Agenda packet — Lawndale City Council, December 18, 2023 (part 9 of 9)

The City of Lawndale’s Noise Ordinance consists of Chapter 8.20 of the Lawndale Municipal Code. The zoning code, Title 17, also contains specific noise limits relating to specific uses.

Section 8.20.010 defines sound-amplifying equipment as any machine or device for the amplification of the human voice, music, or any other sound, including automobile radios and warning devices.

Sections 8.20.020, 8.20.030, and 8.20.050 outline noise restrictions with regards to noncommercial sound trucks, commercial sound trucks or advertising vehicles, and sound-producing vehicles at night.

Section 8.20.060 states that “No person shall make, cause or suffer, or permit to be made upon any premises owned, occupied or controlled by that person any noises or sounds which are unreasonably loud or physically annoying to persons of ordinary sensitivity, or which are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to occasion physical discomfort to other persons.” This section also states that the previous statement does not apply to noise or sounds generated in connection with any of the following:

1. Emergency vehicle response sounds and/or sounds from necessary equipment utilized by members of law enforcement, the fire department, paramedics or other emergency responders for the purpose of responding to an emergency or necessary to restore, preserve, protect or save lives or property from imminent danger of loss or harm.

2. Safety and warning devices, including but not limited to, train horns and railroad crossing warning systems, which are consistent with applicable state and federal laws.

3. The installation, maintenance, repair or replacement of public utilities or public infrastructure conducted by the city, other public entity or a public or private utility company, or their agents, contractors and employees, while undertaking a public works project, subject to the restrictions contained in Section 8.20.070 for allowable construction times.

4. School-related activities and/or programs, including, but not limited to, athletic and entertainment events and activities, provided said activities are conducted on the grounds of a public or private school or college or on other public property.

5. Noise from special community events provided said events are conducted by the city or pursuant to a permit or license issued by the city, including, but not limited to, occasional outdoor events/activities, outdoor gatherings, public dances, shows and sporting and entertainment events.

6. Any activity to the extent regulation thereof has been preempted by state or federal law.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Regulatory Setting
29 Section 8.20.070 outlines the allowable hours for construction as follows:

Construction activity may be conducted between the hours of seven a.m. and seven p.m., Monday through Friday (except national holidays), and eight a.m. and five p.m. Saturdays. Construction activity is prohibited at all other hours and on Sundays and national holidays. For purposes of this section, “construction” or “construction activity” shall include site preparation, demolition, grading, excavation, and the erection, improvement, remodeling or repair of structures, including operation of equipment or machinery and the delivery of materials associated with those activities.

This section also lists scenarios where the provisions of subsection A do not apply.

Section 17.48.273(A) specifies that the interior of apartments in the R-4 zone must not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Part B states that mechanical equipment in this zone will be screened from view and not exceed a maximum of 50 dBA.

Section 17.44.020(K) regulates pool equipment to 40 dBA CNEL as measured from the property line. Part (L) regulations air conditioning equipment to 40 dBA CNEL as measured from the property line as well.

Section 17.96.040(A)12 states that small collection facilities shall not exceed noise levels of 55 dBA as measured at a residential property or 60 dBA as measured at other adjacent properties.

Section 17.80.070(A)16 states that the interior noise levels of condominiums will not exceed 40 dBA CNEL and sound insulation requirements.

Section 17.94.040(A)19 limits the noise levels of adult-oriented businesses to 55 dBA as measured on the property line.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Study Method and Procedure
30 5.0 Study Method and Procedure
The following section describes the noise modeling procedures and assumptions used for this assessment.

5.1 Noise Measurement Procedure and Criteria
Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors:
 Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as the first row of houses  Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent of the area of concern  Human land usage
 Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination
MD conducted the sound level measurements in accordance with the City and Caltrans technical noise specifications. All measurements equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA). The following gives a brief description of the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement procedures for sound level measurements:
 Microphones for sound level meters were placed 5-feet above the ground for all measurements  Sound level meters were calibrated before and after each measurement  Following the calibration of equipment, a windscreen was placed over the microphone  Frequency weighting was set on “A” and slow response
 Results of the long-term noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets  During any short-term noise measurements, any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local traffic, lawnmowers, or aircraft flyovers were noted
 Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented

5.2 SoundPLAN Noise Modeling
SoundPLAN acoustical modeling software was utilized to create existing (2023), future (2045) without Project (Adopted General Plan), and future (2045) with Project (Proposed General Plan) traffic noise level contours for the 15 segments analyzed in the Project’s traffic impact analysis provided by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. and 2 segments from Caltrans traffic census program. The total change in trips from 2023 to 2045 provided by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. was applied to those 2 segments. Model parameters included average daily traffic volumes, day/evening/night split, roadway classification, width, speed, and truck mix. All modeled roadways were assumed to have a “hard site”, as the majority of analysis occurs at 50 feet from the centerline of the road. Possible reductions in noise levels due to intervening topography and buildings were not accounted for in this analysis. Roadway modeling assumptions utilized for the technical study are provided in Table 8 and Table 9 and in Appendix C. A summary of the model parameters and REMEL adjustments is presented below.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Study Method and Procedure
31  Roadway classification – (e.g., freeway, major arterial, arterial, secondary, collector, etc.),  Roadway Active Width – (distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway)
 Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT), Travel Speeds, Percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks
 Roadway grade and angle of view
 Site Conditions (e.g., soft vs. hard)
 Percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour period

5.3 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model
The FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) was utilized to model and compare existing traffic noise levels to 2045 Future noise levels. The FHWA model arrives at the predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). Roadway modeling assumptions utilized for the technical study are provided in Table 8 and Table 9.

Table 8: Roadway Noise Modeling Parameters
Roadway Segment Existing
ADT1
2045 No
Project
ADT1
2045 With
Project
ADT1
Speed2 Vehicle
Mix3
Inglewood Ave Marine Ave to 153rd Pl 30,382 29,900 30,400 35 CLASS6 Inglewood Ave I-405 S Ent to Manhattan Beach Blvd 46,980 47,100 47,200 35 CLASS8 Inglewood Ave Manhattan Beach Blvd to Artesia Blvd 34,669 33,600 33,800 40 CLASS6 Manhattan Beach Blvd Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd 23,463 27,400 27,500 40 CLASS14 Artesia Blvd Inglewood Ave to Grevillea Ave 33,333 33,500 33,500 35 CLASS6 Hawthorne Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 36,715 34,600 35,900 35 CLASS6 Hawthorne Blvd Manhattan Beach Blvd to 160th St 39,254 39,000 40,300 35 CLASS6 Hawthorne Blvd 162nd St to 166th St 44,037 43,200 44,900 35 CLASS8 Hawthorne Blvd 169th St to Redondo Beach Blvd 40,769 40,200 40,300 35 CLASS8 Rosecrans Ave Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 32,747 36,400 36,300 40 CLASS6 Redondo Beach Blvd Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 18,912 22,300 22,300 40 CLASS14 Manhattan Beach Blvd Freeman Ave to Prairie Ave 19,794 23,800 24,100 40 CLASS14 Prairie Ave Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 25,223 28,300 28,900 40 CLASS14 Manhattan Beach Blvd Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 21,543 23,600 24,000 35 CLASS14 Crenshaw Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 27,196 32,900 33,200 35 CLASS14 San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 30,382 29,900 30,400 65 CLASS8 San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd 46,980 47,100 47,200 65 CLASS8 Notes:
1) Kittelson Associates, May 2023.
2) Speed was modeled as posted.
3) See Table 9
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Study Method and Procedure
32 Table 9: Vehicle Mix Data
Motor-Vehicle
Type1,2
Daytime %
(7AM to 7 PM)
Evening %
(7 PM to 10 PM)
Night %
(10 PM to 7 AM)
Total % of
Traffic Flow
CLASS6
Automobiles 77.8% 12.8% 9.4% 87.5%
Medium Trucks 80.5% 8.7% 10.8% 11.5%
Heavy Trucks 75.8% 8.9% 15.3% 1.1%
CLASS8
Automobiles 76.1% 12.7% 11.2% 87.0%
Medium Trucks 80.6% 7.5% 11.9% 11.8%
Heavy Trucks 71.2% 8.4% 20.4% 1.3%
CLASS14
Automobiles 81.8% 11.5% 6.7% 88.3%
Medium Trucks 84.6% 6.6% 8.8% 11.1%
Heavy Trucks 81.5% 4.6% 13.9% 0.6%
Notes:
1 Lawndale 24hr traffic counts, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2023. 2 Project Trip Gen and Fleet Mix Info, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2023.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Existing Noise Environment
33 6.0 Existing Noise Environment

6.1 General Land Use Noise
Existing land uses within the Project Area include single and multiple-family residential development, commercial, industrial, open space, and public facility land uses. Noise sources associated with existing land uses include residential maintenance, parking lot noise, heating, and cooling system (HVAC) noise, property maintenance noise, trash truck noise, loading and unloading noise, and recreational noise.

6.2 Noise Measurements
Three (3) long-term 24-hour noise measurements and ten (10) short-term 15-minute noise measurements were conducted throughout the Project Area to document the existing noise environment. Noise measurement locations are shown in Exhibit H.

6.2.1 Short-Term Noise Measurements
Ten short-term noise measurements (15-minute) were taken on May 24th, 2023, and May 26th, 2023, in order to document the daytime Leq level at different locations throughout the Project Area. Measured noise levels ranged between 57.4 and 72.3 dBA Leq. Vehicle noise associated with Hawthorne Blvd., Marine Ave., and Rosecrans Ave. noise were the primary sources of ambient noise. Noise measurement results are presented in Table 10. Field notes and meter output are provided in Appendix B.

Table 10: Short-Term Noise Measurement Summary
Noise
Measurement
Location
Approximate Location Start Time
A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA)
Leq Lmax Lmin L(2) L(8) L(25) L(50) L(90)
ST1 4317 Rosecrans Ave 5:37 PM 72.3 80.4 54.4 77.9 76.3 73.9 70.7 63.4 ST2 4221 Marine Ave 4:25 PM 69.7 82.7 53.7 74.9 73.1 70.9 68.3 61.8 ST3 15300 Hawthorne Blvd 4:03 PM 67.6 75.9 55.0 73.6 72.2 70.1 63.9 57.1 ST4 4241 Redondo Beach Blvd 2:48 PM 64.9 78.5 49.0 71.0 69.0 66.2 62.8 55.0 ST5 16607 Hawthorne Blvd 12:43 PM 66.4 79.4 51.1 72.2 70.6 67.9 64.4 55.7 ST6 16605 Osage Ave 3:15 PM 60.4 66.5 57.0 63.5 61.9 60.8 60.1 58.9 ST7 4521 W 147th St 5:14 PM 57.8 75.7 47.5 66.0 60.7 56.1 52.9 49.3 ST8 4604 Marine Ave 4:50 PM 66.0 82.7 50.6 71.8 70.1 66.8 62.8 56.3 ST9 16725 Firmona Ave 1:27 PM 57.4 72.8 42.4 64.3 61.3 57.9 54.0 45.7 ST10 4130 154th St 3:42 PM 59.9 78.2 47.2 68.8 63.0 57.5 53.2 48.9

6.2.2 Long-Term Noise Measurements
Three (3) long-term noise measurements (24 consecutive hours) were taken in order to document the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) at different locations throughout the Project Area. As shown in Table 11, the measured CNEL was 77.7 dBA CNEL at 55 feet from the centerline of Manhattan Beach General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Existing Noise Environment
34 Blvd. and 120 feet from the centerline of San Diego Freeway, 74.8 dBA CNEL at 20 feet from the centerline of Freeman Ave and 170 feet from the centerline of San Diego Freeway, and 61.6 dBA CNEL at 50 feet from the railroad and 160 feet from the centerline of Artesia Blvd. The primary noise source was vehicle traffic. Table 11 also outlines the daytime (7 AM to 7 PM), evening (7 PM to 10 PM), and nighttime (10 PM to 7 AM) Leq levels at each location. These represent the average level over each time period (day/evening/night). Field notes and meter output are provided in Appendix B.

Table 11: Long-Term Noise Measurement Summary
Noise
Measurement
Location
Approximate
Location Date Description
A-Weighted Sound Level (dBA)
Daytime
Leq
Evening
Leq
Nighttime
Leq CNEL
LT1 4538 Manhattan
Beach Blvd
05/24/23-
05/25/23
I-405 & Manhattan
Beach Blvd traffic noise 72.8 72.8 70.4 77.7
LT2 16310 Freeman
Ave
05/24/23-
05/25/23 I-405 traffic noise 72.4 70.2 66.7 74.8
LT3 4626 W 173rd St 05/31/23-
06/01/23
Artesia Blvd traffic
noise 62.9 51.5 50.2 61.6
Notes:
dBA = A-weighted decibels
Leq = equivalent noise level
Lmax = maximum noise level
Lmin = minimum noise level
Ln = noise level exceeded n percent of the measurement period 24-hour duration
Exhibit H
Measurement
Location Map
35 Existing Noise Environment
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA
1 = Short-Term
Monitoring Location
= Long-Term
Monitoring Location
2 3
7 8
10 5
6 4
9 1
2 3
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Existing Noise Environment
36 6.3 Existing Noise Modeling
The primary sources of noise in Lawndale are transportation-related noises. Major roadways create ambient noise levels that affect the overall quality of life in the community. Modeled existing noise levels provided in Table 12 and on Exhibit I confirm that there are currently sensitive land uses in the project area that are exposed to noise levels above 65 dBA CNEL.

It should be noted that the modeled noise contours do not take into account factors such as existing buildings, walls, etc., that may reduce or, in some cases, amplify or reduce noise sources. The model also assumes hard site, when in reality, some of the City has soft site ground such as grass or dirt, which will reduce the noise levels. Measured noise levels provided in Tables 12 and 13 do take into account existing structures as well as other noise sources.

Those areas in the City that currently experience sound levels greater than 65 dBA CNEL are typically near major vehicular traffic corridors. Traffic noise levels typically depend on three factors: (1) the volume of traffic, (2) the average speed of traffic, and (3) the vehicle mix (i.e., the percentage of trucks versus automobiles in the traffic flow). Vehicle noise includes noises produced by the engine, exhaust, tires, and wind generated by taller vehicles. Other factors that affect the perception of traffic noise include the distance from the highway, terrain, heavy vegetation, and natural and structural obstacles.

While tire noise from automobiles is generally located at ground level, some truck noise sources may emanate from 12 feet or more above the ground.

Table 12: Existing Exterior Noise Levels Along Roadways CNEL, dBA Distance to Contour (feet)
Roadway Segment Limits @50 ft4 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA Inglewood Ave Marine Ave to 153rd Pl 73.3 107 338 1,068 3,378 Inglewood Ave I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd 75.4 172 544 1,720 5,439 Inglewood Ave Manhattan Beach Blvd to Artesia Blvd 75.5 178 562 1,777 5,619 Manhattan Beach Blvd Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd 73.0 99 313 989 3,127 Artesia Blvd Inglewood Ave to Grevillea Ave 73.9 123 390 1,234 3,901 Hawthorne Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.3 136 430 1,361 4,303 Hawthorne Blvd Manhattan Beach Blvd to 160th St 71.6 145 460 1,455 4,600 Hawthorne Blvd 162nd St to 166th St 72.6 184 582 1,839 5,816 Hawthorne Blvd 169th St to Redondo Beach Blvd 72.3 170 538 1,703 5,384 Rosecrans Ave Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 75.3 168 531 1,678 5,308 Redondo Beach Blvd Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 71.8 75 237 749 2,369 Manhattan Beach Blvd Freeman Ave to Prairie Ave 72.0 78 248 784 2,480 Prairie Ave Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 73.0 100 316 999 3,160 Manhattan Beach Blvd Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 70.7 59 187 591 1,867 Crenshaw Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.9 78 246 778 2,461 San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 85.4 3,480 11,003 34,795 110,033 San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd 85.2 3,315 10,483 33,152 104,835 Notes:

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Existing Noise Environment
37 CNEL, dBA Distance to Contour (feet)
Roadway Segment Limits @50 ft4 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA 1) Exterior noise levels calculated at 5-feet above ground. 2) Noise levels calculated from centerline of subject roadway. 3) Contour distances do not take into account potential noise reduction from existing barriers such as buildings, walls or berms as a worst-case scenario for planning screening purposes. Overall levels are likely lower at sensitive receptors. 4) Hawthorne Blvd & San Diego Freeway were calculated at 100 ft away.

Exhibit I
Existing Roadway Noise Level Contours (CNEL)
38 Existing Noise Environment
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Existing Noise Environment
39 6.3 Existing Airport/Aircraft Noise
There are no airports located within the Project Area, and the Project Area is not located within any airport noise contours. The closest airport to the Project Area is the Hawthorne Municipal Airport located approximately 1.4 miles northeast of the Project Area. The Los Angeles International Airport is 2.5 miles from the Project Are. The noise contours associated with these airports do not encroach into the Project Area.

6.4 Existing Vibration Sources in the Project Area
The main sources of vibration in the project area are related to vehicles, construction, and railway.

Typical roadway traffic, including heavy trucks, rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage. However, there have been cases in which heavy trucks traveling over potholes or other discontinuities in the pavement have caused vibration high enough to result in complaints from nearby residents. These types of issues typically can be resolved by smoothing the roadway surface (Caltrans 2020).

Construction activities that produce vibration that can be felt by adjacent land uses include the use of vibratory equipment, large bulldozers, and pile drivers. The primary source of vibration during construction is usually from a bulldozer. A large bulldozer has a peak particle velocity of 0.089 inches per second (87 VdB) at 25 feet.

One freight rail line runs through the City of Lawndale. According to the Federal Railroad Administration Crossing Inventory Forms, there are 2 daytime and 2 nighttime freight trains that pass through the city each day at a maximum of 20 MPH. Existing buildings are about 50 feet from the centerline of the railway.

Therefore, the expected maximum vibration at these buildings is 76 VdB (0.025 inches per second).

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 40 7.0 Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation This assessment analyzes future noise impacts to and from the proposed Project and compares the results to the City of Lawndale General Plan Policies and Noise Standards. The analysis details the estimated noise levels associated with traffic from adjacent roadways and on-site stationary noise sources. Each future noise source related to the Project was evaluated in light of applicable City of Lawndale General Plan policies and ordinances, and programmatic mitigation measures are provided as applicable.

7.1 Transportation Noise and Vibration
Transportation noise includes noise from aircraft, railways, and roadways. The Project Area is outside of any airport 65 dBA CNEL contours and therefore, there is no aircraft impact.

7.1.1 Railway Vibration
One rail line runs through the City of Lawndale. The proposed Project could facilitate the construction of low-density residential projects adjacent to the existing railroad. With regards to vibration impacts on new development near railroads, human disturbance is the primary concern. It is extremely rare for vibration levels from trains passing to result in structural damage to buildings. In addition, buses and other transit vehicles are not anticipated to generate excessive vibration levels that would disturb sensitive receptors because these vehicles are traveling at lower speeds and do not generate substantial vibrations.

The FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment document provides recommended groundborne vibration criteria for general environmental assessments. The vibration criteria vary according to the sensitivity of the land use and the frequency of vibration events (i.e., number of trains passing by the sensitive land use), as shown in Table 13.

Table 13: FTA Ground-Borne Vibration Impact Criteria for General Assessment Land Use Category/Type
Impact Level (Velocity Decibels)
Frequent
Events
Occasional
Events
Infrequent
Events
Category 1 – Buildings with sensitive equipment 65 VdB 65 VdB 65 VdB Category 2 – Buildings where people sleep 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB Category 3 – Institutional buildings 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB Source: FTA 2018
There are an estimated 4 trains passing per day, according to the 2021 U.S. Dot Crossing Inventory Form.

For infrequent events (i.e., less than 30 trains passing by in one day), the criteria generally vary between 65 VdB for buildings where vibration would interfere with interior operations (e.g., highly sensitive research facilities, hospitals) to 80 VdB for residences and buildings where people normally sleep, to 83 VdB for land uses with primarily daytime use. Highly sensitive research facilities and hospitals are not General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 41 anticipated under the proposed Project, and therefore, the 65 VdB threshold is not considered further in this analysis. The FTA’s guidance document contains generalized ground surface vibration curves derived from vibration measurements of transit systems in North America (FTA 2018, Figure 6-4). The freight curve assumes the freight is traveling at 50 mph. However, the U.S. Dot Crossing Inventory Form states that the train’s maximum timetable speed is 20 mph. According to Table 6-11 in the FTA manual, there is an 8 VdB decrease for a vehicle moving 20 mph compared to 50 mph. Based on these vibration prediction curves and the speed adjustment, the vibration levels will be 80 VdB at residential developments approximately 30 feet away from the passenger rail line centerline and will not exceed the FTA’s recommended threshold of 80 VdB for residences. Therefore, future residential developments along the railway will not be exposed to excessive transit train vibration levels that exceed FTArecommended vibration criteria of 80 VdB if the development is a minimum of 30 feet away from the railroad centerline and the impact is less than significant in accordance with proposed action PS-6h.

7.1.2 Vehicle Traffic Noise
The primary noise source in the Project Area will continue to be vehicle traffic. Future traffic noise level contours are presented in Exhibits I and J. Tables 14 and 15 show the future noise levels at a distance of 50 feet from the centerline of studied roadways by the year 2045 for No Project and With Project. The distances to the 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL noise contours are also provided.

Table 14: 2045 No Project Traffic Noise Levels (dBA, CNEL) CNEL, dBA Distance to Contour (feet)
Roadway Segment Limits @50 ft4 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA Inglewood Ave Marine Ave to 153rd Pl 73.2 105 332 1051 3325 Inglewood Ave I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd 75.4 172 545 1724 5453 Inglewood Ave Manhattan Beach Blvd to Artesia Blvd 75.4 172 545 1722 5446 Manhattan Beach Blvd Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd 73.6 115 365 1155 3652 Artesia Blvd Inglewood Ave to Grevillea Ave 73.9 124 392 1240 3921 Hawthorne Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.1 128 405 1282 4055 Hawthorne Blvd Manhattan Beach Blvd to 160th St 71.6 145 457 1445 4571 Hawthorne Blvd 162nd St to 166th St 72.6 180 571 1804 5706 Hawthorne Blvd 169th St to Redondo Beach Blvd 72.3 168 531 1679 5309 Rosecrans Ave Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 75.7 187 590 1866 5900 Redondo Beach Blvd Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 72.5 88 279 883 2794 Manhattan Beach Blvd Freeman Ave to Prairie Ave 72.8 94 298 943 2981 Prairie Ave Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 73.5 112 355 1121 3545 Manhattan Beach Blvd Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 71.1 65 205 647 2046 Crenshaw Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 72.7 94 298 941 2977 San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 85.4 3466 10960 34658 109600 San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd 85.2 3301 10440 33015 104401 Notes:
1) Exterior noise levels calculated at 5 feet above ground. 2) Noise levels calculated from centerline of subject roadway.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 42 CNEL, dBA Distance to Contour (feet)
Roadway Segment Limits @50 ft4 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA 3) Contour Distances do not take into account potential noise reduction from existing barriers such as buildings, walls, or berms as a worst-case scenario for planning screening purposes. Overall levels are likely lower at sensitive receptors. 4) Hawthorne Blvd & San Diego Freeway were calculated at 100 ft away.

Table 15: 2045 Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels (dBA, CNEL) CNEL, dBA Distance to Contour (feet)
Roadway Segment Limits @50 ft4 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA Inglewood Ave Marine Ave to 153rd Pl 73.3 107 338 1069 3380 Inglewood Ave I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd 75.4 173 546 1728 5465 Inglewood Ave Manhattan Beach Blvd to Artesia Blvd 75.4 173 491 1553 4911 Manhattan Beach Blvd Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd 73.7 116 366 1159 3665 Artesia Blvd Inglewood Ave to Grevillea Ave 73.9 124 392 1240 3921 Hawthorne Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.2 133 421 1330 4207 Hawthorne Blvd Manhattan Beach Blvd to 160th St 71.7 149 472 1494 4723 Hawthorne Blvd 162nd St to 166th St 72.7 188 593 1875 5930 Hawthorne Blvd 169th St to Redondo Beach Blvd 72.3 168 532 1683 5323 Rosecrans Ave Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 75.7 186 588 1861 5884 Redondo Beach Blvd Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 72.5 88 279 883 2794 Manhattan Beach Blvd Freeman Ave to Prairie Ave 72.8 95 302 955 3019 Prairie Ave Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 73.6 114 362 1145 3620 Manhattan Beach Blvd Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 71.2 66 208 658 2080 Crenshaw Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 72.8 95 300 950 3004 San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 85.7 3712 11740 37124 117397 San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd 85.5 3197 10111 31973 101107 Notes:
1) Exterior noise levels calculated at 5 feet above ground. 2) Noise levels calculated from centerline of subject roadway. 3) Contour Distances do not take into account potential noise reduction from existing barriers such as buildings, walls, or berms as a worst-case scenario for planning screening purposes. Overall levels are likely lower at sensitive receptors. 4) Hawthorne Blvd & San Diego Freeway were calculated at 100 ft away.

As shown in Tables 14 and 15 and Exhibit I, J, and K, by the year 2045, existing land uses adjacent to the studied roadways will be exposed to noise levels that exceed the City’s exterior standards of 65 dBA CNEL for sensitive uses. A significant impact would occur if the Project resulted in levels higher than 65 dBA CNEL and increased the overall roadway noise level by 3 dBA CNEL, which is a noticeable change in noise level.

Compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 without Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to

0.8 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and will result in inaudible increases in ambient noise along the analyzed roadways (see Table 16).

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 43 Compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 with Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to 0.9 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and will result in inaudible increases in ambient noise. Implementation of the Project will therefore result in a less than significant impact to roadway noise levels.

Table 16: Change in Noise Along Roadways (dBA, CNEL @ 50’) Roadway Segment
Existing 2045 No Project 2045 With Project
CNEL @
50' dBA3
CNEL @
50’ dBA
Change
in Noise
Level
CNEL @
50’ dBA
Change
in Noise
Level
Inglewood Ave Marine Ave to 153rd Pl 73.3 73.2 -0.1 73.3 0.0 Inglewood Ave I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd 75.4 75.4 0.0 75.4 0.0 Inglewood Ave Manhattan Beach Blvd to Artesia Blvd 75.5 75.4 -0.1 75.4 -0.1 Manhattan Beach Blvd Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd 73.0 73.6 0.6 73.7 0.7 Artesia Blvd Inglewood Ave to Grevillea Ave 73.9 73.9 0.0 73.9 0.0 Hawthorne Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.3 71.1 -0.2 71.2 -0.1 Hawthorne Blvd Manhattan Beach Blvd to 160th St 71.6 71.6 0.0 71.7 0.1 Hawthorne Blvd 162nd St to 166th St 72.6 72.6 0.0 72.7 0.1 Hawthorne Blvd 169th St to Redondo Beach Blvd 72.3 72.3 0.0 72.3 0.0 Rosecrans Ave Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 75.3 75.7 0.4 75.7 0.4 Redondo Beach Blvd Hawthorne Blvd to Prairie Ave 71.8 72.5 0.7 72.5 0.7 Manhattan Beach Blvd Freeman Ave to Prairie Ave 72.0 72.8 0.8 72.8 0.8 Prairie Ave Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 73.0 73.5 0.5 73.6 0.6 Manhattan Beach Blvd Prairie Ave to Crenshaw Blvd 70.7 71.1 0.4 71.2 0.5 Crenshaw Blvd Marine Ave to Manhattan Beach Blvd 71.9 72.7 0.8 72.8 0.9 San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 85.4 85.4 0.0 85.7 0.3 San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd 85.2 85.2 0.0 85.5 0.3 Notes:
1) Existing and Future traffic volumes compiled by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2023. 2) An impact would occur if the Project increased the roadway segment level by 3 dB or more (an audible difference) and resulting in a future level above 65 dBA CNEL.
3) Hawthorne Blvd & San Diego Freeway were calculated at 100 ft away.

Exhibit J
2045 No Project Noise Contours (CNEL)
44 Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA
Exhibit K
2045 With Project Noise Contours (CNEL)
45 Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 46 Where proposed land uses are expected to be exposed to noise levels that exceed the land use compatibility criteria in Exhibit F, impacts can be mitigated to a level that is less than significant with the implementation of noise control measures, such as relocating residential outdoor recreational areas away from 60 dBA CNEL or greater areas or shielding outdoor areas using noise barriers. Per the General Plan, future development associated with implementation of the proposed Project requires a noise study prior to issuance of a grading permit and mitigation implemented if noise levels exceed normally acceptable levels as outlined in Exhibit F. For residential developments, the study must ensure that interior levels in livable areas do not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. The impact is less than significant with proposed policies PS-6.1, PS-6.2, PS-6.3, PS-6.4, and proposed action PS-6c.

7.2 Stationary Noise
Implementation of the Project could result in the future development of land uses that generate noise levels in excess of applicable City noise standards for non-transportation noise sources as outlined in Section 4.3.3. While the Project does not explicitly propose any new noise-generating uses, Project implementation would allow for the development of mixed-uses, increased residential development at higher densities, and new commercial development, which may result in new noise sources. Specific development projects and the details of future noise-generating land uses that may be located in the Project Area in the future are not known at this time. Additionally, noise from existing stationary sources, as identified in the Existing Settings Section, would continue to impact noise-sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the noise sources.

While no specific projects are proposed under the Project, changes in land use may allow for more intensive noise-generating uses in closer proximity to noise-sensitive uses. Where this occurs, detailed noise studies would be required to ensure that noise control measures are implemented into the project design. Such measures could include the redesign of stationary noise sources away from sensitive uses, construction of sound walls or berms between noise generating uses and sensitive uses, using buildings to create additional buffer distance and screening, or other site design measures to ensure that nontransportation (stationary) noise sources do not cause exterior and interior noise levels to exceed allowable standards at sensitive receptors.

The impact is less than significant with the implementation of the Municipal Code and proposed policies PS-6.3, PS-6.4, PS-6.8, and proposed actions PS-6c, PS-6d, and PS-6e.

7.3 Construction Noise
The degree of construction noise may vary for different projects within the scope of the proposed Project and also vary depending on the construction activities. Noise levels associated with the construction will vary with the different phases of construction. Construction must not occur between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays, between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays, or any time on Sunday or a Federal holiday per Section 8.20.070(A) of the Lawndale Municipal Code.

Construction noise is exempt from the noise ordinance outside of those times.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has compiled data regarding the noise-generated characteristics of typical construction activities. The data is presented in Table 17. These noise levels General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 47 would diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example, a noise level of 86 dBA measured 50 feet from the noise source would reduce to 80 dBA at 100 feet. At 200 feet from the noise source, the noise level would reduce to 74 dBA. At 400 feet, the noise source would reduce by another 6 dBA to 68 dBA.

Table 17: Typical Construction Noise Levels

Equipment Powered by Internal Combustion Engines
Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet
Earth Moving
Compactors (Rollers) 73 - 76
Front Loaders 73 - 84
Backhoes 73 - 92
Tractors 75 - 95
Scrapers, Graders 78 - 92
Pavers 85 - 87
Trucks 81 - 94
Materials Handling
Concrete Mixers 72 - 87
Concrete Pumps 81 - 83
Cranes (Movable) 72 - 86
Cranes (Derrick) 85 - 87
Stationary
Pumps 68 - 71
Generators 71 - 83
Compressors 75 - 86
Impact Equipment
Saws 71 - 82
Vibrators 68 - 82
Notes:

Source: Reference Noise Levels from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

7.3.1 Construction Related Traffic
Individual projects within the scope of the Project would result in short-term noise impacts associated with construction activities. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction activities. First, construction crew commute and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site for the proposed Project would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Truck traffic associated with project construction should be limited to within the permitted construction hours, as listed in the City’s Municipal Code Section 8.20.070(A). Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential at a maximum of 87 dBA Lmax at 50 ft from passing trucks, causing possible short-term intermittent annoyances, the effect on ambient noise levels would be less than 1 dBA when averaged over one hour or 24 hours. In other words, the changes in noise levels over 1 hour or 24 hours attributable to passing trucks would not be perceptible to the normal human ear. The impact is less than significant with the implementation of section 8.20.070(A) of the Municipal Code, proposed policy PS-6.9, and proposed action PS-6f.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 48 7.3.2 On-Site Construction Activities
Site preparation phase, which includes grading and paving, tends to generate the highest noise levels since the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. Site-specific construction activities associated with future development is expected to require the use of scrapers, bulldozers, motor graders, and water and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be approximately 87 dBA Lmax at 50 ft from the scraper in operation. Each bulldozer would also generate approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 ft.

The maximum noise level generated by the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Noise reduction potential will be project and site-specific. Construction noise would be an impact if construction occurred outside of the hours outlined in Section 8.20.070(A) of the Lawndale Municipal Code. Potential impacts would be site-specific, depending on the equipment used and distances to sensitive receptors. The impact is less than significant with the implementation of section

8.20.070(A) of the Municipal Code, proposed policy PS-6.9, and proposed action PS-6f.

7.4 Groundborne Vibration
The main sources of vibration in the project area are related to vehicles and construction. Typical roadway traffic, including heavy trucks, rarely generates vibration amplitudes high enough to cause structural or cosmetic damage. However, there have been cases in which heavy trucks traveling over potholes or other discontinuities in the pavement have caused vibration high enough to result in complaints from nearby residents. These types of issues typically can be resolved by smoothing the roadway surface (Caltrans 2020).

7.4.1 On-Site Construction Activities
Construction activities that produce vibration that can be felt by adjacent land uses include the use of vibratory equipment, large bulldozers, and pile drivers. The primary sources of vibration during construction are usually vibratory rollers and large bulldozers. As shown in Table 18, a vibratory roller has a peak particle velocity (inches/second) of 0.21 and a large bulldozer has a peak particle velocity of

0.089 (inches per second) at 25 feet. The use of pile driving equipment can generate a peak particle velocity of 1.5 (inches per second) depending on the size and model.

Table 18: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment

Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level
(inches/second) at 25 feet LV (VdB) at 25 feet
Pile driver (impact)

1.518 (upper range) 112

0.644 (typical) 104
Pile driver (sonic)

0.734 upper range 105

0.170 typical 93
General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA Future Noise Environment, Impacts, and Mitigation 49 Table 18: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment

Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level
(inches/second) at 25 feet LV (VdB) at 25 feet
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66
(slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2006.

The California Department of Transportation has published one of the seminal works for the analysis of ground-borne noise and vibration relating to transportation- and construction-induced vibrations and, although the Project is not subject to these regulations, it serves as a useful tool to evaluate vibration impacts (California Department of Transportation, 2013). Table 19 provides maximum PPV levels (inches/second) to be used to determine if groundborne vibration may result in damage, depending on the type of structure. When evaluated in light of the estimated groundborne vibration levels presented in Table 18, it can be determined that construction activities in the project area have the potential to result in significant impacts related to groundborne vibration associated with construction activities.

These impacts can be avoided by requiring vibration impact studies when construction utilizes pile drivers within 200 feet of existing buildings or vibratory rollers within 50 feet of existing buildings as required in proposed policy PS-6.14 and proposed action PS-6k.

Table 19: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria Maximum PPV (inches/second)
Structure and Condition Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Source
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.1 0.1 Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.3
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
New residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5
Source: California Department of Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April 2020.

Note: transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA CEQA Analysis
50 8.0 CEQA Analysis
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (Appendix G) establishes thresholds for noise impact analysis as presented below:
(a) Would the project result in the 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 Code, or applicable standards of other agencies? Transportation Noise Impacts
Traffic noise will be significant if levels are increased by more than 3 dBA to levels above 65 dBA CNEL in areas with sensitive uses. Compared to existing traffic noise levels, 2045 plus Project traffic volumes are expected to be up to 0.9 dBA CNEL louder than existing ambient noise levels at existing land uses and will not result in substantial increases in ambient noise along the analyzed roadways (see Table 16).

Implementation of the proposed Project will result in less than significant impacts related to exceedances of the land use compatibility criteria. Where existing land uses will be impacted, the impact would be less than significant. Where proposed land uses are expected to be exposed to noise levels that exceed the 65 dBA CNEL land use compatibility criteria, impacts can be mitigated to “less than significant” with implementation of proposed policies PS-6.1, PS-6.2, PS-6.3, PS-6.4, and proposed action PS-6c.

Stationary Noise Sources
Stationary noise will be significant if it exceeds the levels outlined in the Lawndale Municipal Code as outlined in Section 4.3.3. Implementation of the Project may result in stationary noise impacts from future uses. Implementation of good land use planning and policies and actions can minimize noise impacts related to these sources by avoiding the placement of noise generating equipment near noisesensitive land uses and where unavoidable, include design measures to the degree practical to avoid violating the noise criteria presented in Section 4.3.3. Stationary noise impacts can be mitigated to “less than significant” with implementation of Lawndale Noise Ordinance, proposed policies PS-6.3, PS-6.4, PS-6.8, and proposed actions PS-6c, PS-6d, and PS-6e.

Construction Noise and Vibration
Construction noise will be significant if construction occurs outside of the hours specified in Section

8.20.070(A) of the Lawndale Municipal Code. The potential impact is site-specific and depends on the construction equipment used and distance to adjacent sensitive receptors. Implementation of the proposed Project could result in short-term noise impacts associated with construction activities. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction activities, on-site and off-site.

Construction crew commute and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site for the proposed Project would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Truck traffic associated with project construction should be limited to within the permitted construction hours, General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA CEQA Analysis
51 as listed in the City’s Municipal Code. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential at a maximum of 87 dBA Lmax at 50 ft from passing trucks, causing possible shortterm intermittent annoyances, the effect on ambient noise levels would be less than 1 dBA when averaged over one hour or 24 hours. In other words, the changes in noise levels over 1 hour or 24 hours attributable to passing trucks would not be perceptible to the normal human ear. Therefore, short-term construction-related impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport on local streets leading to the project site would result in a less than significant impact on noise-sensitive receptors along the access routes. No mitigation is required.

The site preparation phase of on-site construction activities, which includes grading and paving, tends to generate the highest noise levels since the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders.

Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings. Site-specific construction activities associated with future development are expected to require the use of scrapers, bulldozers, motor graders, and water and pickup trucks. The maximum noise level generated by each scraper is assumed to be approximately 87 dBA Lmax at 50 ft from the scraper in operation. Each bulldozer would also generate approximately 85 dBA Lmax at 50 ft. The maximum noise level generated by the sound sources with equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Noise reduction potential will be Project and sitespecific. Implementation of Section 8.20.070(A) of the Municipal Code, proposed policy PS-6.9, and proposed action PS-6f during site-specific projects will reduce the impact to less than significant. b) Generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels? Construction vibration within the Project Area is not anticipated to be significant unless an individual development uses pile driving or vibratory rollers. These impacts can be avoided by requiring vibration impact studies when construction utilizes pile drivers within 200 feet of existing buildings or vibratory rollers within 50 feet of existing buildings. This impact would be less than significant with the implementation of proposed policy PS-6.14 and action PS-6k.

General Plan Update
Noise Impact Study
City of Lawndale, CA References
52 9.0 References
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
Specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA).

California, State of, Building Standards Commission
2019 California Uniform Building Code (UBC), Title 24.
2019 Green Code Section 5.507.4.3 (2019)
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2013 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. 2020 Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. April. 2021 Caltrans Traffic Counts https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census California Office of Noise Control
2017 Guidelines for the Preparation and Content of Noise Elements of the General Plan. February.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
1974 Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Prepared by the EPA, Office of Noise Abatement and Control.

Federal Interagency Committee on Noise
1992 Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. August.

Federal Transit Administration
2006 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment. Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Emissions. FTAVA-90-1003-06.

Lawndale, City of
1992 General Plan.

City of Lawndale Municipal Code.

Office of Planning and Research, State of California
2017 Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines.

Appendix A:

SoundPLAN Data
MPH KMH Road width Lane width SP9 Lane Name
35 56.32704 70 35 10.668 1. Inglewood Ave between Marine Ave & 153rd Pl 35 56.32704 60 30 9.144 2. Inglewood Ave between I-405 S Entrance & Manhattan Beach Blvd 40 64.37376 80 40 12.192 3. Inglewood Ave between Manhattan Blvd & Artesia Blvd 40 64.37376 80 40 12.192 4. Manhattan Beach Blvd between Inglewood Ave & Hawthorne Blvd 35 56.32704 75 37.5 11.43 5. Artesia Blvd between Inglewood Ave & Grevillea Ave 35 56.32704 140 70 21.336 6. Hawthorne Blvd between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 35 56.32704 140 70 21.336 7. Hawthorne Blvd between Manhattan Beach Blvd & 160th St 35 56.32704 140 70 21.336 8. Hawthorne Blvd between 162nd St & 166th St 35 56.32704 140 70 21.336 9. Hawthorne Blvd between 169th St & Redondo Beach Blvd 40 64.37376 80 40 12.192 10. Rosecrans Ave between Hawthorne Blvd & Prairie Ave 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 11. Redondo Beach Blvd between Hawthorne Blvd & Prairie Ave 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 12. Manhattan Beach Blvd between Freeman Ave & Prairie Ave 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 13. Prairie Ave between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 35 56.32704 65 32.5 9.906 14. Manhattan Beach Blvd between Prairie Ave & Crenshaw Blvd 35 56.32704 70 35 10.668 15. Crenshaw Blvd between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 65 104.6074 120 60 18.288 16. San Diego Freeway West of Hawthorne Blvd 65 104.6074 120 60 18.288 17. San Diego Freeway East of Hawthorne Blvd MPH KMH Road width Lane width SP9 Lane Name
35 56.32704 150 75 22.86 Hawthorne North Rosecrans to Marine 35 56.32704 55 27.5 8.382 Redondo Beach Artesia to Hawthorne 40 64.37376 60 30 9.144 Marine Ave I405 to Crenshaw Blvd 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 Prarie Ave Rosecrans to Marine 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 Prarie Ave Manhattan Beach to Redondo Beach 40 64.37376 75 37.5 11.43 Rosecrans Inglewood to Hawthorne 25 40.2336 55 27.5 8.382 Inglewood Rosecrans to Marine
Appendix B:

Noise Measurement Data and Field Sheets
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet
Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Project: #/Name: 0462-2019-010
Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Date: 05/25/2023
Field Tech/Engineer: Jason Schuyler/ Claire Pincock
Sound Meter: Piccolo 2, Soft dB SN: P0222022803
Settings: A-weighted, slow, 1-min, 24-hour duration
Site Id: LT1, LT2, LT3
Site Observations:

Temps in the Mid 60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH. 1 2
3 Map data ©2023 Google Imagery ©2023 , Airbus, CNES / Airbus, Data CSUMB SFML, CA OPC, Data USGS, Landsat / Copernicus, Maxar Technologies, U.S. Geological Survey, USDA/FPAC/GEO
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT1, LT2, LT3
Figure 1: LT1 Figure 2: LT2 Figure 3: LT3
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT1
Table 1: Baseline Noise Measurement Summary
Date Start Stop Leq Lmax Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 L90
5/24/2023 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 73.9 84.7 69.2 75.6 74.7 74.1 73.8 73.2 5/24/2023 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 73.4 81.5 68.4 74.4 74 73.7 73.4 72.7 5/24/2023 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 73.2 80.9 67.5 74.3 73.9 73.5 73.2 72.5 5/24/2023 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 72.7 85.9 64.2 75.4 73.9 73 72.7 70.9 5/24/2023 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 72.5 81.9 68 73.6 73.5 72.9 72.6 71.6 5/24/2023 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 73.3 85.1 66.4 74.7 74 73.5 73.2 72.7 5/24/2023 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 73.5 86.1 68.2 75.4 74.3 73.7 73.4 72.4 5/24/2023 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 72.7 83 66.6 73.9 73.7 73.1 72.7 71.6 5/24/2023 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 72.3 83.4 66.2 73.9 73.5 72.6 72.1 71.4 5/24/2023 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 71.1 81 63 72.6 72.3 71.6 71 69.9 5/24/2023 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 69.5 78.7 61.4 71.2 70.8 70 69.5 68.2 5/25/2023 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 68.2 83 55.3 70.5 69.8 69 68.1 65.9 5/25/2023 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 66.7 82.2 53.8 69.8 68.5 67.6 66.3 64.3 5/25/2023 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 66.6 78.5 52.1 69.3 68.6 67.3 66.4 64.6 5/25/2023 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 68.9 79.9 52.3 71.2 71 69.9 68.8 65.4 5/25/2023 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 72.4 80.6 59.5 74.6 74.3 73.3 72.5 69.7 5/25/2023 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 73.9 81.2 65.3 75.2 74.8 74.5 74 72.4 5/25/2023 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 70.6 86.1 63.2 72.6 72 71.5 70.7 68.1 5/25/2023 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 70.2 83.1 63.9 71.8 71.2 70.9 70.2 68.3 5/25/2023 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 69.6 77.7 63.9 71.7 71.4 70.5 69.4 67.6 5/25/2023 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 70.3 77.6 63.5 72.7 72.1 70.9 70.2 68.6 5/25/2023 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 73.8 79.4 62.9 74.7 74.5 74.3 74 72 5/25/2023 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 74 81.3 69.9 75 74.6 74.3 74 73.4 5/25/2023 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 73.7 80.7 69.7 74.6 74.3 74 73.8 73 Site Topo: Hill
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Grass
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Road and commercial noise
DNL 77.3
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT2
Table 2: Baseline Noise Measurement Summary
Date Start Stop Leq Lmax Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 L90
5/24/2023 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 72.1 83.5 63.1 73.2 73 72.4 72.2 71.5 5/24/2023 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 71.6 81.4 67.4 72.5 72.2 72 71.5 70.7 5/24/2023 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 71.5 87.2 66.6 74.3 72.4 71.7 71.3 70.4 5/24/2023 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 70.5 85.6 62.2 72.5 71.8 71.1 70.6 68.6 5/24/2023 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 70 80.3 65.8 71.3 71 70.5 70 69.2 5/24/2023 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 70.7 79 66.8 72.1 71.5 70.9 70.6 69.8 5/24/2023 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 71.2 82.7 67.3 73 71.7 71.5 71.1 70.3 5/24/2023 8:00 PM 9:00 PM 70.2 84.1 66.5 71.4 70.8 70.4 70.1 69.2 5/24/2023 9:00 PM 10:00 PM 68.7 79.3 64.4 70.8 69.8 69 68.6 67.9 5/24/2023 10:00 PM 11:00 PM 67.7 72.9 62.3 69.2 68.5 68.1 67.7 66.7 5/24/2023 11:00 PM 12:00 AM 65.9 79.1 60 67.7 67 66.4 65.8 64.4 5/25/2023 12:00 AM 1:00 AM 64.4 74.6 57.8 66.3 65.5 65 64.3 62.8 5/25/2023 1:00 AM 2:00 AM 62.8 72.3 54.7 64.8 64.2 63.1 62.7 61.4 5/25/2023 2:00 AM 3:00 AM 62.3 69.9 53.2 64.1 63.7 63 62.4 60.6 5/25/2023 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 65 79.1 54.2 67 66.7 66.2 65 61.9 5/25/2023 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 69.1 80.9 59.7 71.4 70.7 70 69.1 66 5/25/2023 5:00 AM 6:00 AM 70.8 75 64.2 72.1 71.7 71.4 70.8 69.5 5/25/2023 6:00 AM 7:00 AM 64.9 79.5 58.3 67.3 66.9 65.3 64.4 63.2 5/25/2023 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 76.2 92 61.3 84.1 82.3 72.2 66.7 64.6 5/25/2023 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 75.2 89.1 61.7 82.1 81.4 73.2 66.5 64.8 5/25/2023 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 69.4 86.4 60.6 74.4 73.6 70.9 66.3 64.6 5/25/2023 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 72.6 88.3 68.4 76.7 73 72.7 72.3 71.5 5/25/2023 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 71.9 77.7 69 72.9 72.6 72.3 71.9 71.2 5/25/2023 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 71.6 81 67.8 73.7 72.7 71.7 71.4 70.7 Site Topo: Buildings 1-2 stories
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Buildings and
asphalt
Day: 2 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:
road noise and residential noise
DNL 74.4
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT3
Table 3: Baseline Noise Measurement Summary
Date Start Stop Leq Lmax Lmin L2 L8 L25 L50 L90
5/31/2023 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 69.5 94.5 45.9 78.1 56.4 55 53.9 51.6 5/31/2023 11:30 AM 12:30 PM 58 79.1 47.7 63.6 62 58.8 56.3 52.5 5/31/2023 12:30 PM 1:30 PM 54.9 73 47.1 58.2 56.3 55.2 54.2 51.6 5/31/2023 1:30 PM 2:30 PM 55.2 77 47 59.6 57.7 56 54.1 52 5/31/2023 2:30 PM 3:30 PM 68.8 98.3 48.1 76.1 62.8 56.3 54.6 52.9 5/31/2023 3:30 PM 4:30 PM 55.7 69.5 47.4 57.8 57 56.1 55.3 53.2 5/31/2023 4:30 PM 5:30 PM 59.9 89.3 48.8 69.4 61.5 57.2 55.1 53.2 5/31/2023 5:30 PM 6:30 PM 56.5 75.6 47.4 60.7 58.3 56.4 54.8 51.8 5/31/2023 6:30 PM 7:30 PM 65.2 91.3 45.5 75.6 64.4 55.9 53.7 50.9 5/31/2023 7:30 PM 8:30 PM 52.9 69.8 42.8 57.9 56.5 52.9 52.1 49.6 5/31/2023 8:30 PM 9:30 PM 51.2 70.4 41.6 55.8 53.3 51.5 50.4 48.2 5/31/2023 9:30 PM 10:30 PM 50 69.8 38.1 55.3 52.8 49.5 48.5 46.4 5/31/2023 10:30 PM 11:30 PM 47.7 67 37.2 50.2 49.1 48.4 47.3 44 5/31/2023 11:30 PM 12:30 AM 46.7 67.6 35.3 52.7 50.7 47 44.9 42.6 6/1/2023 12:30 AM 1:30 AM 44.7 66.9 34 50.5 46.7 44.5 43 40.6 6/1/2023 1:30 AM 2:30 AM 43.1 64.2 32.5 48.8 45.2 42.9 41 34.8 6/1/2023 2:30 AM 3:30 AM 41.5 52.8 32.5 45.6 44.6 43.3 40.8 35.4 6/1/2023 3:30 AM 4:30 AM 42.1 58.3 33.4 47 44.7 43.1 41.6 36.4 6/1/2023 4:30 AM 5:30 AM 45.4 62 33.6 49 47.9 46.8 44.8 40.6 6/1/2023 5:30 AM 6:30 AM 57.4 80.5 36.8 67.2 57.8 51.7 49.7 45.8 6/1/2023 6:30 AM 7:30 AM 52.7 68 37.9 56.5 55.1 53.5 52.4 49.6 6/1/2023 7:30 AM 8:30 AM 52.6 69.3 44.2 56.7 55.3 53.4 52.2 49.1 6/1/2023 8:30 AM 9:30 AM 53.4 71.1 42.7 59 55.9 54 52.8 49.8 6/1/2023 9:30 AM 10:30 AM 53.1 72.1 45.5 57.5 54.9 53.9 52.6 50.1 Site Topo: plateau on a hill top
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: buildings 1-2 story
Day: 3 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Light rail and residential noise
DNL 61.4
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT1
24Hr - 1Hr Leq & L90
Site Topo: Hill
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Grass
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Road and commercial noise
Leq L90
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90

73.9 73.4 73.2 72.7 72.5 73.3 73.5 72.7 72.3 71.1 69.5 68.2 66.7 66.6

68.9 72.4 73.9

70.6 70.2 69.6 70.3

73.8 74 73.7
Time
Leq(h), dBA
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT1
24 Hr - 1Min Leq & L90
Site Topo: Hill
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Grass
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Road and commercial noise
Leq Lmax Lmin
1:00:00 PM
1:24:00 PM
1:48:00 PM
2:12:00 PM
2:36:00 PM
3:00:00 PM
3:24:00 PM
3:48:00 PM
4:12:00 PM
4:36:00 PM
5:00:00 PM
5:24:00 PM
5:48:00 PM
6:12:00 PM
6:36:00 PM
7:00:00 PM
7:24:00 PM
7:48:00 PM
8:12:00 PM
8:36:00 PM
9:00:00 PM
9:24:00 PM
9:48:00 PM
10:12:00 PM
10:36:00 PM
11:00:00 PM
11:24:00 PM
11:48:00 PM
12:12:00 AM
12:36:00 AM
1:00:00 AM
1:24:00 AM
1:48:00 AM
2:12:00 AM
2:36:00 AM
3:00:00 AM
3:24:00 AM
3:48:00 AM
4:12:00 AM
4:36:00 AM
5:00:00 AM
5:24:00 AM
5:48:00 AM
6:12:00 AM
6:36:00 AM
7:00:00 AM
7:24:00 AM
7:48:00 AM
8:12:00 AM
8:36:00 AM
9:00:00 AM
9:24:00 AM
9:48:00 AM
10:12:00 AM
10:36:00 AM
11:00:00 AM
11:24:00 AM
11:48:00 AM
12:12:00 PM
12:36:00 PM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
Time
dBA (Leq, 1-min)
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT2
24Hr - 1Hr Leq & L90
Site Topo: Buildings 1-2 stories
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Buildings and
asphalt
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:
road noise and residential noise
Leq L90
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
6:00 PM
7:00 PM
8:00 PM
9:00 PM
10:00 PM
11:00 PM
12:00 AM
1:00 AM
2:00 AM
3:00 AM
4:00 AM
5:00 AM
6:00 AM
7:00 AM
8:00 AM
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90

72.1 71.6 71.5 70.5 70 70.7 71.2 70.2 68.7 67.7 65.9 64.4 62.8 62.3 65 69.1 70.8

64.9 76.2 75.2

69.4 72.6 71.9 71.6
Time
Leq(h), dBA
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT2
24 Hr - 1Min Leq & L90
Site Topo: Buildings 1-2 stories
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: Buildings and
asphalt
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:
road noise and residential noise
Leq Lmax Lmin
1:00:00 PM
1:24:00 PM
1:48:00 PM
2:12:00 PM
2:36:00 PM
3:00:00 PM
3:24:00 PM
3:48:00 PM
4:12:00 PM
4:36:00 PM
5:00:00 PM
5:24:00 PM
5:48:00 PM
6:12:00 PM
6:36:00 PM
7:00:00 PM
7:24:00 PM
7:48:00 PM
8:12:00 PM
8:36:00 PM
9:00:00 PM
9:24:00 PM
9:48:00 PM
10:12:00 PM
10:36:00 PM
11:00:00 PM
11:24:00 PM
11:48:00 PM
12:12:00 AM
12:36:00 AM
1:00:00 AM
1:24:00 AM
1:48:00 AM
2:12:00 AM
2:36:00 AM
3:00:00 AM
3:24:00 AM
3:48:00 AM
4:12:00 AM
4:36:00 AM
5:00:00 AM
5:24:00 AM
5:48:00 AM
6:12:00 AM
6:36:00 AM
7:00:00 AM
7:24:00 AM
7:48:00 AM
8:12:00 AM
8:36:00 AM
9:00:00 AM
9:24:00 AM
9:48:00 AM
10:12:00 AM
10:36:00 AM
11:00:00 AM
11:24:00 AM
11:48:00 AM
12:12:00 PM
12:36:00 PM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Time
dBA (Leq, 1-min)
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT3
24Hr - 1Hr Leq & L90
Site Topo: plateau on a hill top
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: buildings 1-2 story
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Light rail and residential noise
Leq L90
10:30 AM
11:30 AM
12:30 PM
1:30 PM
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
4:30 PM
5:30 PM
6:30 PM
7:30 PM
8:30 PM
9:30 PM
10:30 PM
11:30 PM
12:30 AM
1:30 AM
2:30 AM
3:30 AM
4:30 AM
5:30 AM
6:30 AM
7:30 AM
8:30 AM
9:30 AM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90

69.5 58

54.9 55.2

68.8 55.7

59.9 56.5

65.2 52.9 51.2 50

47.7 46.7

44.7 43.1 41.5 42.1

45.4 57.4

52.7 52.6 53.4 53.1
Time
Leq(h), dBA
24-Hour Continuous Noise Measurement Datasheet - Cont.

Project Name: Lawndale Hawthorne GP & Specific Plan Update Site Address/Location: Manhattan Beach Blvd & I405
Site Id: LT3
24 Hr - 1Min Leq & L90
Site Topo: plateau on a hill top
Meteorological Cond.: Temps in the Mid
60°F during the day, Overcast winds 1-3 MPH
Ground Type: buildings 1-2 story
Day: 1 of 3
Noise Source(s) w/ Distance:

Light rail and residential noise
Leq Lmax Lmin
10:30:00 AM
10:54:00 AM
11:18:00 AM
11:42:00 AM
12:06:00 PM
12:30:00 PM
12:54:00 PM
1:18:00 PM
1:42:00 PM
2:06:00 PM
2:30:00 PM
2:54:00 PM
3:18:00 PM
3:42:00 PM
4:06:00 PM
4:30:00 PM
4:54:00 PM
5:18:00 PM
5:42:00 PM
6:06:00 PM
6:30:00 PM
6:54:00 PM
7:18:00 PM
7:42:00 PM
8:06:00 PM
8:30:00 PM
8:54:00 PM
9:18:00 PM
9:42:00 PM
10:06:00 PM
10:30:00 PM
10:54:00 PM
11:18:00 PM
11:42:00 PM
12:06:00 AM
12:30:00 AM
12:54:00 AM
1:18:00 AM
1:42:00 AM
2:06:00 AM
2:30:00 AM
2:54:00 AM
3:18:00 AM
3:42:00 AM
4:06:00 AM
4:30:00 AM
4:54:00 AM
5:18:00 AM
5:42:00 AM
6:06:00 AM
6:30:00 AM
6:54:00 AM
7:18:00 AM
7:42:00 AM
8:06:00 AM
8:30:00 AM
8:54:00 AM
9:18:00 AM
9:42:00 AM
10:06:00 AM
20 30
40 50
60 70
80 90
100
Time
dBA (Leq, 1-min)

Appendix C:

FHWA Roadway Noise Worksheets
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to 153rd Pl. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 30,382 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,038 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.778 0.128 0.094 0.875 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 40.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.805 0.087 0.108 0.115 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 40.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.758 0.089 0.153 0.011 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 40.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.5 67.6 65.8 59.7 68.3 69.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.4 68.7 65.0 61.2 69.5 69.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.3 63.3 60.0 57.6 65.3 65.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.7 71.8 69.0 64.5 72.8 73.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 107 338 1068 3378
LDN 96 304 960 3036

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT 169th St. to Redondo Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 40,769 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,077 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.761 0.127 0.112 0.869 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 76.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.806 0.075 0.119 0.117 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 76.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.712 0.084 0.204 0.013 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 76.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.0 66.0 64.2 58.9 67.2 67.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.0 67.3 63.0 60.2 68.4 68.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 64.7 62.4 59.1 58.2 65.4 65.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.3 70.4 67.4 64.0 71.9 72.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 170 538 1703 5384
LDN 156 492 1555 4918

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Manhattan Beach Blvd. to 160th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 39,254 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,925 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.778 0.128 0.094 0.875 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 76.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.805 0.087 0.108 0.115 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 76.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.758 0.089 0.153 0.011 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 76.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.8 66.0 64.1 58.0 66.7 67.3
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.7 67.0 63.4 59.5 67.9 68.3
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.6 61.6 58.4 55.9 63.6 63.9
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.0 70.2 67.4 62.8 71.2 71.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 145 460 1455 4600
LDN 131 413 1307 4135

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Artesia Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Inglewood Ave. to Grevillea Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 33,333 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,333 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.778 0.128 0.094 0.875 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 38.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.805 0.087 0.108 0.115 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 38.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.758 0.089 0.153 0.011 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 38.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.1 68.2 66.4 60.3 69.0 69.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.0 69.3 65.7 61.8 70.2 70.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.9 63.9 60.7 58.2 65.9 66.2
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.3 72.5 69.7 65.1 73.5 73.9

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 123 390 1234 3901
LDN 111 351 1109 3506

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Manhattan Beach Blvd. to Artesia Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 34,669 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,467 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.778 0.128 0.094 0.875 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 35.8 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.805 0.087 0.108 0.115 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 35.7 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.758 0.089 0.153 0.011 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 35.8 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.2 70.3 68.5 62.4 71.1 71.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.4 70.6 67.0 63.2 71.5 71.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 66.9 64.9 61.6 59.2 66.9 67.2
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.9 74.1 71.3 66.7 75.0 75.5

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 178 562 1777 5619
LDN 159 504 1593 5037

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 46,980 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 50 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,698 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.761 0.127 0.112 0.869 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 43.4 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.806 0.075 0.119 0.117 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 43.3 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.712 0.084 0.204 0.013 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 43.4 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.0 69.0 67.3 62.0 70.3 70.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.1 70.3 66.1 63.3 71.4 71.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 67.7 65.4 62.2 61.3 68.4 68.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.4 73.5 70.4 67.0 75.0 75.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 172 544 1720 5439
LDN 157 497 1571 4968

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Inglewood Ave to Hawthorne Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 23,463 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,346 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.818 0.115 0.067 0.883 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 35.8 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.846 0.066 0.088 0.111 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 35.7 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.815 0.046 0.138 0.006 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 35.8 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.6 68.9 66.4 59.3 68.8 69.4
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.5 69.0 64.0 60.4 69.3 69.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.7 61.0 54.6 54.6 62.4 62.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.9 72.3 68.6 63.5 72.5 73.0

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 99 313 989 3127
LDN 89 282 892 2820

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 36,715 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,672 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.5 65.7 63.8 57.7 66.4 67.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.4 66.7 63.1 59.2 67.6 68.0
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.3 61.3 58.1 55.6 63.3 63.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 71.7 69.9 67.1 62.5 70.9 71.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 136 430 1361 4303
LDN 122 387 1223 3867

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT 162nd St. to 166th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 44,037 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,404 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.3 66.3 64.6 59.3 67.5 68.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.3 67.6 63.3 60.5 68.7 69.0
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.0 62.7 59.5 58.5 65.7 66.0
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.7 70.8 67.7 64.3 72.3 72.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 184 582 1839 5816
LDN 168 531 1680 5312

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Rosecrans Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Hawthorne Blvd. to Prairie Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 32,747 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,275 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.0 70.1 68.3 62.2 70.8 71.4
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.1 70.4 66.8 62.9 71.3 71.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 66.6 64.7 61.4 59.0 66.6 66.9
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.6 73.8 71.1 66.4 74.8 75.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 168 531 1678 5308
LDN 150 476 1505 4758

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Redondo Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Hawthorne Blvd. to Prairie Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 18,912 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 1,891 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.818 0.115 0.067 0.883 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 38.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.846 0.066 0.088 0.111 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 38.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.815 0.046 0.138 0.006 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 38.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.4 67.7 65.2 58.1 67.6 68.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.3 67.8 62.8 59.2 68.1 68.4
HEAVY TRUCKS 61.5 59.8 53.4 53.4 61.2 61.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.7 71.1 67.4 62.3 71.3 71.8

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 75 237 749 2369
LDN 68 214 676 2137

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Freeman Ave. to Prairie Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 19,794 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 1,979 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.6 67.9 65.4 58.3 67.8 68.4
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.5 68.0 63.0 59.4 68.3 68.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 61.7 60.0 53.6 53.6 61.4 61.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.9 71.3 67.6 62.5 71.5 72.0

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 78 248 784 2480
LDN 71 224 707 2236

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Prairie Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 25,223 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,522 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.6 69.0 66.5 59.3 68.9 69.5
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.6 69.1 64.0 60.5 69.3 69.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.8 61.1 54.6 54.6 62.5 62.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.0 72.4 68.6 63.6 72.6 73.0

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 100 316 999 3160
LDN 90 285 901 2850

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Prairie Ave. to Crenshaw Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 21,543 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 55 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,154 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.818 0.115 0.067 0.883 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 41.9 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.846 0.066 0.088 0.111 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 41.8 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.815 0.046 0.138 0.006 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 41.9 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.9 66.2 63.7 56.6 66.1 66.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.6 67.1 62.0 58.5 67.3 67.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 61.1 59.5 53.0 53.0 60.9 61.0
VEHICULAR NOISE 71.7 70.1 66.2 61.3 70.3 70.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 59 187 591 1867
LDN 53 169 535 1690

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Crenshaw Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 27,196 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,720 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.818 0.115 0.067 0.883 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 40.1 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.846 0.066 0.088 0.111 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 40.0 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.815 0.046 0.138 0.006 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 40.1 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.1 67.4 64.9 57.8 67.3 67.9
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.8 68.3 63.2 59.7 68.5 68.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.3 60.7 54.2 54.2 62.1 62.2
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.9 71.3 67.4 62.5 71.5 71.9

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 78 246 778 2461
LDN 70 223 704 2227

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY San Diego Freeway DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT West of Hawthorne Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 254,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 25,400 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

VEHICLE TYPE DAY EVE NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE GRADE ADJUSTMENT AUTOMOBILES 0.761 0.127 0.112 0.869 AUTOMOBILES = 2.00 83.6 - - MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.806 0.075 0.119 0.117 MEDIUM TRUCKS= 4.00 83.5 - - HEAVY TRUCKS 0.712 0.084 0.204 0.013 HEAVY TRUCKS = 8.01 83.6 0.0

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.2 81.3 79.5 74.2 82.5 83.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.7 79.0 74.7 71.9 80.1 80.4
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.7 72.4 69.1 68.2 75.4 75.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.5 83.6 81.0 76.9 85.0 85.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3480 11003 34795 110033
LDN 3136 9915 31355 99155

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY San Diego Freeway DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT East of Hawthorne Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 242,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 24,200 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.0 81.1 79.3 74.0 82.3 82.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.5 78.8 74.5 71.7 79.9 80.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.5 72.2 68.9 68.0 75.2 75.5
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.3 83.4 80.8 76.7 84.8 85.2

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3315 10483 33152 104835
LDN 2987 9447 29874 94470

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to 153rd Pl. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 29,900 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,990 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.4 67.5 65.7 59.6 68.3 68.9
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.3 68.6 65.0 61.1 69.5 69.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.2 63.2 60.0 57.5 65.2 65.5
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.6 71.8 69.0 64.4 72.8 73.2

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 105 332 1051 3325
LDN 94 299 945 2988

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 33,500 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,350 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.1 68.3 66.4 60.3 69.0 69.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.1 69.3 65.7 61.8 70.2 70.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.9 63.9 60.7 58.3 65.9 66.2
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.3 72.5 69.7 65.1 73.5 73.9

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 124 392 1240 3921
LDN 111 352 1114 3524

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 27,400 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,740 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.2 69.6 67.1 60.0 69.5 70.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.2 69.7 64.7 61.1 70.0 70.3
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.4 61.7 55.3 55.3 63.1 63.3
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.6 73.0 69.2 64.2 73.2 73.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 115 365 1155 3652
LDN 104 329 1041 3293

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 33,600 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,360 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.1 70.2 68.4 62.3 70.9 71.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.2 70.5 66.9 63.0 71.4 71.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 66.8 64.8 61.5 59.1 66.7 67.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.8 73.9 71.2 66.5 74.9 75.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 172 545 1722 5446
LDN 154 488 1544 4882

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 36,400 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,640 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.4 70.6 68.7 62.6 71.3 71.9
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.6 70.9 67.2 63.4 71.7 72.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 67.1 65.1 61.8 59.4 67.1 67.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 76.1 74.3 71.6 66.9 75.2 75.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 187 590 1866 5900
LDN 167 529 1673 5289

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 34,600 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,460 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.3 65.4 63.6 57.5 66.1 66.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.2 66.4 62.8 59.0 67.3 67.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.1 61.1 57.8 55.4 63.0 63.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 71.5 69.6 66.8 62.3 70.6 71.1

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 128 405 1282 4055
LDN 115 364 1152 3644

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Manhattan Beach Blvd. to 160th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 39,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,900 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.8 65.9 64.1 58.0 66.7 67.3
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.7 67.0 63.3 59.5 67.8 68.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.6 61.6 58.3 55.9 63.6 63.9
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.0 70.1 67.3 62.8 71.1 71.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 145 457 1445 4571
LDN 130 411 1299 4108

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT 162nd St. to 166th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 43,200 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,320 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.2 66.2 64.5 59.2 67.5 68.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.2 67.5 63.3 60.5 68.6 68.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 64.9 62.6 59.4 58.5 65.6 65.9
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.6 70.7 67.6 64.2 72.2 72.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 180 571 1804 5706
LDN 165 521 1648 5211

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 40,200 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,020 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.9 65.9 64.2 58.9 67.1 67.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.9 67.2 62.9 60.1 68.3 68.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 64.6 62.3 59.1 58.2 65.3 65.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.3 70.4 67.3 63.9 71.9 72.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 168 531 1679 5309
LDN 153 485 1533 4849

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 47,100 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 50 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,710 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.0 69.1 67.3 62.0 70.3 70.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.1 70.3 66.1 63.3 71.4 71.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 67.7 65.5 62.2 61.3 68.4 68.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.4 73.5 70.4 67.0 75.0 75.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 172 545 1724 5453
LDN 157 498 1575 4980

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 22,300 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,230 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.1 68.4 65.9 58.8 68.3 69.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.1 68.5 63.5 60.0 68.8 69.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.2 60.6 54.1 54.1 61.9 62.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.4 71.8 68.1 63.0 72.0 72.5

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 88 279 883 2794
LDN 80 252 797 2519

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY San Diego Freeway DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT East of Hawthorne Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 241,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 24,100 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.0 81.0 79.3 74.0 82.3 82.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.5 78.8 74.5 71.7 79.9 80.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.4 72.2 68.9 68.0 75.2 75.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.3 83.4 80.8 76.6 84.7 85.2

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3301 10440 33015 104401
LDN 2975 9408 29751 94080

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Freeman Ave. to Prairie Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 23,800 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,380 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.4 68.7 66.2 59.1 68.6 69.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.3 68.8 63.8 60.2 69.1 69.4
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.5 60.8 54.4 54.4 62.2 62.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.7 72.1 68.4 63.3 72.3 72.8

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 94 298 943 2981
LDN 85 269 850 2689

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 28,300 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,830 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.1 69.5 67.0 59.8 69.4 70.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.1 69.6 64.5 61.0 69.8 70.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.3 61.6 55.1 55.1 63.0 63.2
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.5 72.9 69.1 64.1 73.1 73.5

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 112 355 1121 3545
LDN 101 320 1011 3197

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Prairie Ave. to Crenshaw Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Existing

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 23,600 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 55 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,360 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.3 66.6 64.1 57.0 66.5 67.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.0 67.5 62.4 58.9 67.7 68.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 61.5 59.9 53.4 53.4 61.2 61.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.0 70.5 66.6 61.7 70.7 71.1

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 65 205 647 2046
LDN 59 185 586 1852

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 32,900 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,290 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.9 68.2 65.7 58.6 68.1 68.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.6 69.1 64.1 60.5 69.3 69.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.2 61.5 55.0 55.0 62.9 63.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.7 72.1 68.2 63.4 72.3 72.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 94 298 941 2977
LDN 85 269 852 2694

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 253,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 25,300 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.2 81.3 79.5 74.2 82.5 83.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.7 79.0 74.7 71.9 80.1 80.4
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.6 72.4 69.1 68.2 75.4 75.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.5 83.6 81.0 76.9 84.9 85.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3466 10960 34658 109600
LDN 3123 9876 31232 98764

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to 153rd Pl. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 30,400 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,040 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.5 67.6 65.8 59.7 68.4 69.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.4 68.7 65.0 61.2 69.5 69.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.3 63.3 60.0 57.6 65.3 65.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.7 71.8 69.0 64.5 72.8 73.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 107 338 1069 3380
LDN 96 304 961 3038

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 27,500 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,750 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.3 69.6 67.1 60.0 69.5 70.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.2 69.7 64.7 61.1 70.0 70.3
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.4 61.7 55.3 55.3 63.1 63.3
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.6 73.0 69.3 64.2 73.2 73.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 116 366 1159 3665
LDN 105 331 1045 3305

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Inglewood Ave. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT I-405 S Entrance to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 47,200 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 50 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,720 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.0 69.1 67.3 62.0 70.3 70.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.1 70.3 66.1 63.3 71.4 71.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 67.7 65.5 62.2 61.3 68.5 68.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.4 73.5 70.4 67.0 75.0 75.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 173 546 1728 5465
LDN 158 499 1578 4991

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT 162nd St. to 166th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 44,900 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,490 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.4 66.4 64.7 59.3 67.6 68.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.4 67.7 63.4 60.6 68.8 69.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 65.1 62.8 59.5 58.6 65.8 66.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.8 70.8 67.8 64.4 72.3 72.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 188 593 1875 5930
LDN 171 542 1713 5416

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Marine Ave. to Manhattan Beach Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 35,900 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,590 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.4 65.6 63.7 57.6 66.3 66.9
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.3 66.6 63.0 59.1 67.5 67.9
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.2 61.2 58.0 55.6 63.2 63.5
VEHICULAR NOISE 71.6 69.8 67.0 62.4 70.8 71.2

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 133 421 1330 4207
LDN 120 378 1196 3781

NOISE INPUT DATA

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 124 392 1240 3921
LDN 111 352 1114 3524

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Hawthorne Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Manhattan Beach Blvd. to 160th St. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 40,300 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 130 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 4,030 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.9 66.1 64.2 58.1 66.8 67.4
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.8 67.1 63.5 59.6 68.0 68.4
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.7 61.8 58.5 56.1 63.7 64.0
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.1 70.3 67.5 62.9 71.3 71.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 149 472 1494 4723
LDN 134 424 1342 4245

NOISE INPUT DATA

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 67.9 65.9 64.2 58.9 67.2 67.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 68.9 67.2 62.9 60.2 68.3 68.6
HEAVY TRUCKS 64.6 62.3 59.1 58.2 65.3 65.6
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.3 70.4 67.3 63.9 71.9 72.3

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 168 532 1683 5323
LDN 154 486 1537 4861

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 33,800 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,380 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.1 70.2 68.4 62.3 71.0 71.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.3 70.5 66.9 63.0 71.4 71.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 66.8 64.8 61.5 59.1 66.7 67.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 75.8 74.0 71.2 66.6 74.9 75.4

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 173 548 1732 5479
LDN 155 491 1553 4911

NOISE INPUT DATA

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 88 279 883 2794
LDN 80 252 797 2519

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 36,300 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 70 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,630 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.4 70.5 68.7 62.6 71.3 71.9
MEDIUM TRUCKS 72.6 70.8 67.2 63.4 71.7 72.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 67.1 65.1 61.8 59.4 67.1 67.4
VEHICULAR NOISE 76.1 74.3 71.5 66.9 75.2 75.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 186 588 1861 5884
LDN 167 527 1668 5274

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Freeman Ave. to Prairie Ave. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 24,100 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,410 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 70.4 68.8 66.3 59.1 68.7 69.3
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.4 68.9 63.8 60.3 69.1 69.5
HEAVY TRUCKS 62.6 60.9 54.4 54.4 62.3 62.5
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.8 72.2 68.4 63.4 72.4 72.8

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 95 302 955 3019
LDN 86 272 861 2723

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 28,900 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 40 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 65 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,890 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.2 69.5 67.1 59.9 69.5 70.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 71.2 69.7 64.6 61.1 69.9 70.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.4 61.7 55.2 55.2 63.1 63.3
VEHICULAR NOISE 74.5 73.0 69.2 64.1 73.1 73.6

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 114 362 1145 3620
LDN 103 326 1032 3265

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY Manhattan Beach Blvd. DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT Prairie Ave. to Crenshaw Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 24,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 55 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 2,400 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 68.3 66.7 64.2 57.0 66.6 67.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 69.1 67.5 62.5 59.0 67.8 68.1
HEAVY TRUCKS 61.6 59.9 53.5 53.5 61.3 61.5
VEHICULAR NOISE 72.1 70.5 66.6 61.8 70.8 71.2

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 66 208 658 2080
LDN 60 188 595 1883

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 33,200 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 50
SPEED = 35 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 60 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 50 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 3,320 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 69.9 68.3 65.8 58.6 68.2 68.8
MEDIUM TRUCKS 70.7 69.1 64.1 60.6 69.4 69.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 63.2 61.5 55.1 55.1 62.9 63.1
VEHICULAR NOISE 73.7 72.1 68.2 63.4 72.4 72.8

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 95 300 950 3004
LDN 86 272 860 2719

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 271,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 27,100 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.5 81.5 79.8 74.5 82.8 83.3
MEDIUM TRUCKS 81.0 79.3 75.0 72.2 80.4 80.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.9 72.7 69.4 68.5 75.7 75.9
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.8 83.9 81.3 77.1 85.2 85.7

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3712 11740 37124 117397
LDN 3345 10579 33454 105791

VEHICLE MIX DATA
FHWA-RD-77-108 ROADWAY TRAFFIC NOISE PREDICTION MODEL (CNEL) - CALVENO PROJECT: Lawndale General Plan Update JOB #: 0462-19-10 ROADWAY San Diego Freeway DATE: 27-Jun-23
SEGMENT East of Hawthorne Blvd. ENGINEER: C. Pincock
LOCATION: City of Lawndale, CA SCENARIO: Future Plus Project

NOISE INPUT DATA

ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
0 ADT = 259,000 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 100
SPEED = 65 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 110 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 100 ROAD ELEVATION = 0 PAD ELEVATION = 0
GRADE = 0 ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE -90
PK HR VOL = 25,900 RT ANGLE 90
DF ANGLE 180

SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
AUTOMOBILES 10 HTH WALL = 0 FT
MED TRUCKS 10 (HARD SITE=10, SOFT SITE=15) AMBIENT = 0
HVY TRUCKS 10 BARRIER = 0 (0=WALL,1=BERM)
MISC. VEHICLE INFO

NOISE OUTPUT DATA

NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)

VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 83.3 81.4 79.6 74.3 82.6 83.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 80.8 79.1 74.8 72.0 80.2 80.5
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.8 72.5 69.2 68.3 75.5 75.7
VEHICULAR NOISE 85.6 83.7 81.1 77.0 85.0 85.5

NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 3548 11220 35480 112199
LDN 3197 10111 31973 101107

VEHICLE MIX DATA

Appendix F: Transportation Impact Analysis

July 12, 2023

LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN

CEQA TRANSPORTATION

ANALYSIS

LAWNDALE, CA
Inside front cover
Page Intentionally blank
Lawndale General Plan CEQA
Transportation Analysis
Lawndale, CA
Prepared for:

City of Lawndale
14717 Burin Avenue
Lawndale, CA 90260
Prepared by:

Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
750 The City Drive, Suite 410
Orange, CA 92868
714.468.1997
Project Principal:

Tim Erney, AICP, PTP
Senior Principal Planner
Project Manager:

Fernando Sotelo, TE
Associate Engineer

Project Number 24360
July 11, 2023
July 12, 2023
Page Intentionally blank

CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 2 Purpose of Transportation Study............................................................................................ 5 Project Characteristics........................................................................................................... 5 Development Potential ...................................................................................................... 5 Circulation And Parking...................................................................................................... 6 Regulatory Framework .........................................................................................................14 State Regulations ..............................................................................................................14 Regional Regulations........................................................................................................16 Local Regulations ..............................................................................................................17 Existing Circulation System...................................................................................................23 Roadway Network ............................................................................................................23 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities......................................................................................24 Transit Services...................................................................................................................26 CEQA Significance Thresholds.............................................................................................28 Transportation Significance Criteria ................................................................................28 Specific Transportation Thresholds...................................................................................28 CEQA Analysis Methodology...............................................................................................31 Travel Demand Model......................................................................................................31 Impact Analysis.....................................................................................................................34 Roadway Volumes Forecast................................................................................................38 CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 List of Figures
Kittelson & Associates ii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: General Plan Update Land Use Map......................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: General Plan Update Land-Use Change Map ......................................................................................... 9 Figure 3: Roadway Functional Classifications Map................................................................................................10 Figure 4: Existing and Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Networks Map .............................................................11 Figure 5: Local Street Network Map.........................................................................................................................12 Figure 6: Proposed Greenline Extension Project Map............................................................................................13 Figure 7: Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Map................................................................................................22 CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 List of Tables
Kittelson & Associates iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Summary of VMT Impacts............................................................................................................................. 3 Table 2 General Plan Update Buildout by Land Use Designation Summary ......................................................... 7 Table 3 General Plan Update Growth Totals ............................................................................................................ 7 Table 4 LA Metro Bus Service in Lawndale..............................................................................................................27 Table 5: Existing General Plan Non-Residential Land Use Assumptions................................................................32 Table 6: Proposed General Plan Non-Residential Land Use Assumptions............................................................32 Table 7: SCAG Model Land Use Inputs for Lawndale Planning Area TAZs1..........................................................33 Table 8: VMT Generated by Land Uses within the Project Area and Region......................................................36 Table 9: Existing and Future Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes................................................................39 CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Appendices
Kittelson & Associates iv

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Detailed VMT Impact Summary
Page intentionally blank.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Executive Summary
Kittelson & Associates 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Lawndale is updating its General Plan, which will guide the City’s development, growth, and conservation through land use objectives and policy guidance. While no specific development projects are proposed as part of the Lawndale General Plan Update , the General Plan Update will accommodate future growth in Lawndale, including new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and new residential uses.

New growth is anticipated to occur primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area. The buildout analysis assumes a 20-year planning horizon, with 2045 being the full buildout year of the General Plan Update. The study area is comprised of city boundaries and the city’s sphere of influence. The Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) is also being updated and incorporated in this analysis. The proposed general plan is referred to in this study as “General Plan Update” or “Project”, and the project area is referenced as “General Plan Planning Area” or “the Planning Area”. The adopted General Plan is referred in this study as “Existing General Plan”. This transportation impact study was prepared to provide an evaluation of the potential transportation impacts from the Project.

VMT IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Per current CEQA requirements, Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact. Since the City has not officially adopted VMT thresholds and guidelines for the preparation of transportation studies, this analysis relies on guidance from the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) technical advisory to evaluate CEQA guidelines for VMT. The following VMT thresholds apply as project impacts:
 The general plan’s residential generated VMT under future conditions would be compared to 15% below the baseline (existing) region-wide VMT/capita average to determine impact significance.  The general plan’s office generated VMT under future conditions would be compared to 15% below the baseline(existing) region-wide VMT/employee average to determine impact significance.

A significant cumulative VMT impact would occur if the Project threshold is exceeded, or if the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (RTP/SCS). The 2020 RTP/SCS describes how the region can attain the GHG emission-reduction targets set by CARB by achieving a 19 percent reduction by 2035 compared to the 2005 level.

The following scenarios were reviewed and/or developed to analyze potential VMT impacts with the Project:
 2023 Existing Conditions: corresponds to the existing circulation network and 2023 land use profile.  2045 No Project: corresponds to the future year 2045 conditions under currently adopted plan. It consists of the Existing General Plan network and land use adopted in 1992.  2045 Project: corresponds to the future year 2045 conditions with maximum development potential with the General Plan Update that is being proposed.

Project VMT Impact Assessment
The projected VMT impacts due to the Project were calculated using the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) regional travel model, the results of which are shown in Table 1.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Executive Summary
Kittelson & Associates 3
Table 1: Summary of VMT Impacts
Units 2023 Existing Conditions 2045 No Project 2045 Project Capita
VMT Per Capita 9.87 8.87 9.19
Impact Threshold1 N/A N/A 10.89

EXCEEDS THRESHOLD N/A N/A NO
Employee
VMT Per Employee 16.26 15.05 14.78
Impact Threshold1 N/A N/A 15.41

EXCEEDS THRESHOLD N/A N/A NO
Total Regional VMT
Los Angeles County 339,797,977 358,489,475 358,820,209
Source: Kittelson and Associates, 2023.
1 Impact threshold is 15% below Los Angeles County 2023 base year value 2 Refer to Appendix A for detailed VMT summary showing results for the SCAG region, Los Angeles County and Lawndale.

N/A = not applicable.

Future conditions with the Project would result in decreased VMT per employee and VMT per capita in comparison to 2023 existing conditions. Comparing the Project to 2045 No Project conditions , there would be an increase in VMT per capita and a decrease in VMT per employee; however, the impact threshold would not be exceeded for the Project. Therefore, with respect to consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), the impact of the Project would be less than significant.

Cumulative VMT Impact Assessment
As noted above, the project impacts in VMT would be less than significant, as the Project’s VMT per capita and VMT per employee would not exceed applicable thresholds. The project would also be consistent with the RTP/SCS as it’s increasing the local and regional housing supply to meet regional housing needs and locating housing in a transit-rich area. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.

POTENTIAL CONFLICT WITH A PROGRAM, PLAN, ORDINANCE, OR

POLICY ADDRESSING THE CIRCULATION SYSTEM
Relevant City circulation system policies, programs, and plans were reviewed to confirm consistency and that the Project would not preclude implementation of existing plans. Overall, it was determined the Project would not conflict with any approved transportation plans and programs. Moreover, it was determined that there would be a less than significant impact to emergency vehicle access.

POTENTIAL INCREASE IN HAZARDS
The Project does not propose any specific development projects. The Project will accommodate future growth in the City, including new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and new residential uses. New growth is anticipated to occur primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area.

Prior to implementation, any improvements would be subject to a detailed review and future consideration by the City’s Public Works engineering staff and other relevant City agencies. An evaluation of the roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features would be needed at the project design level.

Roadway improvements would have to be made in accordance with the City’s circulation plan and CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Executive Summary
Kittelson & Associates 4
roadway design guidelines and meet design guidelines in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the Caltrans Roadway Design Manual.

Overall, implementation of the Proposed General Plan would not result in hazardous conditions. As individual projects and circulation improvements would undergo review by Public Works and Planning departments for approval and construction and would have to meet design guidelines, no significant impacts would occur.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Purpose of Transportation Study
Kittelson & Associates 5

PURPOSE OF TRANSPORTATION STUDY
The purpose of this transportation study is to assess potentially significant impacts resulting from the implementation of the City of Lawndale General Plan Update project (Project) on the transportation system, and to identify measures to mitigate those impacts. The study also serves as the basis for the transportation component of the Plan’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This study includes a review of the following:
 Assessment of the existing circulation conditions, including roadways, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities.
 Review of consistency with existing City programs, plans, ordinances, and policies related to pedestrian and bicyclists, and transit facilities.
 Assessment of the Project's Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impact compared to the City’s adopted thresholds.
 Assessment of impacts and mitigations related to geometric design and emergency access.

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The City of Lawndale is preparing a comprehensive update to its General Plan, which will guide the City’s development, growth, and conservation through land use objectives and policy guidance. The general plan update is referred to in this study as “General Plan Update” or “Project” The City will implement the project by requiring development, infrastructure improvements, and other projects to be consistent with its policies, and by implementing the actions included in the General Plan Update.

Figure 1 presents the General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area) and the proposed General Plan Land Use Map. The Planning Area includes the current city limits as well as an extended Sphere of Influence area.

While no specific development projects are proposed as part of the Project, it will accommodate future growth in Lawndale, including new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and new residential uses.

New growth is anticipated to occur primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area. The transportation analysis is based on a 20-year planning horizon, and 2045 is assumed to be the full buildout year of the General Plan (the point at which all parcels in the City are developed according to their General Plan land use designation).

The Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) oversees the development of the Hawthorne Boulevard corridor and the north side of both Artesia Boulevard and Redondo Beach Boulevard. The Specific Plan was originally adopted in June 1999 and has undergone various amendments since its adoption. The Specific Plan includes General Commercial, Downtown Commercial, Public Facilities and Multi-Family Medium land use designations. Hawthorne Boulevard serves as the City’s primary transportation route, corridor of economic activity, and the community focal point. The HBSP acts as a tool for implementing the goals and policies of the General Plan through the regulation of use, density, height, and other design standards to achieve the overall vision for the area. The HBSP is incorporated into this analysis.

DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
Table 2 provides a summary of the buildout potential associated with the General Plan Update Land Use Map compared to existing on-the-ground conditions by land use designation. As shown in Table 2, buildout of the General Plan could yield a total of up to 15,405 housing units, a population of 47,430 people, approximately 5.35 million square feet of non-residential building square footage, and 9,208 jobs within the Planning Area. Figure 2 shows the land use change map. As shown in Table 3, this represents increases over existing conditions of up to approximately 3,942 new housing units, 9,482 people, 808,000 square feet of new non-residential building square footage, and 2,738 jobs.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Project Characteristics
Kittelson & Associates 6
The Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan (HBSP) would account for 90 percent of the proposed growth in residential units within the planning area, 38 percent of the growth in non-residential square footage, and 56 percent of the growth in jobs.

CIRCULATION AND PARKING
The General Plan Mobility Element correlates closely with the Land Use Element and identifies the general locations and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, and alternative transportation facilities necessary to support a multi-modal transportation system. This Element is intended to facilitate the movement of people and goods throughout Lawndale by a variety of transportation modes, including vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, and transit.

ROADWAYS
The proposed General Plan Mobility Element includes a map of proposed vehicular roadway classifications, as shown in Figure 3. The proposed General Plan Mobility Element also includes existing and proposed bicycle networks, as shown in Figure 4. The bicycle facilities have been proposed through several documents and plans, including the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan (2012), and the LA Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (2006) and are incorporated in the proposed Mobility Plan.

Figure 5 shows the map of the Local Travel Network to promote micro-mobility modes through the City of Lawndale. The Project is not proposing roadway expansions such as adding through lanes to existing roads.

The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) has plans to connect more of the South Bay by extending the C rail transit line (Green) from Redondo Beach Station to the new Torrance Transit Center (see Figure 6). Metro prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for public review from January 26 to March 27, 2023. The DEIR evaluated three alignments: Metro ROW Elevated/At-Grade Alignment, Trench Option, and Hawthorne Option. Both the Metro ROW and Trench Option would utilize a Metro-owned railroad corridor generally located parallel to Condon Avenue though the western portion of the city, whereas the Hawthorne Option would operate in an elevated alignment located within the median of Hawthorne Boulevard. Metro is anticipated to make a recommendation on its preferred alignment in Summer 2023 based on findings from the DEIR, public comments made during the comment period, technical analysis, stakeholder input, and other factors such as cost, ridership, and project objectives. While three alignments are being considered, this transportation analysis assumes the at-grade alignment within the Metro ROW, consistent with assumptions used by SCAG for the Regional Transportation Plan.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Project Characteristics
Kittelson & Associates 7
Table 2 General Plan Update Buildout by Land Use Designation Summary General Plan
Land Use
Designations
Existing Conditions 2045 Proposed General Plan (Project) Net Change Units Pop. NRSF Jobs Units Pop. NRSF Jobs Units Pop. NRSF Jobs City of Lawndale
LDR 575 2,090 0 0 420 1,537 0 0 -155 -553 0 0
MDR 5,522 19,255 126,644 199 5,534 18,404 0 0 12 -851 -126,644 -199 HDR 3,229 9,190 50,934 80 3,464 9,418 0 0 235 228 -50,934 -80 C 120 365 487,809 768 311 706 836,681 1,673 191 341 348,872 905 I 55 184 336,957 531 0 0 459,130 612 -55 -184 122,173 81 OS 0 0 0 0 27 62 0 0 27 62 0 0
PF 0 0 1,124,243 1,125 0 0 1,124,243 1,124 0 0 0 -1
HBSP 391 1,125 2,174,447 3,424 3,931 11,017 2,484,823 4,970 3,540 9,892 310,376 1,546 City Total 9,892 32,209 4,301,034 6,127 13,688 41,144 4,904,877 8,379 3,796 8,935 603,843 2,252 Sphere of Influence (SOI)
LDR 1,569 5,734 0 0 1,717 6,286 0 0 148 552 0 0
C 2 5 177,631 280 0 0 382,651 765 -2 -5 205,020 485
PF 0 0 63,498 63 0 0 63,498 63 0 0 0 0
SOI Total 1,571 5,740 241,129 343 1,717 6,286 446,149 829 146 546 205,020 486 Grand Total 11,463 37,948 4,542,162 6,470 15,405 47,430 5,351,026 9,208 3,942 9,482 808,864 2,738 Notes: LDR: low density residential; MDR: medium density residential; HDR: high density residential; C: commercial; I: industrial; OS: open space; PF: public facilities; HBSP:

Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan; SOI: Sphere of Influence; Units: Housing Units; Pop.: Population; NRSF: Non-residential square footage; Numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Source: De Novo Planning Group, Project Description, June 7, 2023.

Table 3 General Plan Update Growth Totals
Description Housing Units Population Non-Residential
Development (Square Feet) Jobs
Existing Conditions 11,463 37,948 4,542,162 6,470
Proposed General Plan 15,405 47,430 5,351,026 9,208
Net Change +3,942 +9,482 +808,864 +2,738
Source: De Novo Planning Group, Project Description, June 7, 2023.

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence Planning
Area
Assessor Parcel Boundary
Housing Opportunity Overlay
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Commercial
Hawthorne Blvd Specific Plan
Industrial
Open Space
Public Facilities
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: June 20, 2023.

Figure LU-1.

Land Use Map
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
0 500 1,000
Feet
Figure 1.Figure 1.

General Plan Update
Land Use Map

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Adjacent Incorporated
Hawthorn Boulevard Specific
Plan Boundary
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: June 20, 2023.

Figure LU-3.

Hawthorne Boulevard
Specific Plan Map
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
G a r d e n a
To r ra n c e
0 500 1,000
Feet
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
144th St
W 162nd St Ramona A
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
May Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave Figure 2.

General Plan Update
Land Use Change Map
M cB a in
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Vail Ave
Robinson St
n
May Ave
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Beland Blvd
Pinckard Ave
Gibson Ln

L E G E N D
City of Lawndale
Assessor Parcel Boundary
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Commercial
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan
Industrial
Open Space
Public Facilities
Housing Opportunity Overlay
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
W 170th St
165th St
W 162nd St
163rd St
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
W 145th St
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
173 rd S t
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
166th St
Eastwood Ave
162nd St
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
153rd Pl
161st St
Avis Ave
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
405
Artesia Blvd
Date: October 27, 2022. Revised June 21, 2023

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: March 21, 2023.

Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
To r r a n c e
H a w t h o r n e
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
0 500 1,000
Feet
Figure X.

Functional
Classification
LEGEND
Freeway
Major Arterial
Collector
Local Street
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Roadway Functional
Classifications Map

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: March 21, 2023.

Existing and Planned
Bike Facilities
LEGEND
Existing Bike Facilities
Class I Bike Paths
Class II Bike Lanes
Class III Bike Routes
Class IV Protected Bike Lanes
Proposed Bike Facilities
Class I Bike Paths
Class II Bike Lanes
Class III Bike Routes
Class IV Protected Bike Lanes
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
Figure 4. Existing and
Figure 4.

Proposed Bicycle and
Pedestrian Networks
Map

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
LEGEND
Local Transportation Network
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Other Incorporated Area
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: March 21, 2023.

Figure X.

Local Transportation
Network
Crenshaw Blvd
Prairie Ave
W Rosecrans Ave
Hawthorne Blvd
Prairie Ave
Inglewood Ave
Manhattan Beach Blvd
Rosecrans Ave
Redondo Beach Blvd
Yukon Ave
Marine Ave
Condon Ave
147th St
171st St
Ainsworth Ave
Jefferson Ave
W 168th St
S La C ien e g a Blvd
M cB a i n A ve
Cranbrook Ave
S Doty Ave
Gerkin Ave
S Shoup Ave
W 170th St
Bodger Ave
Kornblum A ve
Carnegie Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
W 140th St
165th St
W 162nd St Ramona Ave
163rd St
Prairie Ave
170th St
Doty Ave
Johnston Ave
Dow Ave
Kingsdale Ave
Mansel Ave
153rd St
S Lemoli Ave
156th St
Cerise Ave
W 152nd St
Robinson St
Perkins Ln
Felton Ln
W 145th St
Mackay Ln
Freeman Ave
Osage Ave
W 157th St
Burin Ave
Grevillea Ave
Firmona Ave
W 154th St
Gates Ave
Graham Ave
Curtis Ave
Voorhees Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
144th Pl
173 rd S t
175th Pl
W 171st St
S Eriel Ave
W 163rd St
168th St
164th St
167th St
W 173rd St 173rd Pl
W 166th St
W 142nd St
141st St
W 147th St
W 149th St
W 161st St
W 160th St
154th St
14 8 th S t
Lemoli Ave
166th St
Eastwood Ave
Chadron Ave
162nd St Beland Blvd
W 159th St
Yukon Ave
160th St
Larch Ave
172nd St
Fo nth ill A ve
153rd Pl
W 146th St
161st St
Avis Ave
139th St
169th St
159th St
W 156th St
W 139th St
142nd St
S Ermanita Ave
S Faysmith Ave
1 4 7 th P l Roselle Ave
Cordary Ave
S Florwood Ave
W 153rd St
W 154th St
175th St
Gibson Ln
405
Artesia Blvd
Mathews Ave
To r r a n c e
H a w t h o r n e
H a w t h o r n e
R e d o n d o B e a c h
0 500 1,000
Feet
Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Local Street Network
Map
Figure 6.

Proposed Greenline Extension Project Map
CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 14

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The regulatory framework applicable to the Project includes state, regional and local plans pertinent to the City of Lawndale and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process for transportation and circulation.

STATE REGULATIONS
California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) manages the operation of state highways and is the primary state agency responsible for transportation issues. One of its duties is the construction and maintenance of the state highway system. Caltrans approves the planning, design, and construction of improvements for all state-controlled facilities, including I-405, and the associated interchanges. Freeway segments, freeway ramps and intersections associated with freeway on- and off-ramps fall under Caltrans jurisdiction. Hawthorne Boulevard is under Caltrans jurisdiction, however the City of Lawndale maintains it within City limits.

Caltrans has developed procedures to determine if state-controlled facilities require improvements. For projects that may physically affect facilities under its administration, Caltrans requires encroachment permits before any construction work may be undertaken. For projects that would not physically affect facilities but may influence traffic flow and operational deficiencies at such facilities, Caltrans may recommend measures to address adverse effects from traffic caused by such projects. Caltrans also prepares comprehensive planning documents, including Corridor System Management Plans and Transportation Concept Reports, which are long-range planning documents that establish a planning concept for state facilities.

Caltrans updated its guidance in 2020 to include metrics to evaluate transportation impacts based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and no longer sets a minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) for its facilities.

Based on the Caltrans Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide, Caltrans has transitioned from LOS performance standards to VMT to identify significant impacts. “For land use projects and plans, automobile delay is no longer considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA (SB 743, 2013). Caltrans review of land use projects and plans is focused on a VMT metric, consistent with changes to the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15064.3(b)(1)). This VMT-focused TISG provides a foundation for review of how lead agencies apply the VMT metric to CEQA project analysis.

Beyond or in addition to the use of the VMT metric, determining how the State Highway System may otherwise be affected by a land use project may still be necessary at times, particularly as it relates to the safety of the traveling public. Additional future guidance will include the basis for requesting transportation impact analysis that is not based on VMT. This guidance will include a simplified safety analysis approach that reduces risks to all road users and focuses on multi-modal conflict analysis as well as access management issues. With this guidance the Department will transition away from requesting LOS or other vehicle operations analyses of land use projects.”1 1 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELLED- FOCUSED TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY GUIDE, CALTRANS, 2020. HTTPS://DOT.CA.GOV/-/MEDIA/DOTMEDIA/PROGRAMS/TRANSPORTATION-PLANNING/DOCUMENTS/SB-743/2020-05-20-APPROVED-VMT-FOCUSED-TISG-A11Y.PDF CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 15
Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 32, and Senate Bill 375
Assembly Bill (AB) 32, also known as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, committed California to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In 2016, SB 32 added a new target:
reducing statewide emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.

SB 375 provides guidance for curbing emissions from cars and light trucks to help California comply with AB

32. There are five major components to SB 375:
 Air Resources Board (ARB) will guide the adoption of GHG emission targets to be met by each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the state.
 MPOs are required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting these regional targets. The SCS must be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).  Regional housing elements and transportation plans must be synchronized on eight-year schedules.

Also, the SCS and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) must be consistent with each other.  CEQA is streamlined for preferred development types such as mixed-use projects and transit-oriented developments (TODs) if they meet specific requirements.  MPOs must use transportation and air emission modeling methodologies consistent with California Transportation Commission (CTC) guidelines.

California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358)
Originally passed in 2008, California’s Complete Streets Act took effect in 2011 and requires local jurisdictions to plan for land use transportation policies that reflect a “complete streets” approach to mobility. “Complete streets” comprises a suite of policies and street design guidelines which provide for the needs of all road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit operators and riders, children, the elderly, and the disabled.

From 2011 onward, any local jurisdiction—county or city—that undertakes a substantive update of the circulation element of its general plan must consider “complete streets” and incorporate corresponding policies and programs. In 2010, OPR released guidelines for compliance with this legislation which provide direction on how circulation elements can best plan for a variety of travel modes such as transit, walking, bicycling, and freight.

Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed into law. SB 743 has fundamentally changed transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. In its Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018), OPR provides recommendations for jurisdictions to implement SB 743-compliant transportation analyses. OPR’s recommendations are not binding and lead agencies ultimately have the discretion to set or apply their own significance thresholds, provided they are based on significant evidence. Key guidance includes:
• VMT is the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact. • OPR recommends tour- and trip-based travel models to estimate VMT, but ultimately defers to local agencies to determine the appropriate tools.
• OPR recommends measuring VMT for residential and office projects on a “per rate” basis.

Specifically, OPR recommends VMT per capita for residential projects and VMT per employee for office projects.
• OPR’s recommended impact threshold for residential and office projects is VMT per capita fifteen percent below the city or regional average (whichever is applied). In other words, an office project that generates VMT per employee that is more than 85 percent of the regional VMT per employee could result in a significant impact. This threshold is in line with statewide greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 16
• For retail projects, OPR recommends measuring the net decrease or increase in VMT in the study area with and without the project. The recommended impact threshold is any increase in total VMT. • Lead agencies ultimately have the discretion to set or apply their own significance thresholds, provided they are based on significant evidence.
• Cities and counties still can use metrics such as LOS for other plans, studies, or network monitoring.

However, LOS and similar metrics cannot constitute the sole basis for CEQA impacts.

For land use and transportation projects, SB 743-compliant CEQA analysis became mandatory on July 1, 2020.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 describes how transportation impacts are to be analyzed under SB 743. It states that in general transportation impacts are best measured by evaluating the project’s vehicle miles traveled. For land use projects, VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact (OPR 2017). The City has not adopted VMT criteria to evalaute transportation impacts under CEQA. For the purpose of this analysis, the Governor’s Office Planning and Research (OPR) technical advisory is being used for the traffic impact analysis guidelines. The technical advisory serves as a tool for the City to evaluate the effects a development will have on the City’s transportation infrastructure, identify improvements required to maintain the Level of Service (LOS) standards and address Section XV (Transportation/Traffic) of Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

REGIONAL REGULATIONS
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
SCAG is a federally designated MPO and is made up of six counties and 191 cities. SCAG develops longrange regional transportation plans including sustainable communities’ strategies and growth forecast components, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations, and a portion of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plans.

On May 7, 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal (2020 - 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy) for federal transportation conformity purposes only. Connect SoCal outlines more than $638 billion in transportation system investments through 2045.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Agency (Metro) coordinates transportation planning efforts throughout Los Angeles County and programs local, regional, state and federal funding for project implementation. Additionally, it prepares the Congestion Management Program (CMP), a plan mandated by California law to describe the strategies to address congestion problems on the CMP network, which includes State highways and principal arterials. The CMP Guidelines require analysis of the Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roadway and transit system and uses level of service standards to measure congestion and to determine how local governments meet CMP standards.

The 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) provides a detailed roadmap for how Metro will plan, build, operate, maintain, and partner for improved mobility in the next 30 years. The LRTP guides future funding plans and policies needed to move LA County forward for a more mobile, resilient, accessible and sustainable future. The adopted 2020 plan lays out a strategy for meeting transportation needs for all users in LA County and includes projects and other improvements for new and existing freeways, local streets, and public transit (paratransit, buses, rails, ferries), as well as facilities and programs to support bicycling and walking.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 17
Metro has several countywide planning efforts that outline regional networks and provide guidance on best practices. These plans include the Countywide Multimodal Arterial Plan, the Countywide Goods Movement Plan, the Countywide Transit Plan, the Active Transportation Strategic Plan, and the First Last Mile Strategic Plan.

As previously discussed, Metro has plans to extend the C Line from Redondo Beach Station to the new Torrance Transit Center, which would travel through the City. Metro is considering three configuration alternatives, two along Metro-owned ROW and one along Hawthorne Boulevard. The determination of the locally preferred alternative is anticipated in 2023.

South Bay Bicycle Master Plan
The 2011 South Bay Bicycle Master Plan, prepared for the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition and the South Bay Bicycle Coalition, aims to develop and maintain a cohesive and connected bicycle network and policy strategy for the cities of El Segundo, Gardena, Hermosa Beach, Lawndale, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance. The plan proposes the installation of 213 additional miles of bike facilities, including over 20 miles of bicycle facilities within Lawndale. The plan generally recommends adding Class II bicycle lanes to the City’s arterial streets and designating key collector and local streets as “bike-friendly streets”.

South Bay Cities Council of Governments
The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is a joint powers authority government agency of 16 cities and Los Angeles County. SBCCOG developed the Local Travel Network (LTN) to support the growing local use of “micromobility” and the use of zero-emission, slow speed vehicles. Such devices include neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs)—which appear similar to golf carts, e-bikes, non-motorized pedal bikes, e-scooters, e-bikes and other “novelty” zero-emission, slow speed mobility devices such as one-wheels (electric skateboards).

In May 2021, the SBCCOG board passed a resolution that directed the SBCCOG to begin implementation of the Local Travel Network in the South Bay. The scope of creating a 243-mile LTN necessitated it be implemented in phases. The initial phase was separated into two (2) corridor projects:
 Phase 1: El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, and Redondo Beach  Phase 2: Hawthorne, Lawndale, Gardena, Inglewood, Carson, Lomita, Torrance, areas of unincorporated Los Angeles County as well as the communities of Wilmington, Harbor City, and San Pedro.

The implementation of the Local Travel Network will continue into the foreseeable future.

LOCAL REGULATIONS
With the exception of State highways that are under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, streets in Lawndale are generally under the jurisdiction of the City.

Lawndale General Plan
The current Lawndale General Plan, adopted in 1991 and amended in 1992, is the primary planning document for the City and serves to guide new development and infrastructure in the city. The General Plan Circulation Element provides the policy framework for the regulation and development of transportation systems, balancing demands for moving people and goods within the city. In particular, the Circulation Element addresses vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle, transit, goods movement, and rail transportation, plus parking. The General Plan Update has a 2045 planning horizon.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 18
Proposed Lawndale General Plan Mobility Element
The General Plan’s Community Mobility and Circulation Element provides guidance on expanding options for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian mobility while continuing to support programs that improve automobile travel. The following goals and policies are the most relevant for the purpose of this analysis:

GOAL 1: Local Circulation System | A community served by a safe circulation system with sufficient traffic flow on arterial roadways and minimized adverse traffic effects on residential neighborhoods.  Arterial Roadway Network. Implement the buildout roadway network based on the classifications mapped in Figure M-1 in order to accommodate existing and future needs due to land use growth and shifts in travel patterns.
 Vehicle Level of Service (LOS). Maintain vehicular LOS “D” along major City intersections whenever possible. The City may exempt locations from the LOS “D” target due to right-of-way constraints, and to align to community goals and to balance the needs for different road users including pedestrians and cyclists.
 Traffic System Management. Facilitate the efficient movement of vehicles and minimize delay utilizing existing roadway facilities.
 Rail Crossings Traffic Operations. Collaborate with Metro to provide adequate intersection operations at at-grade crossing locations to minimize delays and congestion and to create safe crossings for all users.
 Development-Related Traffic Impacts. Require new development to provide appropriate and feasible improvements as condition of approval so they do not adversely affect traffic flow and roadway operations.
 Effects of New Technologies on Traffic Flow. Maximize the benefit to the public of technologies and services such as ride hailing, autonomous vehicles, electric bicycles and scooters without adversely affecting the City’s transportation network.
 Traffic Calming on Local Streets. Encourage traffic calming strategies and incorporation of traffic calming design in residential and school areas to slow traffic and promote safety.

GOAL 2: Regional Circulation | A City that coordinates with neighboring jurisdictions and regional agencies to promote consistent and efficient regional circulation.  Freeway Interchanges. Coordinate with Caltrans to develop appropriate configurations and operations at Interstate 405 interchange intersections to minimize congestion on City streets.  Agency Coordination. Coordinate with regional agencies such as County of Los Angeles, South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and Metro to meet the mobility needs of people living in, working in, or visiting Lawndale.
 Neighboring Jurisdictions. Plan and implement vehicular facilities, roadway treatments, active transportation facilities, transit routes, and goods movement network to be connected with those in neighboring jurisdictions.

GOAL 3: Complete Streets | A community with a well-designed and built transportation network that is safe, accessible, comfortable, and convenient for all transportation modes and users.  Complete Streets for Roadway Projects. Apply Complete Streets principles to all transportation improvements projects (e.g. safety, intelligent transportation systems, roads and intersections widening, transit facilities).
 Multimodal Connectivity. Link activity centers, employment centers, public facilities, and schools to transit and active transportation facilities, wherever feasible.  Streetscape Improvements. Require roadway, sidewalk, and median improvements that enhance the visual character of the roadway system and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety.  ADA Accessibility. Implement a transportation network that is safe, accessible, and consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), to allow mobility-impaired users, such as disabled persons and seniors, to safely travel within the City.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 19
 Safe Routes to School. Provide infrastructure improvements, enforcement and incentives to support Safe Route to School programs and promote walking and bicycling to local schools.

GOAL 4: Parking | A community with an adequate parking supply to support business vibrancy and a high quality of life.
 New Development Parking Supply. Ensure new residential and non-residential developments provide adequate parking supply to meet demand and reduce spillover to surrounding areas.  Effects of New Technologies on Parking Demand. Monitor the development of mobility new technologies and the potential effects on parking demand.  Parking Demand and Supply Trends. Monitor and consider trends in the region pertaining to reduced parking demand for transit-oriented developments, mixed-use developments, and other high activity areas and the allocation of parking for shared vehicles, alternative energy vehicles, bicycles, and other modes of transportation.
 Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan Parking. Consider the development of a parking management plan to ensure developments within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan provide adequate parking supply to meet demand in the area. The plan may include flexible parking principles, such as shared parking, and may consider timing and pricing strategies, and adding supply with the development of parking structures.

GOAL 5: Transit | A community with a comprehensive public transportation system.  Transit Use. Support programs encouraging public transit use by people living in, working in, or visiting Lawndale.
 Improve Local Public Transit Service. Work with Metro, Lawndale Beat Bus, and other local public transit providers to plan and improve local transit service and transit facilities, including bus stops, in the City.  Transit Facilities. Require new developments to construct, when appropriate, transit facilities, including bus turn-outs, lighted bus shelters, and route information signage.  Paratransit Service. Work with local transit and other providers to support paratransit service for seniors and persons with disabilities.
 C (Green) Line Service. Work with Metro to ensure C (Green) Line service (including headways and service hours) are sufficient to meet the needs of transit commuters to and from Lawndale.  C (Green) Line Stations. Work with Metro to ensure the planned C (Green) Line extension project implementation is consistent with the City's Complete Streets, active transportation, and parking policies, and that it provides pedestrian and bicycle connectivity between neighborhoods within Lawndale and future stations.
 Effects of New Technologies on Transit Use. Monitor the development of new mobility technologies and the potential effects on transit demand and how users access public transit.

GOAL 6: Active Transportation | A community with a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities that encourages active transportation.
 Bicycle Master Plan. Implement the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan within City limits to provide active transportation facilities that can serve as an alternative to automobiles, including the Plan’s facility recommendations.
 Local Travel Network. Coordinate with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to implement the Local Travel Network plan to promote micro-mobility modes through the City of Lawndale and support efforts to integrate the network with adjacent cities.
 Hawthorne Boulevard Sidewalks. Allow for modified sidewalk standards and encourage enhanced pedestrian amenities along Hawthorne Boulevard to reflect the corridors unique character and land use vision.
 Sidewalk and Bikeway Gaps. Create a connected and complete active transportation network by identifying and eliminating gaps in sidewalks and bikeways.  Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities at New Developments. Require new residential and non-residential developments in the city to provide safe and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities, such as secure bicycle parking, pedestrian-scale lighting, street furniture, landscaping, and other improvements.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 20
 Effective Roadway Projects. Consider the implementation of projects within the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan when roadways are being rehabilitated or resurfaced.  Effects of New Technologies on Active Transportation. Monitor the development of mobility new technologies and the potential effects on designing a transportation network that accommodates all modes and users.

GOAL 7: Goods Movement | A community that integrates safe and efficient goods movement into the local transportation network.
 Local Truck Routes. Maintain a network of local truck routes to facilitate goods movement to regional roads and to discourage the use of residential roads.
 Roadway Design. Maintain roadway design standards to facilitate access to light industrial and manufacturing areas along designated truck routes.

GOAL 8: Funding | A community with a well-funded and fiscally sound transportation system that utilizes a variety of funding methods.
 Innovative Funding. Research and pursue innovative funding sources at the federal, state, regional, and county level to implement transportation projects.
 Regional Funding. Encourage regional agencies to continue to provide adequate transportation funding to local jurisdictions such as Metro’s Measure R and Measure M to fund capital projects and programs.
 Development Fees. Ensure that new development projects contribute their appropriate fair share to transportation network improvements.

GOAL 9: Transportation Management | A community with transportation management strategies that contributes to achieving regional and statewide greenhouse gas emission targets.  Vehicle Miles Traveled Guidelines. Consider adopting vehicle miles traveled (VMT) guidelines and thresholds for transportation analysis for the purposes of environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City shall continue to maintain Level of Service (LOS) standards for the purposes of planning and designing street improvements.  Transportation Demand Management. Require transportation demand management (TDM) strategies as mitigation measures for new projects that exceed the City's thresholds Vehicle Miles Traveled impact thresholds.
 Regional Coordination. Encourage regional agencies such as Metro, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments to promote TDM programs that reduce single occupancy vehicle travel.
 New Development. Work with developers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and minimize congestion related to new development through improvements to the circulation system and on-site improvements that encourage public and active modes of travel.

Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan
As a supplement to the 1992 General Plan, the currently adopted Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan was developed in 1999. The Plan outlined a long-term vision for land use and development standards, circulation improvements, and an overall vision for streetscape to help make Hawthorne Boulevard a successful urban corridor. In 1998, Lawndale citizens voted to approve up to $15 million for the physical improvement of Hawthorne Boulevard. Figure 7 shows the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area within Lawndale.

Lawndale Parkway Design Policy Guidelines
First developed in 2018 and updated in July 2020, the Lawndale Parkway Design Policy Guidelines outlines specific guidelines and standards for parkways in the City. Parkways are defined as a portion of the public right-of-way that includes the strip of land between the street and the walkway. In Lawndale, property CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Regulatory Framework
Kittelson & Associates 21
owners adjacent to the parkway are responsible for maintaining the area, except for street trees that are maintained by the City.

CITY OF LAWNDALE

GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
LEGEND
City of Lawndale
Sphere of Influence
Planning Area
Adjacent Incorporated
Hawthorn Boulevard Specific
Plan Boundary
Sources: City of Lawndale; Los Angeles County.

Date: June 20, 2023.

Figure LU-3.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Existing Circulation System
Kittelson & Associates 23

EXISTING CIRCULATION SYSTEM

ROADWAY NETWORK
Street design, connectivity, and the overall built environment influence transportation choices and quality of life. The City of Lawndale is supported by a network of core regional streets, including Hawthorne Boulevard, Inglewood Avenue, Prairie Avenue, Manhattan Beach Boulevard, Marine Avenue, Rosecrans Avenue, Redondo Beach Boulevard, and Artesia Boulevard, plus several smaller connecting streets that provide local connectivity. Much of the street network was designed to prioritize cars over other modes of transportation.

This is demonstrated by the abundance of public parking, wide streets and travel lanes, and limited pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and amenities. Key streets which are depicted in Figure 3 include:
 Hawthorne Boulevard is a major north-south roadway that spans the length of the city. It is a six to eight lane corridor (with three to four lanes in each direction) with on-street parking and a wide center median which is used for parking in some sections. The travel lanes are generally 12 to 14 feet wide, with wider outside lanes to accommodate on-street parking. On-street curbside parallel parking is permitted on both sides of Hawthorne Boulevard during specific timeframes. Two-hour parking is permitted in the center median outside the hours of 2:00 am – 4:00 am. The surrounding land context is primarily commercial, and the corridor provides direct access to I-405 south of Manhattan Beach Boulevard. Hawthorne Avenue acts as a major transit corridor, serving transit riders through LA Metro lines 40 and 740 (Rapid), as well as through Lawndale Beat’s Express and Residential Routes. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour. South of I-405, Hawthorne Boulevard is also known as California State Route 107 (SR-107). Hawthorne Boulevard is under Caltrans jurisdiction, however the City of Lawndale maintains it within City limits.
 Inglewood Avenue is a major north-south connection through the city and forms the majority of Lawndale’s western boundary. Inglewood Avenue includes an interchange with I-405 south of Marine Avenue. South of I-405, where Inglewood Avenue abuts mostly residential land uses, the corridor is divided by a median. Three travel lanes are provided in each direction, with the outside lanes serving as flex lanes that flex between through travel lanes and on-street parking. On-street parking is not permitted in the northbound direction from 7:00 am – 9:00 am daily and Monday and Thursdays from 4:00 pm – 7:00 am. In the southbound direction, on-street parking is not permitted from 3:00 pm – 7:00 pm and on Wednesdays from 11:00 am – 2:00 pm. North of I-405, the surrounding land use includes commercial properties, and the roadway has two to three lanes in each direction with a center turn lane and no on-street parking. Between Marine Avenue and Rosecrans Avenue, there are several schools and a major commercial/shopping center. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour south of I-405 and 35 miles per hour north of I-405.
 Prairie Avenue runs in the north-south direction and forms the eastern boundary of Lawndale. It primarily includes two travel lanes in each direction with a two-way center left-turn lane. On-street parking is available throughout the corridor, except for northbound north of Manhattan Beach Boulevard. South of Marine Avenue, Prairie Avenue is mostly residential and is adjacent to Alondra Park and Golf Course, Will Rogers Middle School, and Anderson Elementary School. North of Marine Avenue, the roadway is surrounded by commercial uses, including a major shopping area at Rosecrans Avenue. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour.
 Manhattan Beach Boulevard is an east-west corridor that connects Lawndale to Manhattan Beach to the west and Gardena to the east. It has two lanes in each direction, divided by a median. On-street parking is available on both sides of the street. Manhattan Beach Boulevard passes through an industrial area between Inglewood Avenue and I-405, crossing the Harbor Subdivision railway line. East of I-405, it provides access to residential areas and intermittent commercial development. Manhattan Beach Boulevard does not provide direct access to I-405. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour.  Marine Avenue is an east-west corridor with two lanes in each direction, undivided with an intermittent center left-turn lane. On-street parking is available in both directions except on Tuesday and Fridays CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Existing Circulation System
Kittelson & Associates 24
from 4:00 am – 7:00 am. Marine Avenue is mostly adjacent to commercial and light industrial land uses and provides access to several key destinations, including the LA Metro C Line (Green Line) station, Lawndale High School, and Jane Addams Park. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour.  Rosecrans Avenue is a major east-west corridor that forms the northern boundary of the City. Rosecrans Avenue has three travel lanes in each direction with a continuous center left-turn lane. On-street parking is available outside the hours of 6:30 am – 6:00 pm on both sides of the road. Major commercial and residential developments and schools, including Leuzinger High School, are present along the corridor. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour.
 Redondo Beach Boulevard: runs along the southern boundary of the City and is a major thoroughfare connecting Lawndale to Gardena in the east and Redondo Beach to the west. The corridor has two travel lanes in each direction with a continuous center left-turn lane. On-street parking is permitted throughout from 7:00 am – 6:00 pm, except Tuesdays and Fridays from 4:00 am – 7:00 am. Land use along the corridor is primarily a mix of multi-family residential and commercial. The corridor also provides access to the I-405 freeway.
 Artesia Boulevard: is an east-west corridor along the southern boundary of the city. Artesia Boulevard has three travel lanes in the eastbound direction and two travel lanes in the westbound direction with a raised center median. On-street parking is available in the westbound direction only. The corridor provides direct access to numerous commercial buildings, including the South Bay Galleria mall.

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The City of Lawndale does not currently provide any bicycle facilities on its street network. Facilities have been proposed through several documents and plans, including the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan (2011), the Los Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan (2012), and the LA Metro Bicycle Transportation Strategic Plan (2006). However, there are currently no bike-related projects included in Lawndale’s Capital Improvements Program.

Figure 4 displays the planned bike facilities in Lawndale and in its immediate vicinity. Caltrans categorizes bicycle facilities into four types, as described and depicted in illustrations below. Note that while the graphics include typical widths for each facility type, the exact configuration can vary depending on location and the jurisdiction’s preference.
 Class I Bikeway (Bike Path). Also known as a shared path or multi-use path, a bike path is a paved rightof-way for bicycle travel that is completely separate from any street or highway.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Existing Circulation System
Kittelson & Associates 25
 Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane). A striped and stenciled lane for one-way bicycle travel on a street or highway. This facility could include a buffered (typically painted) space between the bike lane and vehicle lane and the bike lane could be adjacent to on-street parking.  Class III Bikeway (Bike Route). A signed route along a street where the bicyclist shares the right-of-way with motor vehicles. This facility can also be designated using a shared-lane marking (sharrow).  Class IV Bikeway (Separated Bike Lane). A bikeway for the exclusive use of bicycles including a separation required between the separated bikeway and the through vehicular traffic. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or onstreet parking.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Existing Circulation System
Kittelson & Associates 26
I-405 represents a major barrier for bicyclists in both the north/south and east/west direction. The only roadways that provide access under the freeway are Inglewood Avenue, Hawthorne Boulevard, Manhattan Beach Boulevard, 166th Street, and Redondo Beach Boulevard. The Metro rail ROW also presents a challenge to bicyclists, especially in the residential area south of Manhattan Beach Boulevard. The only available railway crossings south of Manhattan Beach Boulevard are at 159th Street, 160th Street, 161st Street, 162nd Street, and 170th Street.

Most streets have paved sidewalks on both sides of the street. Crosswalks are generally provided at signalized or stop-controlled intersections on the arterial and collector roads. They are generally standard crosswalks and on all four approaches. Skewed crossings are common along principal arterials and cause longer pedestrian crossing times and distances. However, the City of Lawndale’s overall automobile-centric design creates long walking distances due to the nature of larger block sizes.

TRANSIT SERVICES
Transit service in Lawndale is primarily provided by Metro, whose transportation system provides bus and passenger rail service throughout Los Angeles County, and by Lawndale Beat, a local agency that runs fixedroute bus service throughout Lawndale. The adjacent cities of Gardena and Torrance also provide local transit options that operate through Lawndale.

LA Metro
LA Metro provides bus, light rail, and heavy rail service for travel within Los Angeles County. LA Metro currently offers bus service throughout Lawndale, including local and rapid fixed-route services. LA Metro’s transit stops are often shared stops with the Lawndale Beat. Three major shared transit stops are located just outside of the city limits –at the LA Metro C Line (Green Line) terminus near Marine Avenue and Redondo Beach Avenue, on Douglas Street north of Rosecrans Avenue, and at South Bay Galleria south of Artesia Boulevard.

Table 4 displays the LA Metro routes that currently serve Lawndale.

While LA Metro does not offer rail service through Lawndale, the C Line (Green Line) ends just west of the City limits at the Redondo Beach Station on Marine Avenue, west of I-405. As previously discussed, Metro has conducted an environmental analysis and is considering alignments to extend the C Line (Green Line) approximately 4.6 miles south through Lawndale into Torrance by 2028.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Existing Circulation System
Kittelson & Associates 27
Table 4 LA Metro Bus Service in Lawndale
Route Route Type Route Description
40 Local Downtown Los Angeles to South Bay Galleria via Martin Luther King Boulevard and Hawthorne Boulevard
125 Local El Segundo to Norwalk Station via Rosecrans Avenue 210 Local Hollywood/Vine Station to South Bay Galleria via Crenshaw Boulevard 211 Local Inglewood to South Bay Galleria via Prairie Avenue/Inglewood Avenue 215 Local Inglewood to South Bay Galleria via Prairie Avenue/Inglewood Avenue Lawndale Beat
Lawndale Beat provides a local transit option through the operation of two fixed-route bus routes: Express Route and Residential Route. The Express Route offers service from LA Metro’s C Line (Green Line) Station on Marine Avenue to the Galleria at South Bay shopping area south of Artesia Boulevard on Hawthorne Boulevard. The Residential Route provides service to various residential areas, parks, schools, and shopping areas.

The Express Route operates with a 40-minute headway, running from 7:20 am to 5:55 pm on weekdays, 8:40 am to 5:55 pm on Saturdays, and 9:20 am to 3:55 pm on Sundays and holidays. The Residential Route has a 50-minute headway, running from 7:00 am to 6:39 pm on weekdays, 8:40 am to 5:49 pm on Saturdays, and 10:20 am to 5:49 pm on Sundays and holidays. Stops for both routes are often shared with LA Metro routes.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Lawndale Beat Transportation service suspended service. However, the service resumed on May 15, 2023.

Other Transit Agencies
The neighboring cities of Gardena and Torrance operate fixed-route bus service that serves areas within and surrounding Lawndale. Gardena’s GTrans Line 1X runs along Marine Avenue through Lawndale, connecting Gardena to LA Metro’s C Line (Green Line); and Line 3 runs along Redondo Beach Boulevard to South Bay Galleria. Torrance Transit’s Lines 2, 8, and 13 also run through Lawndale along Artesia Boulevard, the City’s southern boundary.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Significance Thresholds
Kittelson & Associates 28

CEQA SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS

TRANSPORTATION SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
In accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the Project would be considered to have a significant transportation impact if it would:
a) conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities;
b) conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b); c) substantially increase hazards because of a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or d) result in inadequate emergency access.

Significance criteria “b” is related to the implementation of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the primary performance metric consistent with SB 743 as described above.

SPECIFIC TRANSPORTATION THRESHOLDS
The thresholds used for the CEQA categories are summarized below.

Conflict with Program/Plan/Ordinance/Policy
The following thresholds are used to evaluate impacts for CEQA Appendix G Item (a).

The Project will be qualitatively evaluated to determine if it is expected to conflict with a relevant programs, plans, ordinances, and policies related to the circulation system. A conflict could occur if the proposed Project would preclude the ability of Lawndale to implement its goals or policies. For the purpose of this analysis, the Project could result in a significant impact if it results in a conflict with any adopted City of Lawndale programs, plans, ordinances, and policies.

Generally, a plan/project causes a significant impact to transit facilities and services if an element of it conflicts with existing or planned transit services. The evaluation of transit facilities shall consider if:
 a plan or project creates demand for public transit services above the capacity that is provided or planned;
 a plan or project or related mitigation disrupts existing transit services or facilities;  a plan or project or related mitigation conflicts with an existing or planned transit facility; or  a plan or project or related mitigation conflicts with transit policies adopted by the City of Lawndale for its respective facilities.

The City’s Mobility Element describes the related policies necessary to ensure that pedestrian and bicycle facilities are safe and effective for Lawndale residents, employees and visitors. Using the Mobility Element as a guide, significant impacts to these facilities would occur when a plan or project:
 creates a hazardous condition that currently does not exist for pedestrians and bicyclists, or otherwise interferes with pedestrian accessibility; or
 conflicts with an existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle facility; or  conflicts with policies related to bicycle and pedestrian facilities as adopted by the City of Lawndale for its respective facilities.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Significance Thresholds
Kittelson & Associates 29
Conflict with CEQA Guidelines for VMT
The following thresholds are used to evaluate impacts for CEQA Appendix G Item (b).

As previously discussed, the City has not adopted VMT thresholds and has not published guidelines for the preparation of transportation studies. Under CEQA, lead agencies have the discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate VMT and have discretion to choose their own significance thresholds.

OPR provided a Technical Advisory containing guidelines related to VMT analysis methodology, thresholds, and mitigation. In Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) counties, OPR recommends that the significance threshold for residential and office projects be based on comparisons of VMT/capita and VMT/employee generated by the project to regional and city-wide average values. Lead agencies are encouraged in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines to adopt significance thresholds through a formal adoption process but may also apply thresholds on a case by case basis. Since the City has not officially adopted VMT thresholds and guidelines for the preparation of transportation studies, this analysis relies on guidance from the OPR technical advisory to evaluate CEQA guidelines for VMT.

The OPR recommended thresholds for residential and office land uses as follows:
 Residential: A project exceeding a level of 15% below existing VMT per capita for the city or region may indicate a significant transportation impact.
 Office: A project exceeding a level of 15% below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.

For typical land development projects, such as residential, office, and commercial spaces, the VMT comparison is normally relative to the existing year (e.g., 2023). Since the General Plan is anticipated to take multiple years to be implemented and developed, it is more appropriate to calculate the project-generated VMT under the long-term 2045 horizon year (which would be consistent with the anticipated implementation of the General Plan). Based on this approach, if the VMT per capita or VMT per employee is lower in the horizon year with the Plan than the respective metrics under existing conditions, the Plan would have a less than significant impact on VMT. In summary, the following VMT thresholds apply as project impacts:
 The general plan’s residential generated VMT under horizon conditions would be compared to 15% below the baseline region-wide VMT/capita average to determine impact significance.  The general plan’s office generated VMT under horizon conditions would be compared to 15% below the baseline region-wide VMT/employee average to determine impact significance.

A cumulative impact consists of an impact which is created as a result of the combination of the Project with other projects causing related impacts. A plan/project has cumulatively considerable environmental effects (i.e., is significant) when the incremental effects of the plan/project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of other projects, including probable future projects. According to OPR’s TA, a project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold (such as VMT per capita or VMT per employee) that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans would have no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact. A significant cumulative impact may also occur if the project is not consistent with the RTP/SCS. In summary, a significant cumulative VMT impact would occur if the Project threshold is exceeded, or if the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the RTP/SCS.

Increase Hazards Because of a Geometric Design Feature
The following threshold is used to evaluate impacts for CEQA Appendix G item (c).

Any project that causes a substantial increase in on-street hazards due to geometric design will potentially result in a significant impact. Generally, a plan/project causes a significant impact related to hazards if the CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Significance Thresholds
Kittelson & Associates 30
area plan creates an unsafe geometric design feature in the transportation system. The evaluation of hazards shall consider if:
 The Project creates a change in the transportation system which introduces an unsafe design feature.

Inadequate Emergency Access
The following threshold is used to evaluate impacts for CEQA Appendix G item (d).

Generally, a project causes a significant impact to emergency access if it creates an area with inadequate emergency access. The evaluation of emergency access shall consider if:
 The Project creates a change in land uses or the transportation system which result in inadequate emergency access to one or more areas.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Analysis Methodology
Kittelson & Associates 31

CEQA ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
Because SB 743 eliminated the use of LOS for CEQA impact analysis purposes, road capacity analysis is not included in this TIA. Under CEQA, the primary quantitative measure to evaluate transportation impacts is VMT.

This transportation analysis provides an analysis of potential transportation impacts under current CEQA criteria. A local transportation analysis is being prepared separately to evaluate effects associated with implementation of the Project in terms of roadway capacity and LOS.

TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL
This study assesses the VMT characteristics of the adopted General Plan and the proposed General Plan (Project) conditions in the 2045 planning horizon year to identify if the Project would result in VMT impacts.

The applicable VMT significant impact thresholds are described above. Existing (2023) VMT and future VMT were estimated using the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) travel demand model.

Calculations for the VMT for the Project was determined for the transportation analysis zones (TAZs) that most closely represent the study area including the City limits and sphere of influence.

The SCAG regional travel model evaluates travel throughout the five-county SCAG region and uses the TransCAD software. The model groups land uses in the region into TAZs, and then uses a series of calculation steps to estimate travel associated with the land uses and transportation network.  Trip Generation: How many daily trips by trip purpose are generated by each land use in each TAZ.  Trip Distribution: How many trips of each type travel to each other TAZ.  Mode Choice: Which travel modes are used by people of different demographic categories for trips of different purposes between each origin and destination, including auto, transit, bicycle and walk modes.
 Time of Day: Which trips are made during peak hours versus off-peak hours.  Trip Assignment: Which routes are used by each vehicle trip or transit trip.

The daily activity patterns in the travel model are based on a statistical analysis of a household travel survey, where a representative sample of households were asked to track all daily activities and trips by all members of their household. The travel model was calibrated to these surveyed travel patterns, and also validated by its ability to replicate counted traffic volumes, transit ridership, and total VMT from traffic count sources.

The version of the SCAG model that has been used for VMT analysis in most communities in the SCAG region has a base year of 2012 and a forecast year of 2040.

Modelled Scenarios
The following scenarios were reviewed and developed to provide VMT and roadway segment forecasts:
 2023 Existing Conditions: corresponds to an interpolation between the SCAG model 2012 base year and the 2045 forecast conditions.
 2045 No Project: corresponds to 2045 horizon year conditions under the existing (currently adopted) General Plan. It consists of the adopted general plan network and land use, and assumes allowable land use buildout with current zoning. Outside of the Lawndale planning area, the forecasts use the 2040 SCAG RTP land use forecast.
 2045 Project: corresponds to 2045 conditions with maximum development potential with the General Plan Update, including the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan. Outside of the Lawndale planning area, the forecasts use the 2040 SCAG RTP land use forecast.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Analysis Methodology
Kittelson & Associates 32
Land Use
The SCAG travel model requires land uses to be defined for each geographic area in the county. The model defines land uses in TAZs which are typically bounded by major arterial or collector streets and are generally subdivisions of Census tracts. The model land use inputs include numbers of households and employees by employment category, as well as enrollment at schools.

The SCAG model had defined a 2040 land use forecast based on the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan.

This forecast was generally consistent with the allowable land uses currently in the City and sphere of influence, but did not fully account for the proposed land uses in the planning area. To assess the transportation impacts of the Project more completely, a revised future 2045 land use forecast was prepared for this TIA.

A detailed mapping of parcels and allowable development was compiled to determine the maximum buildout potential of each parcel and planning area with both the City’s currently adopted General Plan (for No Project conditions) and the proposed General Plan land use map (for Project conditions).

Table 5 and Table 6 indicate key assumptions used to calculate model land use inputs. Table 7 summarizes the housing and employment totals in the SCAG model for 2023 and 2045.

Table 5: Existing General Plan Non-Residential Land Use Assumptions Land Use Designation FAR1 Square Feet per Employee
Commercial 0.5 500
Downtown Commercial 0.5 500
Industrial 0.5 750
Public Facilities/Schools 0.2 1,000
Source: De Novo Planning Group, 2023.
1 FAR = floor area ratio; ratio of building square footage to land area square footage Table 6: Proposed General Plan Non-Residential Land Use Assumptions Land Use Designation FAR1 Square Feet per Employee
Commercial 0.5 500
Hawthorne Boulevard Specific
Plan 0.6 500
Industrial 0.5 750
Public Facilities 0.15 1,000
Source: De Novo Planning Group, 2023.
1 FAR = floor area ratio; ratio of building square footage to land area square footage CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 CEQA Analysis Methodology
Kittelson & Associates 33
Table 7: SCAG Model Land Use Inputs for Lawndale Planning Area TAZs1 Housing and Employees 2023 Existing Conditions 2045 No Project 2045 Project

HOUSING UNITS
Single family 7,201 8,184 7,340
Multi family 4,262 5,203 8,065
Total 11,463 13,387 15,405

EMPLOYEES
Retail n/a 2,159 2,448
Non-Retail n/a 6,919 7,121
Total 6,470 9,078 9,569
Source: De Novo Planning Group, 2023.
1 Project was represented in existing SCAG model TAZs, The SCAG model TAZ boundaries in the Project Area include some area and land uses outside the Project Area boundary, so totals may not be identical to the Project Description.

Compared to 2023 existing conditions, the adopted General Plan would allow for a 17 percent increase in housing and a 40 percent increase in employment. Compared to the adopted Genera Plan, the Project would increase housing by 2,018 units (15 percent increase) and employment by 491 (5 percent increase).

Transportation Networks
The travel model contains representations of transportation networks for all travel modes, as described below.  The model road network includes all freeways, highways, arterial streets, most collector streets which provide connectivity between neighborhoods, and selected local streets. The roads are coded with information on functional classification, number of through lanes, speed and capacity.  All regular weekday transit routes are coded in the model. Bus routes are assumed to run on the streets and be subject to varying congested conditions on those streets. Rail transit operates on separate facilities and is not affected by road congestion. The model also has a general representation of transit stop locations and park-and-ride access. The model assumes the C-Line alignment at street level along the railroad right of way east of Condon Avenue.
 Bicycles and pedestrians are assumed to have access to all streets except freeways.

Future Travel Trends
The model presumes that future background travel options and behaviors remain similar to current conditions and does not explicitly account for potential changes associated with disruptive trends, emerging technologies, and changes in travel preferences. As a result, the travel model is likely to represent a conservative estimate of future amounts of commuting, vehicle use and VMT.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Impact Analysis
Kittelson & Associates 34

IMPACT ANALYSIS
The following provides an evaluation of the Project’s (1) potential conflicts with City’s programs, plans, ordinances, and policies, (2) impacts in terms of VMT, (3) potential geometric design hazards, and (4) impacts to emergency vehicle access.

Impact 1: Consistency with Circulation System Programs
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERION A: Would the proposed plans conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? The following reviews consistency with policies and programs related to transit, pedestrian, vehicular, and bicycle travel.

Roadway
No specific development projects are proposed as part of the Lawndale General Plan Update. The update will accommodate future growth in the City, including new businesses, expansion of existing businesses, and new residential uses. New growth is anticipated to occur primarily within the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan area. The Mobility Element would not propose any roadway changes or increases in roadway capacity.

Therefore, the proposed Plan would not conflict with roadway policies adopted by the City of Lawndale or adjacent cities for their respective facilities.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel
The proposed Mobility Element update references and incorporates the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan and the South Bay Cities COG Local Travel Network, which include bicycling and walking improvements, and facilities that will improve non-motorized accessibility and connectivity throughout the city. The proposed Mobility Element includes new planned bike facilities on several key roadways including but not limited to Hawthorne Boulevard, Inglewood Avenue, Prairie Avenue, Rosecrans Avenue, Manhattan Beach Boulevard, Artesia Boulevard. The Project would also enhance the pedestrian experience by providing a more walkable and denser environment, especially in the HBSP area.

The Project is consistent with the goals and policies of Lawndale’s Mobility Element by promoting pedestrian and bicycle safety and Complete Streets improvements which would enhance the safety and attractiveness of bicycle and pedestrian travel. For instance, Goal 3 (Complete Streets) directs the City to apply complete streets principles to all transportation improvements projects, to wherever feasible provide multimodal connectivity, and promote walking and bicycling to local schools. Goal 6 (Active Transportation) includes several policies to promote a comprehensive network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Transit
The proposed Mobility Element update includes transit policies in Goal 5 (Transit) that supports programs encouraging public transit, that require new developments to construct transit facilities when appropriate, and work with Metro to meet the needs of transit commuters to and from Lawndale. The Project would not conflict with transit policies adopted by the City of Lawndale or transit services from other agencies for their respective facilities.

Conclusion
In summary, a review of the Project’s land use and circulation characteristics revealed no potential policy inconsistencies or conflicts with policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities or the performance or safety of those facilities. Additionally, the City has numerous policies CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Impact Analysis
Kittelson & Associates 35
supporting complete streets and to promote use of transit and active transportation. Therefore, with respect to conflicts with circulation system policies, the impact of the Project would be less than significant.

Impact 2: Vehicle Miles of Travel
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERION B: Would the proposed plans conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
The proposed plans were assessed for VMT to comply with SB 743 requirements and CEQA Guideline section 15064.3, subdivision (b).

Applicable Thresholds
As previously discussed, the VMT significant impact thresholds are:
• Project Threshold: a significant impact would occur if the project’s 2045 VMT per capita or VMT per employee exceeds 15 percent below the existing Los Angeles countywide average VMT per capita, or VMT per employee, respectively.
• Cumulative Threshold: a significant cumulative VMT impact would occur if the Project threshold is exceeded, or if the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the RTP/SCS.

VMT Project Impact Assessment
The VMT statistics were calculated for the two scenarios mentioned prior, encompassing the Project Area limits. Table 8 summarizes the VMT results for the 2023 existing conditions, the applicable thresholds to evaluate potential project impacts, and the future two VMT scenarios.

Future conditions with the Project would result in decreased VMT per employee and VMT per capita in comparison to existing conditions. Compared to 2045 No Project (adopted General Plan) conditions there would be an increase in VMT per capita, and a decrease in VMT per employee. In summary:
 The VMT per capita with the Project would be 8 percent lower than existing conditions.  The VMT per employee with the Project would be 7 percent lower than existing conditions.  The VMT per capita with the Project would be 4 percent higher than 2045 No Project conditions.  The VMT per employee with the Project would be 2 percent lower than 2045 No Project conditions.  The impact thresholds would not be exceeded for the Project.

The reductions from the base year to the future year indicate that future development, in particular planned mixed-use development, will provide more opportunities for Lawndale residents and employees to access jobs and services within shorter distances. The shorter trip distances reduce VMT by vehicles, and also increase the likelihood that trips will be made by non-auto modes such as bicycling and walking. Improved transit service and accessibility to transit also help to reduce VMT even as travel activity increases.

Implementation of the Project would result in reductions in VMT per capita and VMT per employee compared to 2023 existing conditions. The impact thresholds would not be exceeded. Therefore, with respect to consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), the impact of the Project would be less than significant and no mitigaiton would be required.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Impact Analysis
Kittelson & Associates 36
Table 8: VMT Generated by Land Uses within the Project Area and Region Units
Los Angeles
County
2023 Existing
Conditions
Lawndale
2023 Existing
Conditions
Lawndale
2045 No
Project
Lawndale
2045 Project
VMT per Capita
Population 10,546,441 38,313 38,686 47,462
Residential VMT 135,033,355 378,185 342,969 436,225
VMT Per Capita 12.81 9.87 8.87 9.19
Impact Threshold1 N/A N/A N/A 10.89

EXCEEDS THRESHOLD N/A N/A N/A NO
VMT per Employee
Employees 4,627,299 9,408 10,489 10,979
Employee VMT 83,880,257 152,996 157,821 162,293
VMT Per Employee 18.13 16.26 15.05 14.78
Impact Threshold1 N/A N/A N/A 15.41

EXCEEDS THRESHOLD N/A N/A N/A NO
Total Regional VMT
Los Angeles County 339,797,977 - 358,489,475 358,820,209 Source: Kittelson and Associates, 2023.

Notes: 1 Thresholds are 15% below the VMT per capita and VMT per employee for the Los Angeles County Region under baseline conditions.

N/A = not applicable.

VMT Cumulative Impact Assessment
As discussed previously, a significant transportation cumulative impact would occur if the Project threshold is exceeded, or if the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the RTP/SCS . As noted above, the project impacts in VMT would be less than significant, as the Project’s VMT per capita and VMT per employee would not exceed applicable thresholds. In addition, the Project is consistent with the SCAG RTP/SCS. Besides helping increase the local and regional housing supply to meet regional housing needs and locating housing in a transit-rich area, the Project helps further the following RTP/SCS goals:
 Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness.  Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety for people and goods.  Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system.  Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality.  Support healthy and equitable communities.
 Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network.
 Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas that are supported by multiple transportation options.

The Project does not exceed the Project VMT threshold and is not inconsistent with the RTP/SCS. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant and no mitigaiton would be required.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Impact Analysis
Kittelson & Associates 37
Impact 3: Roadway Safety Design Hazards
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERION C: Would the proposed plans substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? Buildout of the Project would involve the alteration, intensification, and redistribution of land uses. Hazards are typically assessed at the individual project level when an actual design and construction of a circulation facility is proposed. Potential impacts associated with future land use development projects would be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the city review process for those individual projects. The city’s design and construction standards and specifications provide for coordinated and standardized development of city facilities, including roadways. The standards apply to, regulate, and guide the design and preparation of plans, and the construction of streets, highways, alleys, drainage, traffic signals, site access, and related public improvements. As individual projects would undergo review by Public Works and Planning departments for approval and construction and would have to meet design guidelines, potential safety design hazards associated with land development projects would be addressed and result in less than significant impacts.

Roadway improvements would have to be made in accordance with the City’s circulation plan and roadway design guidelines and meet design guidelines in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the Caltrans Roadway Design Manual. In addition, the City of Lawndale Mobility Element includes goals, policies, and actions to improve the safety of all users of the transportation system in the City such as Goal 1 (Local Circulation System), “Development-Related Traffic Impacts” policy, which requires new development to provide appropriate and feasible improvements as condition of approval so they do not adversely affect traffic flow and roadway operations.

Overall, implementation of the General Plan would not result in hazardous conditions. As individual projects and circulation improvements would undergo review by Public Works and Planning departments for approval and construction and would have to meet design guidelines, impacts would be less than significant.

Impact 4: Emergency Vehicle Access
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERION D: Would the proposed plans result in inadequate emergency access? Emergency access associated with future land use development projects would be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the city review process for those individual projects. The city’s emergency access standards would apply to all developments proposed under the proposed Project. Therefore, with respect to inadequate emergency access, the impact of the proposed plans would be less than significant.

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Roadway Volumes Forecast
Kittelson & Associates 38

ROADWAY VOLUMES FORECAST
Traffic volumes on major roads are provided to inform other technical studies required under CEQA, such as noise analyses. The traffic volumes for existing, and forecasts for 2045 cumulative conditions under the existing General Plan and theGeneral Plan Updateare based on the SCAG Travel Demand Model. Traffic forecasts for specific segments were based on an incremental adjustment methodology to minimize the effects of differences between the travel model and observed traffic counts. For each segment, the increment was calculated between the model’s 2023 base year and the model’s 2045 forecast for each study roadway (link) volume. Additional calculation was done to find the growth increment to 2045. This growth increment was then added to the observed traffic count to create the adjusted traffic volume forecasts (Table 9).

CEQA Transportation analysis
July 12, 2023 Roadway Volumes Forecast
Kittelson & Associates 39
Table 9: Existing and Future Roadway Segment Daily Traffic Volumes # Segment Existing1 2045 No Project 2045 Project
1 Inglewood Ave between Marine Ave & 153rd Pl 30,382 29,900 30,400 2 Inglewood Ave between I-405 S Entrance & Manhattan Beach Blvd 46,980 47,100 47,200 3 Inglewood Ave between Manhattan Blvd & Artesia Blvd 34,669 33,600 33,800 4 Manhattan Beach Blvd between Inglewood Ave & Hawthorne Blvd 23,463 27,400 27,500 5 Artesia Blvd between Inglewood Ave & Grevillea Ave 33,333 33,500 33,500 6 Hawthorne Blvd between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 36,715 34,600 35,900 7 Hawthorne Blvd between Manhattan Beach Blvd & 160th St 39,254 39,000 40,300 8 Hawthorne Blvd between 162nd St & 166th St 44,037 43,200 44,900 9 Hawthorne Blvd between 169th St & Redondo Beach Blvd 40,769 40,200 40,300 10 Rosecrans Ave between Hawthorne Blvd & Prairie Ave 32,747 36,400 36,300 11 Redondo Beach Blvd between Hawthorne Blvd & Prairie Ave 18,912 22,300 22,300 12 Manhattan Beach Blvd between Freeman Ave & Prairie Ave 19,794 23,800 24,100 13 Prairie Ave between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 25,223 28,300 28,900 14 Manhattan Beach Blvd between Prairie Ave & Crenshaw Blvd 21,543 23,600 24,000 15 Crenshaw Blvd between Marine Ave & Manhattan Beach Blvd 27,196 32,900 33,200 Source: Kittelson and Associates, 2023.
1 24-hour directional counts were taken on March 9, 2023 Appendix A:

Detailed VMT Impact Summary

LAWNDALE GP VMT SUMMARY
v2 June 26, 2023
2012 2023 2040 2040 2045 2045
Base Year Interpolated No Project With Project No Project With Project SCAG Region
Demographics
Population 18,317,584 19,816,156 22,132,131 22,140,907
Households 5,883,352 6,483,783 7,411,723 7,413,740
Employment 7,425,052 8,375,476 9,844,314 9,844,804
Daily Vehicle Trips
Auto 76,744,282 81,541,637 88,955,730 88,979,456
Truck 2,097,093 2,409,550 2,892,437 2,892,581
Total 78,841,376 83,951,186 91,848,167 91,872,036
Truck Percent 2.7% 2.9% 3.1% 3.1%
Daily VMT by Purpose
Home Based 267,793,262 281,203,213 301,927,682 302,048,160 VMT/Capita 14.62 14.19 13.64 13.64
Employee Based 149,652,640 157,046,768 168,474,056 168,604,327 VMT/Employee 20.16 18.75 17.11 17.13
Total Daily VMT
Auto
Truck
Total 655,290,194 688,004,357 738,562,609 738,852,673
Truck Percent
VMT/Service Population 25.46 24.40 23.10 23.10
Los Angeles County
Demographics
Population 9,918,214 10,542,993 11,508,560 11,517,336
Households 3,255,425 3,526,628 3,945,761 3,947,778
Employment 4,242,577 4,627,299 5,221,869 5,222,359
Daily Vehicle Trips
Auto 40,598,204 41,864,478 43,821,448 43,847,745
Truck 1,192,970 1,333,870 1,551,626 1,551,770
Total 41,791,173 43,198,349 45,373,074 45,399,515
Truck Percent 2.9% 3.1% 3.4% 3.4%
Daily VMT by Purpose
Home Based 130,625,977 135,033,355 141,844,756 141,946,964 VMT/Capita 13.17 12.81 12.33 12.32
Employee Based 82,706,937 83,880,257 85,693,571 85,823,580 VMT/Employee 19.49 18.13 16.41 16.43
Total Daily VMT
Auto
Truck
Total 339,797,977 347,270,997 358,489,475 358,820,209
Truck Percent
VMT/Service Population 24.00 22.89 21.43 21.44
Lawndale
Demographics
Population 38,072 38,313 38,686 47,462 38,686 47,462
Households 11,295 12,122 13,399 15,416 13,399 15,416
Employment 8,708 9,408 10,489 10,979 10,489 10,979
Daily Vehicle Trips
Auto 123,950 127,988 134,230 152,753 134,230 152,753
Truck 1,715 1,874 2,121 2,266 2,121 2,266
Total 125,664 129,863 136,351 155,019 136,351 155,019
Truck Percent 1.4% 1.4% 1.6% 1.5% 1.6% 1.5%
Daily VMT by Purpose
Home Based 400,971 378,185 342,969 436,225 342,969 436,225 VMT/Capita 10.53 9.87 8.87 9.19 8.87 9.19
Employee Based 149,874 152,996 157,821 162,293 157,821 162,293 VMT/Employee 17.21 16.26 15.05 14.78 15.05 14.78
Total Daily VMT
Auto
Truck
Total 885,378 893,513 906,084 1,026,827 906,084 1,026,827 Truck Percent
VMT/Service Population 18.93 18.72 18.43 17.57 18.43 17.57 Appendix G: Tribal Consultation Communications
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION

Page 1 of 2 ends

May 17, 2021
Amanda Tropiano
City of Lawndale
Via Email to: [email protected]
Re: Native American Consultation, Pursuant to Senate Bill 18, Government Code §65352.3 and §65352.4, Lawndale Comprehensive General Plan Update and Hawthorne Blvd SP Update Project, Los Angeles County
Dear Ms. Tropiano:

Attached is a consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within the boundaries of the above referenced counties.

Government Code §65352.3 and §65352.4 require local governments to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of avoiding, protecting, and/or mitigating impacts to cultural places when creating or amending General Plans, Specific Plans and Community Plans.

The law does not preclude initiating consultation with the tribes that are culturally and traditionally affiliated within your jurisdiction. The NAHC believes that this is the best practice to ensure that tribes are consulted commensurate with the intent of the law.

The NAHC also believes that agencies should also include with their notification letters, information regarding any cultural resources assessment that has been completed on the area of potential effect (APE), such as:

1. The results of any record search that may have been conducted at an Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), including, but not limited to:
• A listing of any and all known cultural resources that have already been recorded or are adjacent to the APE, such as known archaeological sites; • Copies of any and all cultural resource records and study reports that may have been provided by the Information Center as part of the records search response;
• Whether the records search indicates a low, moderate or high probability that unrecorded cultural resources are located in the APE; and • If a survey is recommended by the Information Center to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.

2. The results of any archaeological inventory survey that was conducted, including:
• Any report that may contain site forms, site significance, and suggested mitigation measures.

CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño

VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash

SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño

PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk

COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache

COMMISSIONER
Julie TumamaitStenslie
Chumash

COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo

NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
[email protected]
NAHC.ca.gov

Page 2 of 2 ends

All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for public disclosure in accordance with Government Code §6254.10.

3. The result of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission.

The request form can be found at http://nahc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Local-GovernmentTribal-Consultation-List-Request-Form-Update.pdf.

4. Any ethnographic studies conducted for any area including all or part of the APE; and

5. Any geotechnical reports regarding all or part of the APE.

Lead agencies should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a tribal cultural resource.

This information will aid tribes in determining whether to request formal consultation. In the event, that they do, having the information beforehand will help to facilitate the consultation process.

If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify the NAHC. With your assistance, we are able to assure that our consultation list remains current.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address:

[email protected].

Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
Attachment
Gabrieleno Band of Mission
Indians - Kizh Nation
Andrew Salas, Chairperson
P.O. Box 393
Covina, CA, 91723
Phone: (626) 926 - 4131
[email protected]
Gabrieleno
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel
Band of Mission Indians
Anthony Morales, Chairperson
P.O. Box 693
San Gabriel, CA, 91778
Phone: (626) 483 - 3564
Fax: (626) 286-1262
[email protected]
Gabrieleno
Gabrielino /Tongva Nation
Sandonne Goad, Chairperson
106 1/2 Judge John Aiso St.,
#231
Los Angeles, CA, 90012
Phone: (951) 807 - 0479
[email protected]
Gabrielino
Gabrielino Tongva Indians of
California Tribal Council
Robert Dorame, Chairperson
P.O. Box 490
Bellflower, CA, 90707
Phone: (562) 761 - 6417
Fax: (562) 761-6417
[email protected]
Gabrielino
Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe
Charles Alvarez,
23454 Vanowen Street
West Hills, CA, 91307
Phone: (310) 403 - 6048
[email protected]
Gabrielino
Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla
Indians
Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair
P.O. Box 391820
Anza, CA, 92539
Phone: (951) 659 - 2700
Fax: (951) 659-2228
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Soboba Band of Luiseno
Indians
Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson
P. O. Box 487
San Jacinto, CA, 92581
Phone: (951) 654 - 5544
Fax: (951) 654-4198
[email protected]
Cahuilla
Luiseno
1 of 1
This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 6097.98 of the Public Resources Code and section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

This list is only applicable for consultation with Native American tribes under Government Code Sections 65352.3 and 65352.4 et seq for the proposed Lawndale Comprehensive General Plan Update and Hawthorne Blvd SP Update Project, Los Angeles County.

PROJ-2021-
002667
05/17/2021 09:00 AM
Native American Heritage Commission
Tribal Consultation List
Los Angeles County
5/17/2021
July 14, 2021
Gabrieleno Band of Mission
Indians-Kizh Nation
Andrew Salas, Chairperson
P.O. Box 393
Covina, CA 91723
RE: CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN AND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE 2020. SB 18 TRIBAL
CONSULTATION.

To whom it may concern:

This letter formally invites you to request consultation pursuant to Senate Bill 18 (“SB18, Government Code Section 65352.3) regarding the above referenced project. As you may know, SB18 became effective on March 1, 2005 and requires local governments to consult with California Native American Tribes about proposed local land use planning decisions for the purpose of protecting traditional tribal cultural places and sacred sites.

The above referenced project is subject to the requirements of SB18. The City of Lawndale, is proposing a comprehensive update the City’s General Plan (including the Housing Element) and the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan.

City of Lawndale is committed to fulfilling SB18’s goals and believes that tribal participation in the planning process is crucial for the success of the proposed project.

The City of Lawndale Community Development Department contacted the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to request the list of tribes who should be contacted regarding the proposed project. The NAHC included your tribe on the list.

The intent of consultation is to provide an opportunity for local governments and interested tribes to work together in the project planning early in the process toward the protection of tribal cultural places that might not appear on cultural resource registries.

This is your opportunity to participate in the process for this project.

A Request for Consultation for the project must be made within 90 days of the date of this notice. Under SB18, if your tribe requests to participate in the consultation process, any sensitive information shared with the County regarding cultural places and/or sacred sites will be kept strictly confidential and will not be divulged to the public. 14717 BURIN AVENUE  LAWNDALE, CALIFORNIA 90260  (310) 973-3230 If your tribe would like to consult under SB18 regarding the proposed project, please contact Sean M. Moore, at the City of Lawndale in writing, by email at [email protected], at the address listed on the letterhead or by phone at (310) 973-3206 on or before October 14, 2021.

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter please contact our office.

Sincerely;
____________________________
Jared Chavez, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
July 14, 2021
Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe
Charles Alvarez,
23454 Vanowen Street
West Hills, CA, 91307
RE: CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN AND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE 2020. SB 18 TRIBAL
CONSULTATION.

To whom it may concern:

City of Lawndale is committed to fulfilling SB18’s goals and believes that tribal participation in the planning process is crucial for the success of the proposed project.

This is your opportunity to participate in the process for this project.

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter please contact our office.

Sincerely;
____________________________
Jared Chavez, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
July 14, 2021
Gabrielino /Tongva Nation
Sandonne Goad, Chairperson
106 1/2 Judge John Aiso St. #231
Los Angeles, CA, 90012
RE: CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN AND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE 2020. SB 18 TRIBAL
CONSULTATION.

To whom it may concern:

City of Lawndale is committed to fulfilling SB18’s goals and believes that tribal participation in the planning process is crucial for the success of the proposed project.

This is your opportunity to participate in the process for this project.

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter please contact our office.

Sincerely;
____________________________
Jared Chavez, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
July 14, 2021
Gabrielino/Tongva San Gabriel
Band of Mission Indians
Anthony Morales, Chairperson
P.O. Box 693
San Gabriel, CA 91778
RE: CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN AND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE 2020. SB 18 TRIBAL
CONSULTATION.

To whom it may concern:

City of Lawndale is committed to fulfilling SB18’s goals and believes that tribal participation in the planning process is crucial for the success of the proposed project.

This is your opportunity to participate in the process for this project.

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter please contact our office.

Sincerely;
____________________________
Jared Chavez, Senior Planner
Community Development Department
July 14, 2021
Gabrielino Tongva Indians
of California Tribal Council
Robert Dorame, Chairperson
P.O. Box 490
Bellflower, CA, 90707
RE: CITY OF LAWNDALE GENERAL PLAN AND HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE 2020. SB 18 TRIBAL
CONSULTATION.

To whom it may concern:

City of Lawndale is committed to fulfilling SB18’s goals and believes that tribal participation in the planning process is crucial for the success of the proposed project.

This is your opportunity to participate in the process for this project.

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter please contact our office.

Sincerely;
____________________________
Jared Chavez, Associate Planner
Community Development Department
July 14, 2021
FROM: City of Lawndale – Community Development Department, Jared Chavez, Senior Planner
RE: AB 52 CONSULTATION CEQA Section 21080.3
TO: Grabrieleño Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation – Andre Salas, Chairman Dear Mr. Salas,
This letter is in response to the AB52 letter received from the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians.

The City of Lawndale has decided to undertake the following project: The City of Lawndale, is proposing a comprehensive update the City’s General Plan (including the Housing Element) and the Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan.

If you would like more information on the project you can log in our website www.lawndale.generalplan.org. You may also contact Jared Chavez by email at [email protected] or by phone at (310) 973-3206. 14717 BURIN AVENUE  LAWNDALE, CALIFORNIA 90260  (310) 973-3230 7 8

City Council Meeting - November 6, 2023
Recmmnendation to use Motorola Solutions, lnc.Nigilant Solutions as the exclusive provider of Automatic License Plate Recognition cameras for the Cily ofLawndale Attachment A
Attachment n:

Attaclunent C
Attachment D.

Staff Report from October 16th City Council Meeting on the Recommendation touse Motorola Solutions, lnc. Vigilant Solutions as the exclusive provider of Automatic License Plate Recognition Cameras for the City of Lawndale.

LASD Automatic License Plate Readers Manual of Policy and Procedures City of Manhattan Beach Privacy Policy
Diagram of Southbay Cities with Automatic License Plate Recognition Cameras 3 9

10 11

12 13

14 15

Lawndale City CouncilDecember 18, 2023

Lawndale City Council
December 18, 2023