3,383 AM PK HR PM  PK HR
SIZE

49 Table 7 (Cont.)
Related Project Locations, Descriptions, and Trip Generations PROJECT NAME ADDRESS PROJECT  DESCRIPTION DAILY IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL CITY OF LOS ANGELES

17. Apartment  Project 6733  Sepulveda Boulevard 176 du Apartment 628 (31) 55 24 52 (40) 12 33,484 sf General Office

18. Charter  Middle School 8540  S. La Tijera Boulevard 350 stu Middle School 868 173 142 315 99 111 210

19. Office  Project 12575  Beatrice Street 199,500 sf General Office 1,946 242 33 275 57 277 334 (23,072) sf General Office (to be removed)

20. ICEF  Vista Charter School Expansion 4471  Inglewood Boulevard 800 stu High School/Middle School 275 55 45 100 31 36 67

21. Jandy  Creative Office 5405  S. Jandy Place 93,950 sf Creative Office 613 86 10 96 30 154 184

22. Ocean  Charter School 12870  W. Panama Street 532 stu Elementary/Middle School 1,320 263 216 479 150 169 319

23. Office  Project 11811  S. Teale Street 10,925 sf General Office 121 1 521 752 6 3 1

24. Apartment  Project 6711  S Sepulveda Boulevard 180 du Apartment 898 14 60 74 61 31 92

25. The  Palms Mixed‐Use Project 10601  Washington Boulevard 132 du Apartment 2,343 64 84 148 123 91 214 26,000 sf General Office
18,000 sf Retail

26. LMU  Master Plan 1  LMU Drive 7,800 stu Enrollment 635 29 8 37 20 44 64

27. Office  Project 12777  W. Jefferson Boulevard 49,950 sf General Office Expansion 550 68 9 77 17 83 100

28. Marina  Island 5000  Beethoven 156 du Apartment 1,569 24 96 120 107 58 165

29. Coffee  Bean & Tea Leaf 6024  W. Jefferson Boulevard 53,762 sf Manufacturing 1,737 134 52 186 35 103 138 50,775 sf Warehousing
90,054 sf General  Office
2,200 sf Coffee  Shop

30. Jefferson  and La
Cienega Project 3321,  3351 S. La Cienega Boulev 1,218 du Apartment 10,136 319 419 738 467 382 849 200,000 sf General  Office
50,000 sf Supermarket
30,000 sf Retail
20,000 sf Restaurant
(20,000) sf Light  Industrial (to be removed)
(43,313) sf General  Office (to be removed)

31. Howard  Hughes Center 6801  Center Drive 600 du Apartment 8,370 660 327 987 439 958 1,397 488,659 sf Remaining  development potential

32. Apartment  Project 11612  W. Culver Boulevard 49 du Apartment 447 12 26 38 28 15 43 1,700 sf Restaurant
CITY OF LOS ANGELES TOTAL 32,456 2,127 1,584 3,711 1,721 2,498 4,219 RELATED PROJECTS TOTAL 73,898 3,975 2,502 6,477 3,035 4,567 7,602

1. Trip Generation Study West Los Angeles College 2009 Facilities Master Plan , prepared by Fehr & Peers on 4/2009.  Estimated 25% of the total trip generation would occur as of the future condition scenarios.

2. Traffic Impact Study for C3 Creative Office Development Project , prepared by Crown City Engineers, Inc. on 8/2014. Project has been completed and is fully leased and estimated to be approximately half occupied.

Trip generation reflects 50% occupancy.

3. Traffic Impact Study for Proposed Entrada Creative Office Project , prepared by Crain & Associates on 11/2016.

4. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 932 (High‐Turnover [Sit‐Down] Restaurant), 820 (Shopping Center), and 221 (Multifamily [Mid‐Rise]).

5. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 820 (Shopping Center), 720 (Medical‐Dental Office), and 710 (General Office).

6. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 710 (General Office).

7. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 254 (Assisted Living).

8. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 820 (Shopping Center) and 220 (Multifamily [Low‐Rise]).

9. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 945 (Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market).

10. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 820 (Shopping Center) and 710 (General Office).

AM PK HR PM  PK HR
SIZE
Source:

50 Table 7 (Cont.)
Related Project Locations, Descriptions, and Trip Generations

11. Traffic Impact Analysis for Ivy Station Mixed‐Use Transit Orientated Development at Washington Blvd. and National Blvd. , prepared by Kimley‐Horn and Associates on 10/2015.

12. Draft Traffic Study for the 8888 Washington Boulevard Project , prepared by Raju Associates, Inc. on 2/2017.

13. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 930 (Fast Casual Restaurant) and 820 (Shopping Center).

14. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 710 (General Office).

15. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 220 (Multifamily [Low‐Rise]), 710 (General Office Building), 932 (High‐Turnover [Sit‐Down] Restaurant, and 820 (Shopping Center).

16. Trip generation from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition for LUC 220 (Multifamily [Low‐Rise]), 710 (General Office Building), and 820 (Shopping Center).

17. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019). Project distribution based on Project presentation on 3/2016.

18. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

19. Traffic Impact Study for 12575 Beatrice Street Office Project , prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan on 7/2016.

20. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

21. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

22. Traffic Study for 6711 Sepulveda Project , prepared by The Mobility Group on 9/2017.

23. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

24. Traffic Impact Analysis for Ocean Charter School , prepared by Garland Associates on 4/2016.

25. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

26. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019). Estimated 25% of the total trip generation would occur as of the future conditions scenarios.

27. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

28. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019).

29. Traffic Impact Study for 6024 Jefferson Mixed‐Use Project , prepared by Overland Traffic Consultants, Inc. on 9/2018.

30. Traffic Impact Study for Jefferson and La Cienega Project , prepared by Gibson Transportation Consulting, Inc. on 7/2015.

31. Trip  generation from Third Amendment to Development Agreement for Howard Hughs Center, prepared by Crain & Associates on 2011.

32. Project  description and trip generation data from LADOT database (results generated on March 13, 2019). bd Bed sf       Square feet
du Dwelling  unit sp      Parking space
rm Room stu    Student
24 39
57 7117136
37199
19 8
37 163
99145

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
6 15
31 1926
564
3 13
14 74
245
51 44
113
5 10131
86 15

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
6 107
75 42
198
218
2 248
55 13
22 88
113
20 78
8 51
108
FIGURE 11(a)
51 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AMRELPRJS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

AM PEAK HOUR

TOTAL RELATED PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
39 32
61 7325820
27205
57 24
9311
186
3088

INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
29 21
29 4861
404
5 25
13 57
723
137
101
66 13
2052
21861

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
4 31
52 86
308
138
9 249
16 49
100
226
74 8
35 7
133
27 FIGURE 11(b)
52 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PMRELPRJS

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PM PEAK HOUR

TOTAL RELATED PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES

53 Future Highway System Improvements
A review of the City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Bureau of Engineering Street Improvement Master Schedule did not reveal any projects in the design or construction phases that would impact any of the intersections in the study area.   The City of Culver City does not anticipate any future roadway modifications within the study area that would affect the study intersections.

There are physical mitigation improvements associated with the Entrada creative office project, a related project, that would affect two Project study intersections.  The Entrada creative office project  physical  improvements  are  scheduled  to  be  in  place  prior  to  the  opening  year  of  the Project.  These physical improvements include the following:
 Jefferson Boulevard & Mesmer Avenue:   Restripe the south and north legs of Mesmer Avenue  to  allow  the  installation  of  a  second  northbound  right‐turn  lane.   Modify  the traffic  signal  equipment  at  the  intersection  as  necessary.   No  removal  of  on‐street parking is anticipated due to this improvement.
 Centinela  Avenue  &  Sepulveda  Boulevard:   Restripe  Sepulveda  Boulevard  to  provide  a third northbound left‐turn lane.  Modify the raised island at the southeast corner of the intersection as necessary to provide a shared northbound through/right‐turn lane.   The northbound right‐turn‐only lane would be removed.

Modify  the  channelization  and  raised  median  island  on  the  west  leg  of  Centinela Avenue,  and  restripe  to  provide  three  westbound  departure  lanes  to  receive  the additional lane of left‐turning traffic from Sepulveda Boulevard.  Modify the traffic signal equipment at this intersection as necessary.  All detectors for all the approaches tied to this intersection shall be functional to realize the operational improvements anticipated

54 in  this  mitigation.   No  removal  of  on‐street  parking  is  anticipated  due  to  this improvement.

Both the Los Angeles Mobility Plan 2035 and the Culver City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan identify several roadways to classify as Class III bicycle routes near the Project site; however this designation  will  not  affect  lane  configurations  or  phasing  characteristics  of  any  of  the  study intersections.

Analysis of Future (2024) Traffic Conditions
The analysis of the future year 2024 traffic conditions in the study area was performed using the  same  CMA  procedures  described  previously  in  this  report.   As  described  in  the  previous section,  the  future  condition  scenario  was  examined  assuming  implementation  of  all  planned roadway  improvement  projects  associated  with  the  Entrada  creative  office  project.

Accordingly, future traffic volumes for the analysis were developed as follows:
 As previously discussed, future “Without Project” traffic volumes for the year 2024 were determined  by  superimposing  area‐wide  ambient  traffic  growth  and  the  total  related project traffic volumes onto existing (2018) traffic volumes.  The resulting Future (2024) Without  Project  AM  and  PM  peak‐hour  intersection  volumes  are  provided  in  Figures 12(a)  and  12(b),  respectively.   These  are  the  “benchmark”  volumes  used  for  the “Without Project” case at each of the study intersections.  These  projected  traffic  volumes  represent  a  conservative  condition  due  to  several factors:   some related projects may not be built as described or within the study time frame;  some  related  projects  may  implement  trip  reduction  measures;  transit  usage may increase; and the effects of trip linkages have not been credited. 297
415
164
1071640151
20895816
25 232
56 4349048
571030
22 5951269104
86 53
23 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
6 241
297
169885111
1879865
31 119
127
158
1010
414281252
623
814
966
392106
1133
1175370

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
76 950
327
374
1458
1335
72 1005
256
97 348
616
11 1229
2492
1578
0 277
0 0
3 4
423
622
3 FIGURE 12(a)
55 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AM2024WO

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

AM PEAK HOUR

WITHOUT PROJECT
FUTURE (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
270
314
271
1561389126
295169725
46 347
129
4085964
561362
16 24288756
183
139
17 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
29 115
339
2961030
84 5769038
32 217
230
121
1206
3933442
463
967
1034
541
89243
1375635

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
117
352
422
456
1240
574
231
1798
116
160
832
1436
1 804
867
1539
0 414
0 3
0 2
857
445
FIGURE 12(b)
56 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PM2024WO

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PM PEAK HOUR

WITHOUT PROJECT
FUTURE (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

57  Project  traffic  volumes,  as  determined  earlier,  were  then  added  to  the  Future  (2024) Without  Project  traffic  volumes  to  develop  the  Future  (2024)  With  Project  traffic volumes.   The Future (2024) With Project volumes were then used to determine traffic impacts directly attributable to the Project.  The Future (2024) With Project AM and PM peak‐hour traffic volumes are shown in Figures 13(a) and 13(b), respectively The results of the analysis of future traffic conditions at the study intersections are summarized in Table 8.  As shown, under Future (2024) Without Project traffic conditions, traffic operations are expected to degrade when compared with existing conditions due to ambient and related project traffic growth.   Under Future (2024) Without Project conditions, four intersections are projected to operate at LOS C or better during both peak hours.   The intersection of Jefferson Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Southbound  Ramps  would  degrade  to  LOS  F  during  the  AM  peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour, while the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway  Northbound  Ramps  would  degrade  to  LOS  F  during  the  PM  peak  hour.   The intersection  of  Centinela  Avenue  &  Sepulveda  Boulevard  would  degrade  to  LOS  E  and  LOS  F conditions during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.

Under  Future  (2024)  With  Project  conditions,  six  of  the  seven  study  intersections  would maintain  the  same  LOS  as  the  Without  Project  scenario  during  both  peak  hours.  The  one intersection  that  would  see  a  worsening  LOS  is  the  intersection  of  Slauson  Avenue  &  Marina Freeway, which would degrade from LOS C (0.799 V/C ratio) to LOS D (0.802 V/C ratio) during the  AM  peak  hour.   Three  intersections  would  continue  to  operate  at  LOS  C  or  better  during both  peak  hours.   The  intersections  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Southbound Ramps,  Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Northbound  Ramps,  and  Centinela  Avenue  & Sepulveda Boulevard would continue to operate at LOS F during one or both peak hours. 297
423
164
1071640159
20895816
25 238
62 4349048
571038
22 5951275104
86 53
23 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
6 257
297
169885132
1879670
32 131
144
162
1022
423281252
623
827
971
398111
1133
1183370

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
77 950
327
374
1466
1335
73 1010
256
97 348
616
11 1233
2492
1578
0 281
0 0
3 4
426
625
3 FIGURE 13(a)
58 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\AM2024WP

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

AM PEAK HOUR

WITH PROJECT
FUTURE (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES
270
321
271
1561389133
295169725
46 353
135
4085964
561369
16 24289356
183
139
17 INTERSTATE
405
MESMER
AVE.

JEFFERSON
BLVD.

PLAYA
ST.

SEPULVEDA
BLVD.

SAN DIEGO
FRWY.

ALLEY
SLAUSON AVE.

FRWY.

MARINA
29 127
339
2961030101
5668043
32 228
254
125
1220
4023442
463
978
1040
549
93243
1382635

BERRYMAN
AVE.

PROJECT
SITE

CENTINELA
AVE.
118
352
422
456
1247
574
232
1804
116
160
832
1436
1 807
867
1539
0 418
0 3
0 2
860
449
FIGURE 13(b)
59 9/3/2019
JeffersonHotelCulver\REPORT GRAPHICS20190618\PM2024WP

ASSOCIATES
CRAIN
&
www.crainandassociates.com
PH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771
300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470
Culver City, California 90230
Transportation Planning
Traffic Engineering
NORTH

PM PEAK HOUR

WITH PROJECT
FUTURE (2024) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

60 Table 8
Critical Movement Analysis and Levels of Service Summary:

Existing (2018) and Future (2024) Without and With Project Conditions Peak
No. Intersection City  Location Hour V/C LOS V/C LOS Impact Sig.? V/C LOS V/C LOS Impact Sig.? 1J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 0.569 A 0.572 A 0.003 No 0.695 B 0.697 B 0.002 No Mesmer Ave.1 Los Angeles PM 0.501 A 0.502 A 0.001 No 0.572 A 0.573 A 0.001 No 2J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 0.877 D 0.879 D 0.002 No 1.062 F 1.064 F 0.002 No I‐405 Fwy. SB Ramps1 Los Angeles PM 0.653 B 0.658 B 0.005 No 0.779 C 0.783 C 0.004 No 3J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 1.051 F 1.068 F 0.017 Yes 1.145 F 1.163 F 0.018 Yes I‐405 Fwy. NB Ramps1 Los Angeles PM 0.972 E 0.988 E 0.016 Yes 1.182 F 1.198 F 0.016 Yes 4S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.368 A 0.393 A 0.025 No 0.425 A 0.451 A 0.026 No Jefferson Blvd.2 PM 0.439 A 0.446 A 0.007 No 0.515 A 0.521 A 0.006 No 5S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.485 A 0.488 A 0.003 No 0.606 B 0.609 B 0.003 No Sepulveda Blvd.2 PM 0.495 A 0.501 A 0.006 No 0.657 B 0.659 B 0.002 No 6S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.729 C 0.732 C 0.003 No 0.799 C 0.802 D 0.003 No Marina Fwy.2 PM 0.613 B 0.613 B 0.000 No 0.700 B 0.700 B 0.000 No 7C e n t i n e l a Ave. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 0.894 D 0.896 D 0.002 No 0.957 E 0.959 E 0.002 No Sepulveda Blvd.1 Los Angeles PM 0.879 D 0.881 D 0.002 No 1.109 F 1.110 F 0.001 No Notes
1 Analysis results based on City of Los Angeles CMA methodology and assumptions. 2 Analysis results based on City of Culver City CMA methodology.

Future (2024)
Baseline Without  Project With  Project
Existing (2018)
With Project

61 Residential Streets
As  part  of  the  future  (2024)  traffic  conditions  evaluation,  a  residential  street  impact  analysis was  conducted  to  determine  the  potential  impacts  of  Project  trips  to  residential  street segments within the nearby neighborhood of Sunkist Park.  Table 9 summarizes the existing and future ADT volumes at the three study residential street segment locations.  In order to develop future condition segment volumes, the existing segment volumes were adjusted upward via a

1.0  percent  ambient  traffic  growth  factor  and  with  related  project  traffic  volumes.   The combined traffic volume increases from these two sources provided the basis for the analysis of the  Future  (2024)  Without  Project  condition.   Project  traffic  was  then  analyzed  as  an incremental addition to the Future (2024) Without Project traffic volumes, forming the traffic volumes for the Future (2024) With Project condition.

Table 9
Residential Street Analysis:

Existing (2018) and Future (2024) Conditions
Existing
ADT (2018)
Future
Without
Project
ADT
Project‐
Related
ADT
Future
With
Project
ADT
Project %
Increase in
ADT Significant?
1S e g r e l l Way n/o Slauson Ave. 1540 1635 74 1709 4% No 2C u l v e r Park Drive n/o Slauson Ave. 673 714 74 788 9% No 3S l a u s o n Ave. w/o Segrell Way 3925 4641 58 4699 1% No Residential Street Segment
Future (2024)

The Project is not expected to contribute appreciable traffic volumes to these residential street segments, given that inbound Project traffic must enter from westbound Slauson Avenue and outbound  Project  traffic  would  egress  onto  the  adjacent  alley.   The  adjacent  alley  would provide  the  most  convenient  path  northerly  through  the  Sunkist  Park  neighborhood  to Berryman Avenue and Sawtelle Boulevard, as it would not require traveling south first to then head  north.   Although  the  Project  is  not  expected  to  contribute  noticeable  traffic volumes  to

62 the  three  study  residential  street  segments,  in  order  to  provide  a  conservative  analysis,  an evaluation  of  these  street  segments  was  performed  assuming  the  full  five  percent  of  Project traffic expected to utilize the adjacent alley would instead use Segrell Way, Culver Park Drive, or Slauson  Avenue  to  traverse  the  Sunkist  Park  neighborhood.   The  results  of  this  conservative analysis are shown in Table 9.

The  City  of  Culver  City  defines  a  significant  (residential  street  segment)  traffic  impact attributable  to  a  project  based  on  the  anticipated  future  project  and  street  segment  ADT volumes.  The significant impact thresholds for residential streets are summarized in Table 10.

Table 10
Culver City’s Significant Impact Thresholds
At Residential Streets

Projected Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
With Project
Project‐Related Increase In
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Volume
999 or less  120 or more
1,000 to 1,999  12 percent or more of final ADT
2,000 to 2,999  10 percent or more of final ADT
3,000 or more  8 percent or more of final ADT

As shown in Table 9, the Project‐related increases in ADT volumes would represent less than 10 percent of the Future (2024) With Project ADT volumes.   Based on the criteria summarized in Table 10 and the results shown in Table 9, the Project would not significantly impact any of the three study residential street segments.

Significant Traffic Impact Criteria
Signalized Intersections
The City of Culver City defines a significant (signalized intersection) traffic impact attributable to a  project  as  occurring  when  the  project  causes  an  increase  in  the  V/C  ratio  of  0.050  or  more

63 when the final (with project) LOS is C, an increase of 0.040 or more when the final LOS is D, or an increase of 0.020 or more when the final LOS is E or F.

The City of Los Angeles considers a project to cause a significant (signalized intersection) traffic impact when project‐related traffic results in a V/C ratio increase of 0.040 or more at a final LOS C, an increase of 0.020 or more at a final LOS D, and an increase of 0.010 or more at a final LOS E or F.

For  intersections  solely  within  one  jurisdiction,  that  jurisdiction’s  significance  criteria  were applied.   For  intersections  shared  between  jurisdictions,  the  significance  criteria  of  the jurisdiction  with  operational  control  of  the  traffic  signal  or  other  right‐of‐way  control  were assumed.

Based  on  these  criteria  and  as  shown  previously  in  Table  8,  the  Project  would  significantly impact one study intersection during both peak hours ‐‐  Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps.

Queuing Analyses
Multiple queuing analyses were conducted for the Project based on requests from Culver City staff and community concerns.   The City requested two queuing analyses as part of the traffic impact  study  MOU  process:   1)  evaluate  the  With  Project  conditions  for  the  northeastbound Jefferson Boulevard left‐turn lane at Slauson Avenue to determine if there would be spillover impacts  to  the  Jefferson  Boulevard  northeastbound  through  lanes  and  2)  evaluate  potential inbound  Project  traffic  spillover  onto  westbound  Slauson  Avenue  at  the  Project  site  entry driveways.   Additionally,  the  Project  had  its  first  community  meeting  in  the  Sunkist  Park neighborhood  on  April  16,  2019.   During  that  meeting,  Sunkist  Park  community  members expressed concern regarding existing weekday PM peak‐hour conditions along and adjacent to

64 Slauson Avenue, near the Project site.  In order to address these concerns, a queuing and delay study  was  conducted  to  determine  the  existing  queuing  and  delay  conditions  for  vehicles traveling  south  on  the  unnamed  alley,  Segrell  Way,  and  Culver  Park  Drive  and  turning  left  to travel eastbound on Slauson Avenue.  The results of these analyses are provided below.

Jefferson Boulevard, Northeastbound Left‐Turns to Slauson Avenue At  the  request  of  the  City,  a  queuing  analysis  of  the  future  traffic  conditions  for  the northeastbound  Jefferson  Boulevard  left‐turn  lane  at  Slauson  Avenue  was  undertaken  to determine  potential  Project  spillover  impacts  to  the  adjacent  northeastbound  through  lane.

Under  the  Future  (2024)  Without  Project  scenario,  the  northeastbound  left‐turn  lane  would experience  spillover  onto  the  northeastbound  through  lane  during  the  weekday  AM  and  PM peak hours of approximately 115 feet (or approximately five vehicles based on a 25‐foot length per vehicle) and approximately 82 feet (or approximately three vehicles), respectively, based on the 95th percentile queue length for this turning movement.  In the Future (2024) With Project scenario,  the  Project  would  increase  the  vehicle  spillover  by  23  feet  (or  approximately  one vehicle)  in  the  AM  peak  and  21  feet  (or  approximately  one  vehicle)  in  the  PM  peak  hour, respectively.  The Project would also increase the northeastbound through lane vehicle queues by  approximately  12  feet  and  2  feet  in  the  AM  and  PM  peak  hours,  respectively.   Table  11 summarizes  the  queuing  analysis,  and  the  Synchro  calculation  worksheets  are  provided  in Appendix J.

65 Table 11
Jefferson Boulevard – Northeastbound Left‐Turn Queuing Summary

PEAK QUEUE
SCENARIO HOUR LENGTH1 NEBL NEBT NEBR
4) Slauson  Avenue & Storage 55 470 70
Jefferson Boulevard Future  (2024) Without Project AM 95th  Percentile 170 272 119 PM 137 384 268
Future (2024) With Project AM 95th  Percentile 193 284 119 PM 158 386 268
AM DIFFERENCE 23 12 0
PM 21 2 0
Notes
1 Queue lengths measured in feet.

INTERSECTION
LANE GROUP

An increase in the Jefferson Boulevard northeastbound left‐turn storage would help alleviate the Project’s  contribution  to  the  queuing  spillover.   The  City  reviewed  multiple  alternatives  for providing additional capacity to the northeastbound left‐turn lane, including:
 Extending the existing northeastbound left‐turn lane by an additional 10 feet while reducing the southwestbound left‐turn lane to Selmaraine Drive by 25 feet;  Removing the southwestbound left‐turn lane to Selmaraine Drive in order to provide additional storage capacity for the northeastbound left‐turn lane to Slauson Avenue; and
 Providing a second northeastbound left‐turn lane by reducing several of the lane widths on Jefferson Boulevard and reducing the southwestbound left‐turn storage lane to Selmaraine Drive, along with prohibiting parking and modifying striping and signage on Slauson Avenue to provide an additional westbound receiving lane.

The City determined the most feasible design for providing sufficient left‐turn storage would be to provide an additional left‐turn lane for the northeastbound left‐turn movement from Jefferson Boulevard to Slauson Avenue.  Based on this direction, a conceptual striping plan was prepared to illustrate  the  potential  reconfiguration  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  and  Slauson  Avenue  to  provide

66 dual left‐turn lanes.   The northeastbound left‐turn lane is part of back‐to‐back left‐turn lanes on Jefferson  Boulevard,  with  the  adjacent  southwestbound  left‐turn  lane  providing  access  to Selmaraine  Drive.   The  provision  of  dual  northeastbound  left‐turn  lanes  would  increase  the storage length for this movement from approximately 55 feet via a single lane to approximately 165 feet via two lanes (62 feet in the inner left‐turn lane and 103 feet in the outer left‐turn lane).

The southwestbound left‐turn lane to Selmaraine Drive would be reduced from approximately 65 feet  to  40  feet.   The  reduction  of  the  southwestbound  left‐turn  lane  length  is  supported  by intersection  traffic  volume  counts  conducted  on  August  6,  2019  (see  Appendix  A).   Based  on weekday AM and PM peak‐period counts, the overall peak‐hour volume for the southwestbound left‐turn movement to Selmaraine Drive was 12 vehicles.   With such low left‐turn volumes, the southwestbound left‐turn storage for Selmaraine Drive can be reduced in order to accommodate more storage for the heavier northeastbound left‐turn movement to Slauson Avenue.

The dual left‐turn lanes on the northeastbound Jefferson Boulevard approach would require an additional  receiving  lane  on  westbound  Slauson  Avenue.   Currently,  there  is  only  one  receiving lane on Slauson Avenue west of Jefferson Boulevard.  Per direction from City staff, the conceptual design has been developed with a striped lane drop occurring between Jefferson Boulevard and Culver  Park  Drive.   As  part  of  this  design,  parking  would  be  prohibited  on  the  north  side  of Slauson Avenue.  Appendix F includes the conceptual striping plan as described above.   The dual northeastbound  left‐turn  lanes  were  not  included  in  the  CMA  calculations  for  post‐Project conditions.   Although  the  conceptual  plan  has  been  reviewed  by  City  staff,  the  final  design  has not been approved and, therefore, it is more conservative to assume only a single left‐turn lane.

Project Site Entry Driveways
A  queuing  analysis  was  conducted  to  determine  if  inbound  Project  traffic  would  spillover  onto westbound  Slauson  Avenue.   The  Project  site  would  provide  dual  entry  lanes  from  westbound Slauson Avenue.  The drive aisle closer to the hotel would serve as a passenger drop‐off and pick‐

67 up area.  This drive aisle can accommodate approximately three vehicles.  The second drive aisle would allow entering vehicles to access the parking ramp down to the two subterranean parking levels.   Access to the subterranean parking garage would not be gate controlled.   Parking would generally function with self‐park operation.   Valet‐assist parking would be provided on the two subterranean parking levels in order to maintain safe and efficient use of the tandem spaces, to a greater  extent  for  exiting  vehicles.   Since  most  incoming  vehicles  will  be  self‐parked  and  the parking garage is situated so that entering vehicles will drive down a ramp to access the parking spaces, there would be considerable queuing capacity available for inbound vehicles.

Per  the  trip  rates  provided  in  the  ITE  Trip  Generation  Manual,  the  highest  number  of  inbound trips  for  a  hotel  use  would  occur  during  the  Saturday  peak  hour  of  the  generator.   During  the Saturday peak hour, the Project would be expected to generate a total of 126 trips (71 inbound and  55  outbound).   With  an  average  of  just  over  one  vehicle  arriving  per  minute  during  this overall site peak hour, spillover onto Slauson Avenue is not expected to occur given the proposed parking layout and self‐park with valet‐assist parking operations of the Project.   In the event that the  passenger  drop‐off  and  pick‐up  area  is  at  capacity  (e.g.,  due  to  an  event  in  the  Project’s conference/meeting  room  space),  arriving  hotel  patrons  would  be  directed  to  the  first subterranean parking level to drop‐off or pick‐up their passengers to avoid spillover onto Slauson Avenue.   Additionally,  during  special  events  or  when  higher‐than‐expected  demand  is experienced,  Project  valet  staffing  can  be  augmented  to  provide  an  adequate  number  of  valet attendants in order to process inbound vehicles more quickly.   Therefore, spillover onto Slauson Avenue is not anticipated to occur based on the layout and operation of Project parking.

Slauson Avenue, Unnamed Alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive A  queuing  and  delay  study  was  conducted  along  Slauson  Avenue,  the  unnamed  alley,  Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive in the vicinity of the Project as a direct result of public comments provided  at  the  first  Project  community  meeting.   Community  members  expressed  their

68 concern  regarding  the  existing  traffic  conditions  along  these  roadways  and,  more  specifically, vehicles traveling southbound along the unnamed alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive that make left‐turns onto eastbound Slauson Avenue.   It was suggested that these vehicles have a difficult time turning left into the eastbound Slauson Avenue traffic stream due to queuing on the  Slauson  Avenue  approach  to  Jefferson  Boulevard,  and  that  these  vehicles  will,  at  times, attempt to force their way into eastbound traffic and block westbound Slauson Avenue traffic flow.

To  better  understand  the  existing  operating  conditions  on  these  roadways,  traffic  volume, vehicle  queue,  and  vehicle  delay  data  were  collected  on  April  25,  2019  during  the  weekday morning and afternoon commute peak periods of 7:00 AM to 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM.  The data collected included the following:
 Queue  lengths  in  terms  of  the  number  of  vehicles  for  all  turning  movements  on  the Slauson Avenue eastbound approach to Jefferson Boulevard.  The data were collected at one‐minute  intervals  and  included  notes  identifying  the  time  periods  when  queues extended past the unnamed alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive.  Queue lengths (number of vehicles) and vehicle delay (in seconds) on the southbound approaches  of  the  unnamed  alley,  Segrell  Way,  and  Culver  Park  Drive  to  Slauson Avenue,  by  turning  movement.   Additionally,  the  data  identified  driver  behavior  that impeded  proper  traffic  flow  (e.g.,  southbound  left‐turns  onto  Slauson  Avenue  that impeded  westbound  traffic  flow  on  Slauson  Avenue  or  southbound  left‐turns  that blocked one of the Slauson Avenue eastbound lanes at Jefferson Boulevard).

During  the  AM  peak  period  from  7:00  AM  to  10:00  AM,  the  maximum  queues  observed  by turning movement along Slauson Avenue occurred during the 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM hour, with a maximum queue of 2 vehicles in the left‐turn lane, 9 vehicles in the through lane, and 3 vehicles in the right‐turn lane.  It should be noted that the maximum queues by turning movement were

69 not observed at the same time.   For the overall eastbound approach, there was one instance when the queue extended to the unnamed alley and two instances when the queues extended to Segrell Way during the AM peak hour.  For the PM peak period from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM, the maximum  queues  observed  by  turning  movement  occurred  during  the  5:00  PM  to  6:00  PM hour  and  consisted  of  6  vehicles  in  the  left‐turn  lane,  11  vehicles  in  the  through  lane,  and  8 vehicles  in  the  right‐turn  lane.   Like  the  AM  peak  hour,  the  maximum  queues  by  turning movement did not occur simultaneously.   Overall, the eastbound approach experienced seven instances  when  vehicle  queues  extended  to  the  unnamed  alley  and  four  instances  when  the queues extended to Segrell Way during the PM peak hour.

To  better  understand  current  conditions  experienced  at  the  intersections  of  Slauson  Avenue and the unnamed alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive, a combination of traffic counts and queue/delay data were collected.  Based on a review of these data, during the AM and PM peak hours, an average of approximately 80 percent of southbound vehicle delays were not recorded because vehicles failed to stop at the stop signs.   Table 12 summarizes vehicle queuing/delays on the southbound approaches of the unnamed alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive.

Table 12
Southbound Approaches of Unnamed Alley, Segrell Way, and Culver Park Drive Queuing/Delay Summary

Intersection

Peak
Hour
Average
Delay
(veh/sec)

Level of
Service
Total Number
of Delayed
Vehicles
Maximum
Queue
Observed
Unnamed Alley &
Slauson Avenue
8‐9 AM
5‐6 PM

16.7 10.6
LOS C
LOS B
6 vehicles
16 vehicles
1 vehicle
1 vehicle
Segrell Way &
Slauson Avenue
8‐9 AM
5‐6 PM

10.9 8.9
LOS B
LOS A
7 vehicles
16 vehicles
4 vehicles
4 vehicles
Culver Park Drive &
Slauson Avenue
8‐9 AM
5‐6 PM

8.8 6.0
LOS A
LOS A
24 vehicles
2 vehicles
3 vehicles
1 vehicle

70 As  indicated  in  Table  12,  all  intersections  are  operating  at  excellent‐to‐good  levels  of  service (LOS  A  to  LOS  C).   While  there  were  instances  of  eastbound  queues  extending  along  Slauson Avenue  from  Jefferson  Boulevard  to  Segrell  Way  as  noted  above,  there  were  no  occurrences when southbound left‐turning vehicles were observed impeding westbound traffic on Slauson Avenue during the peak periods.   This is further supported by the observations indicating that an  overwhelming  majority  of  southbound  vehicles  do  not  stop  at  the  stop  signs,  which  is  a direct  result  of  available  gaps  in  Slauson  Avenue  traffic  flow.   Consideration  of  more  traffic enforcement  in  this  area  may  reduce  some  of  the  community’s  concerns.   The  traffic  counts and queue/delay data are provided in Appendix A.

Congestion Management Program (CMP) Impact Analysis
The traffic impact guidelines of the current 2010 CMP for Los Angeles County require analysis of all  CMP  arterial  monitoring  locations  where  a  project  could  add  a  total  of  50  or  more  trips during either peak hour.   Additionally, all freeway monitoring locations where a project could add 150 or more trips in either direction during the peak hours are to be analyzed.

The  CMP  arterial  monitoring  locations  nearest  to  the  Project  site  are  Sepulveda  Boulevard  & Manchester  Avenue  (approximately  2.0  miles  south  of  the  Project  site),  Overland  Avenue  & Venice  Boulevard  (approximately  2.1  miles  north),  and  La  Cienega  Boulevard  &  Centinela Avenue (approximately 1.8 miles southeast).   Based on a review of the Project trip generation (shown in Table 5) and the Project trip distribution patterns (shown in Figure 5), the Project is expected to contribute minimal traffic volumes to these CMP monitoring intersections during the  weekday  AM  and  PM  peak  hours.   Further,  it  is  expected  that  Project  traffic  volume contributions  to  more  distant  CMP  arterial  monitoring  locations  would  be  even  lower,  given that Project traffic would disperse across an increasing number of roadways when farther from the  Project  site.   With  Project  traffic  contributions  well  below  the  50‐trip  threshold,  no

71 significant Project impacts to CMP arterial monitoring locations are forecast and no additional arterial intersection analysis is necessary.

In  terms  of  CMP  freeway  monitoring  segment  analysis,  a  review  of  Project’s  trip  generation indicates  that  the  Project  would  not  generate  more  than  42  net  directional  (inbound  or outbound) trips during either peak hour.   Therefore, the Project would contribute well below the  150  directional‐trip  threshold  to  all  CMP  freeway  monitoring  segments,  no  significant Project impacts to CMP freeway monitoring locations are forecast, and no additional freeway analysis is necessary.

72 TRANSIT IMPACT ANALYSIS
Metro and Culver CityBus provide transit service in the Project vicinity.   As shown in Table 13, there  are  five  Culver  City  Bus  lines  and  four  Metro  bus  lines  that  serve  the  Project  site.   On weekdays,  these  bus  lines  operate  approximately  42  buses  per  hour  (both  directions)  during the AM and PM peak periods within the study area.   Assuming a seating, non‐standing service capacity of 40 passengers per bus, these buses provide a service capacity of 1,680 passengers per hour during the AM and PM peak periods.

Table 13
Weekday Peak‐Hour Transit Service within Project Area
Service Bus
Provider Line
Culver City Bus 2
Culver City Bus 3
Culver City Bus 4
Culver City Bus 6
Culver City Bus R6
Metro 108
Metro 110
Metro 217
Metro 358
Total:
2 6
Buses Per Hour
6 4
(Both Directions)
2 6
8 6
42 2

The  analysis  of  future  transit  conditions  was  performed  using  the  general  transit  impact methodology  in  Appendix  D.8.4  of  Metro’s  CMP.   Under  this  methodology,  a  multiplication factor of 1.4 is used to convert vehicle trips to person trips.  A factor of 7.0 percent is applied to the resulting person trips to estimate the number of person trips utilizing transit, given that the Project  is  within  a  one‐quarter  mile  distance  of  a  CMP  transit  corridor  (Sepulveda  Boulevard)

73 and the proposed/existing uses are commercial.   In this case, the Project net generation of 72 AM peak‐hour and 67 PM peak‐hour vehicle trips would convert to 101 AM peak‐hour and 94 PM peak‐hour person trips.   Of these person trips, approximately seven person trips per hour would  be  expected  to  use  transit  during  both  the  AM  and  PM  peak  hours  per  the  CMP methodology.

Compared to the Project area transit passenger capacity of 1,680  persons per peak hour, the Project  person  trips  would  represent  less  than  one‐half  percent  of  this  capacity  during  each peak hour.   This amount of transit usage by the Project would not result in a significant transit impact, and no Project transit mitigation measures are required.

74 VMT ANALYSIS
Following  the  passage  of  Senate  Bill  (SB)  743,  the  State  of  California’s  Governor’s  Office  of Planning  and  Research  (OPR)  was  tasked  with  developing  new  guidelines  for  evaluating transportation  impacts  under  the  California  Environmental  Quality  Act  (CEQA).   These guidelines were intended to shift the transportation performance metric from automobile delay and  LOS  to  one  that  would  promote  the  reduction  of  greenhouse  gas  emissions  and  the development of multimodal and diverse transportation networks.  As a result, OPR determined that, under the proposed update to the CEQA guidelines, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) would be established as the primary metric for evaluating environmental and transportation impacts.

In  response  to  the  updates  to  the  CEQA  guidelines,  the  City  of  Culver  City  updated  its Transportation Study Criteria and Guidelines in July 2020 to conform to the requirements of SB 743.   The  new  guidelines  replaced  the  2012  Traffic  Study  Criteria  for  the  Review  of  Proposed Development  Projects  within  the  City  of  Culver  City  and  shifted  the  performance  metric  for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA from LOS to VMT for studies completed within the City.  The new criteria and guidelines establish thresholds to identify development projects that would cause substantial VMT.

Under the new criteria and guidelines, the first step in performing a VMT analysis for a land use project  is  to  perform  a  VMT  screening  analysis.   A  land  use  project  that  meets  any  of  the following VMT screening thresholds is presumed to have a less‐than‐significant VMT impact and is therefore cleared from having to perform further VMT analysis:

1. Small land use projects that result in less than 250 daily or 25 peak‐hour trips;

2. Land use projects within the 0.5‐mile radius of these key Transit Priority Areas (TPAs):

Metro  E  (Expo)  Line  Culver  City  Station,  Metro  E  (Expo)  Line  La  Cienega  Station,

75 Westfield‐Culver City Transit Center, and Sepulveda/Venice Boulevard intersection.  The City’s TPAs are displayed graphically in Figure 14;

3. Land  use  projects  located  within  any  TPA  where  at  least  15  percent  of  the  on‐site residential units are affordable;

4. Affordable housing projects where 100 percent of the dwelling units are affordable; and

5. Local‐serving  retail  projects  with  less  than  50,000  square  feet  of  floor  area  at  a  single store.

Given  the  Project’s  proximity  (approximately  one  block)  to  the  Westfield‐Culver  City  Transit Center, the City considers the Project site to be in a key TPA.  Therefore, based on the key TPA screening threshold, the Project is presumed to have a less‐than‐significant VMT impact and no further VMT analysis is required.

FIGURE 14
76 10/19/2020FN: JEFFERSON & SLAUSON HOTEL\REPORT GRAPHICS20201019\TRANSIT PRIORITY AREAS

CITY OF CULVER CITY
SOURCE: CULVER CITY TRANSPORTATION STUDY CRITERIA AND GUIDELINES (JULY 2020) TRANSIT PRIORITY AREASASSOCIATESCRAIN&www.crainandassociates.comPH (310) 473 6508 F (310) 444 9771 300 Corporate Pointe, Suite 470Culver City, California 90230Transportation PlanningTraffic Engineering

77 MITIGATION MEASURES
As indicated in the preceding traffic impact analysis, the Project is not expected to significantly impact  any CMP  monitoring  locations,  public  transit,  or  residential  street  facilities.   However, the  Project  would  result  in  a  significant  traffic  impact  at  one  study  intersection,  Jefferson Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Northbound  Ramps,  prior  to  mitigation.   A  series  of  mitigation measures  were  investigated  to  address  this  significant  traffic  impact,  as  well  as  voluntary improvement  measures  to  deal  with  existing  neighborhood  traffic  intrusion  problems  and Transportation  Demand  Management  (TDM)  plan  measures  to  promote  alternative  travel mode usage for the Project.  These measures are described in detail below.

Transportation Demand Management Plan
To  align  with  the  requirements  of  the  CCMC  and  goals  of  the  City’s  General  Plan  Circulation Element, mitigation measures should prioritize, to the extent possible, the reduction of Project vehicle  trips.   Therefore,  as  a  first  step,  mitigation  in  the  form  of  a  Transportation  Demand Management  (TDM)  plan  was  analyzed.   The  purpose  of  the  TDM  plan  is  to  implement  and maintain measures to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the Project (especially during the peak commute periods).  TDM strategies encourage Project‐goers to use alternative travel  methods  (modes  other  than  single‐occupancy  vehicle),  through  the  provision  of information  services  and  various  programs  and  physical  amenities.   TDM  measures  are intended to increase the awareness and attractiveness of alternative mode travel options.

As  a  first  step,  the  Project  will  comply  with  the  requirements  of  CCMC  Section  7.05.015  as  a new  development  that  results  in  a  net  increase  in  gross  floor  area  of  100,000  square  feet  or more.  Per the CCMC, at a minimum the Project shall provide the following:

78  A bulletin board, display case, or kiosk will be installed in a prominent area accessible to the  greatest  number  of  employees  (approximately  80  full‐time  and  40  part‐time) displaying transportation information that includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Current maps, routes, and schedules for public transit routes serving the site;

2. Telephone  numbers  for  referrals  on  transportation  information  including numbers  for  the  regional  ridesharing  agency,  transportation  management associations, and local transit operators;

3. Ridesharing promotional material supplied by commuter‐oriented organizations;

4. Bicycle route and facility information, including regional/local bicycle maps and bicycle safety information; and

5. A  listing  of  any  other  facilities  and  resources  that  may  be  available  for carpoolers, vanpoolers, bicyclists, transit riders, and pedestrians at the site.  Not  less  than  10  percent  of  the  employee  parking  area  shall  be  located  as  close  as  is practical to the employee entrance(s) without displacing ADA‐accessible and customer parking needs.   These spaces shall be reserved for use by potential carpool or vanpool vehicles.  This preferential parking shall be identified on the site plan accompanying the application for a building permit.  These spaces shall have signs that designate them for employee  carpool  and  vanpool  vehicles.   Although  employee  carpool/vanpool  space designation is not accounted for in the Project parking demand analysis (see Appendix E), the implementation of carpool/vanpool service would have the net effect of reducing overall employee parking demands.   Therefore, the conclusions of the parking demand analysis would remain the same.
 Preferential  parking  spaces  reserved  for  employee  vanpool  shall  be  accessible  to vanpool vehicles.  When located within the subterranean parking structure, appropriate

79 minimum  vertical  clearances,  adequate  turning  radii,  and  minimum  parking  space dimensions shall be provided for vanpool parking areas.  Bicycle parking will be provided above the City required 20 spaces by providing a total of 58 spaces (10 short‐term and 48 long‐term).   Secure bicycle parking will be offered in a bicycle room for long‐term bicycle parking storage.
 The Project will include pedestrian pathways following direct and safe routes from the external  pedestrian  circulation  system,  vehicle  and  bicycle  parking  areas,  and  transit facilities.
 The  Project  will  provide  a  safe  and  convenient  zone  in  which  vanpool  and  carpool vehicles may deliver or board their passengers (the entry drive aisle closer to the hotel used for passenger drop‐offs and pick‐ups).

In  addition  to  these  TDM  measures  required  by  the  City,  the  Project  would  implement additional  measures  as  part  of  its  TDM  plan.   The  Project  is  a  boutique  hotel  development, located within one‐quarter mile of bus lines that provide connections to the greater, regional bus  and  rail  network  for  Project  employees,  visitors,  and  patrons.   The  Project  site  is surrounded  by  supporting  and  complementary  uses  within  walking,  bicycling,  and  convenient transit‐riding  distance,  such  as  additional  housing  for  Project  employees  and  additional commercial uses for Project patrons, visitors, and employees.  The Project shall take advantage of  these  opportunities  through  a  pedestrian/bicycle/transit  rider‐friendly  design  and implementation of a TDM plan.  It should be noted that the Project would eliminate an existing driveway off Jefferson Boulevard along with associated traffic turning conflicts.  This would also provide  a  more  pedestrian‐friendly  environment  along  the  Project’s  Jefferson  Boulevard frontage.

80 The  Project  shall  incorporate  additional  TDM  measures  into  the  TDM  plan  beyond  those required  by  the  CCMC.   The  measures  shall  include  amenity  improvements  for  alternative modes  of  transportation  and  a  TDM  trip  reduction  program  which  shall  include,  but  not  be limited to, the following:

A. Amenity Improvements for Alternative Modes of Transportation  A bicycle tool and repair stand, provided on‐site, in a well‐lit area accessible to Project employees and near on‐site bicycle parking.  The tool and repair stand will be self‐serve, contain a working pump and other basic tools, be available at all hours during which the management  office  of  the  Project  is  open,  and  not  require  supervision  from  building management or staff.
 Free  on‐site  shared  bicycles,  to  be  used  by  Project  employees,  patrons,  and  visitors.

These  bicycles  will  be  provided  free  of  charge  (with  the  submittal  of  a  reasonable deposit) on an hourly or daily basis.   Parking for these bicycles will be provided on the Project site, separate from other bicycle parking.  A member of the Project management office  will  maintain  a  contact  list  for  people  interested  in  forming  bike‐sharing  user groups.   Alternatively,  a  City‐  or  region‐wide  bike‐sharing  entity,  such  as  Metro  Bike Share, may provide these bicycles, if agreeable terms are met between the Project and a bike‐sharing entity and the bikes are available on the Project site or within 500 feet of a Project pedestrian entrance.
 Establish priority parking for carpool, vanpool, and clean‐air vehicles.  Install on‐site EV charging stations.
 Install wayfinding signage for all modes of transportation.

81  Provide amenities such as shower and changing room for employees who bike or walk to work.
 Establish  public‐accessible  parking  for  shared  mobility  devices  (e.g.,  bikeshare  and scooter share systems.)
B. TDM Trip Reduction Program
 New  employee  orientation.   Every  new  employee  will  be  required  to  participate  in  an orientation.   This  orientation  will  be  offered  during  the  hiring  process  and  will  be conducted by a member of the Project management staff.  This orientation will include:
o An  introduction  to  the  concept  and  goals  of  TDM,  both  in  general  and  how  it specifically relates to the Project;
o The  physical  and  programmatic  resources  and  incentives  available  to  all employees; and
o The  distribution  of  transportation  welcome  packages,  with  Metro  pass promotional  plans;  detailed  written  information  about  the  TDM  strategies, resources,  and  incentives;  and  phone  numbers  and  website  links  for  further information.
 Annual continuing employee orientation, offered on an annual basis to all employees of the  Project.   This  training  will  be  in  addition  to  the  orientation  offered  to  new employees, as described above.  This orientation will be conducted by a member of the Project management staff.  This training will serve to:
o Review all of the resources and services of the TDM plan; o Address current strengths and shortcomings of the plan;

82 o Solicit comments, complaints, and/or recommendations from employees; and o Discuss potential future changes and updates to the TDM plan.  An automated website.  Assuming a website is provided for the Project, it will have one or  more  pages  dedicated  to  alternative  transportation  modes  with  all  the  information provided on the Project bulletin board.  The information will be updated periodically by a member of the Project management office or another person acting as webmaster.  Commuter matching services, facilitated by a member of the Project management staff and  made  available  to  all  employees  on  an  annual  basis.   These  services  will  include carpool matching and bicycle group‐ride matching, both with employees of the Project and with other members of the public (via existing commuter matching services).  Promotion of flexible/alternative work schedules for Project hotel employees.  Bike‐ and walk‐to‐work promotions.
 Implementation of a transit pass discount program for Project users.  Set up a monitoring program with average vehicle ridership (AVR) goals to achieve.  Conduct annual TDM surveys.
 Designate  an  on‐site  TDM  coordinator  who  will  serve  as  the  coordinator  (Program Coordinator)  of  this  Trip  Reduction  Program.   The  Program  Coordinator  shall  submit annual reports to the Transportation Department with information of the implemented TDM Program, results of annual TDM surveys, and analysis of program effectiveness and suggested revisions.   Transportation Department will review and confer with the  TDM coordinator to develop program revisions, as necessary, to attain trip reductions.

83  Participate in a future Transportation Management Organization.  Work with City to establish and implement a marketing plan on the available alternative mobility options (transit service, bikeshare/bike routes, carshare, e‐scooter share, etc.) to employees and hotel guests:
o Provide transit/bike/new mobility information kiosk(s); o Promote the sale of transit/bikeshare/new mobility passes; and o Provide  and  update  regularly  the  transit/bikeshare/new  mobility  information displayed at the kiosk(s), on the Project web page, and to employees.  Personalized commute assistance offered by the on‐site TDM coordinator.  Create  a  vanpool  program  for  employees  or  participate  in  the  region’s  vanpool programs.
 Provide  guaranteed  ride  home  to  employees  who  make  use  of  alternative  modes  of transportation to commute to work.
 Create a financial incentive program for employees who make use of alternative modes of transportation to commute to work and hotel guests:
o Create  B‐TAP+Culver  Transit  Pass  Program  with  Culver  City  to  provide  to  all employees.
o Provide monthly subsidy to employees who participate in the vanpool program. o Subsidize the use of bikeshare and e‐scooter share service. o The  property  owner  shall  document  the  total  number  of  employees,  and/or registered  guests  that  requested  and  were  provided  with  the  incentives  for

84 alternative  modes  of  transportation  within  the  last  year  in  its  annual  TDM report.  The property owner shall also submit invoices or receipts, with sensitive billing  information  redacted,  to  document  the  number  and  dollar  amount  of transit subsidies purchased within the last year.  If no employees or guests have opted  to  use  the  available  contribution  or  incentive,  then  the  property  owner shall  submit  documentation  demonstrating  that  the  contributions  or  incentives were offered and declined.

All revisions to the TDM plan must reflect the best practices to promote the use of alternative transportation  modes  and  be  acceptable  to  the  City’s  Planning  Division  and  Public Works/Engineering Transportation Department staff.

Although the implementation of the above‐mentioned TDM plan would result in a reduction in Project vehicle trips, no percent decrease in Project vehicle trips has been assumed in order to provide a more conservative mitigation analysis.

City of Los Angeles Traffic Signal System Upgrades
Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps
Potential traffic signal system upgrades at/near the significantly impacted study intersection of Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405  Freeway  Northbound  Ramps  were  also  investigated  with  LADOT staff, as the implementation of the TDM plan alone would not reduce the Project’s significant impact  to  a  less‐than‐significant  level.   The  LADOT  ATSAC  Division  identified  this  intersection location as requiring the installation of a low‐mounted, closed‐circuit television (CCTV) camera to assist with signal operations.

The  LADOT  places  CCTV  cameras  at  vital  intersection  locations  in  order  to  observe  traffic operations  and  respond  rapidly  to  traffic  incidents  that  can  interrupt  vehicle  flow  and  transit

85 service.   Per  discussions  with  LADOT  staff,  traffic  signal  system  enhancements  such  as  CCTV camera  installation  are  generally  expected  to  improve  the  overall  capacity  of  the  affected intersection/roadway  corridor  by  one  percent.   The  Project  would  contribute  funding  to support  the  installation  of  CCTV  cameras  at  the  intersection  of  Jefferson  Boulevard  &  I‐405 Freeway  Northbound  Ramps.   This  traffic  signal  system  improvement  is  expected  to  improve operations  at  the  intersection.   This  mitigation  measure  was  developed  in  conjunction  with, reviewed, and approved by the LADOT.

Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue
The  Project  will  be  responsible  for  the  following  intersection  improvements  at  Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue:
 Replace  the  pedestrian  push  buttons  at  the  intersection  corners  to  meet  current standards  (2‐wire  accessible  pedestrian  signals  per  LADOT  Standard  Plan  S‐73.2,  with rapid  tick  tone  and  vibrating  arrow  during  the  walk  phase  and  a  locator  tone.   The current crosswalk regulatory sign plate is version R10‐3e).  Replace  the  mast‐arm  mounted  street  name  signs  to  meet  current  standards.   The frame and mounting  hardware  shall  be  for  temple  edge‐lit  razor  internally‐illuminated LED  street  name  signs.   The  sign  panels  shall  be  displayed  on  both  sides  with  green background and white lettering.
 Install video detection at the intersection.

Other Design Improvements
The Project shall be responsible for the following design improvements adjacent to the Project site:

86  Construct  the  driveway  and  sidewalk  along  the  Project’s  frontages,  including  the  curb ramps at the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard & Slauson Avenue, to comply with ADA requirements.
 Construct  the  alley’s  curb  returns  and  driveway  apron  to  comply  with  ADA requirements.   Also,  add  a  crosswalk  marking  across  the  alley  consistent  with  the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), and refresh the STOP control marking on the alley's approach to Slauson Avenue.  Repave the alley along the Project’s frontage.

Analysis of Future (2024) With Project Plus Mitigation Traffic Conditions Based on the abovementioned TDM plan measures and traffic signal system upgrade, a Future (2024) With Project Plus Mitigation condition was analyzed, and the results are shown in Table

14.   As  shown  in  Table  14,  the  implementation  these  mitigation  improvements  would  reduce the  Project  impacts  to  less‐than‐significant  levels  at  the  significantly  impacted  intersection  of Jefferson Boulevard & I‐405 Freeway Northbound Ramps.

Voluntary Neighborhood Traffic Intrusion and Parking Mitigation Measures At the request of the City and based on concerns from the community, the Project will fund a study to identify potential neighborhood traffic intrusion mitigation measures.  These measures may  include  peak‐period  turn  restrictions  at  certain  intersections  to  address  the  cut‐through traffic concerns within the Sunkist Park neighborhood.   City traffic engineering staff indicated that there is a recognized cut‐through traffic problem on southbound Segrell Way and Culver Park  Drive,  between  Sawtelle  Boulevard  and  Slauson  Avenue,  during  the  weekday  PM  peak period.   As  such,  City  staff  indicated  they  would  be  supportive  of  traffic  measures  involving weekday PM peak‐period left‐turn restrictions for the southbound approaches of Segrell Way

87 and Culver Park Drive at Slauson Avenue (and possibly right‐turn restrictions for the eastbound approaches  of  Sawtelle  Boulevard  at  Segrell  Way  and  Culver  Park  Drive).   The  study  would follow  the  Neighborhood  Traffic  Management  Program  (NTMP)  process,  as  required  for  local street traffic intrusion improvements in the Sunkist Park neighborhood.

An  additional  Project  feature  may  include  assisting  the  Sunkist  Park  neighborhood  with expanding the residential permit parking program to ensure that parking along Segrell Way and Culver Park Drive is available primarily (or exclusively) for residents/guests on those roadways.

Within  five  years  of  Project  occupancy,  if  the  City  determines  there  is  an  intrusion  of  Project parking  on  nearby  residential  streets,  the  Project  or  subsequent  property  owner  shall  be responsible to pay for a parking study to be performed by a consultant selected by the City.  If the parking study determines that mitigations are needed such as the establishment of permit parking, the Project shall pay for such mitigations including the cost of signage and one year of residential parking permits to alleviate the intrusion of Project parking on those streets.

Similarly,  within  five  years  after  Project  occupancy,  if  the  City  observes  intrusion  of  Project traffic  on  nearby  residential  streets,  the  Project  or  subsequent  property  owner  shall  be responsible  to  conduct  a  NTMP  with  input  from  the  community  to  study  and  pay  for  the implementation of any traffic calming measures that will minimize or eliminate Project traffic from using the nearby residential streets.  The NTMP review, design, and construction would be carried out by consultants selected by the City.

88 Table 14
Critical Movement Analysis and Levels of Service Summary Future (2024) With Project Plus Mitigation Conditions
Peak
No. Intersection Jurisdiction(s) Hour V/C LOS V/C LOS Impact Sig.? V/C LOS V/C LOS Impact Sig.? 1J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 0.695 B 0.697 B 0.002 No 0.695 B 0.697 B 0.002 No Mesmer Ave.1 Los Angeles PM 0.572 A 0.573 A 0.001 No 0.572 A 0.573 A 0.001 No 2J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 1.062 F 1.064 F 0.002 No 1.062 F 1.064 F 0.002 No I‐405 Fwy. SB Ramps1 Los Angeles PM 0.779 C 0.783 C 0.004 No 0.779 C 0.783 C 0.004 No 3J e f f e r s o n Blvd. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 1.145 F 1.163 F 0.018 Yes 1.145 F 1.153 F 0.008 No I‐405 Fwy. NB Ramps1 Los Angeles PM 1.182 F 1.198 F 0.016 Yes 1.182 F 1.188 F 0.006 No 4S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.425 A 0.451 A 0.026 No 0.425 A 0.451 A 0.026 No Jefferson Blvd.2 PM 0.515 A 0.521 A 0.006 No 0.515 A 0.521 A 0.006 No 5S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.606 B 0.609 B 0.003 No 0.606 B 0.609 B 0.003 No Sepulveda Blvd.2 PM 0.657 B 0.659 B 0.002 No 0.657 B 0.659 B 0.002 No 6S l a u s o n  Ave. &C u l v e r  City AM 0.799 C 0.802 D 0.003 No 0.799 C 0.802 D 0.003 No Marina Fwy.2 PM 0.700 B 0.700 B 0.000 No 0.700 B 0.700 B 0.000 No 7C e n t i n e l a Ave. &C u l v e r  City/ AM 0.957 E 0.959 E 0.002 No 0.957 E 0.959 E 0.002 No Sepulveda Blvd.1 Los Angeles PM 1.109 F 1.110 F 0.001 No 1.109 F 1.110 F 0.001 No Notes
1 Analysis results based on City of Los Angeles CMA methodology and assumptions. 2 Analysis results based on City of Culver City CMA methodology.

Future (2024) Future  (2024) With Mitgation
Without Project With  Project Without  Project With  Project

APPENDIX A
TRAFFIC COUNT DATA SHEETS
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 35 188 19 242 10 14 125 149 4 129 11 144 13 6 1 20 555 07:15 AM 48 210 18 276 17 14 152 183 1 193 5 199 19 8 2 29 687 07:30 AM 65 208 10 283 11 28 109 148 7 222 2 231 23 11 4 38 700 07:45 AM 73 251 23 347 7 20 112 139 7 247 9 263 17 7 11 35 784 Total 221 857 70 1148 45 76 498 619 19 791 27 837 72 32 18 122 2726 08:00 AM 67 222 18 307 6 23 109 138 6 277 7 290 18 11 8 37 772 08:15 AM 89 231 26 346 10 22 115 147 3 249 14 266 23 15 5 43 802 08:30 AM 102 234 28 364 10 25 99 134 8 214 14 236 22 13 7 42 776 08:45 AM 118 287 22 427 7 13 89 109 5 235 14 254 22 10 7 39 829 Total 376 974 94 1444 33 83 412 528 22 975 49 1046 85 49 27 161 3179 09:00 AM 158 307 22 487 18 25 71 114 5 213 11 229 14 12 3 29 859 09:15 AM 123 274 24 421 15 11 62 88 9 204 15 228 21 16 1 38 775 09:30 AM 106 222 21 349 8 13 69 90 1 188 9 198 12 4 4 20 657 09:45 AM 103 263 7 373 18 11 45 74 3 176 14 193 12 3 2 17 657 Total 490 1066 74 1630 59 60 247 366 18 781 49 848 59 35 10 104 2948 Grand Total 1087 2897 238 4222 137 219 1157 1513 59 2547 125 2731 216 116 55 387 8853 Apprch % 25.7 68.6 5.6 9.1 14.5 76.5 2.2 93.3 4.6 55.8 30 14.2 Total % 12.3 32.7 2.7 47.7 1.5 2.5 13.1 17.1 0.7 28.8 1.4 30.8 2.4 1.3 0.6 4.4 Passenger Vehicles 1066 2785 230 4081 133 216 1097 1446 56 2438 117 2611 213 114 54 381 8519 % Passenger Vehicles 98.1 96.1 96.6 96.7 97.1 98.6 94.8 95.6 94.9 95.7 93.6 95.6 98.6 98.3 98.2 98.4 96.2 Dual Wheeled 15 86 8 109 3 3 38 44 2 82 8 92 3 2 1 6 251 % Dual Wheeled 1.4 3 3.4 2.6 2.2 1.4 3.3 2.9 3.4 3.2 6.4 3.4 1.4 1.7 1.8 1.6 2.8 Buses 6 26 0 32 1 0 22 23 1 27 0 28 0 0 0 0 83
% Buses 0.6 0.9 0 0.8 0.7 0 1.9 1.5 1.7 1.1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 89 231 26 346 10 22 115 147 3 249 14 266 23 15 5 43 802 08:30 AM 102 234 28 364 10 25 99 134 8 214 14 236 22 13 7 42 776 08:45 AM 118 287 22 427 7 13 89 109 5 235 14 254 22 10 7 39 829 09:00 AM 158 307 22 487 18 25 71 114 5 213 11 229 14 12 3 29 859 Total Volume 467 1059 98 1624 45 85 374 504 21 911 53 985 81 50 22 153 3266 % App. Total 28.8 65.2 6 8.9 16.9 74.2 2.1 92.5 5.4 52.9 32.7 14.4 PHF .739 .862 .875 .834 .625 .850 .813 .857 .656 .915 .946 .926 .880 .833 .786 .890 .951 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
98 Thru
1059
Left
467
InOut Total
1366 1624 2990
Right
374
Thru
85 Left
45 OutTotal In
570 504 1074
Left
21 Thru
911
Right
53 Out TotalIn
1126 985 2111
Left
81 Thru
50 Right
22 TotalOut In
204 153 357
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:30 AM 07:00 AM 07:45 AM 08:00 AM
+0 mins. 102 234 28 364 10 14 125 149 7 247 9 263 18 11 8 37 +15 mins. 118 287 22 427 17 14 152 183 6 277 7 290 23 15 5 43 +30 mins. 158 307 22 487 11 28 109 148 3 249 14 266 22 13 7 42 +45 mins. 123 274 24 421 7 20 112 139 8 214 14 236 22 10 7 39 Total Volume 501 1102 96 1699 45 76 498 619 24 987 44 1055 85 49 27 161 % App. Total 29.5 64.9 5.7 7.3 12.3 80.5 2.3 93.6 4.2 52.8 30.4 16.8 PHF .793 .897 .857 .872 .662 .679 .819 .846 .750 .891 .786 .909 .924 .817 .844 .936 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 34 176 19 229 10 14 122 146 3 124 11 138 13 6 1 20 533 07:15 AM 48 200 18 266 16 14 147 177 1 188 5 194 19 8 2 29 666 07:30 AM 61 203 10 274 11 28 100 139 7 213 2 222 23 11 4 38 673 07:45 AM 72 246 23 341 7 20 109 136 6 232 8 246 17 7 11 35 758 Total 215 825 70 1110 44 76 478 598 17 757 26 800 72 32 18 122 2630 08:00 AM 63 214 17 294 6 23 106 135 6 274 5 285 18 11 8 37 751 08:15 AM 89 217 24 330 10 22 109 141 3 236 13 252 22 14 5 41 764 08:30 AM 99 224 28 351 10 25 94 129 8 207 13 228 21 12 6 39 747 08:45 AM 118 277 21 416 7 12 81 100 4 223 14 241 22 10 7 39 796 Total 369 932 90 1391 33 82 390 505 21 940 45 1006 83 47 26 156 3058 09:00 AM 154 294 20 468 18 25 64 107 5 203 11 219 14 12 3 29 823 09:15 AM 121 264 24 409 14 10 57 81 9 197 15 221 21 16 1 38 749 09:30 AM 105 213 20 338 8 12 66 86 1 174 7 182 12 4 4 20 626 09:45 AM 102 257 6 365 16 11 42 69 3 167 13 183 11 3 2 16 633 Total 482 1028 70 1580 56 58 229 343 18 741 46 805 58 35 10 103 2831 Grand Total 1066 2785 230 4081 133 216 1097 1446 56 2438 117 2611 213 114 54 381 8519 Apprch % 26.1 68.2 5.6 9.2 14.9 75.9 2.1 93.4 4.5 55.9 29.9 14.2 Total % 12.5 32.7 2.7 47.9 1.6 2.5 12.9 17 0.7 28.6 1.4 30.6 2.5 1.3 0.6 4.5 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 89 217 24 330 10 22 109 141 3 236 13 252 22 14 5 41 764 08:30 AM 99 224 28 351 10 25 94 129 8 207 13 228 21 12 6 39 747 08:45 AM 118 277 21 416 7 12 81 100 4 223 14 241 22 10 7 39 796 09:00 AM 154 294 20 468 18 25 64 107 5 203 11 219 14 12 3 29 823 Total Volume 460 1012 93 1565 45 84 348 477 20 869 51 940 79 48 21 148 3130 % App. Total 29.4 64.7 5.9 9.4 17.6 73 2.1 92.4 5.4 53.4 32.4 14.2 PHF .747 .861 .830 .836 .625 .840 .798 .846 .625 .921 .911 .933 .898 .857 .750 .902 .951 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
93 Thru
1012
Left
460
InOut Total
1296 1565 2861
Right
348
Thru
84 Left
45 OutTotal In
559 477 1036
Left
20 Thru
869
Right
51 Out TotalIn
1078 940 2018
Left
79 Thru
48 Right
21 TotalOut In
197 148 345
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 89 217 24 330 10 22 109 141 3 236 13 252 22 14 5 41 +15 mins. 99 224 28 351 10 25 94 129 8 207 13 228 21 12 6 39 +30 mins. 118 277 21 416 7 12 81 100 4 223 14 241 22 10 7 39 +45 mins. 154 294 20 468 18 25 64 107 5 203 11 219 14 12 3 29 Total Volume 460 1012 93 1565 45 84 348 477 20 869 51 940 79 48 21 148 % App. Total 29.4 64.7 5.9 9.4 17.6 73 2.1 92.4 5.4 53.4 32.4 14.2 PHF .747 .861 .830 .836 .625 .840 .798 .846 .625 .921 .911 .933 .898 .857 .750 .902 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 1 8 0 9 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 13
07:15 AM 0 7 0 7 0 0 3 3 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 15
07:30 AM 3 5 0 8 0 0 5 5 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 18
07:45 AM 1 5 0 6 0 0 3 3 1 11 1 13 0 0 0 0 22
Total 5 25 0 30 0 0 12 12 1 24 1 26 0 0 0 0 68
08:00 AM 4 4 1 9 0 0 2 2 0 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 16
08:15 AM 0 11 2 13 0 0 4 4 0 10 1 11 1 1 0 2 30
08:30 AM 1 8 0 9 0 0 4 4 0 6 1 7 1 1 1 3 23
08:45 AM 0 9 1 10 0 1 5 6 1 10 0 11 0 0 0 0 27
Total 5 32 4 41 0 1 15 16 1 29 4 34 2 2 1 5 96
09:00 AM 3 11 2 16 0 0 5 5 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 28
09:15 AM 2 7 0 9 1 1 2 4 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 19
09:30 AM 0 6 1 7 0 1 2 3 0 11 2 13 0 0 0 0 23
09:45 AM 0 5 1 6 2 0 2 4 0 5 1 6 1 0 0 1 17
Total 5 29 4 38 3 2 11 16 0 29 3 32 1 0 0 1 87
Grand Total 15 86 8 109 3 3 38 44 2 82 8 92 3 2 1 6 251 Apprch % 13.8 78.9 7.3 6.8 6.8 86.4 2.2 89.1 8.7 50 33.3 16.7 Total % 6 34.3 3.2 43.4 1.2 1.2 15.1 17.5 0.8 32.7 3.2 36.7 1.2 0.8 0.4 2.4 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 0 11 2 13 0 0 4 4 0 10 1 11 1 1 0 2 30
08:30 AM 1 8 0 9 0 0 4 4 0 6 1 7 1 1 1 3 23
08:45 AM 0 9 1 10 0 1 5 6 1 10 0 11 0 0 0 0 27
09:00 AM 3 11 2 16 0 0 5 5 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 28
Total Volume 4 39 5 48 0 1 18 19 1 33 2 36 2 2 1 5 108
% App. Total 8.3 81.2 10.4 0 5.3 94.7 2.8 91.7 5.6 40 40 20 PHF .333 .886 .625 .750 .000 .250 .900 .792 .250 .825 .500 .818 .500 .500 .250 .417 .900 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
5 Thru
39 Left
4 InOut Total
53 48 101
Right
18 Thru
1 Left
0 OutTotal In
8 19 27
Left
1 Thru
33 Right
2 Out TotalIn
40 36 76
Left
2 Thru
2 Right
1 TotalOut In
7 5 12
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 0 11 2 13 0 0 4 4 0 10 1 11 1 1 0 2
+15 mins. 1 8 0 9 0 0 4 4 0 6 1 7 1 1 1 3
+30 mins. 0 9 1 10 0 1 5 6 1 10 0 11 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 3 11 2 16 0 0 5 5 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 4 39 5 48 0 1 18 19 1 33 2 36 2 2 1 5
% App. Total 8.3 81.2 10.4 0 5.3 94.7 2.8 91.7 5.6 40 40 20 PHF .333 .886 .625 .750 .000 .250 .900 .792 .250 .825 .500 .818 .500 .500 .250 .417 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 2 2 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 9
07:15 AM 0 3 0 3 1 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
07:30 AM 1 0 0 1 0 0 4 4 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 9
07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 4
Total 1 7 0 8 1 0 8 9 1 10 0 11 0 0 0 0 28
08:00 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
08:15 AM 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
08:30 AM 2 2 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6
08:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
Total 2 10 0 12 0 0 7 7 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 25
09:00 AM 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
09:15 AM 0 3 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 7
09:30 AM 1 3 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
09:45 AM 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 7
Total 3 9 0 12 0 0 7 7 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 30
Grand Total 6 26 0 32 1 0 22 23 1 27 0 28 0 0 0 0 83
Apprch % 18.8 81.2 0 4.3 0 95.7 3.6 96.4 0 0 0 0
Total % 7.2 31.3 0 38.6 1.2 0 26.5 27.7 1.2 32.5 0 33.7 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
08:30 AM 2 2 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6
08:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
09:00 AM 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
Total Volume 3 8 0 11 0 0 8 8 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 28
% App. Total 27.3 72.7 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 0
PHF .375 .667 .000 .688 .000 .000 .667 .667 .000 .750 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .875 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
8 Left
3 InOut Total
17 11 28
Right
8 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
3 8 11
Left
0 Thru
9 Right
0 Out TotalIn
8 9 17
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 2 2 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 3 8 0 11 0 0 8 8 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 27.3 72.7 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 0
PHF .375 .667 .000 .688 .000 .000 .667 .667 .000 .750 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 49 181 6 236 22 8 81 111 1 279 13 293 4 4 1 9 649 03:15 PM 46 174 8 228 12 10 78 100 1 229 15 245 11 15 2 28 601 03:30 PM 46 176 16 238 10 14 72 96 6 279 13 298 43 27 4 74 706 03:45 PM 55 202 10 267 17 8 71 96 2 281 10 293 42 34 4 80 736 Total 196 733 40 969 61 40 302 403 10 1068 51 1129 100 80 11 191 2692 04:00 PM 56 182 9 247 13 17 84 114 4 293 16 313 39 40 3 82 756 04:15 PM 43 193 18 254 19 16 70 105 3 255 14 272 48 30 5 83 714 04:30 PM 27 205 21 253 18 8 72 98 2 231 14 247 44 19 4 67 665 04:45 PM 36 188 15 239 13 15 82 110 4 244 12 260 41 18 4 63 672 Total 162 768 63 993 63 56 308 427 13 1023 56 1092 172 107 16 295 2807 05:00 PM 40 186 21 247 14 25 87 126 4 251 14 269 62 28 1 91 733 05:15 PM 32 190 16 238 15 20 85 120 8 262 7 277 39 30 6 75 710 05:30 PM 43 192 10 245 15 25 68 108 5 250 10 265 34 44 1 79 697 05:45 PM 36 196 13 245 16 18 51 85 9 195 17 221 25 38 7 70 621 Total 151 764 60 975 60 88 291 439 26 958 48 1032 160 140 15 315 2761 Grand Total 509 2265 163 2937 184 184 901 1269 49 3049 155 3253 432 327 42 801 8260 Apprch % 17.3 77.1 5.5 14.5 14.5 71 1.5 93.7 4.8 53.9 40.8 5.2 Total % 6.2 27.4 2 35.6 2.2 2.2 10.9 15.4 0.6 36.9 1.9 39.4 5.2 4 0.5 9.7 Passenger Vehicles 487 2215 160 2862 181 184 868 1233 47 2961 153 3161 426 318 41 785 8041 % Passenger Vehicles 95.7 97.8 98.2 97.4 98.4 100 96.3 97.2 95.9 97.1 98.7 97.2 98.6 97.2 97.6 98 97.3 Dual Wheeled 14 29 3 46 3 0 11 14 2 61 2 65 6 9 1 16 141 % Dual Wheeled 2.8 1.3 1.8 1.6 1.6 0 1.2 1.1 4.1 2 1.3 2 1.4 2.8 2.4 2 1.7 Buses 8 21 0 29 0 0 22 22 0 27 0 27 0 0 0 0 78
% Buses 1.6 0.9 0 1 0 0 2.4 1.7 0 0.9 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 46 176 16 238 10 14 72 96 6 279 13 298 43 27 4 74 706 03:45 PM 55 202 10 267 17 8 71 96 2 281 10 293 42 34 4 80 736 04:00 PM 56 182 9 247 13 17 84 114 4 293 16 313 39 40 3 82 756 04:15 PM 43 193 18 254 19 16 70 105 3 255 14 272 48 30 5 83 714 Total Volume 200 753 53 1006 59 55 297 411 15 1108 53 1176 172 131 16 319 2912 % App. Total 19.9 74.9 5.3 14.4 13.4 72.3 1.3 94.2 4.5 53.9 41.1 5 PHF .893 .932 .736 .942 .776 .809 .884 .901 .625 .945 .828 .939 .896 .819 .800 .961 .963 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
53 Thru
753
Left
200
InOut Total
1577 1006 2583
Right
297
Thru
55 Left
59 OutTotal In
384 411 795
Left
15 Thru
1108
Right
53 Out TotalIn
828 1176 2004
Left
172
Thru
131
Right
16 TotalOut In
123 319 442
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:45 PM 04:45 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 55 202 10 267 13 15 82 110 6 279 13 298 43 27 4 74 +15 mins. 56 182 9 247 14 25 87 126 2 281 10 293 42 34 4 80 +30 mins. 43 193 18 254 15 20 85 120 4 293 16 313 39 40 3 82 +45 mins. 27 205 21 253 15 25 68 108 3 255 14 272 48 30 5 83 Total Volume 181 782 58 1021 57 85 322 464 15 1108 53 1176 172 131 16 319 % App. Total 17.7 76.6 5.7 12.3 18.3 69.4 1.3 94.2 4.5 53.9 41.1 5 PHF .808 .954 .690 .956 .950 .850 .925 .921 .625 .945 .828 .939 .896 .819 .800 .961 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 47 175 6 228 21 8 78 107 0 269 13 282 3 3 0 6 623 03:15 PM 44 168 8 220 12 10 75 97 1 224 15 240 9 13 2 24 581 03:30 PM 41 173 15 229 10 14 71 95 6 266 13 285 43 25 4 72 681 03:45 PM 52 198 10 260 17 8 67 92 1 274 9 284 42 33 4 79 715 Total 184 714 39 937 60 40 291 391 8 1033 50 1091 97 74 10 181 2600 04:00 PM 54 178 7 239 13 17 81 111 4 284 16 304 39 39 3 81 735 04:15 PM 42 186 18 246 18 16 69 103 3 245 14 262 47 29 5 81 692 04:30 PM 25 201 21 247 17 8 67 92 2 225 14 241 44 19 4 67 647 04:45 PM 36 183 15 234 13 15 77 105 4 233 12 249 39 18 4 61 649 Total 157 748 61 966 61 56 294 411 13 987 56 1056 169 105 16 290 2723 05:00 PM 38 182 21 241 14 25 85 124 4 244 14 262 62 28 1 91 718 05:15 PM 31 186 16 233 15 20 81 116 8 258 7 273 39 29 6 74 696 05:30 PM 43 190 10 243 15 25 67 107 5 247 10 262 34 44 1 79 691 05:45 PM 34 195 13 242 16 18 50 84 9 192 16 217 25 38 7 70 613 Total 146 753 60 959 60 88 283 431 26 941 47 1014 160 139 15 314 2718 Grand Total 487 2215 160 2862 181 184 868 1233 47 2961 153 3161 426 318 41 785 8041 Apprch % 17 77.4 5.6 14.7 14.9 70.4 1.5 93.7 4.8 54.3 40.5 5.2 Total % 6.1 27.5 2 35.6 2.3 2.3 10.8 15.3 0.6 36.8 1.9 39.3 5.3 4 0.5 9.8 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 41 173 15 229 10 14 71 95 6 266 13 285 43 25 4 72 681 03:45 PM 52 198 10 260 17 8 67 92 1 274 9 284 42 33 4 79 715 04:00 PM 54 178 7 239 13 17 81 111 4 284 16 304 39 39 3 81 735 04:15 PM 42 186 18 246 18 16 69 103 3 245 14 262 47 29 5 81 692 Total Volume 189 735 50 974 58 55 288 401 14 1069 52 1135 171 126 16 313 2823 % App. Total 19.4 75.5 5.1 14.5 13.7 71.8 1.2 94.2 4.6 54.6 40.3 5.1 PHF .875 .928 .694 .937 .806 .809 .889 .903 .583 .941 .813 .933 .910 .808 .800 .966 .960 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
50 Thru
735
Left
189
InOut Total
1528 974 2502
Right
288
Thru
55 Left
58 OutTotal In
367 401 768
Left
14 Thru
1069
Right
52 Out TotalIn
809 1135 1944
Left
171
Thru
126
Right
16 TotalOut In
119 313 432
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 41 173 15 229 10 14 71 95 6 266 13 285 43 25 4 72 +15 mins. 52 198 10 260 17 8 67 92 1 274 9 284 42 33 4 79 +30 mins. 54 178 7 239 13 17 81 111 4 284 16 304 39 39 3 81 +45 mins. 42 186 18 246 18 16 69 103 3 245 14 262 47 29 5 81 Total Volume 189 735 50 974 58 55 288 401 14 1069 52 1135 171 126 16 313 % App. Total 19.4 75.5 5.1 14.5 13.7 71.8 1.2 94.2 4.6 54.6 40.3 5.1 PHF .875 .928 .694 .937 .806 .809 .889 .903 .583 .941 .813 .933 .910 .808 .800 .966 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 2 3 0 5 1 0 1 2 1 9 0 10 1 1 1 3 20
03:15 PM 1 4 0 5 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 4 2 2 0 4 15
03:30 PM 4 2 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 2 0 2 18
03:45 PM 2 2 0 4 0 0 2 2 1 4 1 6 0 1 0 1 13
Total 9 11 1 21 1 0 5 6 2 26 1 29 3 6 1 10 66
04:00 PM 1 3 2 6 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 7 0 1 0 1 15
04:15 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 7 0 7 1 1 0 2 13
04:30 PM 1 4 0 5 1 0 2 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 11
04:45 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 8 0 8 2 0 0 2 15
Total 2 13 2 17 2 0 5 7 0 25 0 25 3 2 0 5 54
05:00 PM 1 3 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
05:15 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 1 6
05:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
05:45 PM 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 4
Total 3 5 0 8 0 0 1 1 0 10 1 11 0 1 0 1 21
Grand Total 14 29 3 46 3 0 11 14 2 61 2 65 6 9 1 16 141 Apprch % 30.4 63 6.5 21.4 0 78.6 3.1 93.8 3.1 37.5 56.2 6.2 Total % 9.9 20.6 2.1 32.6 2.1 0 7.8 9.9 1.4 43.3 1.4 46.1 4.3 6.4 0.7 11.3 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 4 2 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 2 0 2 18
03:45 PM 2 2 0 4 0 0 2 2 1 4 1 6 0 1 0 1 13
04:00 PM 1 3 2 6 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 7 0 1 0 1 15
04:15 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 7 0 7 1 1 0 2 13
Total Volume 7 10 3 20 1 0 3 4 1 27 1 29 1 5 0 6 59
% App. Total 35 50 15 25 0 75 3.4 93.1 3.4 16.7 83.3 0 PHF .438 .833 .375 .714 .250 .000 .375 .500 .250 .750 .250 .806 .250 .625 .000 .750 .819 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
3 Thru
10 Left
7 InOut Total
31 20 51
Right
3 Thru
0 Left
1 OutTotal In
13 4 17
Left
1 Thru
27 Right
1 Out TotalIn
11 29 40
Left
1 Thru
5 Right
0 TotalOut In
4 6 10
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 4 2 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 2 0 2
+15 mins. 2 2 0 4 0 0 2 2 1 4 1 6 0 1 0 1
+30 mins. 1 3 2 6 0 0 1 1 0 7 0 7 0 1 0 1
+45 mins. 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 7 0 7 1 1 0 2
Total Volume 7 10 3 20 1 0 3 4 1 27 1 29 1 5 0 6
% App. Total 35 50 15 25 0 75 3.4 93.1 3.4 16.7 83.3 0 PHF .438 .833 .375 .714 .250 .000 .375 .500 .250 .750 .250 .806 .250 .625 .000 .750 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6
03:15 PM 1 2 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5
03:30 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 7
03:45 PM 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
Total 3 8 0 11 0 0 6 6 0 9 0 9 0 0 0 0 26
04:00 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
04:15 PM 1 4 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 9
04:30 PM 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 7
04:45 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 3 3 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
Total 3 7 0 10 0 0 9 9 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 30
05:00 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 5
05:15 PM 1 2 0 3 0 0 4 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8
05:30 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 5
05:45 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
Total 2 6 0 8 0 0 7 7 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 22
Grand Total 8 21 0 29 0 0 22 22 0 27 0 27 0 0 0 0 78
Apprch % 27.6 72.4 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 0
Total % 10.3 26.9 0 37.2 0 0 28.2 28.2 0 34.6 0 34.6 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Mesmer Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Mesmer Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 7
03:45 PM 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 8
04:00 PM 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
04:15 PM 1 4 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 9
Total Volume 4 8 0 12 0 0 6 6 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 0 30
% App. Total 33.3 66.7 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 0
PHF 1.00 .500 .000 .600 .000 .000 .750 .750 .000 .750 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .833 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 01_LAC_Jefferson_Mesmer PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Mesmer Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Mesmer Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
8 Left
4 InOut Total
18 12 30
Right
6 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
4 6 10
Left
0 Thru
12 Right
0 Out TotalIn
8 12 20
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 1 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 1 1 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 1 4 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 4 8 0 12 0 0 6 6 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 33.3 66.7 0 0 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 0
PHF 1.000 .500 .000 .600 .000 .000 .750 .750 .000 .750 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
City Of Los Angeles
Department Of Transportation

MANUAL TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South Jefferson Boulevard
East/West Mesmer Avenue
Day: Date: Weather: CLEAR
Hours: 7-10AM 3-6PM Staff: CUI
School Day: YES District: Western Los Angele I/S CODE 10947

N/B S/B E/B W/B
DUAL-
WHEELED 157 155 22 58
BIKES 17 24 5 5
BUSES 55 61 0 45

N/B TIM E S/B TIM E E/B TIM E W/B TIM E
AM PK 15 MIN 290 8.00 487 9.00 43 8.15 183 7.15
PM PK 15 MIN 313 4.00 267 3.45 91 5.00 126 5.00
AM PK HOUR 1055 7.45 1699 8.30 161 8.00 619 7.00
PM PK HOUR 1176 3.30 1021 3.45 319 3.30 464 4.45
NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total N-S Pe d Sch Ped Sch 7-8 19 791 27 837 7-8 221 857 70 1148 1985 12 0 8 0
8-9 22 975 49 1046 8-9 376 974 94 1444 2490 11 0 6 0
9-10 18 781 49 848 9-10 490 1066 74 1630 2478 14 0 9 0
3-4 10 1068 51 1129 3-4 196 733 40 969 2098 90 4 0
4-5 13 1023 56 1092 4-5 162 768 63 993 2085 11 0 9 0
5-6 26 958 48 1032 5-6 151 764 60 975 2007 80 8 0
TOTAL 108 5596 280 5984 TOTAL 1596 5162 401 7159 13143 65 0 44 0 EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total E- W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 72 32 18 122 7-8 45 76 498 619 741 30 3 0
8-9 85 49 27 161 8-9 33 83 412 528 689 10 8 0
9-10 59 35 10 104 9-10 59 60 247 366 470 20 1 0
3-4 100 80 11 191 3-4 61 40 302 403 594 00 8 0
4-5 172 107 16 295 4-5 63 56 308 427 722 40 8 0
5-6 160 140 15 315 5-6 60 88 291 439 754 2 0 11 1
TOTAL 648 443 97 1188 TOTAL 321 403 2058 2782 3970 12 0 39 1 (Rev Oct 06)
November 25, 2018Wednesday

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
BICYCLE COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:

NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N‐S
7‐8 1 2 0 3 7‐8 1 4 0 5 8
8‐9 0 0 0 0 8‐9 2 8 0 10 10
9‐10 0 1 0 1 9‐10 0 2 1 3 4
3‐4 0 3 0 3 3‐4 0 1 1 2 5
4‐5 0 6 0 6 4‐5 0 2 0 2 8
5‐6 0 4 0 4 5‐6 0 2 0 2 6
TOTAL 1 16 0 17 TOTAL 3 19 2 24 41
EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E‐W
7‐8 0 0 0 0 7‐8 0 0 0 0 0
8‐9 0 0 0 0 8‐9 0 0 0 0 0
9‐10 1 0 0 1 9‐10 0 1 0 1 2
3‐4 0 1 0 1 3‐4 0 2 0 2 3
4‐5 0 1 0 1 4‐5 0 0 1 1 2
5‐6 1 1 0 2 5‐6 0 1 0 1 3
TOTAL 2 3 0 5 TOTAL 0 4 1 5 10
REMARKS (6 hour total):

NB SB EB WB TOTAL
‐ Female Riders 2701 1 0
‐ No helmet riders 10 11 5 4 30
‐ Sidewalk Riding 12 20 5 5 42
‐ Wrong way riding 2531 1 1
NB: Northbound, SB: Southbound, EB: Eastbound, WB: Westbound, I/S: Intersection Source: CUI LADOT 2015 CMP
CLEAR
10947
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Date:

District:

Wednesday
Yes
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM
11/25/2018
Western Los Ang
CUI     Staff:

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
PEDESTRIAN COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:
15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 7:00‐7:15 1500 6 3:00‐3:15 18201 1
7:15‐7:30 3221 8 3:15‐3:30 26601 4
7:30‐7:45 3312 9 3:30‐3:45 1020 3
7:45‐8:00 1200 3 3:45‐4:00 04601 0
8:00‐8:15 0100 1 4:00‐4:15 21 22 2 1 8
8:15‐8:30 1420 7 4:15‐4:30 12621 1
8:30‐8:45 5121 9 4:30‐4:45 06801 4
8:45‐9:00 0540 9 4:45‐5:00 62041 2
9:00‐9:15 2400 6 5:00‐5:15 6 6 12 0 24
9:15‐9:30 3600 9 5:15‐5:30 01 08 2 2 0
9:30‐9:45 4101 6 5:30‐5:45 1022 5
9:45‐10:00 0311 5 5:45‐6:00 1000 1
Hours Hours
7 ‐ 8 8 12 3 3 26 3 ‐ 4 4 18 16 0 38
8 ‐ 9 6 11 8 1 26 4 ‐ 5 9 22 16 8 55
9 ‐ 10 9 14 1 2 26 5 ‐ 6 8 16 22 4 50
TOTAL 23 37 12 6 78 21 56 54 12 143
REMARKS (6 hour total):

N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL
‐ Wheelchair/special needs assistance 00000
‐ Skateboard/scooter 02013
N: North, S: South, E: East, W: West, I/S: Intersection Source:

CUI
Jefferson Boulevard
Mesmer Avenue
Wednesday      Date: ################ CLEAR
LADOT 2015 CMP
AM PEAK PERIOD PM PEAK PERIOD
YES      District: Western Los Angele 10947
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM      Staff:

File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 49 145 0 194 0 0 0 0 0 211 56 267 17 0 103 120 581 07:15 AM 76 145 0 221 0 0 0 0 0 280 80 360 16 0 141 157 738 07:30 AM 92 143 0 235 0 0 0 0 0 240 94 334 25 0 155 180 749 07:45 AM 67 194 0 261 0 0 0 0 0 298 97 395 18 1 167 186 842 Total 284 627 0 911 0 0 0 0 0 1029 327 1356 76 1 566 643 2910 08:00 AM 87 171 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 323 96 419 16 0 151 167 844 08:15 AM 93 178 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 300 92 392 20 0 194 214 877 08:30 AM 102 188 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 258 86 344 22 2 203 227 861 08:45 AM 84 206 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 249 90 339 19 0 261 280 909 Total 366 743 0 1109 0 0 0 0 0 1130 364 1494 77 2 809 888 3491 09:00 AM 86 232 0 318 0 0 0 0 0 219 66 285 29 1 286 316 919 09:15 AM 62 194 0 256 0 0 0 0 0 241 84 325 26 0 233 259 840 09:30 AM 74 184 0 258 0 0 0 0 0 198 64 262 20 1 198 219 739 09:45 AM 56 191 0 247 0 0 0 0 0 200 59 259 39 0 197 236 742 Total 278 801 0 1079 0 0 0 0 0 858 273 1131 114 2 914 1030 3240 Grand Total 928 2171 0 3099 0 0 0 0 0 3017 964 3981 267 5 2289 2561 9641 Apprch % 29.9 70.1 0 0 0 0 0 75.8 24.2 10.4 0.2 89.4 Total % 9.6 22.5 0 32.1 0 0 0 0 0 31.3 10 41.3 2.8 0.1 23.7 26.6 Passenger Vehicles 900 2094 0 2994 0 0 0 0 0 2908 932 3840 260 5 2244 2509 9343 % Passenger Vehicles 97 96.5 0 96.6 0 0 0 0 0 96.4 96.7 96.5 97.4 100 98 98 96.9 Dual Wheeled 24 48 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 64 29 93 5 0 43 48 213 % Dual Wheeled 2.6 2.2 0 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 2.1 3 2.3 1.9 0 1.9 1.9 2.2 Buses 4 29 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 45 3 48 2 0 2 4 85
% Buses 0.4 1.3 0 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 0.3 1.2 0.7 0 0.1 0.2 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 93 178 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 300 92 392 20 0 194 214 877 08:30 AM 102 188 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 258 86 344 22 2 203 227 861 08:45 AM 84 206 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 249 90 339 19 0 261 280 909 09:00 AM 86 232 0 318 0 0 0 0 0 219 66 285 29 1 286 316 919 Total Volume 365 804 0 1169 0 0 0 0 0 1026 334 1360 90 3 944 1037 3566 % App. Total 31.2 68.8 0 0 0 0 0 75.4 24.6 8.7 0.3 91 PHF .895 .866 .000 .919 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .855 .908 .867 .776 .375 .825 .820 .970 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
804
Left
365
InOut Total
1116 1169 2285
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
702 0 702
Left
0 Thru
1026
Right
334
Out TotalIn
1748 1360 3108
Left
90 Thru
3 Right
944
TotalOut In
0 1037 1037
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 07:00 AM 07:45 AM 08:30 AM
+0 mins. 93 178 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 298 97 395 22 2 203 227 +15 mins. 102 188 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 323 96 419 19 0 261 280 +30 mins. 84 206 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 300 92 392 29 1 286 316 +45 mins. 86 232 0 318 0 0 0 0 0 258 86 344 26 0 233 259 Total Volume 365 804 0 1169 0 0 0 0 0 1179 371 1550 96 3 983 1082 % App. Total 31.2 68.8 0 0 0 0 0 76.1 23.9 8.9 0.3 90.9 PHF .895 .866 .000 .919 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .913 .956 .925 .828 .375 .859 .856 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 47 136 0 183 0 0 0 0 0 204 55 259 16 0 99 115 557 07:15 AM 75 141 0 216 0 0 0 0 0 273 79 352 14 0 137 151 719 07:30 AM 89 138 0 227 0 0 0 0 0 229 92 321 23 0 152 175 723 07:45 AM 67 190 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 286 96 382 18 1 165 184 823 Total 278 605 0 883 0 0 0 0 0 992 322 1314 71 1 553 625 2822 08:00 AM 86 164 0 250 0 0 0 0 0 316 94 410 16 0 148 164 824 08:15 AM 87 170 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 287 88 375 20 0 191 211 843 08:30 AM 98 181 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 250 81 331 22 2 198 222 832 08:45 AM 82 201 0 283 0 0 0 0 0 240 86 326 19 0 254 273 882 Total 353 716 0 1069 0 0 0 0 0 1093 349 1442 77 2 791 870 3381 09:00 AM 82 221 0 303 0 0 0 0 0 205 63 268 29 1 281 311 882 09:15 AM 62 186 0 248 0 0 0 0 0 235 82 317 24 0 230 254 819 09:30 AM 71 178 0 249 0 0 0 0 0 191 59 250 20 1 194 215 714 09:45 AM 54 188 0 242 0 0 0 0 0 192 57 249 39 0 195 234 725 Total 269 773 0 1042 0 0 0 0 0 823 261 1084 112 2 900 1014 3140 Grand Total 900 2094 0 2994 0 0 0 0 0 2908 932 3840 260 5 2244 2509 9343 Apprch % 30.1 69.9 0 0 0 0 0 75.7 24.3 10.4 0.2 89.4 Total % 9.6 22.4 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 31.1 10 41.1 2.8 0.1 24 26.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 87 170 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 287 88 375 20 0 191 211 843 08:30 AM 98 181 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 250 81 331 22 2 198 222 832 08:45 AM 82 201 0 283 0 0 0 0 0 240 86 326 19 0 254 273 882 09:00 AM 82 221 0 303 0 0 0 0 0 205 63 268 29 1 281 311 882 Total Volume 349 773 0 1122 0 0 0 0 0 982 318 1300 90 3 924 1017 3439 % App. Total 31.1 68.9 0 0 0 0 0 75.5 24.5 8.8 0.3 90.9 PHF .890 .874 .000 .926 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .855 .903 .867 .776 .375 .822 .818 .975 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
773
Left
349
InOut Total
1072 1122 2194
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
670 0 670
Left
0 Thru
982
Right
318
Out TotalIn
1697 1300 2997
Left
90 Thru
3 Right
924
TotalOut In
0 1017 1017
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 87 170 0 257 0 0 0 0 0 287 88 375 20 0 191 211 +15 mins. 98 181 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 250 81 331 22 2 198 222 +30 mins. 82 201 0 283 0 0 0 0 0 240 86 326 19 0 254 273 +45 mins. 82 221 0 303 0 0 0 0 0 205 63 268 29 1 281 311 Total Volume 349 773 0 1122 0 0 0 0 0 982 318 1300 90 3 924 1017 % App. Total 31.1 68.9 0 0 0 0 0 75.5 24.5 8.8 0.3 90.9 PHF .890 .874 .000 .926 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .855 .903 .867 .776 .375 .822 .818 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 2 5 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 4 4 14
07:15 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6 2 0 4 6 14
07:30 AM 3 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 2 0 3 5 19
07:45 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 10 0 0 2 2 14
Total 5 13 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 21 5 26 4 0 13 17 61
08:00 AM 1 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 0 0 3 3 16
08:15 AM 4 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 12 0 0 3 3 24
08:30 AM 3 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 11 0 0 4 4 22
08:45 AM 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 8 0 0 7 7 21
Total 10 18 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 24 14 38 0 0 17 17 83
09:00 AM 4 7 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 12 0 0 5 5 28
09:15 AM 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 1 0 3 4 14
09:30 AM 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 0 0 3 3 17
09:45 AM 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 2 2 10
Total 9 17 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 19 10 29 1 0 13 14 69
Grand Total 24 48 0 72 0 0 0 0 0 64 29 93 5 0 43 48 213 Apprch % 33.3 66.7 0 0 0 0 0 68.8 31.2 10.4 0 89.6
Total % 11.3 22.5 0 33.8 0 0 0 0 0 30 13.6 43.7 2.3 0 20.2 22.5 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 4 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 12 0 0 3 3 24
08:30 AM 3 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 11 0 0 4 4 22
08:45 AM 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 8 0 0 7 7 21
09:00 AM 4 7 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 12 0 0 5 5 28
Total Volume 13 20 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 28 15 43 0 0 19 19 95 % App. Total 39.4 60.6 0 0 0 0 0 65.1 34.9 0 0 100
PHF .813 .714 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .778 .750 .896 .000 .000 .679 .679 .848 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
20 Left
13 InOut Total
28 33 61
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
28 0 28
Left
0 Thru
28 Right
15 Out TotalIn
39 43 82
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
19 TotalOut In
0 19 19
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 4 5 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 12 0 0 3 3
+15 mins. 3 4 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 11 0 0 4 4
+30 mins. 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 8 0 0 7 7
+45 mins. 4 7 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 12 0 0 5 5
Total Volume 13 20 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 28 15 43 0 0 19 19
% App. Total 39.4 60.6 0 0 0 0 0 65.1 34.9 0 0 100
PHF .813 .714 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .778 .750 .896 .000 .000 .679 .679 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 1 0 0 1 10
07:15 AM 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 5
07:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 7
07:45 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 5
Total 1 9 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 1 0 0 1 27
08:00 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:15 AM 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
08:30 AM 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 7
08:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 6
Total 3 9 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 13 1 14 0 0 1 1 27
09:00 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 9
09:15 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 1 0 0 1 7
09:30 AM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 1 1 8
09:45 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 7
Total 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 16 2 18 1 0 1 2 31
Grand Total 4 29 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 45 3 48 2 0 2 4 85
Apprch % 12.1 87.9 0 0 0 0 0 93.8 6.2 50 0 50
Total % 4.7 34.1 0 38.8 0 0 0 0 0 52.9 3.5 56.5 2.4 0 2.4 4.7 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:15 AM
08:15 AM 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
08:30 AM 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 7
08:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 6
09:00 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 9
Total Volume 3 11 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 17 0 0 1 1 32
% App. Total 21.4 78.6 0 0 0 0 0 94.1 5.9 0 0 100
PHF .375 .688 .000 .700 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .800 .250 .850 .000 .000 .250 .250 .800 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
11 Left
3 InOut Total
16 14 30
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
4 0 4
Left
0 Thru
16 Right
1 Out TotalIn
12 17 29
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
1 TotalOut In
0 1 1
Peak Hour Begins at 08:15 AM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:15 AM to 09:00 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1
+30 mins. 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 3 11 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 16 1 17 0 0 1 1
% App. Total 21.4 78.6 0 0 0 0 0 94.1 5.9 0 0 100
PHF .375 .688 .000 .700 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .800 .250 .850 .000 .000 .250 .250 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 95 195 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 265 94 359 25 0 53 78 727 03:15 PM 101 198 0 299 0 0 0 0 0 248 74 322 17 0 52 69 690 03:30 PM 118 212 0 330 0 0 0 0 0 278 138 416 19 0 59 78 824 03:45 PM 93 246 0 339 0 0 0 0 0 284 124 408 14 0 42 56 803 Total 407 851 0 1258 0 0 0 0 0 1075 430 1505 75 0 206 281 3044 04:00 PM 159 214 0 373 0 0 0 0 0 252 137 389 16 0 46 62 824 04:15 PM 127 240 0 367 0 0 0 0 0 276 142 418 16 0 33 49 834 04:30 PM 139 232 0 371 0 0 0 0 0 244 102 346 8 1 28 37 754 04:45 PM 116 222 0 338 0 0 0 0 0 274 122 396 12 2 23 37 771 Total 541 908 0 1449 0 0 0 0 0 1046 503 1549 52 3 130 185 3183 05:00 PM 129 243 0 372 0 0 0 0 0 259 115 374 10 0 25 35 781 05:15 PM 118 212 0 330 0 0 0 0 0 288 112 400 5 0 23 28 758 05:30 PM 131 219 0 350 0 0 0 0 0 290 103 393 14 0 13 27 770 05:45 PM 110 234 0 344 0 0 0 0 0 209 58 267 11 0 19 30 641 Total 488 908 0 1396 0 0 0 0 0 1046 388 1434 40 0 80 120 2950 Grand Total 1436 2667 0 4103 0 0 0 0 0 3167 1321 4488 167 3 416 586 9177 Apprch % 35 65 0 0 0 0 0 70.6 29.4 28.5 0.5 71
Total % 15.6 29.1 0 44.7 0 0 0 0 0 34.5 14.4 48.9 1.8 0 4.5 6.4 Passenger Vehicles 1411 2605 0 4016 0 0 0 0 0 3085 1291 4376 162 3 408 573 8965 % Passenger Vehicles 98.3 97.7 0 97.9 0 0 0 0 0 97.4 97.7 97.5 97 100 98.1 97.8 97.7 Dual Wheeled 24 33 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 37 26 63 5 0 6 11 131 % Dual Wheeled 1.7 1.2 0 1.4 0 0 0 0 0 1.2 2 1.4 3 0 1.4 1.9 1.4 Buses 1 29 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 45 4 49 0 0 2 2 81
% Buses 0.1 1.1 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 1.4 0.3 1.1 0 0 0.5 0.3 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 118 212 0 330 0 0 0 0 0 278 138 416 19 0 59 78 824 03:45 PM 93 246 0 339 0 0 0 0 0 284 124 408 14 0 42 56 803 04:00 PM 159 214 0 373 0 0 0 0 0 252 137 389 16 0 46 62 824 04:15 PM 127 240 0 367 0 0 0 0 0 276 142 418 16 0 33 49 834 Total Volume 497 912 0 1409 0 0 0 0 0 1090 541 1631 65 0 180 245 3285 % App. Total 35.3 64.7 0 0 0 0 0 66.8 33.2 26.5 0 73.5 PHF .781 .927 .000 .944 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .960 .952 .975 .855 .000 .763 .785 .985 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
912
Left
497
InOut Total
1155 1409 2564
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
1038 0 1038
Left
0 Thru
1090
Right
541
Out TotalIn
1092 1631 2723
Left
65 Thru
0 Right
180
TotalOut In
0 245 245
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:45 PM 03:00 PM 03:30 PM 03:00 PM
+0 mins. 93 246 0 339 0 0 0 0 0 278 138 416 25 0 53 78
+15 mins. 159 214 0 373 0 0 0 0 0 284 124 408 17 0 52 69 +30 mins. 127 240 0 367 0 0 0 0 0 252 137 389 19 0 59 78 +45 mins. 139 232 0 371 0 0 0 0 0 276 142 418 14 0 42 56 Total Volume 518 932 0 1450 0 0 0 0 0 1090 541 1631 75 0 206 281 % App. Total 35.7 64.3 0 0 0 0 0 66.8 33.2 26.7 0 73.3 PHF .814 .947 .000 .972 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .960 .952 .975 .750 .000 .873 .901 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 92 189 0 281 0 0 0 0 0 258 90 348 24 0 52 76 705 03:15 PM 99 195 0 294 0 0 0 0 0 238 73 311 17 0 49 66 671 03:30 PM 116 205 0 321 0 0 0 0 0 271 133 404 18 0 58 76 801 03:45 PM 87 240 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 275 123 398 14 0 41 55 780 Total 394 829 0 1223 0 0 0 0 0 1042 419 1461 73 0 200 273 2957 04:00 PM 157 207 0 364 0 0 0 0 0 248 133 381 16 0 45 61 806 04:15 PM 124 233 0 357 0 0 0 0 0 269 139 408 14 0 33 47 812 04:30 PM 137 226 0 363 0 0 0 0 0 234 100 334 8 1 28 37 734 04:45 PM 116 216 0 332 0 0 0 0 0 265 115 380 11 2 23 36 748 Total 534 882 0 1416 0 0 0 0 0 1016 487 1503 49 3 129 181 3100 05:00 PM 125 240 0 365 0 0 0 0 0 253 115 368 10 0 24 34 767 05:15 PM 117 206 0 323 0 0 0 0 0 282 111 393 5 0 23 28 744 05:30 PM 131 216 0 347 0 0 0 0 0 286 101 387 14 0 13 27 761 05:45 PM 110 232 0 342 0 0 0 0 0 206 58 264 11 0 19 30 636 Total 483 894 0 1377 0 0 0 0 0 1027 385 1412 40 0 79 119 2908 Grand Total 1411 2605 0 4016 0 0 0 0 0 3085 1291 4376 162 3 408 573 8965 Apprch % 35.1 64.9 0 0 0 0 0 70.5 29.5 28.3 0.5 71.2 Total % 15.7 29.1 0 44.8 0 0 0 0 0 34.4 14.4 48.8 1.8 0 4.6 6.4 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 116 205 0 321 0 0 0 0 0 271 133 404 18 0 58 76 801 03:45 PM 87 240 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 275 123 398 14 0 41 55 780 04:00 PM 157 207 0 364 0 0 0 0 0 248 133 381 16 0 45 61 806 04:15 PM 124 233 0 357 0 0 0 0 0 269 139 408 14 0 33 47 812 Total Volume 484 885 0 1369 0 0 0 0 0 1063 528 1591 62 0 177 239 3199 % App. Total 35.4 64.6 0 0 0 0 0 66.8 33.2 25.9 0 74.1 PHF .771 .922 .000 .940 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .966 .950 .975 .861 .000 .763 .786 .985 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
885
Left
484
InOut Total
1125 1369 2494
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
1012 0 1012
Left
0 Thru
1063
Right
528
Out TotalIn
1062 1591 2653
Left
62 Thru
0 Right
177
TotalOut In
0 239 239
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 116 205 0 321 0 0 0 0 0 271 133 404 18 0 58 76 +15 mins. 87 240 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 275 123 398 14 0 41 55 +30 mins. 157 207 0 364 0 0 0 0 0 248 133 381 16 0 45 61 +45 mins. 124 233 0 357 0 0 0 0 0 269 139 408 14 0 33 47 Total Volume 484 885 0 1369 0 0 0 0 0 1063 528 1591 62 0 177 239 % App. Total 35.4 64.6 0 0 0 0 0 66.8 33.2 25.9 0 74.1 PHF .771 .922 .000 .940 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .966 .950 .975 .861 .000 .763 .786 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 9 1 0 0 1 16
03:15 PM 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 3 3 14
03:30 PM 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 1 0 1 2 15
03:45 PM 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 1 1 14
Total 13 11 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 19 9 28 2 0 5 7 59
04:00 PM 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 1 1 10
04:15 PM 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 2 0 0 2 13
04:30 PM 2 5 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 6 0 0 0 0 13
04:45 PM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 10 1 0 0 1 15
Total 6 15 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 12 14 26 3 0 1 4 51
05:00 PM 4 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 10
05:15 PM 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 5
05:30 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 4
05:45 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
Total 5 7 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 9 0 0 0 0 21
Grand Total 24 33 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 37 26 63 5 0 6 11 131
Apprch % 42.1 57.9 0 0 0 0 0 58.7 41.3 45.5 0 54.5
Total % 18.3 25.2 0 43.5 0 0 0 0 0 28.2 19.8 48.1 3.8 0 4.6 8.4 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 1 0 1 2 15
03:45 PM 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 1 1 14
04:00 PM 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 1 1 10
04:15 PM 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 2 0 0 2 13
Total Volume 12 13 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 10 11 21 3 0 3 6 52
% App. Total 48 52 0 0 0 0 0 47.6 52.4 50 0 50
PHF .500 .813 .000 .694 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .833 .688 .750 .375 .000 .750 .750 .867 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
13 Left
12 InOut Total
13 25 38
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
23 0 23
Left
0 Thru
10 Right
11 Out TotalIn
16 21 37
Left
3 Thru
0 Right
3 TotalOut In
0 6 6
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 7 1 0 1 2
+15 mins. 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 1 1
+30 mins. 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 1 1
+45 mins. 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 6 2 0 0 2
Total Volume 12 13 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 10 11 21 3 0 3 6
% App. Total 48 52 0 0 0 0 0 47.6 52.4 50 0 50
PHF .500 .813 .000 .694 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .833 .688 .750 .375 .000 .750 .750 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 6
03:15 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 5
03:30 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 8
03:45 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 9
Total 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 14 2 16 0 0 1 1 28
04:00 PM 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 8
04:15 PM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 9
04:30 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 7
04:45 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 6 0 0 0 0 8
Total 1 11 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 18 2 20 0 0 0 0 32
05:00 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 4
05:15 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 9
05:30 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 5
05:45 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
Total 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 1 1 21
Grand Total 1 29 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 45 4 49 0 0 2 2 81
Apprch % 3.3 96.7 0 0 0 0 0 91.8 8.2 0 0 100
Total % 1.2 35.8 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 55.6 4.9 60.5 0 0 2.5 2.5 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 03:30 PM
03:30 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0 8
03:45 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 9
04:00 PM 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0 8
04:15 PM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 9
Total Volume 1 14 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 17 2 19 0 0 0 0 34
% App. Total 6.7 93.3 0 0 0 0 0 89.5 10.5 0 0 0
PHF .250 .700 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .708 .500 .792 .000 .000 .000 .000 .944 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 02_LAC_Jefferson_405S PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Los Angeles
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Southbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Southbound Off Ramp
I-405 Southbound On Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
14 Left
1 InOut Total
17 15 32
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
3 0 3
Left
0 Thru
17 Right
2 Out TotalIn
14 19 33
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 03:30 PM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:30 PM to 04:15 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM 03:30 PM
+0 mins. 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 4 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 1 14 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 17 2 19 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 6.7 93.3 0 0 0 0 0 89.5 10.5 0 0 0
PHF .250 .700 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .708 .500 .792 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
City Of Los Angeles
Department Of Transportation

MANUAL TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South Jefferson Boulevard
East/West I-405 Southbound Ramps
Day: Date: Weather: CLEAR
Hours: 7-10AM 3-6PM Staff: CUI
School Day: YES District: Western Los Angele I/S CODE 0

N/B S/B E/B W/B
DUAL-
WHEELED 156 129 59 0
BIKES 01 7 6
BUSES 97 63 6 0

N/B TIM E S/B TIM E E/B TIM E W/B TIM E
AM PK 15 MIN 419 8.00 318 9.00 316 9.00 0 7.00
PM PK 15 MIN 418 4.15 373 4.00 78 3.00 0 3.00
AM PK HOUR 1550 7.45 1169 8.15 1082 8.30 0 7.00
PM PK HOUR 1631 3.30 1450 3.45 281 3.00 0 3.00
NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total N-S Pe d Sch Ped Sch 7-8 0 1029 327 1356 7-8 284 627 0 911 2267 00 0 0
8-9 0 1130 364 1494 8-9 366 743 0 1109 2603 10 0 0
9-10 0 858 273 1131 9-10 278 801 0 1079 2210 40 0 0
3-4 0 1075 430 1505 3-4 407 851 0 1258 2763 00 0 0
4-5 0 1046 503 1549 4-5 541 908 0 1449 2998 20 0 0
5-6 0 1046 388 1434 5-6 488 908 0 1396 2830 10 0 0
TOTAL 0 6184 2285 8469 TOTAL 2364 4838 0 7202 15671 8 0 0 0 EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total E- W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 76 1 566 643 7-8 000 0 643 00 5 0
8-9 77 2 809 888 8-9 000 0 888 0 0 11 0
9-10 114 2 914 1030 9-10 000 0 1030 00 6 0
3-4 75 0 206 281 3-4 000 0 281 2 0 13 1
4-5 52 3 130 185 4-5 000 0 185 0 0 14 0
5-6 40 0 80 120 5-6 000 0 120 00 9 0
TOTAL 434 8 2705 3147 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 3147 2 0 58 1
(Rev Oct 06)
November 25, 2018Wednesday

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
BICYCLE COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:

NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N‐S
7‐8 0 0 0 0 7‐8 1 0 0 1 1
8‐9 0 0 0 0 8‐9 0 0 0 0 0
9‐10 0 0 0 0 9‐10 0 0 0 0 0
3‐4 0 0 0 0 3‐4 0 0 0 0 0
4‐5 0 0 0 0 4‐5 0 0 0 0 0
5‐6 0 0 0 0 5‐6 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 1 1
EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E‐W
7‐8 0 0 0 0 7‐8 0 0 0 0 0
8‐9 0 1 0 1 8‐9 0 0 0 0 1
9‐10 0 0 0 0 9‐10 0 1 0 1 1
3‐4 0 2 0 2 3‐4 0 2 0 2 4
4‐5 2 2 0 4 4‐5 0 2 0 2 6
5‐6 0 0 0 0 5‐6 0 1 0 1 1
TOTAL 2 5 0 7 TOTAL 0 6 0 6 13
REMARKS (6 hour total):

NB SB EB WB TOTAL
‐ Female Riders 00213
‐ No helmet riders 00538
‐ Sidewalk Riding 00426
‐ Wrong way riding 00112
NB: Northbound, SB: Southbound, EB: Eastbound, WB: Westbound, I/S: Intersection Source: CUI LADOT 2015 CMP
CLEAR
0 Jefferson Boulevard
I‐405 Southbound Ramps
Date:

District:

Wednesday
Yes
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM
11/25/2018
Western Los Ang
CUI     Staff:

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
PEDESTRIAN COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:
15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 7:00‐7:15 0010 1 3:00‐3:15 0062 8
7:15‐7:30 0010 1 3:15‐3:30 0062 8
7:30‐7:45 0020 2 3:30‐3:45 0 0 12 0 12
7:45‐8:00 0010 1 3:45‐4:00 0020 2
8:00‐8:15 0130 4 4:00‐4:15 0260 8
8:15‐8:30 0030 3 4:15‐4:30 0060 6
8:30‐8:45 0040 4 4:30‐4:45 0 2 10 0 12
8:45‐9:00 0010 1 4:45‐5:00 0060 6
9:00‐9:15 0220 4 5:00‐5:15 0 2 10 0 12
9:15‐9:30 0030 3 5:15‐5:30 0060 6
9:30‐9:45 0200 2 5:30‐5:45 0020 2
9:45‐10:00 0010 1 5:45‐6:00 0000 0
Hours Hours
7 ‐ 8 0050 5 3 ‐ 4 0 0 26 4 30
8 ‐ 9 0 1 11 0 12 4 ‐ 5 0 4 28 0 32
9 ‐ 10 04601 0 5 ‐ 6 0 2 18 0 20
TOTAL 0 5 22 0 27 0 6 72 4 82
REMARKS (6 hour total):

N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL
‐ Wheelchair/special needs assistance 01001
‐ Skateboard/scooter 05005
N: North, S: South, E: East, W: West, I/S: Intersection Source:

CUI
Jefferson Boulevard
I‐405 Southbound Ramps
Wednesday      Date: ################ CLEAR
LADOT 2015 CMP
AM PEAK PERIOD PM PEAK PERIOD
YES      District: Western Los Angele 0
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM      Staff:

File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 165 38 203 33 70 75 178 129 108 0 237 0 0 0 0 618 07:15 AM 0 159 30 189 40 64 68 172 165 125 0 290 0 0 0 0 651 07:30 AM 0 201 29 230 32 52 94 178 121 156 0 277 0 0 0 0 685 07:45 AM 0 208 33 241 50 65 121 236 143 178 0 321 0 0 0 0 798 Total 0 733 130 863 155 251 358 764 558 567 0 1125 0 0 0 0 2752 08:00 AM 0 213 37 250 51 62 101 214 134 200 0 334 0 0 0 0 798 08:15 AM 0 228 34 262 40 74 80 194 151 168 0 319 0 0 0 0 775 08:30 AM 0 233 32 265 54 64 86 204 111 179 0 290 0 0 0 0 759 08:45 AM 0 235 35 270 56 66 88 210 96 165 0 261 0 0 0 0 741 Total 0 909 138 1047 201 266 355 822 492 712 0 1204 0 0 0 0 3073 09:00 AM 0 262 31 293 51 64 72 187 109 166 0 275 0 0 0 0 755 09:15 AM 0 213 24 237 45 70 69 184 72 186 0 258 0 0 0 0 679 09:30 AM 0 201 27 228 49 52 60 161 92 138 0 230 0 0 0 0 619 09:45 AM 0 204 28 232 43 42 43 128 51 185 0 236 0 0 0 0 596 Total 0 880 110 990 188 228 244 660 324 675 0 999 0 0 0 0 2649 Grand Total 0 2522 378 2900 544 745 957 2246 1374 1954 0 3328 0 0 0 0 8474 Apprch % 0 87 13 24.2 33.2 42.6 41.3 58.7 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 29.8 4.5 34.2 6.4 8.8 11.3 26.5 16.2 23.1 0 39.3 0 0 0 0 Passenger Vehicles 0 2434 360 2794 524 730 932 2186 1327 1883 0 3210 0 0 0 0 8190 % Passenger Vehicles 0 96.5 95.2 96.3 96.3 98 97.4 97.3 96.6 96.4 0 96.5 0 0 0 0 96.6 Dual Wheeled 0 55 17 72 20 11 24 55 41 27 0 68 0 0 0 0 195 % Dual Wheeled 0 2.2 4.5 2.5 3.7 1.5 2.5 2.4 3 1.4 0 2 0 0 0 0 2.3 Buses 0 33 1 34 0 4 1 5 6 44 0 50 0 0 0 0 89
% Buses 0 1.3 0.3 1.2 0 0.5 0.1 0.2 0.4 2.3 0 1.5 0 0 0 0 1.1 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM
07:45 AM 0 208 33 241 50 65 121 236 143 178 0 321 0 0 0 0 798 08:00 AM 0 213 37 250 51 62 101 214 134 200 0 334 0 0 0 0 798 08:15 AM 0 228 34 262 40 74 80 194 151 168 0 319 0 0 0 0 775 08:30 AM 0 233 32 265 54 64 86 204 111 179 0 290 0 0 0 0 759 Total Volume 0 882 136 1018 195 265 388 848 539 725 0 1264 0 0 0 0 3130 % App. Total 0 86.6 13.4 23 31.2 45.8 42.6 57.4 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .946 .919 .960 .903 .895 .802 .898 .892 .906 .000 .946 .000 .000 .000 .000 .981 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
136
Thru
882
Left
0 InOut Total
1113 1018 2131
Right
388
Thru
265
Left
195
OutTotal In
0 848 848
Left
539
Thru
725
Right
0 Out TotalIn
1077 1264 2341
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
940 0 940
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:15 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:00 AM
+0 mins. 0 228 34 262 50 65 121 236 143 178 0 321 0 0 0 0 +15 mins. 0 233 32 265 51 62 101 214 134 200 0 334 0 0 0 0 +30 mins. 0 235 35 270 40 74 80 194 151 168 0 319 0 0 0 0 +45 mins. 0 262 31 293 54 64 86 204 111 179 0 290 0 0 0 0 Total Volume 0 958 132 1090 195 265 388 848 539 725 0 1264 0 0 0 0 % App. Total 0 87.9 12.1 23 31.2 45.8 42.6 57.4 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .914 .943 .930 .903 .895 .802 .898 .892 .906 .000 .946 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 154 37 191 32 65 73 170 127 103 0 230 0 0 0 0 591 07:15 AM 0 155 28 183 40 62 65 167 163 118 0 281 0 0 0 0 631 07:30 AM 0 197 29 226 29 50 89 168 114 146 0 260 0 0 0 0 654 07:45 AM 0 205 29 234 48 63 119 230 137 172 0 309 0 0 0 0 773 Total 0 711 123 834 149 240 346 735 541 539 0 1080 0 0 0 0 2649 08:00 AM 0 206 36 242 50 62 99 211 130 197 0 327 0 0 0 0 780 08:15 AM 0 216 34 250 38 73 78 189 147 159 0 306 0 0 0 0 745 08:30 AM 0 224 28 252 51 64 84 199 110 174 0 284 0 0 0 0 735 08:45 AM 0 227 33 260 56 66 87 209 92 160 0 252 0 0 0 0 721 Total 0 873 131 1004 195 265 348 808 479 690 0 1169 0 0 0 0 2981 09:00 AM 0 251 30 281 45 63 70 178 103 159 0 262 0 0 0 0 721 09:15 AM 0 207 23 230 45 70 69 184 67 181 0 248 0 0 0 0 662 09:30 AM 0 193 27 220 47 51 59 157 90 133 0 223 0 0 0 0 600 09:45 AM 0 199 26 225 43 41 40 124 47 181 0 228 0 0 0 0 577 Total 0 850 106 956 180 225 238 643 307 654 0 961 0 0 0 0 2560 Grand Total 0 2434 360 2794 524 730 932 2186 1327 1883 0 3210 0 0 0 0 8190 Apprch % 0 87.1 12.9 24 33.4 42.6 41.3 58.7 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 29.7 4.4 34.1 6.4 8.9 11.4 26.7 16.2 23 0 39.2 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM
07:45 AM 0 205 29 234 48 63 119 230 137 172 0 309 0 0 0 0 773 08:00 AM 0 206 36 242 50 62 99 211 130 197 0 327 0 0 0 0 780 08:15 AM 0 216 34 250 38 73 78 189 147 159 0 306 0 0 0 0 745 08:30 AM 0 224 28 252 51 64 84 199 110 174 0 284 0 0 0 0 735 Total Volume 0 851 127 978 187 262 380 829 524 702 0 1226 0 0 0 0 3033 % App. Total 0 87 13 22.6 31.6 45.8 42.7 57.3 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .950 .882 .970 .917 .897 .798 .901 .891 .891 .000 .937 .000 .000 .000 .000 .972 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
127
Thru
851
Left
0 InOut Total
1082 978 2060
Right
380
Thru
262
Left
187
OutTotal In
0 829 829
Left
524
Thru
702
Right
0 Out TotalIn
1038 1226 2264
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
913 0 913
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 0 205 29 234 48 63 119 230 137 172 0 309 0 0 0 0 +15 mins. 0 206 36 242 50 62 99 211 130 197 0 327 0 0 0 0 +30 mins. 0 216 34 250 38 73 78 189 147 159 0 306 0 0 0 0 +45 mins. 0 224 28 252 51 64 84 199 110 174 0 284 0 0 0 0 Total Volume 0 851 127 978 187 262 380 829 524 702 0 1226 0 0 0 0 % App. Total 0 87 13 22.6 31.6 45.8 42.7 57.3 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .950 .882 .970 .917 .897 .798 .901 .891 .891 .000 .937 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 6 1 7 1 2 1 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 12
07:15 AM 0 2 1 3 0 1 3 4 1 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 13
07:30 AM 0 3 0 3 3 2 5 10 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 22
07:45 AM 0 1 4 5 2 2 2 6 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 20
Total 0 12 6 18 6 7 11 24 14 11 0 25 0 0 0 0 67
08:00 AM 0 5 1 6 1 0 2 3 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 14
08:15 AM 0 7 0 7 2 1 2 5 3 5 0 8 0 0 0 0 20
08:30 AM 0 5 4 9 3 0 2 5 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 18
08:45 AM 0 7 2 9 0 0 1 1 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 15
Total 0 24 7 31 6 1 7 14 12 10 0 22 0 0 0 0 67
09:00 AM 0 5 1 6 6 1 2 9 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 24
09:15 AM 0 6 1 7 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 12
09:30 AM 0 4 0 4 2 1 1 4 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 11
09:45 AM 0 4 2 6 0 1 3 4 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 14
Total 0 19 4 23 8 3 6 17 15 6 0 21 0 0 0 0 61
Grand Total 0 55 17 72 20 11 24 55 41 27 0 68 0 0 0 0 195 Apprch % 0 76.4 23.6 36.4 20 43.6 60.3 39.7 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 28.2 8.7 36.9 10.3 5.6 12.3 28.2 21 13.8 0 34.9 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM
07:45 AM 0 1 4 5 2 2 2 6 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0 20
08:00 AM 0 5 1 6 1 0 2 3 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 14
08:15 AM 0 7 0 7 2 1 2 5 3 5 0 8 0 0 0 0 20
08:30 AM 0 5 4 9 3 0 2 5 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 18
Total Volume 0 18 9 27 8 3 8 19 14 12 0 26 0 0 0 0 72
% App. Total 0 66.7 33.3 42.1 15.8 42.1 53.8 46.2 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .643 .563 .750 .667 .375 1.00 .792 .583 .600 .000 .722 .000 .000 .000 .000 .900 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
9 Thru
18 Left
0 InOut Total
20 27 47
Right
8 Thru
3 Left
8 OutTotal In
0 19 19
Left
14 Thru
12 Right
0 Out TotalIn
26 26 52
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
26 0 26
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 0 1 4 5 2 2 2 6 6 3 0 9 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 5 1 6 1 0 2 3 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 7 0 7 2 1 2 5 3 5 0 8 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 5 4 9 3 0 2 5 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 18 9 27 8 3 8 19 14 12 0 26 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 0 66.7 33.3 42.1 15.8 42.1 53.8 46.2 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .643 .563 .750 .667 .375 1.000 .792 .583 .600 .000 .722 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 5 0 5 0 3 1 4 1 5 0 6 0 0 0 0 15
07:15 AM 0 2 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 7
07:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 8 0 0 0 0 9
07:45 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 5
Total 0 10 1 11 0 4 1 5 3 17 0 20 0 0 0 0 36
08:00 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:15 AM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
08:30 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
08:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 5
Total 0 12 0 12 0 0 0 0 1 12 0 13 0 0 0 0 25
09:00 AM 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 10
09:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 5
09:30 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 8
09:45 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 5
Total 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 2 15 0 17 0 0 0 0 28
Grand Total 0 33 1 34 0 4 1 5 6 44 0 50 0 0 0 0 89
Apprch % 0 97.1 2.9 0 80 20 12 88 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 37.1 1.1 38.2 0 4.5 1.1 5.6 6.7 49.4 0 56.2 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM
07:45 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 5
08:00 AM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:15 AM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
08:30 AM 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 6
Total Volume 0 13 0 13 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 12 0 0 0 0 25
% App. Total 0 100 0 0 0 0 8.3 91.7 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .650 .000 .650 .000 .000 .000 .000 .250 .688 .000 .600 .000 .000 .000 .000 .625 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
13 Left
0 InOut Total
11 13 24
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
0 0 0
Left
1 Thru
11 Right
0 Out TotalIn
13 12 25
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
1 0 1
Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:45 AM to 08:30 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM
+0 mins. 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 13 0 13 0 0 0 0 1 11 0 12 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 0 100 0 0 0 0 8.3 91.7 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .650 .000 .650 .000 .000 .000 .000 .250 .688 .000 .600 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 232 31 263 52 4 61 117 68 217 0 285 0 0 0 0 665 03:15 PM 0 244 33 277 56 2 66 124 90 193 0 283 0 0 0 0 684 03:30 PM 0 255 25 280 72 4 65 141 70 221 0 291 0 0 0 0 712 03:45 PM 0 254 21 275 92 0 81 173 69 233 0 302 0 0 0 0 750 Total 0 985 110 1095 272 10 273 555 297 864 0 1161 0 0 0 0 2811 04:00 PM 0 292 30 322 75 1 67 143 76 205 0 281 0 0 0 0 746 04:15 PM 0 289 36 325 93 1 78 172 79 199 0 278 0 0 0 0 775 04:30 PM 0 263 22 285 96 1 81 178 71 193 0 264 0 0 0 0 727 04:45 PM 0 238 21 259 111 0 103 214 87 209 0 296 0 0 0 0 769 Total 0 1082 109 1191 375 3 329 707 313 806 0 1119 0 0 0 0 3017 05:00 PM 0 292 23 315 95 1 102 198 70 215 0 285 0 0 0 0 798 05:15 PM 0 232 25 257 74 3 90 167 82 199 0 281 0 0 0 0 705 05:30 PM 0 261 20 281 98 1 112 211 75 211 0 286 0 0 0 0 778 05:45 PM 0 253 26 279 99 2 110 211 69 176 0 245 0 0 0 0 735 Total 0 1038 94 1132 366 7 414 787 296 801 0 1097 0 0 0 0 3016 Grand Total 0 3105 313 3418 1013 20 1016 2049 906 2471 0 3377 0 0 0 0 8844 Apprch % 0 90.8 9.2 49.4 1 49.6 26.8 73.2 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 35.1 3.5 38.6 11.5 0.2 11.5 23.2 10.2 27.9 0 38.2 0 0 0 0 Passenger Vehicles 0 3028 305 3333 1000 20 1009 2029 885 2403 0 3288 0 0 0 0 8650 % Passenger Vehicles 0 97.5 97.4 97.5 98.7 100 99.3 99 97.7 97.2 0 97.4 0 0 0 0 97.8 Dual Wheeled 0 48 7 55 12 0 6 18 18 26 0 44 0 0 0 0 117 % Dual Wheeled 0 1.5 2.2 1.6 1.2 0 0.6 0.9 2 1.1 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 1.3 Buses 0 29 1 30 1 0 1 2 3 42 0 45 0 0 0 0 77
% Buses 0 0.9 0.3 0.9 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.7 0 1.3 0 0 0 0 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 289 36 325 93 1 78 172 79 199 0 278 0 0 0 0 775 04:30 PM 0 263 22 285 96 1 81 178 71 193 0 264 0 0 0 0 727 04:45 PM 0 238 21 259 111 0 103 214 87 209 0 296 0 0 0 0 769 05:00 PM 0 292 23 315 95 1 102 198 70 215 0 285 0 0 0 0 798 Total Volume 0 1082 102 1184 395 3 364 762 307 816 0 1123 0 0 0 0 3069 % App. Total 0 91.4 8.6 51.8 0.4 47.8 27.3 72.7 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .926 .708 .911 .890 .750 .883 .890 .882 .949 .000 .948 .000 .000 .000 .000 .961 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
102
Thru
1082
Left
0 InOut Total
1180 1184 2364
Right
364
Thru
3 Left
395
OutTotal In
0 762 762
Left
307
Thru
816
Right
0 Out TotalIn
1477 1123 2600
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
412 0 412
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:45 PM 04:45 PM 03:00 PM 03:00 PM
+0 mins. 0 254 21 275 111 0 103 214 68 217 0 285 0 0 0 0 +15 mins. 0 292 30 322 95 1 102 198 90 193 0 283 0 0 0 0 +30 mins. 0 289 36 325 74 3 90 167 70 221 0 291 0 0 0 0 +45 mins. 0 263 22 285 98 1 112 211 69 233 0 302 0 0 0 0 Total Volume 0 1098 109 1207 378 5 407 790 297 864 0 1161 0 0 0 0 % App. Total 0 91 9 47.8 0.6 51.5 25.6 74.4 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .940 .757 .928 .851 .417 .908 .923 .825 .927 .000 .961 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 224 31 255 52 4 61 117 66 213 0 279 0 0 0 0 651 03:15 PM 0 238 31 269 56 2 66 124 84 185 0 269 0 0 0 0 662 03:30 PM 0 248 25 273 70 4 63 137 68 215 0 283 0 0 0 0 693 03:45 PM 0 243 21 264 91 0 80 171 68 226 0 294 0 0 0 0 729 Total 0 953 108 1061 269 10 270 549 286 839 0 1125 0 0 0 0 2735 04:00 PM 0 286 29 315 72 1 66 139 74 202 0 276 0 0 0 0 730 04:15 PM 0 279 34 313 92 1 77 170 78 192 0 270 0 0 0 0 753 04:30 PM 0 258 19 277 93 1 81 175 68 185 0 253 0 0 0 0 705 04:45 PM 0 233 21 254 110 0 101 211 84 202 0 286 0 0 0 0 751 Total 0 1056 103 1159 367 3 325 695 304 781 0 1085 0 0 0 0 2939 05:00 PM 0 286 23 309 94 1 102 197 70 209 0 279 0 0 0 0 785 05:15 PM 0 226 25 251 73 3 90 166 81 195 0 276 0 0 0 0 693 05:30 PM 0 257 20 277 98 1 112 211 75 206 0 281 0 0 0 0 769 05:45 PM 0 250 26 276 99 2 110 211 69 173 0 242 0 0 0 0 729 Total 0 1019 94 1113 364 7 414 785 295 783 0 1078 0 0 0 0 2976 Grand Total 0 3028 305 3333 1000 20 1009 2029 885 2403 0 3288 0 0 0 0 8650 Apprch % 0 90.8 9.2 49.3 1 49.7 26.9 73.1 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 35 3.5 38.5 11.6 0.2 11.7 23.5 10.2 27.8 0 38 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 279 34 313 92 1 77 170 78 192 0 270 0 0 0 0 753 04:30 PM 0 258 19 277 93 1 81 175 68 185 0 253 0 0 0 0 705 04:45 PM 0 233 21 254 110 0 101 211 84 202 0 286 0 0 0 0 751 05:00 PM 0 286 23 309 94 1 102 197 70 209 0 279 0 0 0 0 785 Total Volume 0 1056 97 1153 389 3 361 753 300 788 0 1088 0 0 0 0 2994 % App. Total 0 91.6 8.4 51.7 0.4 47.9 27.6 72.4 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .923 .713 .921 .884 .750 .885 .892 .893 .943 .000 .951 .000 .000 .000 .000 .954 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
97 Thru
1056
Left
0 InOut Total
1149 1153 2302
Right
361
Thru
3 Left
389
OutTotal In
0 753 753
Left
300
Thru
788
Right
0 Out TotalIn
1445 1088 2533
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
400 0 400
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM
+0 mins. 0 279 34 313 92 1 77 170 78 192 0 270 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 258 19 277 93 1 81 175 68 185 0 253 0 0 0 0 +30 mins. 0 233 21 254 110 0 101 211 84 202 0 286 0 0 0 0 +45 mins. 0 286 23 309 94 1 102 197 70 209 0 279 0 0 0 0 Total Volume 0 1056 97 1153 389 3 361 753 300 788 0 1088 0 0 0 0 % App. Total 0 91.6 8.4 51.7 0.4 47.9 27.6 72.4 0 0 0 0 PHF .000 .923 .713 .921 .884 .750 .885 .892 .893 .943 .000 .951 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 10
03:15 PM 0 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 6 6 0 12 0 0 0 0 17
03:30 PM 0 4 0 4 2 0 2 4 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 12
03:45 PM 0 8 0 8 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 12
Total 0 21 2 23 3 0 3 6 11 11 0 22 0 0 0 0 51
04:00 PM 0 3 1 4 2 0 1 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 9
04:15 PM 0 5 2 7 1 0 1 2 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 13
04:30 PM 0 4 2 6 3 0 0 3 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 14
04:45 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 1 2 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
Total 0 15 5 20 7 0 3 10 7 9 0 16 0 0 0 0 46
05:00 PM 0 5 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 10
05:15 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
05:30 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3
05:45 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3
Total 0 12 0 12 2 0 0 2 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 20
Grand Total 0 48 7 55 12 0 6 18 18 26 0 44 0 0 0 0 117
Apprch % 0 87.3 12.7 66.7 0 33.3 40.9 59.1 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 41 6 47 10.3 0 5.1 15.4 15.4 22.2 0 37.6 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 5 2 7 1 0 1 2 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0 13
04:30 PM 0 4 2 6 3 0 0 3 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 14
04:45 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 1 2 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 10
05:00 PM 0 5 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 10
Total Volume 0 17 4 21 6 0 2 8 5 13 0 18 0 0 0 0 47
% App. Total 0 81 19 75 0 25 27.8 72.2 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .850 .500 .750 .500 .000 .500 .667 .417 .813 .000 .900 .000 .000 .000 .000 .839 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
4 Thru
17 Left
0 InOut Total
15 21 36
Right
2 Thru
0 Left
6 OutTotal In
0 8 8
Left
5 Thru
13 Right
0 Out TotalIn
23 18 41
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
9 0 9
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM
+0 mins. 0 5 2 7 1 0 1 2 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 4 2 6 3 0 0 3 3 2 0 5 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 3 0 3 1 0 1 2 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 5 0 5 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 17 4 21 6 0 2 8 5 13 0 18 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 0 81 19 75 0 25 27.8 72.2 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .850 .500 .750 .500 .000 .500 .667 .417 .813 .000 .900 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
03:15 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 5
03:30 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 7
03:45 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 9
Total 0 11 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 14 0 0 0 0 25
04:00 PM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 7
04:15 PM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 9
04:30 PM 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 8
04:45 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 8
Total 0 11 1 12 1 0 1 2 2 16 0 18 0 0 0 0 32
05:00 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
05:15 PM 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 8
05:30 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 6
05:45 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
Total 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 1 12 0 13 0 0 0 0 20
Grand Total 0 29 1 30 1 0 1 2 3 42 0 45 0 0 0 0 77
Apprch % 0 96.7 3.3 50 0 50 6.7 93.3 0 0 0 0
Total % 0 37.7 1.3 39 1.3 0 1.3 2.6 3.9 54.5 0 58.4 0 0 0 0 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:15 PM
04:15 PM 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0 9
04:30 PM 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0 8
04:45 PM 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 8
05:00 PM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
Total Volume 0 9 1 10 0 0 1 1 2 15 0 17 0 0 0 0 28
% App. Total 0 90 10 0 0 100 11.8 88.2 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .450 .250 .500 .000 .000 .250 .250 .250 .625 .000 .708 .000 .000 .000 .000 .778 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 03_CVC_Jefferson_405N PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: I-405 Northbound Ramps
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
I-405 Northbound On Ramp
I-405 Northbound Off Ramp
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
1 Thru
9 Left
0 InOut Total
16 10 26
Right
1 Thru
0 Left
0 OutTotal In
0 1 1
Left
2 Thru
15 Right
0 Out TotalIn
9 17 26
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
3 0 3
Peak Hour Begins at 04:15 PM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:15 PM to 05:00 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM 04:15 PM
+0 mins. 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 9 1 10 0 0 1 1 2 15 0 17 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 0 90 10 0 0 100 11.8 88.2 0 0 0 0
PHF .000 .450 .250 .500 .000 .000 .250 .250 .250 .625 .000 .708 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
City Of Los Angeles
Department Of Transportation

MANUAL TRAFFIC COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South Jefferson Boulevard
East/West I-405 Northbound Ramps
Day: Date: Weather: CLEAR
Hours: 7-10AM 3-6PM Staff: CUI
School Day: YES District: Culver City I/S CODE 0

N/B S/B E/B W/B
DUAL-
WHEELED 112 127 0 73
BIKES 01 6 7
BUSES 95 64 0 7

N/B TIM E S/B TIM E E/B TIM E W/B TIM E
AM PK 15 MIN 334 8.00 293 9.00 0 7.00 236 7.45
PM PK 15 MIN 302 3.45 325 4.15 0 3.00 214 4.45
AM PK HOUR 1264 7.45 1090 8.15 0 7.00 848 7.45
PM PK HOUR 1161 3.00 1207 3.45 0 3.00 790 4.45
NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL XING S/L XING N/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total N-S Pe d Sch Ped Sch 7-8 558 567 0 1125 7-8 0 733 130 863 1988 00 0 0
8-9 492 712 0 1204 8-9 0 909 138 1047 2251 00 1 0
9-10 324 675 0 999 9-10 0 880 110 990 1989 00 4 0
3-4 297 864 0 1161 3-4 0 985 110 1095 2256 00 0 0
4-5 313 806 0 1119 4-5 0 1082 109 1191 2310 00 0 0
5-6 296 801 0 1097 5-6 0 1038 94 1132 2229 00 0 1
TOTAL 2280 4425 0 6705 TOTAL 0 5627 691 6318 13023 0 0 5 1 EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL XING W/L XING E/L Hours L t Th Rt Total Hours L t Th Rt Total E- W Ped Sch Ped Sch 7-8 000 0 7-8 155 251 358 764 764 00 5 0
8-9 000 0 8-9 201 266 355 822 822 0 0 11 0
9-10 000 0 9-10 188 228 244 660 660 00 6 0
3-4 000 0 3-4 272 10 273 555 555 2 0 11 1
4-5 000 0 4-5 375 3 329 707 707 0 0 15 3
5-6 000 0 5-6 366 7 414 787 787 00 3 1
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1557 765 1973 4295 4295 2 0 51 5
(Rev Oct 06)
November 25, 2018Wednesday

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
BICYCLE COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:

NORTHBOUND Approach SOUTHBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total N‐S
7‐8 0 0 0 0 7‐8 0 0 0 0 0
8‐9 0 0 0 0 8‐9 0 0 0 0 0
9‐10 0 0 0 0 9‐10 0 0 0 0 0
3‐4 0 0 0 0 3‐4 0 0 0 0 0
4‐5 0 0 0 0 4‐5 0 1 0 1 1
5‐6 0 0 0 0 5‐6 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 0 1 1
EASTBOUND Approach WESTBOUND Approach TOTAL
Hours Lt Th Rt Total Hours Lt Th Rt Total E‐W
7‐8 0 1 0 1 7‐8 0 0 0 0 1
8‐9 0 2 0 2 8‐9 0 0 0 0 2
9‐10 0 0 0 0 9‐10 0 2 0 2 2
3‐4 0 2 0 2 3‐4 0 2 0 2 4
4‐5 0 1 0 1 4‐5 0 3 0 3 4
5‐6 0 0 0 0 5‐6 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 6 0 6 TOTAL 0 7 0 7 13
REMARKS (6 hour total):

NB SB EB WB TOTAL
‐ Female Riders 00202
‐ No helmet riders 0165 1 2
‐ Sidewalk Riding 00516
‐ Wrong way riding 01124
NB: Northbound, SB: Southbound, EB: Eastbound, WB: Westbound, I/S: Intersection Source: CUI LADOT 2015 CMP
CLEAR
0 Jefferson Boulevard
I‐405 Northbound Ramps
Date:

District:

Wednesday
Yes
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM
11/25/2018
Culver City
CUI     Staff:

City of Los Angeles
Department of Transportation
PEDESTRIAN COUNT SUMMARY
STREET:

North/South:

East/West:

Day:      Weather:

School Day:      I/S Code:

Hours:
15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 15 Min. Interval N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL 7:00‐7:15 0020 2 3:00‐3:15 00821 0
7:15‐7:30 0010 1 3:15‐3:30 0042 6
7:30‐7:45 0010 1 3:30‐3:45 0 0 10 0 10
7:45‐8:00 0010 1 3:45‐4:00 0000 0
8:00‐8:15 1020 3 4:00‐4:15 0 0 10 0 10
8:15‐8:30 0010 1 4:15‐4:30 0060 6
8:30‐8:45 0070 7 4:30‐4:45 0040 4
8:45‐9:00 0010 1 4:45‐5:00 0 0 10 0 10
9:00‐9:15 2020 4 5:00‐5:15 1040 5
9:15‐9:30 2030 5 5:15‐5:30 0020 2
9:30‐9:45 0000 0 5:30‐5:45 0000 0
9:45‐10:00 0010 1 5:45‐6:00 0000 0
Hours Hours
7 ‐ 8 0050 5 3 ‐ 4 0 0 22 4 26
8 ‐ 9 1 0 11 0 12 4 ‐ 5 0 0 30 0 30
9 ‐ 10 40601 0 5 ‐ 6 1060 7
TOTAL 5 0 22 0 27 1 0 58 4 63
REMARKS (6 hour total):

N‐LEG S‐LEG E‐LEG W‐LEG TOTAL
‐ Wheelchair/special needs assistance 00011
‐ Skateboard/scooter 01135
N: North, S: South, E: East, W: West, I/S: Intersection Source:

CUI
Jefferson Boulevard
I‐405 Northbound Ramps
Wednesday      Date: ################ CLEAR
LADOT 2015 CMP
AM PEAK PERIOD PM PEAK PERIOD
YES      District: Culver City 0
7‐10 AM, 3‐6 PM      Staff:

File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 1 114 6 121 72 29 0 101 8 141 24 173 0 4 16 20 415 07:15 AM 0 137 5 142 47 32 0 79 21 161 26 208 0 2 16 18 447 07:30 AM 0 175 7 182 40 39 1 80 22 195 31 248 2 5 22 29 539 07:45 AM 4 160 6 170 57 63 0 120 37 240 31 308 0 9 18 27 625 Total 5 586 24 615 216 163 1 380 88 737 112 937 2 20 72 94 2026 08:00 AM 3 187 9 199 57 45 0 102 26 212 37 275 0 9 31 40 616 08:15 AM 4 166 17 187 71 69 0 140 25 207 29 261 8 12 21 41 629 08:30 AM 6 180 23 209 44 66 0 110 34 210 38 282 6 29 27 62 663 08:45 AM 4 166 8 178 79 33 0 112 20 180 37 237 12 50 41 103 630 Total 17 699 57 773 251 213 0 464 105 809 141 1055 26 100 120 246 2538 09:00 AM 2 188 9 199 54 19 0 73 18 189 37 244 1 21 22 44 560 09:15 AM 4 168 7 179 42 18 0 60 9 182 54 245 3 11 21 35 519 09:30 AM 4 159 5 168 52 13 0 65 17 150 44 211 5 12 10 27 471 09:45 AM 9 170 5 184 38 10 0 48 11 152 57 220 2 6 20 28 480 Total 19 685 26 730 186 60 0 246 55 673 192 920 11 50 73 134 2030 Grand Total 41 1970 107 2118 653 436 1 1090 248 2219 445 2912 39 170 265 474 6594 Apprch % 1.9 93 5.1 59.9 40 0.1 8.5 76.2 15.3 8.2 35.9 55.9 Total % 0.6 29.9 1.6 32.1 9.9 6.6 0 16.5 3.8 33.7 6.7 44.2 0.6 2.6 4 7.2 Passenger Vehicles 41 1916 107 2064 602 427 1 1030 242 2155 405 2802 36 165 255 456 6352 % Passenger Vehicles 100 97.3 100 97.5 92.2 97.9 100 94.5 97.6 97.1 91 96.2 92.3 97.1 96.2 96.2 96.3 Dual Wheeled 0 50 0 50 21 9 0 30 6 55 6 67 3 5 10 18 165 % Dual Wheeled 0 2.5 0 2.4 3.2 2.1 0 2.8 2.4 2.5 1.3 2.3 7.7 2.9 3.8 3.8 2.5 Buses 0 4 0 4 30 0 0 30 0 9 34 43 0 0 0 0 77
% Buses 0 0.2 0 0.2 4.6 0 0 2.8 0 0.4 7.6 1.5 0 0 0 0 1.2 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM
08:00 AM 3 187 9 199 57 45 0 102 26 212 37 275 0 9 31 40 616 08:15 AM 4 166 17 187 71 69 0 140 25 207 29 261 8 12 21 41 629 08:30 AM 6 180 23 209 44 66 0 110 34 210 38 282 6 29 27 62 663 08:45 AM 4 166 8 178 79 33 0 112 20 180 37 237 12 50 41 103 630 Total Volume 17 699 57 773 251 213 0 464 105 809 141 1055 26 100 120 246 2538 % App. Total 2.2 90.4 7.4 54.1 45.9 0 10 76.7 13.4 10.6 40.7 48.8 PHF .708 .934 .620 .925 .794 .772 .000 .829 .772 .954 .928 .935 .542 .500 .732 .597 .957 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
57 Thru
699
Left
17 InOut Total
835 773 1608
Right
0 Thru
213
Left
251
OutTotal In
258 464 722
Left
105
Thru
809
Right
141
Out TotalIn
1070 1055 2125
Left
26 Thru
100
Right
120
TotalOut In
375 246 621
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 09:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:00 AM 07:45 AM 07:45 AM 08:15 AM
+0 mins. 3 187 9 199 57 63 0 120 37 240 31 308 8 12 21 41 +15 mins. 4 166 17 187 57 45 0 102 26 212 37 275 6 29 27 62 +30 mins. 6 180 23 209 71 69 0 140 25 207 29 261 12 50 41 103 +45 mins. 4 166 8 178 44 66 0 110 34 210 38 282 1 21 22 44 Total Volume 17 699 57 773 229 243 0 472 122 869 135 1126 27 112 111 250 % App. Total 2.2 90.4 7.4 48.5 51.5 0 10.8 77.2 12 10.8 44.8 44.4 PHF .708 .934 .620 .925 .806 .880 .000 .843 .824 .905 .888 .914 .563 .560 .677 .607 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 1 111 6 118 67 29 0 96 8 137 20 165 0 4 12 16 395 07:15 AM 0 135 5 140 43 31 0 74 20 155 22 197 0 2 16 18 429 07:30 AM 0 172 7 179 38 39 1 78 22 184 26 232 2 3 22 27 516 07:45 AM 4 157 6 167 53 61 0 114 35 229 29 293 0 8 18 26 600 Total 5 575 24 604 201 160 1 362 85 705 97 887 2 17 68 87 1940 08:00 AM 3 181 9 193 53 45 0 98 25 209 35 269 0 8 29 37 597 08:15 AM 4 158 17 179 63 69 0 132 25 198 25 248 8 12 21 41 600 08:30 AM 6 174 23 203 40 64 0 104 33 207 36 276 5 29 27 61 644 08:45 AM 4 161 8 173 76 32 0 108 20 177 35 232 11 50 41 102 615 Total 17 674 57 748 232 210 0 442 103 791 131 1025 24 99 118 241 2456 09:00 AM 2 185 9 196 47 16 0 63 17 185 32 234 1 20 19 40 533 09:15 AM 4 162 7 173 41 18 0 59 9 178 52 239 3 11 21 35 506 09:30 AM 4 156 5 165 47 13 0 60 17 147 40 204 5 12 9 26 455 09:45 AM 9 164 5 178 34 10 0 44 11 149 53 213 1 6 20 27 462 Total 19 667 26 712 169 57 0 226 54 659 177 890 10 49 69 128 1956 Grand Total 41 1916 107 2064 602 427 1 1030 242 2155 405 2802 36 165 255 456 6352 Apprch % 2 92.8 5.2 58.4 41.5 0.1 8.6 76.9 14.5 7.9 36.2 55.9 Total % 0.6 30.2 1.7 32.5 9.5 6.7 0 16.2 3.8 33.9 6.4 44.1 0.6 2.6 4 7.2 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM
08:00 AM 3 181 9 193 53 45 0 98 25 209 35 269 0 8 29 37 597 08:15 AM 4 158 17 179 63 69 0 132 25 198 25 248 8 12 21 41 600 08:30 AM 6 174 23 203 40 64 0 104 33 207 36 276 5 29 27 61 644 08:45 AM 4 161 8 173 76 32 0 108 20 177 35 232 11 50 41 102 615 Total Volume 17 674 57 748 232 210 0 442 103 791 131 1025 24 99 118 241 2456 % App. Total 2.3 90.1 7.6 52.5 47.5 0 10 77.2 12.8 10 41.1 49 PHF .708 .931 .620 .921 .763 .761 .000 .837 .780 .946 .910 .928 .545 .495 .720 .591 .953 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
57 Thru
674
Left
17 InOut Total
815 748 1563
Right
0 Thru
210
Left
232
OutTotal In
247 442 689
Left
103
Thru
791
Right
131
Out TotalIn
1024 1025 2049
Left
24 Thru
99 Right
118
TotalOut In
370 241 611
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM

Passenger Vehicles
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM
+0 mins. 3 181 9 193 53 45 0 98 25 209 35 269 0 8 29 37 +15 mins. 4 158 17 179 63 69 0 132 25 198 25 248 8 12 21 41 +30 mins. 6 174 23 203 40 64 0 104 33 207 36 276 5 29 27 61 +45 mins. 4 161 8 173 76 32 0 108 20 177 35 232 11 50 41 102 Total Volume 17 674 57 748 232 210 0 442 103 791 131 1025 24 99 118 241 % App. Total 2.3 90.1 7.6 52.5 47.5 0 10 77.2 12.8 10 41.1 49 PHF .708 .931 .620 .921 .763 .761 .000 .837 .780 .946 .910 .928 .545 .495 .720 .591 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Dual Wheeled
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 4 9
07:15 AM 0 2 0 2 1 1 0 2 1 5 3 9 0 0 0 0 13
07:30 AM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 9 0 9 0 2 0 2 15
07:45 AM 0 3 0 3 2 2 0 4 2 10 0 12 0 1 0 1 20
Total 0 10 0 10 5 3 0 8 3 26 3 32 0 3 4 7 57
08:00 AM 0 6 0 6 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 4 0 1 2 3 15
08:15 AM 0 5 0 5 4 0 0 4 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 0 18
08:30 AM 0 6 0 6 2 2 0 4 1 3 0 4 1 0 0 1 15
08:45 AM 0 5 0 5 2 1 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 12
Total 0 22 0 22 10 3 0 13 2 17 1 20 2 1 2 5 60
09:00 AM 0 3 0 3 1 3 0 4 1 3 1 5 0 1 3 4 16
09:15 AM 0 6 0 6 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 10
09:30 AM 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 1 8
09:45 AM 0 6 0 6 3 0 0 3 0 3 1 4 1 0 0 1 14
Total 0 18 0 18 6 3 0 9 1 12 2 15 1 1 4 6 48
Grand Total 0 50 0 50 21 9 0 30 6 55 6 67 3 5 10 18 165 Apprch % 0 100 0 70 30 0 9 82.1 9 16.7 27.8 55.6
Total % 0 30.3 0 30.3 12.7 5.5 0 18.2 3.6 33.3 3.6 40.6 1.8 3 6.1 10.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM
08:00 AM 0 6 0 6 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 4 0 1 2 3 15
08:15 AM 0 5 0 5 4 0 0 4 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 0 18
08:30 AM 0 6 0 6 2 2 0 4 1 3 0 4 1 0 0 1 15
08:45 AM 0 5 0 5 2 1 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1 12
Total Volume 0 22 0 22 10 3 0 13 2 17 1 20 2 1 2 5 60
% App. Total 0 100 0 76.9 23.1 0 10 85 5 40 20 40
PHF .000 .917 .000 .917 .625 .375 .000 .813 .500 .531 .250 .556 .500 .250 .250 .417 .833 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
22 Left
0 InOut Total
19 22 41
Right
0 Thru
3 Left
10 OutTotal In
2 13 15
Left
2 Thru
17 Right
1 Out TotalIn
34 20 54
Left
2 Thru
1 Right
2 TotalOut In
5 5 10
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM

Dual Wheeled
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM
+0 mins. 0 6 0 6 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 4 0 1 2 3
+15 mins. 0 5 0 5 4 0 0 4 0 8 1 9 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 6 0 6 2 2 0 4 1 3 0 4 1 0 0 1
+45 mins. 0 5 0 5 2 1 0 3 0 3 0 3 1 0 0 1
Total Volume 0 22 0 22 10 3 0 13 2 17 1 20 2 1 2 5
% App. Total 0 100 0 76.9 23.1 0 10 85 5 40 20 40
PHF .000 .917 .000 .917 .625 .375 .000 .813 .500 .531 .250 .556 .500 .250 .250 .417 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Buses
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 1 0 1 4 0 0 4 0 2 4 6 0 0 0 0 11
07:15 AM 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 5
07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 5 7 0 0 0 0 8
07:45 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 5
Total 0 1 0 1 10 0 0 10 0 6 12 18 0 0 0 0 29
08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:15 AM 0 3 0 3 4 0 0 4 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 11
08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 3
Total 0 3 0 3 9 0 0 9 0 1 9 10 0 0 0 0 22
09:00 AM 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6 0 1 4 5 0 0 0 0 11
09:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 3
09:30 AM 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 8
09:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 4
Total 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 11 0 2 13 15 0 0 0 0 26
Grand Total 0 4 0 4 30 0 0 30 0 9 34 43 0 0 0 0 77
Apprch % 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 20.9 79.1 0 0 0
Total % 0 5.2 0 5.2 39 0 0 39 0 11.7 44.2 55.8 0 0 0 0
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 08:00 AM
08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:15 AM 0 3 0 3 4 0 0 4 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 0 11
08:30 AM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 4
08:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 3
Total Volume 0 3 0 3 9 0 0 9 0 1 9 10 0 0 0 0 22
% App. Total 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 10 90 0 0 0
PHF .000 .250 .000 .250 .563 .000 .000 .563 .000 .250 .750 .625 .000 .000 .000 .000 .500 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson AM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
0 Thru
3 Left
0 InOut Total
1 3 4
Right
0 Thru
0 Left
9 OutTotal In
9 9 18
Left
0 Thru
1 Right
9 Out TotalIn
12 10 22
Left
0 Thru
0 Right
0 TotalOut In
0 0 0
Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM

Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 08:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM 08:00 AM
+0 mins. 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
+15 mins. 0 3 0 3 4 0 0 4 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 0
+30 mins. 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
+45 mins. 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0
Total Volume 0 3 0 3 9 0 0 9 0 1 9 10 0 0 0 0
% App. Total 0 100 0 100 0 0 0 10 90 0 0 0
PHF .000 .250 .000 .250 .563 .000 .000 .563 .000 .250 .750 .625 .000 .000 .000 .000 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles - Dual Wheeled - Buses Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 10 174 13 197 70 18 0 88 21 201 55 277 5 16 34 55 617 03:15 PM 8 169 10 187 71 20 0 91 16 167 57 240 3 21 33 57 575 03:30 PM 16 157 15 188 67 14 0 81 22 186 80 288 9 19 40 68 625 03:45 PM 10 177 10 197 70 15 0 85 24 201 76 301 5 20 33 58 641 Total 44 677 48 769 278 67 0 345 83 755 268 1106 22 76 140 238 2458 04:00 PM 6 188 5 199 74 22 0 96 26 185 72 283 3 25 45 73 651 04:15 PM 12 187 8 207 98 23 0 121 21 194 57 272 7 32 44 83 683 04:30 PM 19 165 8 192 65 15 0 80 21 181 70 272 6 39 55 100 644 04:45 PM 7 165 9 181 50 24 0 74 28 212 72 312 8 26 50 84 651 Total 44 705 30 779 287 84 0 371 96 772 271 1139 24 122 194 340 2629 05:00 PM 16 167 9 192 79 27 0 106 21 209 63 293 8 45 57 110 701 05:15 PM 11 146 7 164 66 20 0 86 20 234 62 316 5 40 51 96 662 05:30 PM 16 155 8 179 64 21 0 85 21 250 51 322 4 49 56 109 695 05:45 PM 11 144 8 163 83 21 0 104 17 220 58 295 8 47 53 108 670 Total 54 612 32 698 292 89 0 381 79 913 234 1226 25 181 217 423 2728 Grand Total 142 1994 110 2246 857 240 0 1097 258 2440 773 3471 71 379 551 1001 7815 Apprch % 6.3 88.8 4.9 78.1 21.9 0 7.4 70.3 22.3 7.1 37.9 55 Total % 1.8 25.5 1.4 28.7 11 3.1 0 14 3.3 31.2 9.9 44.4 0.9 4.8 7.1 12.8 Passenger Vehicles 141 1945 110 2196 820 236 0 1056 257 2410 734 3401 71 373 541 985 7638 % Passenger Vehicles 99.3 97.5 100 97.8 95.7 98.3 0 96.3 99.6 98.8 95 98 100 98.4 98.2 98.4 97.7 Dual Wheeled 0 45 0 45 12 4 0 16 1 26 2 29 0 6 10 16 106 % Dual Wheeled 0 2.3 0 2 1.4 1.7 0 1.5 0.4 1.1 0.3 0.8 0 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.4 Buses 1 4 0 5 25 0 0 25 0 4 37 41 0 0 0 0 71
% Buses 0.7 0.2 0 0.2 2.9 0 0 2.3 0 0.2 4.8 1.2 0 0 0 0 0.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM
05:00 PM 16 167 9 192 79 27 0 106 21 209 63 293 8 45 57 110 701 05:15 PM 11 146 7 164 66 20 0 86 20 234 62 316 5 40 51 96 662 05:30 PM 16 155 8 179 64 21 0 85 21 250 51 322 4 49 56 109 695 05:45 PM 11 144 8 163 83 21 0 104 17 220 58 295 8 47 53 108 670 Total Volume 54 612 32 698 292 89 0 381 79 913 234 1226 25 181 217 423 2728 % App. Total 7.7 87.7 4.6 76.6 23.4 0 6.4 74.5 19.1 5.9 42.8 51.3 PHF .844 .916 .889 .909 .880 .824 .000 .899 .940 .913 .929 .952 .781 .923 .952 .961 .973 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
32 Thru
612
Left
54 InOut Total
938 698 1636
Right
0 Thru
89 Left
292
OutTotal In
469 381 850
Left
79 Thru
913
Right
234
Out TotalIn
1121 1226 2347
Left
25 Thru
181
Right
217
TotalOut In
200 423 623
Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM

Passenger Vehicles
Dual Wheeled
Buses
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 03:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
03:45 PM 03:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM
+0 mins. 10 177 10 197 67 14 0 81 28 212 72 312 8 45 57 110 +15 mins. 6 188 5 199 70 15 0 85 21 209 63 293 5 40 51 96 +30 mins. 12 187 8 207 74 22 0 96 20 234 62 316 4 49 56 109 +45 mins. 19 165 8 192 98 23 0 121 21 250 51 322 8 47 53 108 Total Volume 47 717 31 795 309 74 0 383 90 905 248 1243 25 181 217 423 % App. Total 5.9 90.2 3.9 80.7 19.3 0 7.2 72.8 20 5.9 42.8 51.3 PHF .618 .953 .775 .960 .788 .804 .000 .791 .804 .905 .861 .965 .781 .923 .952 .961 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 1
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Passenger Vehicles
Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 03:00 PM 10 170 13 193 65 17 0 82 21 200 53 274 5 16 30 51 600 03:15 PM 8 167 10 185 66 19 0 85 16 164 55 235 3 20 33 56 561 03:30 PM 16 150 15 181 65 14 0 79 22 184 76 282 9 18 39 66 608 03:45 PM 10 169 10 189 68 15 0 83 24 198 71 293 5 20 32 57 622 Total 44 656 48 748 264 65 0 329 83 746 255 1084 22 74 134 230 2391 04:00 PM 6 184 5 195 72 22 0 94 26 184 69 279 3 25 44 72 640 04:15 PM 12 181 8 201 93 22 0 115 20 189 55 264 7 31 43 81 661 04:30 PM 19 160 8 187 63 15 0 78 21 179 64 264 6 38 54 98 627 04:45 PM 7 164 9 180 46 24 0 70 28 208 68 304 8 26 50 84 638 Total 44 689 30 763 274 83 0 357 95 760 256 1111 24 120 191 335 2566 05:00 PM 16 163 9 188 77 26 0 103 21 204 61 286 8 44 57 109 686 05:15 PM 11 140 7 158 63 20 0 83 20 234 58 312 5 40 51 96 649 05:30 PM 16 154 8 178 61 21 0 82 21 247 49 317 4 48 56 108 685 05:45 PM 10 143 8 161 81 21 0 102 17 219 55 291 8 47 52 107 661 Total 53 600 32 685 282 88 0 370 79 904 223 1206 25 179 216 420 2681 Grand Total 141 1945 110 2196 820 236 0 1056 257 2410 734 3401 71 373 541 985 7638 Apprch % 6.4 88.6 5 77.7 22.3 0 7.6 70.9 21.6 7.2 37.9 54.9 Total % 1.8 25.5 1.4 28.8 10.7 3.1 0 13.8 3.4 31.6 9.6 44.5 0.9 4.9 7.1 12.9 Jefferson Boulevard
Southbound
Slauson Avenue
Westbound
Jefferson Boulevard
Northbound
Slauson Avenue
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 05:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM
05:00 PM 16 163 9 188 77 26 0 103 21 204 61 286 8 44 57 109 686 05:15 PM 11 140 7 158 63 20 0 83 20 234 58 312 5 40 51 96 649 05:30 PM 16 154 8 178 61 21 0 82 21 247 49 317 4 48 56 108 685 05:45 PM 10 143 8 161 81 21 0 102 17 219 55 291 8 47 52 107 661 Total Volume 53 600 32 685 282 88 0 370 79 904 223 1206 25 179 216 420 2681 % App. Total 7.7 87.6 4.7 76.2 23.8 0 6.6 75 18.5 6 42.6 51.4 PHF .828 .920 .889 .911 .870 .846 .000 .898 .940 .915 .914 .951 .781 .932 .947 .963 .977 Counts Unlimited
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
File Name : 04_CVC_Jefferson_Slauson PM
Site Code : 16618886
Start Date : 11/28/2018
Page No : 2
City of Culver City
N/S: Jefferson Boulevard
E/W: Slauson Avenue
Weather: Clear
Jefferson Boulevard
Slauson Avenue
Slauson Avenue
Jefferson Boulevard
Right
32 Thru
600
Left
53 InOut Total
929 685 1614
Right
0 Thru
88 Left
282
OutTotal In
455 370 825
Left
79 Thru
904
Right
223
Out TotalIn
1098 1206 2304
Left
25 Thru
179
Right
216
TotalOut In
199 420 619
Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM