Agenda packet — Los Alamitos City Council, November 18, 2024 (part 17 of 18)

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 3-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.553
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 37 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.15 0.01 0.84 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 1598 0 1700 241 11 1345 1700 3400 1700 1700 3237 61 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.29 0.02 0.00 0.27 0.28 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-10

Page 2757 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 4-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Basswood & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.510
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 34 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.98 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.06 0.84 1.00 1.71 0.29 1.00 1.99 0.01 Final Sat.: 1700 0 1598 157 94 1347 1700 2838 460 1700 3285 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.28 0.29 0.01 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-11

Page 2758 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 5-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 Candleberrry & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.436
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.75 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.68 0.32 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1206 0 392 0 0 0 0 2793 505 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.25 0.02 0.19 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-12

Page 2759 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 6-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 Heather & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.422
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 806 0 792 0 0 0 0 2987 311 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.04 0.17 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-13

Page 2760 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 7-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Rose & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.427
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.34 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.89 0.11 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 538 0 1060 0 0 0 0 3127 171 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.22 0.05 0.18 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-14

Page 2761 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:21 Page 8-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Tulip & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.433
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.46 0.00 0.54 1.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat.: 1700 0 1598 732 0 866 1700 3162 136 1700 3200 98 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.22 0.23 0.05 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-15

Page 2762 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 14:03:20 Page 9-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Valley View & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 130 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.873
Loss Time (sec): 7 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 87 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Protected Protected Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.94 1.00 0.98 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.31 0.69 1.00 1.35 0.65 Final Sat.: 1700 5100 1700 1700 5100 1700 1700 2195 1103 1700 2260 1038 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.15 0.37 0.10 0.12 0.40 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.12 0.12 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.1-16

Page 2763 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
APPENDIX 6.2: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT

CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

Page 2764 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 2765 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 2-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Seal Beach & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 1.031
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Ovl Include Include Ovl
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
Added Vol: 0 0 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 15
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 1479 435 694 1591 0 0 0 0 496 0 742
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 1479 435 694 1591 0 0 0 0 496 0 742
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 1479 435 694 1591 0 0 0 0 496 0 742
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 1479 435 694 1591 0 0 0 0 496 0 742
OvlAdjVol: 187
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 5100 1700 3400 5100 0 0 0 0 3400 0 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.29 0.26 0.20 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.44 OvlAdjV/S: 0.11
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-1

Page 2766 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 3-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.580
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 38 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 732 36 11 1032 20
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 732 36 11 1032 20
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 40 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 746 36 11 1072 20
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 746 36 11 1072 20
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 746 36 11 1072 20
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 33 3 8 14 0 76 106 746 36 11 1072 20
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 0.92 0.08 1.00 0.16 0.00 0.84 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 1465 133 1700 249 0 1349 1700 3400 1700 1700 3239 59 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.33 0.34 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-2

Page 2767 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 4-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Basswood & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.544
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 36 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 550 90 10 878 7
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 550 90 10 878 7
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 40 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 564 90 10 918 7
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 564 90 10 918 7
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 564 90 10 918 7
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 233 1 3 1 0 8 21 564 90 10 918 7
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.25 0.75 0.11 0.00 0.89 1.00 1.72 0.28 1.00 1.98 0.02 Final Sat.: 1700 400 1199 178 0 1420 1700 2858 440 1700 3274 24 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.20 0.20 0.01 0.28 0.29 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-3

Page 2768 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 5-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 Candleberrry & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.464
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 31 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 467 88 23 700 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 467 88 23 700 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 40 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 481 88 23 740 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 481 88 23 740 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 481 88 23 740 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 195 0 39 0 0 0 0 481 88 23 740 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.83 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.69 0.31 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1332 0 266 0 0 0 0 2804 494 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.11 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.22 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-4

Page 2769 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 6-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 Heather & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.399
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 434 71 39 628 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 434 71 39 628 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 40 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 448 71 39 668 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 448 71 39 668 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 448 71 39 668 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 95 0 69 0 0 0 0 448 71 39 668 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.58 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.73 0.27 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 926 0 672 0 0 0 0 2861 437 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.20 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-5

Page 2770 of 3005 ends

HCM 7th TWSC 4665 Lampson Avenue (JN 14501)
6: Lampson Av. & Driveway 1 07/01/2024
2045 With Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.2
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 506 695 7 0 18
Future Vol, veh/h 0 506 695 7 0 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 550 755 8 0 20
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 382
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 616
Stage 1 0 - - - 0 -
Stage 2 0 - - - 0 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 616
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 11.03

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 616
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.032
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - - - 11
HCM Lane LOS - - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1

6.2-6

Page 2771 of 3005 ends

HCM 7th TWSC 4665 Lampson Avenue (JN 14501)
7: Lampson Av. & Driveway 2 07/01/2024
2045 With Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.8
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 492 680 5 33 22
Future Vol, veh/h 14 492 680 5 33 22
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 150 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 15 535 739 5 36 24
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 745 0 - 0 1040 372
Stage 1 - - - - 742 -
Stage 2 - - - - 298 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 859 - - - 226 625
Stage 1 - - - - 432 -
Stage 2 - - - - 727 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 859 - - - 222 625
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 334 -
Stage 1 - - - - 424 -
Stage 2 - - - - 727 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.26 0 15.25

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 859 - - - 411
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.018 - - - 0.146
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 9.3 - - - 15.3
HCM Lane LOS A - - - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.5

6.2-7

Page 2772 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 7-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Rose & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.352
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 465 27 34 631 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 465 27 34 631 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 12 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 498 27 34 643 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 498 27 34 643 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 498 27 34 643 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 42 0 58 0 0 0 0 498 27 34 643 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.42 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 671 0 927 0 0 0 0 3134 164 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.19 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-8

Page 2773 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 8-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Tulip & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.363
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 505 13 41 603 10
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 505 13 41 603 10
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 12 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 538 13 41 615 10
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 538 13 41 615 10
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 538 13 41 615 10
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 44 1 89 13 1 16 6 538 13 41 615 10
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.01 0.99 0.43 0.03 0.54 1.00 1.95 0.05 1.00 1.97 0.03 Final Sat.: 1700 18 1580 692 53 852 1700 3223 75 1700 3247 51 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.06 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.02 0.19 0.20 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-9

Page 2774 of 3005 ends

2045 WP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:54:43 Page 9-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Valley View & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 130 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.868
Loss Time (sec): 7 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 85 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Protected Protected Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 180 1694 201 131 1844 218 234 296 189 311 373 267 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 180 1694 201 131 1844 218 234 296 189 311 373 267 Added Vol: 5 0 0 0 0 3 7 11 15 0 4 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 185 1694 201 131 1844 221 241 307 204 311 377 267 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 185 1694 201 131 1844 221 241 307 204 311 377 267 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 185 1694 201 131 1844 221 241 307 204 311 377 267 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 185 1694 201 131 1844 221 241 307 204 311 377 267 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.94 1.00 0.99 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 0.80 1.00 1.17 0.83 Final Sat.: 1700 5100 1700 1700 5100 1700 1700 2022 1276 1700 1973 1325 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.11 0.33 0.12 0.08 0.36 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.19 0.20 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-10

Page 2775 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 2-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Seal Beach & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 1.016
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 180 Level Of Service: F
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Ovl Include Include Ovl
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
Added Vol: 0 0 28 16 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 10
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 1893 603 611 1504 0 0 0 0 505 0 620
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 1893 603 611 1504 0 0 0 0 505 0 620
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 1893 603 611 1504 0 0 0 0 505 0 620
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 1893 603 611 1504 0 0 0 0 505 0 620
OvlAdjVol: 351
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.37 0.35 0.18 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.36 OvlAdjV/S: 0.21
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-11

Page 2776 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 3-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.561
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 37 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 976 39 8 875 17
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 27 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 1021 39 8 902 17
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 1021 39 8 902 17
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 1021 39 8 902 17
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 0 11 21 1 117 99 1021 39 8 902 17
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.15 0.01 0.84 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 1598 0 1700 241 11 1345 1700 3400 1700 1700 3239 59 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.30 0.02 0.00 0.28 0.29 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-12

Page 2777 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 4-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Basswood & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.524
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 35 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Protected Protected
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 786 132 13 710 3
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 27 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 831 132 13 737 3
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 831 132 13 737 3
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 831 132 13 737 3
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 141 0 11 5 3 43 30 831 132 13 737 3
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.10 0.06 0.84 1.00 1.73 0.27 1.00 1.99 0.01 Final Sat.: 1700 0 1598 157 94 1347 1700 2860 438 1700 3285 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.22 0.23 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-13

Page 2778 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 5-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 Candleberrry & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.450
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 31 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 676 127 31 646 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 27 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 721 127 31 673 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 721 127 31 673 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 721 127 31 673 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 80 0 26 0 0 0 0 721 127 31 673 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.75 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.70 0.30 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1206 0 392 0 0 0 0 2819 479 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.27 0.02 0.20 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-14

Page 2779 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 6-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 Heather & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.429
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 604 65 74 590 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 27 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 649 65 74 617 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 649 65 74 617 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 649 65 74 617 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 56 0 55 0 0 0 0 649 65 74 617 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 806 0 792 0 0 0 0 3007 291 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.04 0.18 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-15

Page 2780 of 3005 ends

HCM 7th TWSC 4665 Lampson Avenue (JN 14501)
6: Lampson Av. & Driveway 1 07/01/2024
2045 With Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.1
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 754 674 20 0 12
Future Vol, veh/h 0 754 674 20 0 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length - - - - - 0
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 0 820 733 22 0 13
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All - 0 - 0 - 377
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy - - - - - 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy - - - - - 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 - - - 0 620
Stage 1 0 - - - 0 -
Stage 2 0 - - - 0 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver - - - - - 620
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - - -
Stage 1 - - - - - -
Stage 2 - - - - - -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 10.93

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) - - - 620
HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - - 0.021
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) - - - 10.9
HCM Lane LOS - - - B
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - - 0.1

6.2-16

Page 2781 of 3005 ends

HCM 7th TWSC 4665 Lampson Avenue (JN 14501)
7: Lampson Av. & Driveway 2 07/01/2024
2045 With Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 45 709 679 16 22 15
Future Vol, veh/h 45 709 679 16 22 15
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 150 - - - 0 -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -
Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 49 771 738 17 24 16
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2
Conflicting Flow All 755 0 - 0 1230 378
Stage 1 - - - - 747 -
Stage 2 - - - - 483 -
Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 -
Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 851 - - - 170 620
Stage 1 - - - - 429 -
Stage 2 - - - - 586 -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 851 - - - 160 620
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 288 -
Stage 1 - - - - 404 -
Stage 2 - - - - 586 -
Approach EB WB SB
HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.57 0 15.99

HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBR SBLn1
Capacity (veh/h) 851 - - - 368
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.057 - - - 0.109
HCM Control Delay (s/veh) 9.5 - - - 16
HCM Lane LOS A - - - C
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.4

6.2-17

Page 2782 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 7-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Rose & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.434
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 671 38 78 627 0
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 36 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 693 38 78 663 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 693 38 78 663 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 693 38 78 663 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 32 0 63 0 0 0 0 693 38 78 663 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.34 0.00 0.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 538 0 1060 0 0 0 0 3132 166 1700 3400 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.23 0.05 0.20 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-18

Page 2783 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:55:01 Page 8-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Tulip & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.432
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: A
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 695 31 91 662 21
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 36 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 717 31 91 698 21
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 717 31 91 698 21
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 717 31 91 698 21
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 31 0 73 11 0 13 8 717 31 91 698 21
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 1.00 0.97 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.46 0.00 0.54 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat.: 1700 0 1598 732 0 866 1700 3166 132 1700 3205 93 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.05 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-19

Page 2784 of 3005 ends

2045 WP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 14:03:49 Page 9-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Valley View & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 130 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.895
Loss Time (sec): 7 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 99 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Protected Protected Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 251 1875 177 198 2029 275 267 315 166 207 264 127 Added Vol: 16 0 0 0 0 8 5 7 10 0 12 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 267 1875 177 198 2029 283 272 322 176 207 276 127 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 267 1875 177 198 2029 283 272 322 176 207 276 127 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 267 1875 177 198 2029 283 272 322 176 207 276 127 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 267 1875 177 198 2029 283 272 322 176 207 276 127 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.94 1.00 0.98 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 1.29 0.71 1.00 1.37 0.63 Final Sat.: 1700 5100 1700 1700 5100 1700 1700 2168 1130 1700 2291 1007 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.37 0.10 0.12 0.40 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.2-20

Page 2785 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
APPENDIX 6.3: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT

CONDITIONS TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

Page 2786 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 2787 of 3005 ends

California MUTCD 2014 Edition
(FHWA's MUTCD 2009, as amended for use in California)
Figure 4C-4. Warrant 3, Peak Hour (70% Factor)
Traffic Conditions = General Plan Buildout Conditions - Weekday AM Peak Hour Major Street Name = Lampson Av. Total of Both Approaches (VPH) = 1191 Number of Approach Lanes Major Street = 2
Minor Street Name = Driveway 2 High Volume Approach (VPH) = 55 Number of Approach Lanes Minor Street = 1
(COMMUNITY LESS THAN 10,000 POPULATION OR ABOVE 64 km/h OR ABOVE 40 mph ON MAJOR STREET)

SIGNAL WARRANT NOT SATISFIED
*Note: 100 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with two or more lanes and 75 vph applies as the lower threshold for a minor-street approach with one lane 1191
55 0
100
200
300
400
500
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Minor Street - Higher-Volume Approach (VPH)
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches (VPH)
1 Lane (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor)
2+ Lanes (Major) & 1 Lane (Minor) OR 1 Lane (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor) 2+ Lanes (Major) & 2+ Lanes (Minor)
Major Street Approaches
Minor Street Approaches

6.3-1

Page 2788 of 3005 ends

California MUTCD 2014 (FHWA's MUTCD 2009, as amended for use in California) Figure 4C-103 (CA). Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheet
(Average Traffic Estimate Form)
___ ___ ___ ___ TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

DIST CO RTE PM CALC DATE
Jurisdiction: City of Seal Beach/Los Alamitos CHK DATE
Major Street: Lampson Av. Critical Approach Speed (Major) 45 mph Minor Street: Driveway 2 Critical Approach Speed (Minor) 25 mph Major Street Approach Lanes = 2 lane Minor Street Approach Lanes 1 lane Major Street Future ADT = 15,316 vpd Minor Street Future ADT = 578 vpd Speed limit or critical speed on major street traffic > 64 km/h (40 mph); ….…... √ or
In built up area of isolated community of < 10,000 population …………….….….

Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach
Urban Rural Urban Rural
1 1 8,000 5,600 2,400 1,680
2 + 15,316 1 578 9,600 6,720 * 2,400 1,680
2 + 2 + 9,600 6,720 3,200 2,240
1 2 + 8,000 5,600 3,200 2,240
Satisfied Not Satisfied
XX
Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach
Urban Rural Urban Rural
1 1 12,000 8,400 1,200 850
2 + 15,316 1 578 14,400 10,080 * 1,200 850
2 + 2 + 14,400 10,080 1,600 1,120
1 2 + 12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120
No one condition satisfied, but following conditions
fulfilled 80% of more ….. A B
34% 68%
Note: To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where it is not reasonable to count actual traffic volumes.

XX
on Higher-Volume

GPBO WP
CS
CS
07/01/24
07/01/24
(Based on Estimated Average Daily Traffic - See Note)
Major Street Minor Street
CONDITION B - Interruption of Continuous Traffic
Vehicles Per Day
on Major Street

RURAL (R)

URBAN RURAL
Major Street Minor Street
The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. (Total of Both Approaches)
Combination of CONDITIONS A + B
2 CONDITIONS
80%
2 CONDITIONS
80%
Satisfied Not Satisfied
XX
(One Direction Only)
Satisfied Not Satisfied
XX
CONDITION A - Minimum Vehicular Volume Vehicles Per Day Vehicles Per Day on
Minor Street Approach
(One Direction Only)
Minimum Requirements
EADT
Vehicles Per Day
on Higher-Volume
Major Street
(Total of Both Approaches)
Minor Street Approach

6.3-2

Page 2789 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
APPENDIX 6.4: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT

CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

WITH IMPROVEMENTS

Page 2790 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 2791 of 3005 ends

2045 NP AM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:35:18 Page 2-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Seal Beach & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.829
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 74 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Ovl Include Include Ovl
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1! 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 1479 426 689 1591 0 0 0 0 470 0 727
OvlAdjVol: 23
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 Lanes: 0.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.18 0.00 1.82 Final Sat.: 0 5100 1700 3400 5100 0 0 0 0 1984 0 3014
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.29 0.25 0.20 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.24 OvlAdjV/S: 0.01
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.4-1

Page 2792 of 3005 ends

2045 NP PM Mon Jul 1, 2024 12:35:57 Page 2-1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Seal Beach & Lampson
******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.865
Loss Time (sec): 10 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 85 Level Of Service: D
******************************************************************************** Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Control: Permitted Protected Protected Protected
Rights: Ovl Include Include Ovl
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 0 0 3 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1! 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module:

Base Vol: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Initial Fut: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 1893 575 595 1504 0 0 0 0 488 0 610
OvlAdjVol: 203
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module:

Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 Lanes: 0.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.33 0.00 1.67 Final Sat.: 0 5100 1700 3400 5100 0 0 0 0 2233 0 2765
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module:

Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.37 0.34 0.17 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.22 OvlAdjV/S: 0.12
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to URBAN CROSSROADS, IRVINE

6.4-2

Page 2793 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
APPENDIX 6.5: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITHOUT PROJECT

CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS

Page 2794 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 2795 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
1: Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO Without Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1002 476 1826 526 851 1964
v/c Ratio 1.01 0.64 1.02 0.54 0.96 0.61
Control Delay (s/veh) 69.2 22.4 64.4 12.3 66.7 14.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 69.2 22.4 64.4 12.3 66.7 14.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~365 252 ~550 181 336 308
Queue Length 95th (ft) #409 310 #506 219 #365 295
Internal Link Dist (ft) 646 730 841
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 375
Base Capacity (vph) 989 751 1794 979 900 3239
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.01 0.63 1.02 0.54 0.95 0.61
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

6.5-1

Page 2796 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
10: Valley View St. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO Without Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 254 527 338 695 196 1841 218 142 2004 237 v/c Ratio 1.26 0.68 1.33 0.88 1.16 0.95 0.34 1.08 1.10 0.38 Control Delay (s/veh) 182.1 39.1 201.0 50.7 167.8 47.0 14.8 157.0 88.4 17.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 182.1 39.1 201.0 50.7 167.8 47.0 14.8 157.0 88.4 17.4 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~211 165 ~254 237 ~193 533 61 ~132 ~691 76 Queue Length 95th (ft) #387 227 #438 315 #356 #677 128 #276 #815 150 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1165 924 1012 1072
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 150 250 120 140 140
Base Capacity (vph) 201 882 255 893 169 1938 647 131 1829 622 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.26 0.60 1.33 0.78 1.16 0.95 0.34 1.08 1.10 0.38 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

6.5-2

Page 2797 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
1: Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO Without Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 773 359 1952 593 613 1551
v/c Ratio 0.86 0.55 0.92 0.56 0.92 0.47
Control Delay (s/veh) 48.1 23.5 41.7 10.0 67.1 11.2
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 48.1 23.5 41.7 10.0 67.1 11.2
Queue Length 50th (ft) 261 192 528 177 241 213
Queue Length 95th (ft) 338 286 #643 256 #346 247
Internal Link Dist (ft) 646 730 841
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 375
Base Capacity (vph) 968 662 2114 1088 690 3337
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.80 0.54 0.92 0.55 0.89 0.46
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Page 2798 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
10: Valley View St. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO Without Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 303 496 213 416 286 1933 182 204 2092 292 v/c Ratio 1.44 0.77 1.20 0.68 1.23 0.91 0.26 1.24 1.08 0.43 Control Delay (s/veh) 251.5 46.9 163.9 44.0 179.1 37.5 10.5 191.9 79.8 15.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 251.5 46.9 163.9 44.0 179.1 37.5 10.5 191.9 79.8 15.2 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~288 164 ~127 136 ~266 478 33 ~190 ~643 75 Queue Length 95th (ft) #484 223 #308 189 #496 #713 94 #384 #870 175 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1165 924 1012 1072
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 150 250 120 140 140
Base Capacity (vph) 211 925 178 901 232 2127 706 165 1935 673 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.44 0.54 1.20 0.46 1.23 0.91 0.26 1.24 1.08 0.43 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Page 2799 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
APPENDIX 6.6: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT

CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS WITH

IMPROVEMENTS

Page 2800 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Page 2801 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
1: Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO With Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 1043 485 1826 537 857 1964
v/c Ratio 1.06 0.65 1.02 0.55 0.96 0.61
Control Delay (s/veh) 82.2 22.8 64.7 12.5 67.4 14.1
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 82.2 22.8 64.7 12.5 67.4 14.1
Queue Length 50th (ft) ~413 259 ~550 187 338 308
Queue Length 95th (ft) #445 318 #506 225 #371 295
Internal Link Dist (ft) 646 730 841
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 375
Base Capacity (vph) 985 751 1792 978 899 3236
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.06 0.65 1.02 0.55 0.95 0.61
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

6.6-1

Page 2802 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
10: Valley View St. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO With Project - AM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 262 556 338 700 201 1841 218 142 2004 229 v/c Ratio 1.31 0.71 1.38 0.88 1.19 0.95 0.34 1.08 1.10 0.37 Control Delay (s/veh) 198.4 39.6 222.3 50.9 178.2 47.4 14.8 157.1 89.3 16.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 198.4 39.6 222.3 50.9 178.2 47.4 14.8 157.1 89.3 16.9 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~226 174 ~271 241 ~202 536 61 ~133 ~695 71 Queue Length 95th (ft) #405 239 #465 319 #368 #677 128 #276 #815 143 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1165 924 1012 1072
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 150 250 120 140 140
Base Capacity (vph) 200 886 245 892 169 1935 646 131 1826 620 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.31 0.63 1.38 0.78 1.19 0.95 0.34 1.08 1.10 0.37 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

6.6-2

Page 2803 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
1: Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO With Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 1
Lane Group WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT
Lane Group Flow (vph) 789 371 1952 622 630 1551
v/c Ratio 0.88 0.56 0.93 0.59 0.94 0.47
Control Delay (s/veh) 49.8 23.9 42.6 10.7 70.3 11.4
Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 49.8 23.9 42.6 10.7 70.3 11.4
Queue Length 50th (ft) 271 201 528 193 250 213
Queue Length 95th (ft) 349 300 #643 278 #361 247
Internal Link Dist (ft) 646 730 841
Turn Bay Length (ft) 300 375
Base Capacity (vph) 957 663 2096 1080 684 3310
Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.82 0.56 0.93 0.58 0.92 0.47
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Page 2804 of 3005 ends

Queues 4665 Lampson (JN 14501)
10: Valley View St. & Lampson Av. 07/01/2024
GPBO With Project - PM Peak Hour Synchro 11 Report
Urban Crossroads, Inc. Page 2
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Group Flow (vph) 308 513 213 416 286 1933 182 204 2092 292 v/c Ratio 1.45 0.78 1.22 0.67 1.24 0.91 0.26 1.24 1.09 0.44 Control Delay (s/veh) 254.8 47.1 173.0 43.5 181.2 38.1 10.6 193.7 81.6 15.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Delay (s/veh) 254.8 47.1 173.0 43.5 181.2 38.1 10.6 193.7 81.6 15.3 Queue Length 50th (ft) ~295 170 ~133 136 ~268 484 34 ~191 ~650 75 Queue Length 95th (ft) #496 230 #315 189 #496 #713 94 #384 #870 175 Internal Link Dist (ft) 1165 924 1012 1072
Turn Bay Length (ft) 100 150 250 120 140 140
Base Capacity (vph) 213 924 175 898 231 2119 703 164 1927 670 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced v/c Ratio 1.45 0.56 1.22 0.46 1.24 0.91 0.26 1.24 1.09 0.44 Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.

Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.

Page 2805 of 3005 ends

4665 LAMPSON AVENUE

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Reference Number Agency Date
14501-09A TA Report City of Los Alamitos September 3, 2024 PREPARED BY: Charlene So, PE | [email protected]
Aric Evatt | [email protected]

Page 2806 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................... ii Appendices......................................................................................................................................................... iv List of Exhibits..................................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ...................................................................................................................................................... vi List of Abbreviated Terms ............................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Summary of Findings ...............................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Project Overview.......................................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Analysis Scenarios .....................................................................................................................................................4

1.4 Study Area ....................................................................................................................................................................5

1.5 Deficiencies ..................................................................................................................................................................7

1.6 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................................9

1.7 Queuing Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 12

1.8 Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities............................................................................................................................ 12 2 Methodologies ........................................................................................................................................13

2.1 Level of Service........................................................................................................................................................ 13

2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis........................................................................................................................... 13

2.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................ 15

2.4 Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis ............................................................................................................ 15

2.5 Queuing Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 16

2.6 Level of Serivce (LOS) Criteria .......................................................................................................................... 16

2.7 Deficiency Criteria.................................................................................................................................................. 16

2.8 Project Fair Share Calculation Methodology .............................................................................................. 17 3 Area Conditions ......................................................................................................................................19

3.1 Existing Circulation Network ............................................................................................................................. 19

3.2 City of Los Alamitos General Plan Circulation Element ......................................................................... 19

3.3 City of Seal Beach................................................................................................................................................... 19

3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities............................................................................................................................ 19

3.5 Transit Service.......................................................................................................................................................... 25

3.6 Existing (2022) Traffic Counts........................................................................................................................... 25

3.7 Intersection Operations Analysis..................................................................................................................... 28

3.8 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 28

3.9 Roadway Segment Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 30 4 Projected Future Traffic .........................................................................................................................31

4.1 Project Trip Generation ....................................................................................................................................... 31

4.2 Project Trip Distribution...................................................................................................................................... 32

4.3 Modal Split................................................................................................................................................................. 32

4.4 Project Trip Assignment....................................................................................................................................... 34

4.5 Background Traffic................................................................................................................................................. 34

4.6 Cumulative Development Traffic..................................................................................................................... 34

Page 2807 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
iii

4.7 Volume Development for General Plan Buildout Conditions ............................................................. 39 5 Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Traffic Conditions..........................................................................41

5.1 Roadway Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... 41

5.2 Without Project Traffic Volume Forecasts .................................................................................................. 41

5.3 With Project Traffic Volume Forecasts ......................................................................................................... 41

5.4 Intersection Operations Analysis..................................................................................................................... 41

5.5 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 44

5.6 Roadway Segment Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 44

5.7 Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements...................................................................................... 46 6 General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions............................................................................................47

6.1 Roadway Improvements ..................................................................................................................................... 47

6.2 Without Project Traffic Volume Forecasts .................................................................................................. 47

6.3 With Project Traffic Volume Forecasts ......................................................................................................... 47

6.4 Intersection Operations Analysis..................................................................................................................... 47

6.5 Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 50

6.6 Roadway Segment Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 51

6.7 Deficiencies and Recommended Improvements...................................................................................... 51 7 Fair Share Calculations ..........................................................................................................................55 8 References...............................................................................................................................................57

Page 2808 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
iv

APPENDICES
Appendix 1.1: Approved Traffic Study Scoping Agreement
Appendix 1.2: Site Access Queuing Analysis worksheets
Appendix 3.1: Existing Traffic Counts
Appendix 3.2: Existing (2022) Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets Appendix 4.1: Post Processing Worksheets
Appendix 5.1: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 5.2: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 5.3: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project Conditions Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 5.4: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets With Improvements
Appendix 6.1: General Plan Buildout Without Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 6.2: General Plan Buildout With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 6.3: General Plan Buildout with Project Conditions Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix 6.4: General Plan Buildout With Project Conditions Intersection Operations Analysis Worksheets With Improvements
Appendix 6.5: General Plan Buildout Without Project Conditions Queuing Analysis Worksheets Appendix 6.6: General Plan Buildout With Project Conditions Queuing Analysis Worksheets With Improvements

Page 2809 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
v

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1-1: Location Map.................................................................................................................................. 2 Exhibit 1-2: Preliminary Site Plan ..................................................................................................................... 3 Exhibit 1-3: Study Area....................................................................................................................................... 6 Exhibit 1-4: Site Access Recommendations ..................................................................................................10 Exhibit 3-1: Existing Number of Through Lanes and Intersection Controls.............................................20 Exhibit 3-2: City of Los Alamitos General Plan Circulation Element..........................................................21 Exhibit 3-3: City of Seal Beach General Plan Circulation Element .............................................................22 Exhibit 3-4: City of Los Alamitos Existing and Planned Bicycle Network ..................................................23 Exhibit 3-5: City of Seal Beach Exisitng and Planned Bicycle Network......................................................24 Exhibit 3-6: Existing Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................26 Exhibit 3-7: Transit Routes ..............................................................................................................................27 Exhibit 3-8: Existing (2022) Traffic Volumes..................................................................................................29 Exhibit 4-1: Project Trip Distribution..............................................................................................................33 Exhibit 4-2: Project Only Traffic volumes ......................................................................................................35 Exhibit 4-3: Cumulative Development Location Map ..................................................................................36 Exhibit 4-4: Cumulative Only Traffic Volumes ..............................................................................................37 Exhibit 5-1: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project Traffic Volumes ......................................42 Exhibit 5-2: Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project Traffic Volumes ............................................43 Exhibit 6-1: General Plan Buildout Without Project Traffic Volumes ........................................................48 Exhibit 6-2: General Plan Buildout With Project Traffic Volumes ..............................................................49

Page 2810 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Intersection Analysis Locations ...................................................................................................... 5 Table 1-2: Roadway Segment Analysis Locations ..........................................................................................7 Table 1-3: Summary of LOS............................................................................................................................... 8 Table 1-4: Summary of Intersection Improvements....................................................................................11 Table 1-5: Peak Hour Queuing Summary for General Plan Buildout conditions.....................................12 Table 2-1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) LOS Definitions..............................................................13 Table 2-2: Unsignalized Intersection LOS Thresholds .................................................................................14 Table 3-1: Intersection Analysis for Existing (2022) Conditions .................................................................28 Table 3-2: Roadway Segment Analysis for Existing (2022) Conditions......................................................30 Table 4-1: Project Trip Generation Summary...............................................................................................31 Table 4-2: Project Alternative Trip Generation Summary...........................................................................32 Table 4-3: Cumulative Development Land Use Summary ..........................................................................38 Table 5-1: Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Conditions ..................................44 Table 5-2: Roadway Segment Analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Conditions ......................45 Table 5-3: Intersection Analysis for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Conditions With Improvements 46 Table 6-1: Intersection Analysis for General Plan Buildout Conditions ....................................................50 Table 6-2: Roadway Segment Analysis for General Plan Buildout Conditions.........................................52 Table 6-3: Intersection Analysis for General Plan Buildout Conditions With Improvements ................53 Table 6-4: Peak Hour Intersection Queuing Analysis for General Plan Buildout Conditions.................54 Table 7-1: Project Fair Share Calculations.....................................................................................................55

Page 2811 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS
(1) Reference
ADT Average Daily Traffic
CA MUTCD California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CMP Congestion Management Program
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
LOS Level of Service
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority
OCTAM Orange County Transportation Analysis Model
PHF Peak Hour Factor
Project 4665 Lampson Avenue
TA Traffic Analysis
v/c Volume to Capacity
vphgpl Vehicles per Hour Green per Lane

Page 2812 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
viii
This page intentionally left blank

Page 2813 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
1 1 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the Traffic Analysis (TA) for 4665 Lampson Avenue (“Project”), which is located in the City of Los Alamitos but adjacent to the City of Seal Beach, as shown on Exhibit 1-1.

The purpose of this TA is to evaluate the potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed Project, and where necessary recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations consistent with General Plan level of service goals and policies.

Although the proposed Project is located in the City of Los Alamitos, access to the site via Lampson Avenue lies within the City of Seal Beach’s jurisdiction. This traffic study has been prepared in accordance with the City of Los Alamitos’ requirements and the City of Seal Beach’s Transportation Analysis Guidelines (June 2020, referred to as City Guidelines) as the study area intersections lie within the City of Seal Beach. (1) The Project traffic study scoping agreement is provided in Appendix 1.1 of this TA, which has been reviewed and approved by the City of Los Alamitos and City of Seal Beach.

1.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Project is to construct the following improvements as design features in conjunction with development of the site:
• Project to implement stop controls for the southbound approach at all driveways on Lampson Avenue.

Driveway 1 is proposed to be restricted to right-in/right-out access only and a median will need to be constructed to restrict the access. Access to Driveway 2 will allow for full access. For the purposes of this TA, no traffic signal has been recommended at Driveway 2 as it does not meet peak hour warrants and the intersection has been evaluated as a cross-street stop-controlled intersection. • The Project frontage roadway of Lampson Avenue is currently constructed to its ultimate General Plan roadway classification. As such, frontage improvements will be limited to sidewalks, driveway modifications needed to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements as required by City standards. The design of Lampson Avenue should meet the City of Seal Beach’s criteria.

Additional details and intersection lane geometrics are provided in Section 1.6 Recommendations of this report.

1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project consists of the development of 55 single family detached residential dwelling units (cluster homes), 114 multifamily (low-rise) residential dwelling units, and 77 affordable apartment dwelling units (total of 246 dwelling units). A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1-2. Access to the Project site will be accommodated to Lampson Avenue via two proposed driveways.

The site is currently occupied by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife building and parking lot; however, no credit has been taken for the existing use for the purposes of this traffic study in an effort to conduct a conservative analysis. The Project is anticipated to have an Opening Year of 2026.

In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed project, trip-generation statistics published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021). (2) The Project is anticipated to generate an increase of 1,658 two-way trip-ends per day with 112 AM peak hour trips and 147 PM peak hour trips. The assumptions and methods used to estimate the Project’s trip generation characteristics are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.1 Project Trip Generation of this report.

Page 2814 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
2 EXHIBIT 1-1: LOCATION MAP

Page 2815 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
3 EXHIBIT 1-2: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

Page 2816 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
4 1.3 ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
For the purposes of this traffic study, potential deficiencies to traffic and circulation have been assessed for each of the following conditions:
• Existing (2022) Conditions
• Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project
• Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Buildout
• General Plan Buildout (2045) Without Project
• General Plan Buildout (2045) With Project
The General Plan Buildout volumes have been developed using the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM).

1.3.1 EXISTING (2022) CONDITIONS
Information for Existing (2022) conditions is disclosed to represent the baseline traffic conditions as they existed at the time this report was prepared.

1.3.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) CONDITIONS
The Opening Year Cumulative (2026) traffic conditions analyses determine the potential near-term cumulative circulation system deficiencies. The roadway network is similar to Existing conditions except for new connections to be constructed by other known cumulative projects or the Project. To account for background traffic growth, an ambient growth factor from Existing (2022) conditions of

8.24% (2 percent per year, compounded over 4 years) is included for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) traffic conditions.

Conservatively, this TA estimates the area ambient traffic growth and then adds traffic generated by other known or probable related projects. These related projects are at least in part already accounted for in the assumed ambient growth rates; and some of these related projects may not be implemented and operational within the 2026 Opening Year timeframe assumed for the Project. The resulting traffic growth utilized in the TA (ambient growth factor plus traffic generated by related projects) would therefore tend to overstate rather than understate background cumulative traffic deficiencies under 2026 conditions.

1.3.3 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS
The General Plan Buildout traffic conditions analyses determine the potential long-range cumulative circulation system deficiencies. The roadway network is similar to Existing conditions except for new connections to be constructed by other known cumulative projects or the Project. Traffic forecasts for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions for the intersections of Seal Beach Boulevard at Lampson Avenue and Valley View Street at Lampson Avenue have been developed using OCTAM. However, all other remaining study area intersections are not reflected in the traffic model. As such, the traffic volumes at all remaining study intersections have been forecasted by applying an ambient growth factor from Existing (2022) conditions of 14% in conjunction with the traffic generated by other known or probable related projects. This growth is based on the growth observed between Existing and General Plan Buildout conditions for the two intersections that are included in the OCTAM model.

The General Plan Buildout conditions analysis will be utilized to determine if improvements needed to accommodate the long-range cumulative traffic at the target Level of Service (LOS) identified in the City of Los Alamitos (lead agency) and City of Seal Beach General Plans. (3) (4)

Page 2817 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
5 1.4 STUDY AREA
To ensure that this TA satisfies the City of Los Alamitos and City of Seal Beach’s traffic study requirements, Urban Crossroads, Inc. prepared a Project traffic study scoping package for review by both agencies prior to the preparation of this report. This agreement provides an outline of the Project study area, trip generation, trip distribution, and analysis methodology. The agreement approved by both Cities is included in Appendix 1.1 of this TA.

The 10 study area intersections shown on Exhibit 1-3 and listed in Table 1-1 were selected for evaluation in this TA based on consultation with both agencies during the scoping process. The intent of a Congestion Management Program (CMP) is to more directly link land use, transportation, and air quality, thereby prompting reasonable growth management programs that will effectively utilize new transportation funds, alleviate traffic congestion and related deficiencies, and improve air quality. The Orange County CMP became effective with the passage of Proposition 111 in 1990 and most recently updated in 2021. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) adopted the 2021 CMP for the County of Orange in November 2021. (5) There are no CMP intersections within the study area.

TABLE 1-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
# Intersection Jurisdiction CMP?
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach No
2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. Seal Beach No
3 Basswood St. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach No
4 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach No
5 Heather St. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach/Los Alamitos No
6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av. Seal Beach/Los Alamitos No
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av. Seal Beach/Los Alamitos No
8 Rose St. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach/Los Alamitos No
9 Tulip St. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach/Los Alamitos No
10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av. Garden Grove No

Page 2818 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
6 EXHIBIT 1-3: STUDY AREA

Page 2819 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
7 For the purposes of this TA, a total of 9 study area roadway segments were selected for evaluation based on City of Seal Beach’s Guidelines which requires analysis of any roadway segment where a project contributes one percent or more of the total traffic on the segment. Table 1-2 provides a list of study area roadway segment analysis locations.

TABLE 1-2: ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS LOCATIONS

1.5 DEFICIENCIES
This section provides a summary of deficiencies by analysis scenario. Section 2 Methodologies provides information on the methodologies used in the analysis and Section 3 Area Conditions, Section 5 Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Traffic Conditions, and Section 6 General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions includes the detailed analyses. A summary of LOS results for all analysis scenarios are presented in Table 1-3.

1.5.1 EXISTING (2022) CONDITIONS
The study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the peak hours.

1.5.2 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) CONDITIONS
The following study area intersection is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project traffic conditions (see Table 1-3):
• Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. (#1) – LOS E PM peak hour only The addition of Project traffic is anticipated to increase the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio by more than

0.01 at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. # Roadway Segment Limits
1 Seal Beach Bl. South of Lampson Av.
2 Lampson Av. Seal Beach Bl. to Old Ranch Plaza
3 Lampson Av. Old Ranch Plaza to Basswood St.
4 Lampson Av. Basswood St. to Candleberry Av.
5 Lampson Av. Candleberry Av. to Heather St.
6 Lampson Av. Heather St. to Rose St.
7 Lampson Av. Rose St. to Tulip St.
8 Lampson Av. Tulip St. to Valley View St.
9 Lampson Av. East of Valley View St.

Page 2820 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
8 TABLE 1-3: SUMMARY OF LOS
# Intersection AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av.
2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av.
3 Basswood St. & Lampson Av.
4 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av.
5 Heather St. & Lampson Av.
6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
8 Rose St. & Lampson Av.
9 Tulip St. & Lampson Av.
10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av.1
= A - D = E = F
1 Based on HCM methodology.

Existing (2022)
GPBO Without
Project
GPBO With
Project
2026 Without
Project
2026 With
Project

Page 2821 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
9 1.5.3 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS
The following study area intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions (see Table 1-3):
• Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. (#1) – LOS F AM and PM peak hours There are no additional study area intersections anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours with the addition of Project traffic, in addition to the locations identified for General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions. Similar to Opening Year Cumulative traffic conditions, the addition of Project traffic is anticipated to increase the v/c ratio by more than 0.01 at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue under General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions.

1.6 RECOMMENDATIONS

1.6.1 SITE ADJACENT AND SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are based on the minimum improvements needed to accommodate site access and maintain acceptable peak hour operations for the proposed Project. The driveway intersection recommendations are shown on Exhibit 1-4 and roadway improvements are summarized below.

Driveway 1 & Lampson Avenue (#6) – Project to implement a stop control for egress traffic at Driveway 1 on Lampson Avenue. The intersection is proposed to be restricted to right-in/right-out access only. The access at this driveway should be controlled by a raised median.

The Project frontage roadway of Lampson Avenue is currently constructed to its ultimate General Plan roadway classification. As such, frontage improvements will be limited to sidewalk improvements, driveway modifications to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements as required by City standards.

Wherever necessary, roadways adjacent to the Project, site access points and site-adjacent intersections will be constructed to be consistent with the identified roadway classifications and respective cross-sections in the City of Los Alamitos General Plan Circulation Element.

On-site traffic signing and striping should be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the Project site.

1.6.2 OFF-SITE RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommended improvements needed to address the cumulative deficiency identified under Opening Year Cumulative (2026) and General Plan Buildout traffic conditions are shown in Table 1-4.

The Project Applicant’s responsibility for the Project’s contributions towards deficient intersections is fulfilled through payment of fair share that would be assigned to construction of the identified recommended improvements.

Page 2822 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
10 EXHIBIT 1-4: SITE ACCESS RECOMMENDATIONS

Page 2823 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
11 TABLE 1-4: SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
# Intersection Location Jurisdiction 2026 With Project GPBO With Project 1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. Seal Beach Restripe the number 2 WB left as a shared left-right turn lane
Same No Fair Share 5.1%
1 2 Program improvements constructed may be eligible for fee credit, at discretion of City. See Table 7-1 for Fair Share Calculations.

Identifies the Project's responsibility to construct an improvement or contribute fair share or fee payment towards the implementation of the improvements shown. If identified as a Project construct obligation, then no fair share percentage has been identified.

Improvements
included in Fee
Program?
Mechanism for
Improvement1
Fair Share
%2
Analysis Scenarios

Page 2824 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
12 1.7 QUEUING ANALYSIS
A queuing analysis has been performed for the Project driveways on Lampson Avenue under General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions. Both Driveway 1 and Driveway 2 on Lampson Avenue are evaluated assuming cross-street stop-controlled intersections for the purposes of the queuing assessment. The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package SimTraffic has been utilized to assess the queues. SimTraffic is designed to model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, with the primary purpose of checking and fine-tuning signal operations. SimTraffic uses the input parameters from Synchro to generate random simulations. These random simulations generated by SimTraffic have been utilized to determine the 95th percentile queue lengths observed for each applicable turn lane. The SimTraffic simulation has been recorded 5 times, during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, and has been seeded for 15-minute periods with 60-minute recording intervals. Queuing analysis worksheets for the weekday AM and PM peak hours are provided in Appendix 1.2 of this report for General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions.

As shown in Table 1-5, no site adjacent queues are anticipated under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. An eastbound left turn lane with a minimum of 150-feet of storage at Driveway 2 is anticipated to sufficiently accommodate 95th percentile peak hour queues.

TABLE 1-5: PEAK HOUR QUEUING SUMMARY FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS

1.8 PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE FACILITIES
As noted previously, frontage improvements will include sidewalk improvements, driveway modifications to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements as required by City standards. The proposed sidewalk along the Project’s frontage on the north side of Lampson Avenue will provide connectivity with proposed sidewalks and paths internal to the Project. The Project should also maintain the existing Class II (on-street, striped) bike lanes along its frontage on Lampson Avenue. # Intersection AM PM
6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av. SBR 100 39 37 Yes Yes
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av. SBL/R 100 58 60 Yes Yes
EBL 150 23 42 Yes Yes
WBT 520 0 3 Yes Yes
* SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, L = Left, T = Through, R = Right 1 Stacking Distance is acceptable if the required stacking distance is less than or equal to the stacking distance provided. An additional 25 feet of stacking which is assumed to be provided in the transition for turn pockets is reflected in the stacking distance shown on this table, where applicable.

Movement
Available
Stacking
Distance (Feet)
95th Percentile Queue (Feet) Acceptable? 1
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Page 2825 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
13 2 METHODOLOGIES
This section of the report presents the methodologies used to perform the traffic analyses summarized in this report. The methodologies described are consistent with City Guidelines.

2.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE
Traffic operations of roadway facilities are described using the term "Level of Service" (LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of traffic flow based on several factors, such as speed, travel time, delay, and freedom to maneuver. Six levels are typically defined ranging from LOS A, representing completely free-flow conditions, to LOS F, representing breakdown in flow resulting in stop-and-go conditions.

LOS E represents operations at or near capacity, an unstable level where vehicles are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining uniform flow.

2.2 INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The definitions of LOS for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained by the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ slightly depending on the type of traffic control.

2.2.1 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Los Alamitos requires signalized CMP intersections to be evaluated through ICU analysis which compares the peak hour traffic volumes to intersection capacity. Lane capacities of 1,600 vehicles per hour of green time (left turn and shared lanes) and 1,700 vehicles per hour of green time (through and right turn lanes) for the ICU calculations. 0.10 has been assumed representing 10 percent for the yellow clearance/lost time and inherent vehicle delay between cycles with an assumed signal cycle of 100 seconds. The ICU LOS definitions based on volume to capacity (v/c) ratio are presented in Table 2-1. The Traffix software package has been utilized to evaluate the signalized intersections using the ICU methodology with the analysis parameters discussed above.

TABLE 2-1 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) LOS DEFINITIONS Level of Service Critical Volume to Capacity Ratio
A 0.00 - 0.60
B 0.61 - 0.70
C 0.71 - 0.80
D 0.81 - 0.90
E 0.91 - 1.00
F >1.00
Source: 2021 OCTA CMP, Figure 1 (Chapter 2)

Page 2826 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
14 2.2.2 UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
The City of Los Alamitos and City of Seal Beach require the operations of unsignalized intersections be evaluated using the methodology described in the HCM. (6) The LOS rating is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (see Table 2-2). At two-way or sidestreet stop-controlled intersections, LOS is calculated for each controlled movement and for the left turn movement from the major street, as well as for the intersection as a whole. For approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane. Delay for the intersection is reported for the worst individual movement at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. For all-way stop controlled intersections, LOS is computed for the intersection as a whole (average delay).

The LOS is typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway. The 6th Edition Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. (6) The HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control.

The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package Synchro (Version 11) has been utilized to analyze signalized intersections. Synchro is a microscopic traffic software program that is based on the signalized intersection capacity analysis as specified in the HCM. Equations are used to determine measures of effectiveness such as delay and queue length.

The peak hour traffic volumes have been adjusted using a peak hour factor (PHF) to reflect peak 15- minute volumes. Customary practice for LOS analysis is to use a peak 15-minute rate of flow.

However, flow rates are typically expressed in vehicles per hour. The PHF is the relationship between the peak 15-minute flow rate and the full hourly volume (e.g., PHF = [Hourly Volume] / [4 x Peak 15- minute Flow Rate]). The use of a 15-minute PHF produces a more detailed analysis as compared to analyzing vehicles per hour. Existing PHFs have been used for all analysis scenarios. Per the HCM, PHF values over 0.95 often are indicative of high traffic volumes with capacity constraints on peak hour flows while lower PHF values are indicative of greater variability of flow during the peak hour. (6)
TABLE 2-2: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LOS THRESHOLDS
Description Average Control Delay
(Seconds), V/C ≤ 1.0
Level of Service,
V/C ≤ 1.01
Little or no delays. 0 to 10.00 A
Short traffic delays. 10.01 to 15.00 B
Average traffic delays. 15.01 to 25.00 C
Long traffic delays. 25.01 to 35.00 D
Very long traffic delays. 35.01 to 50.00 E
Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded. > 50.00 F Source: HCM, 6th Edition
1 If V/C is greater than 1.0 then LOS is F per HCM.

Page 2827 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
15 2.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The term "signal warrants" refers to the list of established criteria used by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or ascertain the potential need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This TA uses the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the Caltrans’ California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD), for all study area intersections. (7) The signal warrant criteria for Existing study area intersections are based upon several factors, including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, frequency of accidents, and location of school areas. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. (7) Specifically, this TA utilizes the Peak Hour Volume-based Warrant 3 as the appropriate representative traffic signal warrant analysis for existing traffic conditions. Rural warrants have been utilized for intersections located in communities with populations of less than 10,000 persons or with adjacent major streets operating above 40 miles per hour and urban warrants have been utilized for those that operate at less than 40 miles per hour. For the purposes of this study, the speed limit was the basis for determining whether Urban or Rural warrants were used for a given intersection.

Traffic signal warrant analyses were performed for the future unsignalized study area intersection of Driveway 2 at Lampson Avenue during the peak weekday conditions wherein the Project is anticipated to contribute the highest trips. All existing study area intersections are currently signalized, so traffic signal warrant analysis has not been performed for Existing traffic conditions. Driveway 1 on Lampson Avenue is proposed to be restricted to right-in/right-out access only. As such, traffic signal warrant analysis has not been performed for Driveway 1 as the installation of a signal at this location is not suitable based on its access and location with respect to other existing and proposed signalized intersections. The traffic signal warrant analyses for future conditions are presented in Section 5 Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Traffic Conditions and Section 6 General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions of this report.

It is important to note that a signal warrant defines the minimum condition under which the installation of a traffic signal might be warranted. Meeting this threshold condition does not require that a traffic control signal be installed at a particular location, but rather, that other traffic factors and conditions be evaluated in order to determine whether the signal is truly justified. It should also be noted that signal warrants do not necessarily correlate with LOS. An intersection may satisfy a signal warrant condition and operate at or above acceptable LOS or operate below acceptable LOS and not meet a signal warrant.

2.4 ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Roadway segment operations have been evaluated using the City of Seal Beach’s General Plan Roadway Segment capacity thresholds. These roadway capacities are “rule of thumb” estimates for planning purposes and are affected by such factors as intersections (spacing, configuration and control features), degree of access control, roadway grades, design geometrics (horizontal and vertical alignment standards), sight distance, vehicle mix (truck and bus traffic) and pedestrian and bicycle traffic. In other words, while using ADT for planning purposes is suitable with regards to evaluating potential volume to capacity with future forecasts, it is not suitable for operational analysis because it does not account for the factors listed previously. As such, where the ADT based roadway segment analysis indicates a potential roadway capacity deficiency (i.e., unacceptable LOS), a review of the

Page 2828 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
16 more detailed peak hour intersection analysis and progression analysis are undertaken. The more detailed peak hour intersection analysis explicitly accounts for factors that affect roadway capacity.

2.5 QUEUING ANALYSIS
The 95th percentile queuing of vehicles has been assessed at the intersections of Seal Beach Boulevard and Valley View Street along Lampson Avenue and all proximate freeway or state highway off-ramps to determine potential queuing deficiencies for the turning lanes. This queuing analysis has been conducted for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions only. Specifically, the queuing analysis is utilized to identify any potential queuing and “spill back” onto the adjacent arterial through lanes from the turn lanes. The traffic modeling and signal timing optimization software package SimTraffic has been utilized to assess the queues. SimTraffic is designed to model networks of signalized and unsignalized intersections, with the primary purpose of checking and fine-tuning signal operations. SimTraffic uses the input parameters from Synchro to generate random simulations. These random simulations generated by SimTraffic have been utilized to determine the 95th percentile queue lengths observed for each applicable turn lane. A SimTraffic simulation has been recorded up to 5 times, during the weekday AM and weekday PM peak hours, and has been seeded for 15-minute periods with 60-minute recording intervals.

2.6 LEVEL OF SERIVCE (LOS) CRITERIA
The City of Los Alamitos and City of Seal Beach have established LOS D as the minimum level of service for all roadways/intersections within the City. Therefore, any intersection operating at LOS E or F will be considered deficient for the purposes of this analysis.

2.7 DEFICIENCY CRITERIA
This section outlines the methodology used in this analysis related to identifying circulation system deficiencies.

2.7.1 CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS & CITY OF SEAL BEACH
To determine whether the addition of project traffic at a study intersection result in a deficiency, the following thresholds of significance will be utilized to determine when an intersection requires improvements:

2.7.2 CITY OF GARDEN GROVE
To determine whether the addition of project traffic at a study intersection result in a deficiency, the following thresholds of significance will be utilized:

Existing ICU Project Related Increase in ICU

0.00 - 0.69 0.06

0.70 - 0.79 0.04

0.80 - 0.89 0.02

0.90+ 0.01

Page 2829 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
17 • Any signalized study intersection operating at an acceptable LOS D or better without project in which the addition of project traffic causes the intersection to degrade to LOS E or F shall identify improvements to improve the operations to LOS D or better.
• Any signalized intersection that is operating at LOS E or F without project traffic where the project increases v/c by 0.010 or more shall identify improvements to offset the increase in delay. • An operational improvement would be required if the study determines that either section a) or both sections b) and c) occur at unsignalized study intersections:
a) The addition of project related traffic causes the intersection to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or better to LOS E or LOS F.

AND
b) The intersection meets the peak hour traffic signal warrant after the addition of project traffic.

2.8 PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATION METHODOLOGY
For improvements that do not appear in a pre-existing fee program, a fair share contribution based on the Project’s proportional share may be imposed in order to address the Project’s share of deficiencies in lieu of construction. It should be noted that fair share calculations are for informational purposes only and the City’s Traffic Engineer will determine the appropriate improvements to be implemented by a project (to be identified in the conditions of approval). The Project’s fair share cost of improvements would be determined based on the following equation, which is the ratio of Project traffic to new traffic, where new traffic is total future traffic less existing baseline traffic:

Project Fair Share % = Project Traffic / (General Plan Buildout With Project Total Traffic – Existing (2022) Traffic)
The detailed Project fair share contribution calculations are presented in Section 7 Fair Share Calculations of this TA (see Table 7-1).

Page 2830 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
18 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 2831 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
19 3 AREA CONDITIONS
This section provides a summary of the existing circulation network, the City of Los Alamitos and City of Seal Beach General Plan Circulation Network, and a review of existing peak hour intersection operations analyses.

3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK
Pursuant to the scoping agreement (Appendix 1.1), the study area includes a total of 10 existing and future intersections as shown previously on Exhibit 1-3. Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the study area intersections located near the proposed Project and identifies the number of through traffic lanes for existing roadways and intersection traffic controls.

3.2 CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT As noted previously, the Project site is located within the City of Los Alamitos. The roadway classifications and planned (ultimate) roadway cross-sections of the major roadways, as identified in the City of Los Alamitos General Plan Circulation Element, are described subsequently. Exhibit 3-2 shows the City of Los Alamitos General Plan Circulation Element and below is a summary of the major study area roadways and their General Plan classifications:
• Smart Street (right-of-way is 122-146-feet, typically 6 to 8-lane divided roadways) • Major Arterial (right-of-way is 120-feet, typically 6-lane divided roadways) • Primary Arterial (right-of-way is 100-120-feet, typically 4-lane divided roadways) • Secondary Arterial (right-of-way is 80-feet, typically 4-lane undivided roadways) There are no classified City roadways within the study area.

3.3 CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Although the Project site is located within the City of Los Alamitos, the majority of the study area lies within the City of Seal Beach. The roadway classifications and planned (ultimate) roadway crosssections of the major roadways within the study area, as identified in the City of Seal Beach General Plan Circulation Element, are described subsequently. Exhibit 3-3 shows the City of Seal Beach General Plan Circulation Element and Below is a summary of the major study area roadways and their General Plan classifications:
• Major Arterial (right-of-way is 120-feet, typically 6-lane divided roadways): Seal Beach Boulevard • Primary Arterial (right-of-way is 100-feet, typically 4-lane divided roadways): None • Secondary Arterial (right-of-way is 80-feet, typically 4-lane undivided roadways): Lampson Avenue • Principal Roadways: Basswood Street, Candleberry Avenue, Heather Street, Rose Street, Tulip Street

3.4 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The City of Los Alamitos existing and planned bicycle network is shown on Exhibit 3-4 and the City of Seal Beach’s is shown on Exhibit 3-5. There are existing Class II (on-street, striped) bike lanes on the north and south sides of Lampson Avenue from Basswood Street to the east. In addition, there is a Class I bike/pedestrian path on Seal Beach Boulevard north of Lampson Avenue and a Class II bike lane south of Lampson Avenue. The Project should maintain the existing Class II bike lane on Lampson Avenue along its frontage.

Page 2832 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
20 EXHIBIT 3-1: EXISTING NUMBER OF THROUGH LANES AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS

Page 2833 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
21 EXHIBIT 3-2: CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT

Page 2834 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
22 EXHIBIT 3-3: CITY OF SEAL BEACH GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT

Page 2835 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
23 EXHIBIT 3-4: CITY OF LOS ALAMITOS EXISTING AND PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK

Page 2836 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
24 EXHIBIT 3-5: CITY OF SEAL BEACH EXISITNG AND PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK

Page 2837 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
25 Exhibit 3-6 illustrates the existing crosswalks and existing sidewalks near the study area intersections.

As shown on Exhibit 3-6, there are sidewalks provided along the frontage of the Project. The sidewalk on the north side of Lampson begins near Manley Street and continues to the east. The existing sidewalk on the south side of Lampson Avenue starts at Old Ranch Plaza and continues to the east.

All signalized study area intersections accommodate at least two approaches that have crosswalks to provide connectivity to the existing sidewalks.

3.5 TRANSIT SERVICE
The study area is currently served by OCTA with bus service along Seal Beach Boulevard, Valley View Street, and Lampson Avenue (east of Valley View Street). OCTA route 42 runs along Seal Beach Boulevard and serves Seal Beach to Orange with an existing stop provided at Lampson Avenue. Bus service frequency is approximately 20-minute intervals during the peak commute hours and 40- mintus during other times of the day during a typical weekday. OCTA Route 123 serves the City of Anaheim to City of Huntington Beach via Malvern Avenue, Valley View Street, and Bolsa Chica. There are existing stops along Valley View Street with an existing stop at Chapman Avenue. Bus service frequency is approximately 60-minute intervals on a typical weekday for OCTA Route 123. The existing bus routes and stops are illustrated on Exhibit 3-7. Transit service is reviewed and updated by OCTA periodically to address ridership, budget, and community demand needs. Changes in land use can affect these periodic adjustments which may lead to either enhanced or reduced service where appropriate. Transit routes in the area should be reviewed to consider a potential route along Lampson Avenue for service between Seal Beach Boulevard and Valley View Street.

3.6 EXISTING (2022) TRAFFIC COUNTS
The intersection LOS analysis is based on the traffic volumes observed during the peak hour conditions using traffic count data collected in June and September 2022. The following peak hours were selected for analysis:
• AM Peak Period: 7:00-9:00 AM
• PM Peak Period: 4:00-6:00 PM
The 2022 weekday AM and PM peak hour count data is representative of typical weekday peak hour traffic conditions in the study area. There were no observations made in the field that would indicate atypical traffic conditions on the count dates, such as construction activity or detour routes and nearby schools were in session and operating on normal schedules. The raw manual peak hour turning movement traffic count data sheets are included in Appendix 3.1. Baseline volumes were adjusted to account for volume balancing between intersections so there is no unexplained loss of vehicles between intersections with no other access.

Page 2838 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
26 EXHIBIT 3-6: EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

Page 2839 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
27 EXHIBIT 3-7: TRANSIT ROUTES

Page 2840 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
28 Existing weekday Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-8. Where actual 24-hour tube count data was not available, Existing ADT volumes were based upon factored intersection peak hour counts collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. using the following formula for each intersection leg:

Weekday PM Peak Hour (Approach Volume + Exit Volume) x 10.64 = Leg Volume A comparison of the PM peak hour and daily traffic volumes of various roadway segments within the study area indicated that the peak-to-daily relationship is approximately 9.40 percent. As such, the above equation utilizing a factor of 10.64 estimates the ADT volumes on the study area roadway segments assuming a peak-to-daily relationship of approximately 9.40 percent (i.e., 1/0.0940 = 10.64) and was assumed to sufficiently estimate ADT volumes for planning-level analyses. Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are shown on Exhibit 3-8.

3.7 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Existing peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2.2 Intersection Capacity Analysis of this report. The intersection operations analysis results are summarized in Table 3-1, which indicates that the study area intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the peak hours. The intersection operations analysis worksheets are included in Appendix 3.2 of this TA.

TABLE 3-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2022) CONDITIONS There are existing westbound U-turns occurring at the intersection of Heather Street and Lampson Avenue, however, the intersection operates at an acceptable LOS with the inclusion of these peak hour U-turns as shown in Table 3-1.

3.8 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
All of the existing study area intersections are currently signalized. As such, no traffic signal warrant analysis has been conducted for Existing (2022) traffic conditions.

Traffic
# Intersection Control2 AM PM AM PM
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. TS 0.78 0.79 C C
2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. TS 0.40 0.37 A A
3 Basswood St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.47 0.44 A A
4 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. TS 0.39 0.37 A A
5 Heather St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.34 0.37 A A
6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av.
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av.
8 Rose St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.30 0.36 A A
9 Tulip St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.30 0.37 A A
10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.64 0.71 B C
1 ICU is reported in volume-to-capacity (v/c). ICU analysis conducted for signalized intersections only. 2 TS = Traffic Signal
Level of
ICU (v/c) Service 1
Future Intersection
Future Intersection

Page 2841 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
29 EXHIBIT 3-8: EXISTING (2022) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2842 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
30 3.9 ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS
Table 3-2 provides a summary of the Existing (2022) conditions roadway segment capacity analysis.

As shown in Table 3-2, the study area roadway segments are currently operating at an unacceptable LOS based on the daily roadway capacity thresholds and minimum LOS criteria.

TABLE 3-2: ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING (2022) CONDITIONS Roadway LOS
# Roadway Segment Limits Section Capacity1 2022 V/C2 LOS3 1 Seal Beach Bl. South of Lampson Av. 6D 56,300 36,668 0.651 B 2 Lampson Av. Seal Beach Bl. to Old Ranch Plaza 4D 37,500 17,399 0.464 A 3 Lampson Av. Old Ranch Plaza to Basswood St. 4D 37,500 16,668 0.444 A 4 Lampson Av. Basswood St. to Candleberry Av. 4D 37,500 13,134 0.350 A 5 Lampson Av. Candleberry Av. to Heather St. 4D 37,500 11,474 0.306 A 6 Lampson Av. Heather St. to Rose St. 4D 37,500 11,644 0.311 A 7 Lampson Av. Rose St. to Tulip St. 4D 37,500 12,059 0.322 A 8 Lampson Av. Tulip St. to Valley View St. 4D 37,500 13,007 0.347 A 9 Lampson Av. East of Valley View St. 4D 37,500 10,186 0.272 A 1 These maximum roadway capacities are based on the City of Seal Beach's General Plan Roadway Segment Thresholds. 2 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio
3 LOS = Level of Service
Existing

Page 2843 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
31 4 PROJECTED FUTURE TRAFFIC
The Project consists of the development of 55 single family detached residential dwelling units (cluster homes), 114 multifamily (low-rise) residential dwelling units, and 77 affordable apartment dwelling units (total of 246 dwelling units). Access to the Project site will be accommodated to Lampson Avenue via two proposed driveways. The site is currently occupied by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife building and parking lot; however, no credit has been taken for the existing use for the purposes of this traffic study in an effort to conduct a conservative analysis.

4.1 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic which is both attracted to and produced by a development. Determining traffic generation for a specific project is therefore based upon forecasting the amount of traffic that is expected to be both attracted to and produced by the specific land uses being proposed for a given development.

4.1.1 PROPOSED PROJECT
In order to develop the traffic characteristics of the proposed Project, trip-generation statistics published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) for the Single Family Detached Residential Land Use category (ITE Land Use Code 210), Multifamily (Low-Rise) Housing (ITE Land Use Code 220), and Affordable Housing (ITE Land Use Code 223) were used to calculate the Project trip generation (see Table 4-1 for rates). The trip generation summary illustrating daily, and peak hour trip generation estimates for the proposed Project are also shown on Table 4-1. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate 1,658 two-way trip-ends per day with 112 AM peak hour trips and 147 PM peak hour trips.

TABLE 4-1: PROJECT TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY
ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Single Family Detached DU 210 0.18 0.52 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 9.43 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) (2-3 Floors) DU 220 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 Affordable Housing DU 223 0.10 0.26 0.36 0.27 0.19 0.46 4.81 1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 DU = Dwelling Units
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Single Family Detached 55 DU 10 28 38 33 19 52 520
Multifamily Housing 114 DU 11 35 46 37 22 59 768
Affordable Housing 77 DU 8 20 28 21 15 36 370
Project Total Trips 29 83 112 91 56 147 1,658
1 DU = Dwelling Units .

Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Page 2844 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
32 4.1.2 PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The proposed Project is considering an alternative that replaces the affordable housing with agerestricted housing (attached product type). The trip generation rates for the Project including the alternative attached senior housing (see Table 4-2 for rates). The trip generation summary illustrating daily, and peak hour trip generation estimates for the Project Alternative are also shown on Table 4-

2. The Project Alternative is anticipated to generate 1,538 two-way trip-ends per day with 99 AM peak hour trips and 130 PM peak hour trips. As shown, the Project Alternative generates 120 fewer twoway trip-ends per day with 13 fewer AM peak hour trips and 17 fewer PM peak hour trips.

TABLE 4-2: PROJECT ALTERNATIVE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY

4.2 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The Project trip distribution represents the directional orientation of traffic to and from the Project site. Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable destinations, directions or traffic routes that will be utilized by Project traffic. The potential interaction between the planned land uses and surrounding regional access routes are considered, to identify the route where the Project traffic would distribute. Exhibit 4-1 shows the Project trip distribution patterns which was reviewed as part of the traffic study scoping process (see Appendix 1.1). Project traffic is not anticipated to utilize Heather Street for U-turns along Lampson Avenue as the multifamily component would have access to the full access driveway (Driveway 2) on Lampson Avenue for making southbound left turns.

4.3 MODAL SPLIT
The potential for Project trips to be reduced by the use of public transit, walking or bicycling have not been included as part of the Project’s estimated trip generation. Essentially, the Project’s traffic projections are "conservative" in that these alternative travel modes would reduce the forecasted traffic volumes.

ITE LU AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use1 Units2 Code In Out Total In Out Total
Single Family Detached DU 210 0.18 0.52 0.70 0.59 0.35 0.94 9.43 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) (2-3 Floors) DU 220 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.19 0.51 6.74 Senior Housing - Attached DU 252 0.07 0.13 0.20 0.14 0.11 0.25 3.24 1 Trip Generation & Vehicle Mix Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition (2021). 2 DU = Dwelling Units
Land Use Quantity Units1 In Out Total In Out Total Daily Single Family Detached 55 DU 10 28 38 33 19 52 520
Multifamily Housing 114 DU 11 35 46 37 22 59 768
Senior Housing Attached 77 DU 5 10 15 11 8 19 250
Project Alternative Total Trips 26 73 99 81 49 130 1,538 Proposed Project Total Trips 29 83 112 91 56 147 1,658
Variance (Alternative - Proposed) -3 -10 -13 -10 -7 -17 -120 1 DU = Dwelling Units .

Daily
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour

Page 2845 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
33 EXHIBIT 4-1: PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION

Page 2846 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
34 4.4 PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT
The assignment of traffic from the Project area to the adjoining roadway system is based upon the Project trip generation, trip distribution, and the arterial highway and local street system improvements that would be in place by the time of initial occupancy of the Project. Based on the identified Project traffic generation and trip distribution patterns, Project only ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Exhibit 4-2.

4.5 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
Future year traffic forecasts have been based upon background (ambient) growth at 2.0% per year for 2026 traffic conditions. The ambient growth factor is intended to approximate regional traffic growth.

The total ambient growth is 8.24% for 2026 traffic conditions (growth of 2.0 percent per year over 4 years). This ambient growth rate is added to existing traffic volumes to account for area-wide growth not reflected by cumulative development projects. Ambient growth has been added to daily and peak hour traffic volumes on surrounding roadways, in addition to traffic generated by the development of future projects that have been approved but not yet built and/or for which development applications have been filed and are under consideration by governing agencies. Opening Year Cumulative (2026) traffic volumes are provided in Section 6 of this report.

4.6 CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC
A cumulative project list was developed for the purposes of this analysis through consultation with planning staff from the City of Los Alamitos, City of Seal Beach, and City of Garden Grove. The cumulative projects listed are those that would generate traffic and would contribute traffic to study area intersections. Exhibit 4-3 illustrates the cumulative development location map. A summary of cumulative development projects and their proposed land uses are shown in Table 4-3. In an effort to conduct a conservative analysis, the cumulative projects are added in conjunction with the ambient growth identified in Section 4.5 Background Traffic. The Cumulative ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes for all cumulative development projects are shown on Exhibit 4-4.

Page 2847 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
35 EXHIBIT 4-2: PROJECT ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2848 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
36 EXHIBIT 4-3: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION MAP

Page 2849 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
37 EXHIBIT 4-4: CUMULATIVE ONLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2850 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
38 TABLE 4-3: CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
ID Project Land Use Quantity Unit1
Los Alamitos
LA1 Los Alamitos Luxury Apartments Multifamily (Low-Rise) Housing 107 DU LA2 Chevron Gas Station Gas Station w/ Convenience Store 2.724 TSF LA3 4562 Katella Avenue Medical Office Building 5.200 TSF LA4 Los Alamitos Medical Center (Phase 2 & 3) Hospital Building I 92 Beds Hospital Building II 126 Beds
Seal Beach
SB1 13980 Seal Beach Boulevard Project/Hydrogen Fueling Station Hydrogen Fueling Facility 1.010 TSF SB2 Accurate Storage Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 59 DU SB3 Shops at Rossmoor Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 400 DU SB4 Old Ranch Town Center Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 200 DU SB5 Old Ranch Country Club Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 116 DU Senior Housing - Attached 51 DU
Medical Office 25.340 TSF
Hotel 150 Rooms
SB6 Leisure World Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 150 DU SB7 Seal Beach Plaza Multifamily (Mid-Rise) Housing 75 DU Garden Grove
GG1 Valley View Lanes (CUP-211-2021) Bowling Alley 13.740 TSF GG2 12141 Valley View Street Restaurant 7.214 TSF
Drive-Thru Restaurant 2.000 TSF
GG3 Marley's Preschool (CUP-212-2021) Preschool/Day Care 84 STU GG4 Pro Athletics (CUP-216-2022) Athletic & Health Club/Gym 7.100 TSF 1 DU = Dwelling Units; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; STU = Students

Page 2851 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
39 4.7 VOLUME DEVELOPMENT FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS Traffic projections for General Plan Buildout Without Project and With Project conditions were derived from the OCTAM Version 5.5 maintained by the OCTA. Based on the city-wide land use data and the regional socioeconomic growth projections, future trip activity is estimated and assigned to the roadway circulation system. Model output is post-processed based on established postprocessing methodologies. The post-processor applies the model’s projected growth to each turning movement for both General Plan Buildout Without and With Project scenarios, forecasting a value that reflects future growth.

The traffic forecasts reflect the area-wide growth anticipated between Existing (2022) conditions and General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. In most instances the traffic model zone structure is not designed to provide accurate turning movements along arterial roadways unless refinement and reasonableness checking is performed. Therefore, the General Plan Buildout peak hour forecasts were refined using the model derived long range forecasts, base (validation) year model forecasts, along with existing peak hour traffic count data collected at each analysis location in June/September 2022. The OCTAM has a base (validation) year of 2016 and a horizon (future forecast) year of 2045.

The difference in model volumes (2045-2016) defines the growth in traffic over the 29-year period.

The refined future peak hour approach and departure volumes obtained from the model output data are then entered into a spreadsheet program consistent with the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP Report 765), along with initial estimates of turning movement proportions.

A linear programming algorithm is used to calculate individual turning movements which match the known directional roadway segment forecast volumes computed in the previous step. This program computes a likely set of intersection turning movements from intersection approach counts and the initial turning proportions from each approach leg.

The OCTAM uses an AM peak period-to-peak hour factor of 0.36 and a PM peak period-to-peak hour factor of 0.266. These factors represent the relationship of the highest single AM peak hour to the modeled 3-hour AM peak period (an even distribution would result in a factor of 0.33) and the highest single PM peak hour to the modeled 4-hour PM peak period (an even distribution would result in a factor of 0.25). Typically, the model growth is prorated and is subsequently added to the existing (base validation) traffic volumes to represent General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. In an effort to conduct a conservative analysis, reductions to traffic forecasts from either Existing traffic conditions were not assumed as part of this analysis. Future estimated peak hour traffic data was used for new intersections and intersections with an anticipated change in travel patterns to further refine the General Plan Buildout peak hour forecasts.

The future General Plan Buildout Without Project and With Project peak hour turning movements were then reviewed by Urban Crossroads, Inc. for reasonableness, and in some cases, were adjusted to achieve flow conservation, reasonable growth, and reasonable diversion between parallel routes.

Flow conservation checks ensure that traffic flow between two closely spaced intersections, such as two adjacent driveway locations, is verified in order to make certain that vehicles leaving one intersection are entering the adjacent intersection and that there is no unexplained loss of vehicles.

The result of this traffic forecasting procedure is a series of traffic volumes which are suitable for traffic operations analysis. Post processing has been performed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours only as these are the only time periods where traffic model data was readily available. The post processed volumes for General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions are provided in Appendix 4.1.

Page 2852 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
40 Only the intersections of Seal Beach Boulevard at Lampson Avenue and Valley View Street at Lampson Avenue are modeled in OCTAM. All other study area intersections are not reflected in the traffic model.

As such, the traffic volumes at all remaining study intersections have been calculated by applying an ambient growth factor from Existing (2022) conditions of 14% in conjunction with the traffic generated by other known or probable related projects. The total growth between existing and General Plan Buildout conditions has been determined by calculating the average growth observed at the two modeled intersections.

Page 2853 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
41 5 OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the traffic forecasts for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) conditions and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of the following:
• Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements at the Project’s frontage and driveways).
• Driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by cumulative developments to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for Opening Year Cumulative conditions (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements along the cumulative development’s frontages and driveways).

5.2 WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Existing traffic volumes plus an ambient growth factor of 8.24% plus traffic from pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the area. The weekday ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes which can be expected for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5-1.

5.3 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project volumes plus Project traffic.

The weekday ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes which can be expected for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 5-2.

5.4 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
Opening Year Cumulative peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2 Methodologies of this TA.

The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 5-1 for Opening Year Cumulative traffic conditions, which indicates that the study area intersections are anticipated to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the peak hours under Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project traffic conditions.

The following study area intersection is anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours with the addition of Project traffic:
• Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. (#1) – LOS E PM peak hour only The addition of Project traffic is also anticipated to increase the v/c ratio by more than 0.01 at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. As such, improvements are provided for the deficient intersection. The intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without and With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.1 and Appendix 5.2 of this TA, respectively.

Page 2854 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
42 EXHIBIT 5-1: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2855 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
43 EXHIBIT 5-2: OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2856 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
44 TABLE 5-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) CONDITIONS

5.5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
All existing study area intersections are currently signalized. As such, no traffic signal warrant analysis has been conducted for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without Project traffic conditions. The intersection of Driveway 2 at Lampson Avenue is not anticipated to warrant a peak hour or planninglevel (ADT) based warrant under Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project traffic conditions. The traffic signal warrant analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 5.3 of this TA.

5.6 ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS
Table 5-2 provides a summary of the Opening Year Cumulative (2026) conditions roadway segment capacity analysis. As shown in Table 5-2, the study area roadway segments are anticipated to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS based on the daily roadway capacity thresholds and minimum LOS criteria under Opening Year Cumulative (2026) Without and With Project traffic conditions.

Level of Level of
Traffic Service Service
Control2 AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. TS 0.87 0.90 D D 0.88 0.91 D E 2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. TS 0.46 0.43 A A 0.48 0.44 A A 3 Basswood St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.51 0.49 A A 0.52 0.50 A A 4 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. TS 0.43 0.41 A A 0.44 0.43 A A 5 Heather St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.37 0.41 A A 0.38 0.43 A A 6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av. CSS 10.9 10.8 B B
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av. CSS 14.8 15.6 B C
8 Rose St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.33 0.41 A A 0.33 0.41 A A 9 Tulip St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.34 0.41 A A 0.34 0.42 A A 10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.72 0.81 C D 0.73 0.83 C D * BOLD = Level of Service (LOS) does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS). 1 ICU is reported in volume-to-capacity (v/c). ICU analysis conducted for signalized intersections only. 2 CSS = Cross-street Stop; TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Improvement # Intersection
2026 Without Project 2026 With Project
Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown.

Delay (secs.) or
ICU (v/c)1
Delay (secs.) or
ICU (v/c)1
Future Intersection
Future Intersection

Page 2857 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
45 TABLE 5-2: ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) CONDITIONS Roadway LOS
# Roadway Segment Limits Section Capacity1 2026 V/C2 LOS3 2026 V/C2 LOS3 1 Seal Beach Bl. South of Lampson Av. 6D 56,300 42,255 0.75 C 42,835 0.76 C 2 Lampson Av. Seal Beach Bl. to Old Ranch Plaza 4D 37,500 20,405 0.54 A 21,317 0.57 A 3 Lampson Av. Old Ranch Plaza to Basswood St. 4D 37,500 19,048 0.51 A 19,960 0.53 A 4 Lampson Av. Basswood St. to Candleberry Av. 4D 37,500 15,223 0.41 A 16,135 0.43 A 5 Lampson Av. Candleberry Av. to Heather St. 4D 37,500 13,506 0.36 A 14,418 0.38 A 6 Lampson Av. Heather St. to Rose St. 4D 37,500 13,770 0.37 A 14,682 0.39 A 7 Lampson Av. Rose St. to Tulip St. 4D 37,500 14,299 0.38 A 15,045 0.40 A 8 Lampson Av. Tulip St. to Valley View St. 4D 37,500 15,437 0.41 A 16,183 0.43 A 9 Lampson Av. East of Valley View St. 4D 37,500 11,416 0.30 A 11,664 0.31 A 1 These maximum roadway capacities are based on the City of Seal Beach's General Plan Roadway Segment Thresholds. 2 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio
3 LOS = Level of Service
Without Project With Project

Page 2858 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
46 5.7 DEFICIENCIES AND RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides a summary of deficiencies and recommended improvements for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) traffic conditions. Based on deficiency criteria discussed in Section 2.5 Deficiency Criteria, the following intersection was found to be deficient. Improvements necessary to improve the traffic deficiency back to acceptable levels are discussed below.

Seal Beach Boulevard & Lampson Avenue (#1): The intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue is anticipated to meet the applicable deficiency criteria for LOS. As shown in Table 5-3, restriping the number two westbound left turn lane as a shared left-right turn lane would improve the intersection operations back to acceptable LOS.

The intersection operations analysis worksheets for Opening Year Cumulative (2026) With Project traffic conditions, with improvements, are included in Appendix 5.4 of this TA.

TABLE 5-3: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR OPENING YEAR CUMULATIVE (2026) CONDITIONS

WITH IMPROVEMENTS
Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ICU (v/c)2 Service # Intersection Control3 L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM 1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av.

TS 0 3 1> 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 1> 0.88 0.91 D E
TS 0 3 1> 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1> 0.71 0.78 C C
1 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
2 ICU is reported in volume-to-capacity (v/c). ICU analysis conducted for signalized intersections only. 3 TS = Traffic Signal
4 Improvement includes restriping the number 2 westbound left as a shared left-right turn lane.

Intersection Approach Lanes1
- Without Improvements
- With Improvements4
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; 1 = Improvement

Page 2859 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
47 6 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
This section discusses the traffic forecasts for General Plan Buildout conditions and the resulting intersection operations and traffic signal warrant analyses.

6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for General Plan Buildout conditions are consistent with those shown previously on Exhibit 3-1, with the exception of the following:
• Project driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by the Project to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for General Plan Buildout conditions (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements at the Project’s frontage and driveways).
• Driveways and those facilities assumed to be constructed by cumulative developments to provide site access are also assumed to be in place for General Plan Buildout conditions (e.g., intersection and roadway improvements along the cumulative development’s frontages and driveways).

6.2 WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
For the intersections of Seal Beach Boulevard at Lampson Avenue and Valley View Steet at Lampson Avenue the General Plan Buildout Without Project weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes are based on the OCTAM traffic model. For the remaining study intersections, the scenario includes Existing traffic volumes plus an ambient growth factor of 14% plus traffic from pending and approved but not yet constructed known development projects in the area (see Section 4.7 for additional discussion on volume development). The weekday ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes which can be expected for General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 6-1.

6.3 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
This scenario includes General Plan Buildout Without Project volumes plus Project traffic. The weekday ADT and weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes which can be expected for General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions are shown on Exhibit 6-2.

6.4 INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
General Plan Buildout peak hour traffic operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections based on the analysis methodologies presented in Section 2 Methodologies of this TA.

The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 6-1 for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions, which indicates that the following study area intersection is anticipated to continue to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours under General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions:
• Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. (#1) – LOS F AM and PM peak hours There are no additional study area intersections anticipated to operate at an unacceptable LOS during the peak hours with the addition of Project traffic, in addition to the locations identified for General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions. However, the addition of Project traffic is anticipated to increase the v/c ratio by more than 0.01 at the intersection of Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. As such, improvements are provided for the deficient intersections.

Page 2860 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
48 EXHIBIT 6-1: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2861 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
49 EXHIBIT 6-2: GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2862 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
50 TABLE 6-1: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS The intersection operations analysis worksheets for General Plan Buildout Without and With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 6.1 and Appendix 6.2 of this TA, respectively. The intersection of Driveway 2 and Lampson Avenue is anticipated to operate at an acceptable LOS as a cross-street stop. As such, no traffic signal is recommended at Driveway 2 and Lampson Avenue.

6.5 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANTS ANALYSIS
All existing study area intersections are currently signalized. As such, no traffic signal warrant analysis has been conducted for General Plan Buildout Without Project traffic conditions. The intersection of Driveway 2 at Lampson Avenue is not anticipated to warrant a peak hour or planning-level (ADT) based warrant under General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions. The traffic signal warrant analysis worksheets for General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendix 6.3 of this TA.

Level of Level of
Traffic Service Service
Control2 AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. TS 1.02 1.01 F F 1.03 1.02 F F 2 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. TS 0.57 0.55 A A 0.58 0.56 A A 3 Basswood St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.53 0.51 A A 0.54 0.52 A A 4 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. TS 0.45 0.44 A A 0.46 0.45 A A 5 Heather St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.38 0.42 A A 0.40 0.43 A A 6 Driveway 1 & Lampson Av. CSS 11.0 10.9 B B
7 Driveway 2 & Lampson Av. CSS 15.3 16.0 C C
8 Rose St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.35 0.43 A A 0.35 0.43 A A 9 Tulip St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.35 0.43 A A 0.36 0.43 A A 10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av. TS 0.86 0.87 D D 0.87 0.90 D D * BOLD = Level of Service (LOS) does not meet the applicable jurisdictional requirements (i.e., unacceptable LOS). 1 ICU is reported in volume-to-capacity (v/c). ICU analysis conducted for signalized intersections only. 2 CSS = Cross-street Stop; TS = Traffic Signal; CSS = Improvement Future Intersection
Future Intersection
Per the Highway Capacity Manual (6th Edition), overall average intersection delay and level of service are shown for intersections with a traffic signal or all way stop control. For intersections with cross street stop control, the delay and level of service for the worst individual movement (or movements sharing a single lane) are shown. # Intersection
GPBO Without Project GPBO With Project
Delay (secs.) or Delay (secs.) or
ICU (v/c)1 ICU (v/c)1

Page 2863 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
51 6.6 ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS
Table 6-2 provides a summary of the General Plan Buildout conditions roadway segment capacity analysis. As shown in Table 6-2, the study area roadway segments are anticipated to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS based on the daily roadway capacity thresholds and minimum LOS criteria under General Plan Buildout Without and With Project traffic conditions.

6.7 DEFICIENCIES AND RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides a summary of deficiencies and recommended improvements for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. Based on deficiency criteria discussed in Section 2.5 Deficiency Criteria, the following intersection was found to be deficient. Improvements necessary to improve this traffic deficiency back to acceptable levels are discussed below.

Seal Beach Boulevard & Lampson Avenue (#1): the same improvements as those identified previously for Opening Year Cumulative traffic conditions would improve the intersection operations back to acceptable LOS (see Table 6-3).

The intersection operations analysis worksheets for General Plan Buildout With Project traffic conditions, with improvements, are included in Appendix 6.4 of this TA.

Page 2864 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
52 TABLE 6-2: ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS Roadway LOS
# Roadway Segment Limits Section Capacity1 GPBO V/C2 LOS3 GPBO V/C2 LOS3 1 Seal Beach Bl. South of Lampson Av. 6D 56,300 47,688 0.85 D 48,268 0.86 D 2 Lampson Av. Seal Beach Bl. to Old Ranch Plaza 4D 37,500 24,242 0.65 B 25,154 0.67 B 3 Lampson Av. Old Ranch Plaza to Basswood St. 4D 37,500 20,306 0.54 A 21,218 0.57 A 4 Lampson Av. Basswood St. to Candleberry Av. 4D 37,500 16,277 0.43 A 17,189 0.46 A 5 Lampson Av. Candleberry Av. to Heather St. 4D 37,500 14,464 0.39 A 15,376 0.41 A 6 Lampson Av. Heather St. to Rose St. 4D 37,500 14,741 0.39 A 15,653 0.42 A 7 Lampson Av. Rose St. to Tulip St. 4D 37,500 15,294 0.41 A 16,040 0.43 A 8 Lampson Av. Tulip St. to Valley View St. 4D 37,500 16,486 0.44 A 17,232 0.46 A 9 Lampson Av. East of Valley View St. 4D 37,500 12,685 0.34 A 12,933 0.34 A 1 These maximum roadway capacities are based on the City of Seal Beach's General Plan Roadway Segment Thresholds. 2 V/C = Volume to Capacity Ratio
3 LOS = Level of Service
Without Project With Project

Page 2865 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
53 TABLE 6-3: INTERSECTION ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS WITH

IMPROVEMENTS
The peak hour queues have been assessed with the proposed improvements shown at Seal Beach Boulevard at Lampson Avenue and also at the intersection of Valley View Street with Lampson Avenue.

Table 6-4 indicates there are no peak hour queuing issues with the recommendations at Seal Beach Boulevard and Lampson Avenue. Although there are queuing issues identified for the intersection of Valley View Street at Lamson Avenue, the same queuing issues are anticipated for both Without and With the Project. It should also be noted that the addition of Project traffic would not add more than one vehicle length (approximately 25-feet) to any of the turning movements with queuing issues identified. The queuing analysis worksheets for General Plan Buildout Without and With Project traffic conditions are included in Appendixes 6.5 and 6.6, respectively.

Level of
Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound ICU (v/c)2 Service # Intersection Control3 L T R L T R L T R L T R AM PM AM PM 1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av.

TS 0 3 1> 2 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 1> 1.03 1.02 F F
TS 0 3 1> 2 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 1> 0.83 0.87 D D
1 When a right turn is designated, the lane can either be striped or unstriped. To function as a right turn lane there must be sufficient width for right turning vehicles to travel outside the through lanes.
2 ICU is reported in volume-to-capacity (v/c). ICU analysis conducted for signalized intersections only. 3 TS = Traffic Signal
4 Improvement includes restriping the number 2 westbound left as a shared left-right turn lane.

Intersection Approach Lanes1
- Without Improvements
- With Improvements4
L = Left; T = Through; R = Right; > = Right-Turn Overlap Phasing; 1 = Improvement Westbound

Page 2866 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
54 TABLE 6-4: PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION QUEUING ANALYSIS FOR GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT CONDITIONS # Intersection AM PM AM PM
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. NBR 300 219 256 Yes Yes 225 278 Yes Yes SBL 375 365 2 346 2 Yes Yes 371 2 361 2 Yes Yes
WBL 650 409 2 338 Yes Yes 445 349 Yes Yes
WBR 650 310 286 Yes Yes 318 300 Yes Yes
10 Valley View St. & Lampson Av. NBL 250 356 2 496 2 No No 368 2 496 2 No No NBR 120 128 94 Yes Yes 128 94 Yes Yes
SBL 140 276 2 384 2 No No 276 2 384 2 No No
SBR 140 150 175 Yes No 143 175 Yes No
EBL 100 387 2 484 2 No No 405 2 496 2 No No
WBL 150 438 308 2 No No 465 2 315 2 No No
* NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, L = Left, T = Through, R = Right 1 Stacking Distance is acceptable if the required stacking distance is less than or equal to the stacking distance provided. An additional 25 feet of stacking which is assumed to be provided in the transition for turn pockets is reflected in the stacking distance shown on this table, where applicable.

Movement
Available
Stacking
Distance (Feet)
GPBO With Project
95th Percentile Queue (Feet) Acceptable? 1
PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
GPBO Without Project
95th Percentile Queue (Feet) Acceptable? 1
AM Peak Hour

Page 2867 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
55 7 FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS
Transportation improvements are funded through a combination of improvements constructed by the Project or fair share contributions. When off-site improvements are identified with a minor share of responsibility assigned to proposed development, the approving jurisdiction may elect to collect a fair share contribution or require the development to construct improvements. Detailed fair share calculations, for each peak hour, have been provided in Table 7-1 for the applicable deficient study area intersections. Fair share contributions are collected with the proceeds solely used as part of a funding mechanism aimed at ensuring that regional highways and arterial expansions keep pace with the projected population increases.

TABLE 7-1: PROJECT FAIR SHARE CALCULATIONS
# Intersection
Existing
2022
Project
Only
GPBO With
Project
Total New
Traffic
Project % of
New Traffic
1 Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av.

AM: 3,985 55 5,438 1,453 3.8%
PM: 4,339 71 5,737 1,398 5.1%
BOLD = Highest fair share percentage is highlighted.

Page 2868 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
56 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 2869 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
57 8 REFERENCES

1. City of Seal Beach - Public Works. Transportation Analysis Guidelines. City of Seal Beach : s.n., June 2020.

2. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. 2021.

3. City of Los Alamitos. City of Los Alamitos General Plan. City of Los Alamitos : s.n., March 2015.

4. City of Seal Beach. City of Seal Beach General Plan. City of Seal Beach : s.n., December 2003.

5. Orange County Transportation Authority. 2021 Orange County Congestion Management Program Report. County of Orange : OCTA, November 2021.

6. Transportation Research Board. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). 6th Edition. s.l. : National Academy of Sciences, 2016.

7. Caltrans. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). [book auth.] California Department of Transportation. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD). 2014.

Page 2870 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09A TA Report
58 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 2871 of 3005 ends

DATE: September 5, 2024
TO: Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
FROM: Jose Alire/Taryn Ferguson, Urban Crossroads
JOB NO: 14501D-07 Safety Eval
4665 LAMPSON AVENUE SAFETY EVALUATION
The firm of Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit the following Safety Evaluation for the 4665 Lampson Avenue development (Project), which is located in the City of Los Alamitos. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine if the Project creates any new safety issues along the public roadways or adjacent to the Project access points.

PROPOSED PROJECT
The Project consists of the development of 55 single family detached residential dwelling units (cluster homes), 114 multifamily (low-rise) residential dwelling units, and 77 affordable apartment dwelling units (total of 246 dwelling units). A preliminary site plan for the proposed Project is shown on Exhibit 1. The Project is anticipated to have an Opening Year of 2026. Access to the Project site will be accommodated to Lampson Avenue via two proposed driveways. Driveway 1 at Lampson Avenue is currently proposed with stop control for egress traffic and right-in/right out access only. A median will be constructed to restrict access at Driveway 1. Access to Driveway 2 will allow for full access. Driveway 2 does not meet peak hour or planning level (daily volume) based traffic signal warrant under any of the analysis scenarios. Although the proposed Project is located in the City of Los Alamitos, access to the site is via intersections controlled by the City of Seal Beach.

Page 2872 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 2 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
EXHIBIT 1: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

SAFETY EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
The safety evaluation completed for this project included the following elements:
• Review of available collision data
• Review of potential increase presence of pedestrians and bicyclist • Review of any proposed changes to the walking and bicycling environment and experience • New pedestrian and bicyclist connection desires
• Multimodal conflict points, especially at intersections and project access locations • Change in traffic mix such as an increase in bicyclists or pedestrians where features such as shoulders or sidewalks may not exist or are inconsistent with facility design (sidewalks, bike and multi-user paths, multimodal roadways, etc.)
• Increased traffic volumes
• Site access management (i.e., driveway sight distance, driveway or intersection spacing, project access queuing, multimodal conflict points, incomplete pedestrian, and bicycle connections)

Page 2873 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 3 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

COLLISION DATA
The collision data analysis is based on the collision data received from California Highway Patrols’ (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). The collision data includes 5 years of collision data gathered by CHP staff and members of its Allied Agencies throughout California (including the City of Los Alamitos). The SWITRS data is provided in Attachment A. Table 1 provides a summary of the types of collisions by intersection.

TABLE 1: COLLISION SUMMARY (MARCH 2019 TO MARCH 2024)
HeadOnSideswipe RearEndBroadside HitObject Overturn AutoPed Other Not Stated
Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. (Total: 0 Collisions)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. (Total: 0 Collisions)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Basswood St. & Lampson Av. (Total: 1 Collision)
0 (0.0%)
1 (100.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. (Total: 1 Collision)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (100.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Heather St. & Lampson Av. (Total: 0 Collisions)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Rose St. & Lampson Av. (Total: 2 Collisions)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (50.0%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (50.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Tulip St. & Lampson Av. (Total: 1 Collision)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (100.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)
Valley View St. & Lampson Av. (Total: 14 Collisions)
2 (14.3%)
1 (7.1%)
4 (28.6%)
5 (35.7%)
1 (7.1%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (7.1%)
0 (0.0%)
0 (0.0%)

Page 2874 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 4 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
The CHP SWITRS collision data includes the following collision types:
• Head-On
• Sideswipe
• Rear-End
• Broadside
• Hit Object
• Overturned
• Vehicle/Pedestrian
• Other
• Not Stated
The Caltrans 2021 Crash Data on California State Highways report (2021 Crash Report) provides data on crash reports collected by law enforcement agencies. Calculation rates by intersection are computed for various types of facilities and settings, and then are averaged statewide. The intersection crash rate is calculated by the following formula:

Crashes / Million Vehicle (MV) Entering the Intersection For the purposes of this analysis, average daily traffic (ADT) will be utilized to determine the crashes / MV. Existing weekday ADT volumes from the 4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis (Urban Crossroads, July 2024) are provided in Attachment B. A summary of the crash rate comparison, by intersection, is shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2: CRASH RATE COMPARISON
Intersection
Intersection Control
and Setting1
Average
Rate2
Crash
Rate
Seal Beach Bl. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 3-leg 0.43 0.00 Old Ranch Plaza & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 4-leg 0.55 0.00 Basswood St. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 4-leg 0.55 0.04 Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 3-leg 0.43 0.05 Heather St. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 3-leg 0.43 0.00 Rose St. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 3-leg 0.43 0.09
Tulip St. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 4-leg 0.55 0.04
Valley View St. & Lampson Av. Suburban, TS, 4-leg 0.55 0.19 1 TS = Traffic Signal
2 Source: Intersection crash rates from the Caltrans 2021 Crash Data on California State Highways report Basswood St. & Lampson Av. had a total of 1 reported collision in a 5-year period. The common collision included a sideswipe collision. Sideswipe collisions are commonly caused by failure to yield or impaired/distracted driving. The 5-year average rate for this intersection is calculated as followed:

Page 2875 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 5 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
(1 collision / 5 years) / (365 days/year x (29,200 ADT / 2) / 1,000,000 MV) = 0.04 total crashes per MV
The intersection of Basswood St. & Lampson Av. has a lower crash rate than the state average for similar facilities.

Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. had a total of 1 reported collision in a 5-year period. The common collision include a broadside collisions. Broadside collisions are commonly caused by failure to yield, failure to stop, or impaired/distracted driving. The 5-year average rate for this intersection is calculated as followed:
(1 collision / 5 years) / (365 days/year x (24,600 ADT / 2) / 1,000,000 MV) = 0.05 total crashes per MV
The intersection of Candleberry Av. & Lampson Av. has a lower crash rate than the state average for similar facilities.

Rose St. & Lampson Av. had a total of 2 reported collisions in a 5-year period. The common collisions include broadside and overturn collisions. Overturned vehicles are commonly caused by unsafe speeds, improper maneuvers, or loss of vehicle control. The 5-year average rate for this intersection is calculated as followed:
(2 collisions / 5 years) / (365 days/year x (23,500 ADT / 2) / 1,000,000 MV) = 0.09 total crashes per MV
The intersection of Rose St. & Lampson Av. has a lower crash rate than the state average for similar facilities.

Tulip St. & Lampson Av. had a total of 1 reported collision in a 5-year period. The common collision include a broadside collision. The 5-year average rate for this intersection is calculated as followed:
(1 collision / 5 years) / (365 days/year x (25,050 ADT / 2) / 1,000,000 MV) = 0.04 total crashes per MV
The intersection of Tulip St. & Lampson Av. has a lower crash rate than the state average for similar facilities.

Valley View St. & Lampson Av. had a total of 14 reported collisions in a 5-year period. The common collision include rear-end and broadside collisions. Rearend collisions are commonly caused by failure to yield, failure to stop, or impaired/distracted driving. The 5-year average rate for this intersection is calculated as followed:
(14 collisions / 5 years) / (365 days/year x (82,350 ADT / 2) / 1,000,000 MV) = 0.19 total crashes per MV
The intersection of Valley View St. & Lampson Av. has a lower crash rate than the state average for similar facilities.

The existing crash rates for the study area intersections are lower than the statewide average crash rates as determined by the 2021 Crash Report.

A Project would have the potential to create an increase in collision rate if it introduced a geometric design feature that did not meet safety standards or incompatible uses (e.g. farm

Page 2876 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 6 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
equipment). As demonstrated in the analysis below, implementation of Project improvements (within the public right-of-way) per Los Alamitos and Seal Beach standards ensures all that sight distance requirements, pedestrian crossing requirements, and street design requirements are met. Additionally, the Project vehicle mix is consistent with the adjacent land uses, including the residential neighborhood to the south. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Project will result in a significant change in collision rates or result in an accident rate higher than the statewide average.

BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
In an effort to promote alternative modes of transportation, the City of Los Alamitos and Seal Beach have several existing and planned bicycle routes. There are existing Class II (on-street, striped) bike lanes on the north and south sides of Lampson Avenue from Basswood Street to the east. In addition, there is a Class I bike/pedestrian path on Seal Beach Boulevard north of Lampson Avenue and a Class II bike lane south of Lampson Avenue. The Project should maintain the existing Class II bike lane on Lampson Avenue along its frontage to maintain bicycle safety.

The existing sidewalks adjacent to the Project met design standards and any Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 3 standards at the time they were constructed. The City of Los Alamitos and Seal Beach should continue to improve pedestrian facilities to increase the desire to bike or walk and meet current standards.

The sidewalks along the Project frontage will be improved as part of the Project. Frontage improvements will include sidewalks, driveway modifications to accommodate site access, median modifications, and landscaping improvements as required by City of Los Alamitos4 and City of Seal Beach5 standards. The proposed sidewalk along the Project’s frontage on the north side of Lampson Avenue will provide connectivity with proposed sidewalks and paths internal to the Project.

The intersections at Lampson Avenue at Heather Avenue and Lampson Avenue at Rose Avenue are currently signalized and both have pedestrian crosswalks for Lampson Avenue. The wheelchair ramp on the north side of Lampson Avenue at Heather Avenue does not meet ADA requirements, as shown in Exhibit 2. However, the wheelchair ramp on the north side of Lampson Avenue at Rose Avenue does meet ADA standard requirements. 3 Source: ADA Standards for Accessible Design https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-standards/ 4 Source: City of Los Alamitos Public Works and Engineering Standards https://cityoflosalamitos.org/205/Public-WorksEngineering 5 Source: City of Seal Beach Standard Plans for Streets, Sewers, Water: https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/PublicWorks/Administration-Engineering

Page 2877 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 7 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
EXHIBIT 2: LAMPSON AVENUE AT HEATHER AVENUE RAMP
All Project driveways should be designed to meet current City standards and accommodate pedestrian crossing per current ADA standards. The Project should also maintain the existing Class II (on-street, striped) bike lanes along its frontage on Lampson Avenue. These improvements will ensure the project meets all compliance requirements.

INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
Attachment C identifies limited use areas per Orange County Standard Plan6 1117 – Intersection Sight Distance. The limited use areas determine the necessary sight distance to allow 7 ½ seconds for the driver on the crossroad (or left turn pocket) to safely cross the main roadway or turn left while the approach vehicle travels at the assumed design speed of the main roadway. All Project driveways should be required to meet these sight distance requirements. Exhibit 3 shows sight distance requirements for Driveways 1 and 2, as shown, the Project does not create any new sight distance issues along Lampson Avenue (A full size version is included in Attachment C, Page 2) and meets all compliance requirements.
6 Source: Orange County Public Works Standard Plans: https://ocpublicworks.com/ocpw/oc-public-works-standard-plans

Page 2878 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 8 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
EXHIBIT 3: DRIVEWAYS 1 AND 2 SIGHT DISTANCE

STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE
According to the Highway Design Manual7 (HDM), stopping sight distance is the minimum sight distance for a given design speed to be provided on multilane highways, and on 2-lane roads, when passing sight distance is not economically obtainable. Stopping sight distance is to be provided for all users, including motorists and bicyclists, at all elements of interchanges and intersections at grade, including private road connections. Lampson Avenue has a posted speed limit of 45 MPH. As stated in the HDM Table 201, a stopping sight distance of 360 feet is the standard for a design speed of 45 MPH. The Project does not introduce any new stopping sight distance issues to Lampson Avenue and meets all compliance requirements.

ON-SITE VEHICLE CIRCULATION
Attachment D identifies the on-site circulation for the site based on the plans prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. The exhibits identify various vehicle paths (front-loading garbage trucks, fire trucks, delivery trucks, etc.) for various internal drive aisles, which allow for two-way traffic. Access to and from the site will be accommodated via driveways on Lampson Avenue. As shown in Attachment D, the vehicle turning templates show acceptable turning movements for the various vehicles and trucks anticipated to access the site.
7 Source: California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/manualhighway-design-manual-hdm

Page 2879 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 9 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

SITE ACCESS
The following improvements are recommended and will be constructed as part of the Project to accommodate site access.

Driveway 1 & Lampson Avenue (#6) – Project will implement a stop control for egress traffic at Driveway 1 on Lampson Avenue. The intersection is proposed to be restricted to right-in/rightout access only. The access at this driveway should be controlled by a raised median.

Driveway 2 & Lampson Avenue (#7) – Driveway 2 is not anticipated to meet a peak hour or planning level (daily volume) based traffic signal warrant under any of the analysis scenarios. The Project frontage roadway of Lampson Avenue is currently constructed to its ultimate General Plan roadway classification. As such, frontage improvements will be limited to sidewalk improvements, driveway modifications to accommodate site access, median modifications, and landscaping improvements as required per City standards. Any Project-related improvements shall meet sight distance and all requirements within the public right of way per City of Los Alamitos and Seal Beach standards. On-site traffic signing and striping should be implemented in conjunction with detailed improvement plans for the Project site.

SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS
Frontage improvements will include sidewalk improvements, driveway modifications to accommodate site access, and landscaping improvements as required by City standards. The proposed sidewalk along the Project’s frontage on the north side of Lampson Avenue will provide connectivity with proposed sidewalks and paths internal to the Project. The Project will also maintain the existing Class II (on-street, striped) bike lanes along its frontage on Lampson Avenue.

CONCLUSION
A review of available collision data indicates that the study area intersections have lower crash rates than the statewide average of intersections with similar configuration and settings. The addition of Project traffic is not anticipated to increase the crash rates by a significant margin. As discussed throughout this evaluation, the implementation of Project improvements (within the public right of way) per Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Orange County Public Works, Highway Design Manual (HDM), and American with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards ensures all sight distance requirements, pedestrian crossing requirements, and street design requirements are met.

Additionally, the Project TIA indicates the highest peak hour volume along Lampson Avenue at Driveway 2 is 561 vehicles (Refer to Exhibit 3-8 of the TIA). The highest Project peak hour volume of 50 vehicles occurs at Driveway 2 in the evening (Refer to Exhibit 4-2 of the TIA). The Project contributes 9% of the additional vehicles to the evening peak hour ([50/561]*100=9%). Therefore, the addition of Project-related traffic is not anticipated to increase the accident rate above the nationally accepted average or cause new safety deficiencies.

Page 2880 of 3005 ends

Nicole Morse, T&B Planning
September 5, 2024

Page 10 of 10 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4
If you have any questions or comments, we can be reached at [email protected].

Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.

Jose Alire, P.E. Taryn Ferguson
Senior Traffic Engineer Transportation Analyst

Page 2881 of 3005 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

ATTACHMENT A

SWITRS DATA

Page 2882 of 3005 ends

CASE_ID ACCIDENT_YEAR COLLISION_DATE COLLISION_TIME DAY_OF_WEEK PRIMARY_RD SECONDARY_RD DISTANCE DIRECTION INTERSECTION COLLISION_SEVERITY NUMBER_KILLED NUMBER_INJURED PARTY_COUNT PCF_VIOL_CATEGORY PCF_VIOLATION TYPE_OF_COLLISION PEDESTRIAN_ACCIDENT BICYCLE_ACCIDENT MOTORCYCLE_ACCIDENT TRUCK_ACCIDENT ALCOHOL_INVOLVED 8851648 2019 4/14/2019 1010 7 LAMPSON AV BASSWOOD AV 45 E N 3 0 1 2 8 22107 B 9320982 2020 8/6/2020 1331 4 LAMPSON AV CANDLEBERRY AV 0 Y 4 0 1 2 12 21453 D 8867848 2019 5/9/2019 1533 4 LAMPSON AV ROSE ST 0 Y 3 0 3 2 8 22107 D 9320966 2020 6/8/2020 1823 1 LAMPSON AV ROSE ST 284 E N 3 0 2 1 3 22350 F 8911200 2019 10/21/2019 1418 1 LAMPSON AV TULIP ST 0 Y 1 1 2 3 9 21801 D Y8888988 2019 6/10/2019 2319 1 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 123 S N 3 0 1 2 3 22350 B Y Y 8993701 2019 10/30/2019 752 3 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 545 S N 4 0 1 3 3 22350 C 8911480 2020 4/22/2020 645 3 LAMPSON AV VALLEY VIEW 11 E N 1 1 0 2 0 G Y 9151611 2020 7/29/2020 2321 3 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 504 S N 4 0 2 2 9 21801 D 9149013 2020 9/11/2020 454 5 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 33 S N 4 0 1 2 3 22350 C 9166783 2020 9/22/2020 1620 2 LAMPSON AV VALLEY VIEW 51 W N 4 0 1 2 9 21804 D 9188719 2020 10/27/2020 1340 2 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 884 N N 4 0 1 1 8 22107 E 9256121 2020 10/27/2020 1859 2 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 0 Y 1 1 0 2 9 21801 A Y Y 9262667 2021 4/5/2021 839 1 LAMPSON AV VALLEY VIEW ST 184 W N 4 0 3 2 9 21801 D 9389008 2021 12/16/2021 1802 4 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 510 S N 4 0 1 2 9 21801 D 9412890 2022 1/27/2022 718 4 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 63 S N 4 0 1 3 3 22350 C 9410442 2022 1/31/2022 945 1 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 0 Y 4 0 2 2 9 21801 A 9603090 2023 6/16/2023 1319 5 LAMPSON AV VALLEY VIEW ST 38 E N 3 0 2 2 4 21703 C 9626769 2023 9/25/2023 2038 1 VALLEY VIEW ST LAMPSON AV 489 S N 4 0 1 2 9 21801 D Y

Page 2883 of 3005 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

ATTACHMENT B

EXISTING COUNT DATA

Page 2884 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Avenue Traffic Analysis
14501-09 TA Report
29 EXHIBIT 3-8: EXISTING (2022) TRAFFIC VOLUMES

Page 2885 of 3005 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

ATTACHMENT C

CONCEPT PLAN AND SIGHT DISTANCE EXHIBIT

Page 2886 of 3005 ends

0 20 40 80 120 160 SCALE: 1" = 40' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 3: INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAY 1 URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM 550' 550' DRIVEWAY 1 LAMPSON AVE (45 MPH)
12' 12' 5' 12' 13' 5' 10' LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117 LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117 12' 12' 5' 12' 14' 5'
DRIVEWAY 2 15' 25' LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117

Page 2887 of 3005 ends

0 20 40 80 120 160 SCALE: 1" = 40' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 4: INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAY 2 URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM 550' 550' DRIVEWAY 2
DRIVEWAY 1
ROSE ST LAMPSON AVE (45 MPH)
12' 12' 5' 12' 14' 5' 10' 15' 25' LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117 LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117 12' 11' 5' 12' 14' 5' 10' LIMITED USE AREA PER ORANGE COUNTY STANDARD PLAN 1117

Page 2888 of 3005 ends

14501D-07 Safety Eval Rev4

ATTACHMENT D

ON-SITE CIRCULATION EXHIBIT

Page 2889 of 3005 ends

0 10 20 40 60 80 SCALE: 1" = 20' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 1: LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAYS PASSENGER CAR TURNING TEMPLATE URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM LAMPSON AVE DWY 1
DWY 2
ALLEY

Page 2890 of 3005 ends

R30' R30' R30' R30' 0 10 20 40 60 80 SCALE: 1" = 20' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 2: LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAYS SU-30 TRUCK TURNING TEMPLATE URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM LAMPSON AVE DWY 1
DWY 2
ALLEY

Page 2891 of 3005 ends

R30' R30' R30' R30' 0 10 20 40 60 80 SCALE: 1" = 20' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 3: LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAYS GARBAGE TRUCK TURNING TEMPLATE URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM LAMPSON AVE DWY 1
DWY 2
ALLEY

Page 2892 of 3005 ends

R30' R30' R30' R30' 0 10 20 40 60 80 SCALE: 1" = 20' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 4: LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAYS FIRE TRUCK TURNING TEMPLATE URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM LAMPSON AVE DWY 1
DWY 2
ALLEY

Page 2893 of 3005 ends

R30' R30' 0 10 20 40 60 80 SCALE: 1" = 20' (ON 24" x 36" SHEET) EXHIBIT 5: LAMPSON AVENUE AT PROJECT DRIVEWAYS FIRE TRUCK TURNING TEMPLATE URBAN CROSSROADS TELEPHONE # 949-660-1994 WWW.URBANXROADS.COM TS DWY 3 LAMPSON AVE

ROSE ST

Page 2894 of 3005 ends

10'
3'
3'
NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.6 SUN SHADOW STUDY JUNE 21st, 9:00AM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2895 of 3005 ends

10'
NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.7 SUN SHADOW STUDY JUNE 21st, 11:00AM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2896 of 3005 ends

10'
2'
3'
NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.8 SUN SHADOW STUDY JUNE 21st, 3:00PM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2897 of 3005 ends

87'

NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK
76'
10' Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.9 SUN SHADOW STUDY DECEMBER 21st, 9:00AM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2898 of 3005 ends

10'

NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK
55'
46' Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.10 SUN SHADOW STUDY DECEMBER 21st, 11:00AM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2899 of 3005 ends

10'

NAVY GOLF COURSE LAMPSON AVE PUBLIC PARK
89'
78' Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 20 40 80 A1.11 SUN SHADOW STUDY DECEMBER 21st, 3:00PM Architecture + Planning 17911 Von Karman Ave, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949.851.2133 ktgy.com 27702 Crown Valley Parkway Suite D-4-197 Ladera Ranch, CA 92694 # Plot Date: 01.16.24 LAMPSON - LOS ALAMITOS LOS ALAMITOS, CA 2021-0812 Pre-App Submittal: 01.28.2022 1st Planning Submittal: 06.30.2022 2nd Planning Submittal: 10.10.2022 3rd Planning Submittal: 02.17.2023 MJW INVESTMENTS, LLC SCHEMATIC DESIGN N

Page 2900 of 3005 ends

Trans.

T
T
T
T
T

T METERS DATA METERS DATA
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
26'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
26'
24'
24' 24' 24' 24'
25'
24'
20' 24'
20' 26'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20' R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20' R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20'
R=40'
R=20' 25'
24' 32'
24' 149' 149' 24' 149' 149' 149' 149' 22' 0" 23' 24'
22' 24' 23' 128'-3" 121' 51'-6"
22' 72' 88' 8'
R=20'
R=40' 24'

KB KB KB KB KB KB
KB KB
KB
KB
KB
KB
KB
KB
Trans.
21' 21'
21'
R20'
R20' 140'
60'
T
20'
R40'
R20' 20' 24' 8'

VERTICAL
CURB

VERTICAL
CURB 32'

INDICATES FIRE APPARATUS
TURNING RADII: 20' WIDE PATH
WITH 20' INSIDE AND 40' OUTSIDE R=40' R=20'
20'

PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE DRIVABLE
PAVERS OR PAVED SURFACE. NOT A

PART OF FIRE ACCESS

PROPOSED PAVED ACCESS ROADS

SHALL BE DESIGNED AND

MAINTAINED TO SUPPORT AN
IMPOSED LOAD OF 94,000 LBS. PER
OCFA REQUIREMENTS.

PROPOSED EMERGENCY VEHICULAR

ACCESS (EVA) ENTRY SIGN

PROPOSED EVA ENTRY ALL

WEATHER DECORATIVE PAVING OR

PAVERS THAT SHALL BE DESIGNED

AND MAINTAINED TO SUPPORT AN
IMPOSED LOAD OF 94,000 LBS. PER
OCFA REQUIREMENTS.

PROPOSED FIRE LANE ENTRY SIGN

PAINT CURB RED WITH 'NO PARKING
FIRE LANE' STENCIL AT 30' O.C. PER

DETAILS HEREON AND OCFA
GUIDELINE B-01
The use of these plans and specifications shall be restricted to the original site for which they were prepared and publication thereof is expressly limited to such use. Reproduction, publication, or re-use by any method, in whole or in part without the express consent of FIRESAFE PLANNING SOLUTIONS is prohibited. 0 GRAPHIC SCALE
1 inch = ft.
40' 80'
40 INDICATES PROPOSED 3-STORY

APARTMENT BUILDING (RESIDENTIAL

AND INTERIOR COMMON USE)
INDICATES PROPOSED 3-STORY

TOWNHOME BUILDING
INDICATES PROPOSED 3-STORY

SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNIT

INDICATES APPROXIMATE LOCATION
OF KNOX BOX WITH 3-SETS OF ENTRY
DOOR/GATE KEYS.

PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT WITH BLUE REFLECTIVE FIRE HYDRANT MARKER. MARKER SHALL BE PLACED 6" FROM CENTERLINE OF HYDRANT SIDE OF STREET.

INDICATES NOT A PART OF

FIRE ACCESS
150' MAXIMUM HOSE PULL DISTANCE 300' MAXIMUM HOSE PULL DISTANCE 18" 12"

EMERGENCY

VEHICULAR

ACCESS ONLY

FOR LAMPSON

PARK PLACE

VIOLATING VEHICLES

WILL BE CITED

OR TOWED AT
(562) 431-2255
TOWING COMPANY NAME & PHONE #
CVC 22658(a)

NO PARKING IN AREAS

MARKED AS FIRE LANES

FIRE LANE
NOTICE
CVC 22500.1

OWNER'S EXPENSE
30"
18"

PHONE NUMBER

TOWING COMPANY

VIOLATING VEHICLES

WILL BE CITED OR

TOWED AT OWNER'S

EXPENSE
CVC 22500.1
CVC 22658(a)

LOS ALAMITOS POLICE DEPARTMENT
1 2
3 4
A
B
C
A
B
C

FIRE LANE SIGN MOUNTING DETAIL
THE WORDS "FIRE LANE" SHALL BE BOLD WHITE REFLECTIVE
ON RED BACKGROUND, (2-3/4) INCHES IN HEIGHT.

LETTERING SHALL BE RED ON WHITE REFLECTIVE
BACKGROUND, (1) INCHES IN HEIGHT.

LETTERING SHALL BE BOLD, CONDENSED WHITE REFLECTIVE
LETTERING ON RED BACKGROUND, (2) INCHES IN HEIGHT.

DEPTH OF SIGN SHALL BE 18 INCHES FROM STANDARD CURB
AND 24 INCHES WITH ROLLED CURB TO CENTER OF POST.

HEIGHT OF SIGN IN SIDEWALK OR PEDESTRIAN AREA
SHALL BE 7"-0", AND 5"-0" IN ALL OTHER AREAS.

LETTERING SHALL BE BOLD RED ON WHITE
REFLECTIVE BACKGROUND, (1-3/8) INCHES IN HEIGHT.

BURY DEPTH SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 24 INCHES AND REBAR, A

CONCRETE FOOTING, OR ANOTHER METHOD TO PREVENT
REMOVAL OF THE SIGN IS RECOMMENDED. FOOTINGS FOR SIGNS

LOCATED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE PER THE
LOCAL JURISDICTION'S REQUIREMENTS.
4 2
1 2
3 3

BUILDING STORIES CONSTRUCTION
TYPE

AUTOMATIC FIRE

SPRINKLERS
SQUARE

FOOTAGE
SINGLE FAMILY 2 & 3 VB NFPA 13D

FIRE FLOW INFORMATION & HYDRANT SPACING REQUIREMENTS
PER 2023 OCFA GUIDELINE B-01
2,815SF
TOP OF

HIGHEST
ROOF
TOWNHOUSE 3 VB NFPA 13D 12,091SF

FIRE LANE - NO PARKING
6"

STANDARD CURB

FIRE LANE - NO PARKING
8"
6" ROLLED CURB

WEDGE CURB
8"

FIRE LANE - NO PARKING

PAINT RED

BUILDING INFORMATION AND DATA

PAINT RED

PAINT RED
MULTI-FAMILY 3 V-A NFPA 13 38,700SF

MULTI-FAMILY
FIRE FLOW OF 1,750GPM / 3 HOURS FOR THE LARGEST BUILDING OF 38,700 SF WITH TYPE V-A CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM. HYDRANT SPACING REQUIREMENT IS 500' MAXIMUM BETWEEN HYDRANTS ON A THRU ROAD.

TOWNHOUSE
FIRE FLOW OF 1,500GPM / 3 HOURS FOR THE LARGEST BUILDING OF 12,091 SF WITH TYPE V-B CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM. HYDRANT SPACING REQUIREMENT IS 500' MAXIMUM BETWEEN HYDRANTS ON A THRU ROAD.

SINGLE FAMILY
FIRE FLOW OF 500GPM /1 HOUR FOR THE LARGEST BUILDING OF 2,815 SF WITH TYPE V-B CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM. HYDRANT SPACING REQUIREMENT IS 600' MAXIMUM BETWEEN HYDRANTS ON A THRU ROAD.
37'-6"
37'-0"
NOTE THAT BUILDING HEIGHT TO EAVE SHALL NOT EXCEED 29'-11" AT DESIGNATED GROUND LADDERING AREAS.

EMERGENCY VEHICULAR ACCESS SIGN

FIRE LANE ENTRANCE SIGN
*
*
36'-0"*
*
LEGEND
12' 25' 33' 40' 25' 20'

OCFA TURNAROUND DETAILS
NOTE: ALL FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS INCLUDING STREETS NOT A PART OF FIRE ACCESS SHALL BE INSTALLED TO MEET OCFA REQUIREMENTS TO SUPPORT VEHICULAR LOADS OF 94,000 LBS. 21' R20'
R20'
120' MIN. 60'

OCFA TURNAROUND ENLARGEMENT

RED CURB DETAILS
NOTE: CURBS ALONG ACCESS LANES SHALL BE
PAINTED OSHA SAFETY RED OR EQUIVALENT. "FIRE
LANE NO PARKING" SHALL BE PAINTED ON TOP OF
CURB IN WHITE LETTERING 3 INCHES HIGH AND SHALL
BE SPACED 30'-0" ON CENTER OR PORTION THEREOF.

LAMPSON PARK PLACE - LOS ALAMITOS
PRELIMINARY FIRE ACCESS EXHIBIT SHEET 1 OF 1
DATE: 06/26/2024
PREPARED BY:
28506 AIROSO STREET
RANCHO MISSION VIEJO, CA 92694
OFFICE: (949) 240-5911
KB

PAINT CURB RED

FIRE LANE ENTRY SIGN AND EMERGENCY VEHICULAR ACCESS SIGN EVA DRIVE TURNING RADII ENLARGEMENT SCALE: 1" = 20'
SCALE: 1" = 20'

Page 2901 of 3005 ends

OCFA WATER AVAILABILITY FORM
SECTION A: To be completed by customer
Project Name: ____________________________________ OCFA SR #: _____________________ Project Address: ___________________________________ City: ____________________________ Applicant Phone #: (______)__________________________ Fax #: (______)___________________ Area of largest building ___________ ft
2 ; Construction type? (check one): IA IB IIA IIB IIIA IIIB IV VA VB Is this building sprinklered throughout? (check one) N Y SECTION B: To be completed by local water department/district Customer to provide results to OCFA
Water Department/District: ______________________________________________________________ Test location (indicate address or cross-streets & provide reference map): __________________________________ Hydrant number(s) (if applicable): ___________________________________________________________ Elevation of test hydrant: _______________________________________________ feet above sea level Date of Test1: _____________________________ Time of test1: _____________________ am pm 1 Test to be performed as close as possible to the time that the lowest flows and pressures are expected (e.g., M-F, 6:00 – 9:00 am and 5:00 - 9:00 pm)

FLOW TEST RESULTS
TEST INFORMATION IS VALID FOR 6 MONTHS FROM DATE TEST IS PERFORMED Static pressure: psi Residual pressure: psi
Observed flow: gpm Flow calc’d at 20 psi: gpm
Check the box if the test information above was obtained in a manner other than an actual flow test (i.e. by computer modeling).

Based on fluctuations known to exist at the site of the test, provide estimated values for the following:

Maximum static pressure psi Minimum static pressure psi Minimum residual pressure psi Minimum residual flow gpm I have witnessed and/or reviewed this water flow information and by personal knowledge and/or on-site observation certify that the above information is correct.

Name: _____________________________________
Signature: __________________________________
Date: ______________________________________
Company/Agency:_________________________
Title: ___________________________________
Revised 1/7/16 ese

ASSIGNED UPON PLAN SUBMITTAL

Page 2902 of 3005 ends

Page 2903 of 3005 ends

July 9, 2024
Dane McDougall
C&V Consulting Inc.
9830 Irvine Center Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
Re: Will Serve Letter
4665 Lampson Avenue
Los Alamitos, California 90720
Dear Dane McDougall,
This letter is to inform you that water service is available to the above referenced address from Golden State Water Company’s (GSWC) Orange County District water system. Service to the address can be provided from our existing water facilities within Lampson Avenue.

Upon completion and execution of a Water Service Agreement, that contains satisfactory financial arrangements and other provisions governing the extension of water service, Golden State Water Company (GSWC) will begin providing water service for the referenced address once all owner obligations have been satisfied. Analysis of more detailed development plans may require the owner to participate in the construction of special facilities prior to the Company providing water service.

GSWC is committed to providing water service to all customers within its service area, consistent with the company’s obligations under rules, statutes and regulations of both the California Department of Public Health and the California Public Utilities Commission.

Unless modified or extended by GSWC, this Will Serve Letter shall terminate and be of no further force and effect one year from the date indicated above.

If you have any questions concerning the issues addressed in this letter, please let us know.

Sincerely,
Melynda Holm
Operations Engineer
Orange County District
Digitally signed by Melynda L. Holm
DN: C=US, [email protected], OU=Golden
State Water Company, CN=Melynda L. Holm
Date: 2024.07.10 07:41:27-07’00’ Page 2904 of 3005
Will Serve Letter Only
Rev. 07/09/12 DS-125

Your project is located in Southern California Edison (SCE) service territory. SCE will serve the above subject project’s electrical requirements per the California Public Utilities Commission and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission tariffs.

SCE may need to conduct utility studies, where applicable, to assess whether additions or modifications to the existing electric infrastructure are required to serve this project. Where applicable, SCE has attached Appendix (B) which not only describes the study, and permitting, but includes a Project Information Sheet that will need to be completed by you and submitted to SCE if your project is at a point where SCE has to determine the required electrical utility work. This Will-Serve letter does not imply that either: (i) these studies have been completed, or (ii) that any required California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis of project-related electric utility impacts has been conducted.

I am the SCE Design Representative currently assigned to this project. SCE or Applicant will design and construct all required electrical infrastructure to serve this project provided you enter into the applicable contractual agreements with SCE identify scope of electrical utility work required, and supply the following information:

Site plans as required
Required contracts and agreements (fully executed)
Applicable fees
Local permits
Required easement documents
Your project will be scheduled for construction once SCE has all the necessary information for your project and you have submitted or agreed to the applicable requirements as stated above, and paid any necessary fees.

If your project will not require SCE services, please notify us so that we can update our records.

SCE appreciates your business. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at Sincerely,
SCE Design Representative
Enclosure: Appendix B, where applicable
8/19/2022
Lampson Los Al
4665 Lampson Avenue, Los Alamitos 90720
(714) 296-7609.

Page 2905 of 3005 ends

Large Enough to Serve, Small Enough to Care
Universal Waste Systems, Inc
P O BOX 3038 • WHITTIER, CA 90605
Telephone: (800) 631-7016 • Fax (562) 205-9237
Peter Duarte
Principal Landscape Architect
23195 La Cadena Dr. Ste 103
Laguna Hills, CA 92653
Mr. Duarte,
Universal Waste Systems Inc. has reviewed the plan and is currently able to provide service as outlined for your project at Los Alamitos- Lampson Ave. It is hard to tell exact measurements from what is provided, but if they are designed for large collection trucks then we will service as outline in the proposal.

If you have any questions please let me know.

Thank you
Matt Blackburn
Matt Blackburn
Universal Waste Systems Inc.

Page 2906 of 3005 ends

1 | P a g e
9830 Irvine Center Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
(949) 916-3800
August 23, 2024
RE: OLD RANCH COUNTRY CLUB SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT, SEAL BEACH – SEWER DEMAND CALCULATIONS
We have been asked to evaluate sewer capacity conditions related to further refinements of the proposed Old Ranch Country Club Project located at 3901 Lampson Avenue in the City of Seal Beach in the context of the proposed 4665 Lampson Avenue Project located in the City of Los Alamitos. Additionally, this memorandum describes revisions made to the Sanitary Sewer Analysis to address comments received from the City of Seal Beach.

As background for this request, the City of Seal Beach’s updated Sewer Master Plan (September 2022) identified the sewer loads for potential development areas within the City of Seal Beach. Those sewer loads are summarized in Table 1 of that Sewer Master Plan, which is shown below. The Old Ranch Country Club is listed as Site B-5, and it is identified as comprising 150 acres, five of which are indicated as “redevelopment area.” Table 1 also identifies the Old Ranch Country Club development area as including 120 potential dwelling units resulting in a sewer load of 19,200 gallons per day (gpd).

Since 2022, the proposed development of the Old Ranch Country Club Project has been further refined, and as of January 2023 now includes more than the residential component identified in Table 1 of the Sewer Master Plan. Per the Initial Study dated February 7, 2023, prepared to support the Old Ranch Country Club Specific Plan, the anticipated redevelopment area has increased from 5 acres to approximately 35 acres over the existing site, and

Page 2907 of 3005 ends

2 | P a g e
includes a 116-unit multi-family housing development, a 51-unit senior housing complex including an approximately 25,340 square foot medical office facility on the ground floor, a 150-key overnight accommodation, an approximately 2,650 square foot relocated maintenance facility, a parking structure, and a new clubhouse pool and associated structures (21,000 square feet) abutting the existing clubhouse.

This more refined development proposal for the Old Ranch Country Club project would result in an increase in thesewer demand. The following table and corresponding calculations have been developed to determine the anticipated increased sewer demand associated with the more current Old Ranch Country Club Project proposal.

Flow factors as provided by City of Seal Beach were utilized for residential land uses and additional flow factors from the Orange County Sanitation District (OSCD) were utilized for office, hotel, and commercial/ office (medical) land uses.

The relocated maintenance facility comprising approximately 2,650 square feet was not included in this analysis because this facility is being relocated and is not a new facility.

As shown in the Potential Development Areas (September 2022) table set forth above, the 120 dwelling units of the Old Ranch Country Club Project is anticipated to generate a sewer demand of 19,200 gpd, and as shown in the summary above, the further refined proposal for the Old Ranch Country Club Project is anticipated to generate a sewer demand of 51,626 gpd. This is an increase in total demand of approximately 32,426 gpd (0.0502 cfs).

As explained in the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the 4655 Lampson Avenue project, a Sanitary Sewer Analysis (September 2022) was prepared for the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project which evaluated proposed sewer demands anticipated by the Project and downstream segments. Sewer manhole monitoring was conducted in September 2022 to determine the actual discharge at three manholes (MH): (1) Basswood and Aster Street (Manhole A-16); (2) Candleberry Avenue and Aster Street (Manhole A-21); and (3) Elder Avenue (Manhole A-25). In response to comments received from the City of Seal Beach on the Sanitary Sewer Analysis dated September 2022, a revised Sanitary Sewer Analysis was prepared in March 2024. Sewer system model data was provided by the City of Seal Beach (AKM’s City wide sewer study) utilizing an area calculation method which indicated there are 16 sewer segments shown to have a d/D level above 0.5.

Because the area calculation is used to calculate flows for large areas and is not necessarily representative of actual flows, actual monitored flows were determined and evaluated. Using the actual monitored flows indicated that there are only 7 segments estimated to exceed the City's peak dry weather flows (PDWF) d/D criteria after the proposed project is implemented. The remaining capacity above a PDWF d/D of 0.50 is reserved for wet weather flows. Flows over the d/D criteria range from 0.51 to 0.55 and represent approximately 56% of the pipe’s flow capacity, which is well within the capacity of the downstream sewer lines.

No additional pipe segments in the AKM study were found to be undersized. The nine (9) segments that were found to be undersized in AKM’s study were determined to be acceptable after analyzing using the actual monitored flows. The d/D levels are shown to be higher because the existing segments have flat slopes, ranging from 0.16% - 0.22%. However, the pipe size can handle proposed flow levels, and sewer pipe upgrades are not required.

To evaluate a potential increase in the flow depth to pipe diameter ratio (d/D) based on the increase in total demand associated with the further refined Old Ranch Country Club project and after taking into consideration the amount of sewer discharge associated with the 4655 Lampson Avenue project, C&V Consulting, Inc. applied the increase in total demand from the further refined Old Ranch Country Club Project to manhole (MH) IDs B03-A14 and B01-A13 through B01-A02A, as shown below. These manholes and their associated pipeline segments are located downstream of the three manholes that were monitored for the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project and as such include the upstream sewer flows anticipated by the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project and currently existing development. The Draft Environmental Impact Redeveloped Land Units Area (SF) Area (AC) Land Use Category Flow Factor Unit Flow (GPD) Multi-Family Housing 116 188,500 4.33 Residential High Density* 160 GDP/DU 18,560 Senior Housing Complex 51 25,340 0.58 Residential High Density* 160 GDP/DU 8,160 Medical Office 1 25,340 0.58 Office** 2,262 GPD/AC 1,316 Hotel 150 109,015 2.50 Hotel** 150 GPD/Room 22,500
Parking Structure 1 226,441 5.20 N/A - 0
Clubhouse 1 21,000 0.48 Commercial/Office** 2,262 GPD/AC 1,090 Total -- 595,636 13.67 -- -- 51,626
*Flow Factor per City of Seal Beach Sewer Master Plan 2018 **Flow Factor per OCSD Wastewater Flow Estimates for Development Planning Page 2908 of 3005 3 | P a g e
Report concluded that the proposed flows from the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project, in addition to the observed flows, create a proposed depth of flow that would not impact the existing surrounding sanitary sewer systems, and that the existing sewer system has adequate capacity for the proposed development.

Per the following table, the overall d/D is anticipated to be less than 0.5 for the identified segments with the increased demand added to the system. This means that when the sewer flows from the further refined Old Ranch Country Club Project are added to the sewer flows from the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project based on the downstream monitored manhole flows, the depth of flow to pipe diameter ratio is less than 50%. This in turn means that even with the Old Ranch Country Club Project, the sewer pipe system capacity remains capable of maintaining an adequate flow well below 50% of its flow depth capacity. As such, adequate capacity exists to serve the 4655 Lampson Avenue Project’s projected demand in addition to the sewer pipe systems existing commitments, even after taking into account the Old Ranch Country Club Project. The anticipated d/D increase determined from the 4665 Lampson Avenue Project plus the Old Ranch Country Club Project is approximately 2.6-3.4%, which is considered negligible.

Refer to the following exhibit identifying the location of the monitored manholes and downstream segments analyzed for the Old Ranch Country Club redevelopment area.

ID
PDWF
Total
Flow
(cfs)
PDWF
d/D
Total PDWF +
Old Ranch
Redevelopm
ent Area
(cfs)
Calculated
Depth (ft)
Calculated
PDWF
d/D
d/D
Percent
Incease
B03-A14 0.8619 0.34 0.9121 0.5240 0.35 3.1%
B01-A13 0.8811 0.38 0.9313 0.4900 0.39 3.4%
B01-A12 0.9003 0.42 0.9505 0.5450 0.44 3.2%
B01-A11 0.9195 0.43 0.9697 0.5510 0.44 3.0%
B01-A10 0.9387 0.43 0.9889 0.5570 0.45 3.0%
B01-A09 0.9578 0.44 1.0080 0.5630 0.45 2.9%
B01-A08 0.9770 0.44 1.0272 0.5690 0.46 2.9%
B01-A07 0.9961 0.45 1.0463 0.5750 0.46 2.9%
B01-A06 1.0328 0.46 1.0830 0.5860 0.47 2.6%
B01-A05 1.0519 0.46 1.1021 0.5920 0.47 2.6%
B01-A04 1.0710 0.47 1.1212 0.5980 0.48 2.6%
B01-A03A 1.1237 0.28 1.1739 0.4240 0.28 2.2%
B01-A02A 1.1237 0.26 1.1739 0.4030 0.27 2.8% Page 2909 of 3005 4 | P a g e

Page 2910 of 3005 ends

SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS
TTM No. 22-01
Prepared for:

Lampson Park Place, LLC
27702 Crown Valley Parkway D4-197
Ladera Ranch, CA 92694
Property:

TTM No. 22-01
APN 130-012-35
4665 Lampson Ave.

Los Alamitos, California
Prepared by:

C&V Consulting, Inc.
9830 Irvine Center Drive
Irvine, CA 92618
Contact: Dane P. McDougall, P.E.
(949) 916-3800

Dane P. McDougall R.C.E. 80705
September 2022
Revised: March 2024

Page 2911 of 3005 ends

Table of Contents

SECTION PAGE
INTRODUCTION 3
SITE DESCRIPTION 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
METHODOLOGY 5
SEWER PIPE CAPACITY ANALYSIS 6
CONCLUSION 7
Appendices
A. SEWER MONITORING STUDY TABLE & DEPTH OF FLOW CALCULATIONS B. FLOW MONITORING DATA
C. REFERENCES

Page 2912 of 3005 ends

INTRODUCTION
The following study has been prepared by C&V Consulting, Inc. to determine and illustrate:

A. The capacity of the existing sewer segments from the proposed development site to the OCSD Sewer Trunk.

B. If the existing sewer facilities will adequately service the proposed development.

Although the project site is in the City of Los Alamitos, the City of Seal Beach is providing sewer service to the proposed development which falls within the Rossmoor/Los Alamitos Area Sewer District (RLAASD).

The sewer system conveys wastewater from the service area for treatment by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). This study utilizes a sewer monitoring method to determine the results. The report will analyze the existing capacity and how the future flows from the proposed development will impact the sewer system and all reaches from the site point of connection to the OCSD Sewer Trunk.

Page 2913 of 3005 ends

SITE DESCRIPTION
The project site comprises a gross total of 12.367 acres and is located at 4665 Lampson Ave., at the northwest corner of Rose Street and Lampson Avenue, in the City of Los Alamitos, California (APN: 130- 012-35). The site is bounded by Lampson Avenue to the south, Arbor Park to the north and east, and undeveloped land to the west.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The development proposes the construction of 246 total units (77 affordable apartment units, 55 detached SFD units, and 114 townhouse units) with private garages, private drive aisles, sidewalks, guest parking areas, and common landscaped areas.

Project Site Size (ac)
Total Project Area
(APN: 130-012-35)

12.367

Page 2914 of 3005 ends

METHODOLOGY/EXISTING CONDITIONS
The study will investigate the sewerage discharge route from the proposed development (TTM No. 22-01) to the OCSD Sewer Trunk. The existing sewer mains have flats slopes with most ranging with slopes of (0.1%-0.2%).

Sewer Monitoring Method
Basswood Street and Aster Street Intersection
As part of this study for the sewer monitoring analysis, the project was conditioned to flow monitor the existing conditions at northern inlet of Manhole B03-A16 of the 15” local main, located in the Basswood Street and Aster Street Intersection by ADS. The flow monitoring took place from 8/23/22 to 9/5/22.

Candleberry Avenue and Aster Street Intersection
As part of this study for the sewer monitoring analysis, the project was conditioned to flow monitor the existing conditions at northern inlet of Manhole B06-A21 of the 17.88” xx 17” (H x W) elliptical local main, located in the Candleberry Avenue and Aster Street Intersection by ADS. The flow monitoring took place from 8/23/22 to 9/5/22.

Elder Avenue
As part of this study for the sewer monitoring analysis, the project was conditioned to flow monitor the existing conditions at northern inlet of Manhole B08-A25 of the 12” local main, located in Elder Avenue by ADS. The flow monitoring took place from 8/23/22 to 9/5/22.

Page 2915 of 3005 ends

SEWER PIPE CAPACITY ANALYSIS
Sewer Monitoring Method
AKM provided “Table 2 Hydraulic Analysis Results For Sewers Downstream of West Ed Development” highlighting the reaches suspected to have d/D levels above 0.5.

However, the monitored manholes show a lower flow average than the table provided by AKM.

Using “Table 2 Hydraulic Analysis Results For Sewers Downstream of West Ed Development”, ratios were used from the flow monitored averages to calculate the flows for all reaches upstream of the monitored manholes. For reaches downstream of the monitored manholes, the delta flow value was added to the last monitored manholes to calculate the flow for the remaining reaches.

The average dry weather flow was used to calculate the peak dry weather flows (PDWF). The PDWF was used to calculate the d/D levels for each sewer segment.

Sewer pipes were analyzed per City of Seal Beach Sewer Master Plan 2018 Table ES-1, for a maximum design depth at half-full for pipe sized at 15” or under.

The “Unit Flow Factors” Table 3-1 per the City of Seal Beach Sewer Master Plan 2018 was utilized for this method to obtain the peak flow generated from the proposed residential project site. It was determined from the architectural plans for the 246 residential unit (20.33 DU/AC) project has a proposed zoning of Adopted R-3 Ordinance. It is assumed that this zoning is equivalent to the “Residential High Density” Land Use from the “Unit Flow Factors.” The project is estimated to be a total average flow output of 39,360 GPD (0.0609 cfs) of effluent.

Refer to the Sewer Monitoring Study Table in Appendix A for calculation details for all reaches.

Page 2916 of 3005 ends

CONCLUSION
The d/D results from this study were calculated using methods provided by ADS and Manning’s equation.

Based on the sewer analysis on future developed land use provided in AKM’s City wide sewer study, there are 16 sewer segments shown to have a d/D level above 0.5. Then, as analyzed per actual monitored flows, there are only 7 segments estimated to exceed the City's PDWF d/D criteria after the proposed project is implemented. The remaining capacity above a PDWF d/D of 0.50 is reserved for wet weather flows. No additional pipe segments that were found in the AKM study were found to be undersized. 9 segments that were found to be undersized in AKM’s study were found to be acceptable after analyzing using the monitored flows. Typically, the pipe size can handle these flow levels, however, the existing segments has flat slopes (ranging from 0.16%-0.22%) which causes the d/D levels to be higher.

Page 2917 of 3005 ends

Appendix A

SEWER MONITORING STUDY TABLE &

DEPTH OF FLOW CALCULATIONS

Page 2918 of 3005 ends

ID From ID To ID
Diameter
(in)
Length
(ft) Slope
PDWF
Total
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Unpeaka
ble Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Peak-able
Flow (cfs)
PDWF
d/D
PDWF
Total
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Unpeakable Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Peak-able
Flow (cfs)
PDWF
d/D
B15-M04 B15-M04 B15-M03 8 124 0.0280 0.0079 0.0007 0.0024 0.05 0.1003 0.0007 0.0418 0.15 B15-M03 B15-M03 B15-M02 8 335 0.0020 0.0151 0.0014 0.0048 0.11 0.1063 0.0014 0.0442 0.30 B15-M02 B15-M02 B15-M01 8 265 0.0020 0.0220 0.0021 0.0073 0.14 0.1123 0.0021 0.0466 0.31 B15-M01 B15-M01 B15-A39 8 149 0.0019 0.0287 0.0028 0.0097 0.16 0.1182 0.0028 0.0490 0.32 B15-A39 B15-A39 B15-A38 8 251 0.0016 0.2395 0.0275 0.0949 0.49 0.3192 0.0275 0.1343 0.59 B15-A38 B15-A38 B12-A37 8 220 0.0020 0.2485 0.0286 0.0988 0.47 0.3280 0.0286 0.1381 0.56 B12-A37T B12-A37 B12-H14 8 286 0.0016 0.2552 0.0294 0.1016 0.51 0.3345 0.0294 0.1410 0.61 B12-H14 B12-H14 B12-H13 8 285 0.0020 0.2619 0.0302 0.1045 0.49 0.3410 0.0302 0.1439 0.58 B12-H13 B12-H13 B12-H12 8 285 0.0022 0.2685 0.0311 0.1074 0.48 0.3476 0.0311 0.1467 0.56 B12-H12 B12-H12 B12-H11 8 285 0.0020 0.2752 0.0319 0.1102 0.51 0.3541 0.0319 0.1496 0.59 B12-H11 B12-H11 B12-A32 8 245 0.0022 0.3076 0.0360 0.1243 0.52 0.3858 0.0360 0.1636 0.60 B12-A32 B12-A32 B08-A31 12 256 0.0018 0.5701 0.0698 0.2414 0.43 0.6447 0.0698 0.2807 0.46 B08-A31 B08-A31 B08-A30 12 290 0.0018 0.5760 0.0706 0.2440 0.43 0.6505 0.0706 0.2834 0.46 B08-A30 B08-A30 B08-A29 12 220 0.0018 0.5818 0.0714 0.2467 0.43 0.6563 0.0714 0.2861 0.46 B08-A29 B08-A29 B08-A28 12 225 0.0019 0.5877 0.0721 0.2494 0.43 0.6621 0.0721 0.2887 0.46 B08-A28 B08-A28 B08-A27 12 267 0.0019 0.5935 0.0729 0.2521 0.43 0.6679 0.0729 0.2914 0.46 B08-A27 B08-A27 B08-A26 12 234 0.0019 0.5994 0.0737 0.2547 0.43 0.6737 0.0737 0.2941 0.46 B08-A26 B08-A26 B08-A25 12 226 0.0019 0.6052 0.0744 0.2574 0.43 0.6795 0.0744 0.2968 0.46 B08-A25 B08-A25 B08-A24 12 261 0.0019 0.6111 0.0752 0.2601 0.44 0.6853 0.0752 0.2994 0.47 B08-A24 B08-A24 B07-A23 15 251 0.0014 0.8372 0.1062 0.3644 0.41 0.9095 0.1062 0.4038 0.42 B07-A23 B07-A23 B06-A22 15 257 0.0014 0.8702 0.1107 0.3799 0.41 0.9423 0.1107 0.4193 0.43 B06-A22B B06-A22 B06-A22A 18 138 0.0009 0.8802 0.1115 0.3849 0.31 0.9522 0.1115 0.4243 0.32 B06-A22A B06-A22A B06-A21 18 86 0.0010 0.8802 0.1115 0.3849 0.30 0.9522 0.1115 0.4243 0.31 B06-A21 B06-A21 B06-F01 18 11 0.0018 0.9952 0.1272 0.4393 0.28 1.0665 0.1272 0.4787 0.29 B06-F01 B06-F01 B06-F01A 18 253 0.0011 0.9952 0.1272 0.4393 0.32 1.0665 0.1272 0.4787 0.33 B06-F01A B06-F01A B05-A20 18 7 0.0015 0.9952 0.1272 0.4393 0.29 1.0665 0.1272 0.4787 0.30 B05-A20 B05-A20 B03-A19 15 242 0.0014 1.1305 0.1468 0.5033 0.48 1.2011 0.1468 0.5427 0.50 B03-A19 B03-A19 B03-A18 15 227 0.0014 1.1345 0.1475 0.5051 0.48 1.2050 0.1475 0.5445 0.50 B03-A18 B03-A18 B03-A17 15 229 0.0014 1.1384 0.1481 0.5070 0.48 1.2089 0.1481 0.5463 0.50 B03-A17 B03-A17 B03-A16 15 134 0.0014 1.1423 0.1487 0.5088 0.48 1.2128 0.1487 0.5482 0.50 B03-A16 B03-A16 B03-A15 18 168 0.0011 1.2225 0.1603 0.5471 0.41 1.2926 0.1603 0.5865 0.42 B03-A15 B03-A15 B03-A14 18 267 0.0011 1.2264 0.1610 0.5490 0.41 1.2965 0.1610 0.5883 0.42 B03-A14 B03-A14 B01-A13 18 241 0.0011 1.2794 0.1665 0.5756 0.42 1.3492 0.1665 0.6149 0.43 B01-A13 B01-A13 B01-A12 15 325 0.0020 1.2983 0.1769 0.5804 0.47 1.3681 0.1769 0.6197 0.48 B01-A12 B01-A12 B01-A11 15 325 0.0014 1.3172 0.1874 0.5851 0.53 1.3870 0.1874 0.6245 0.54 B01-A11 B01-A11 B01-A10 15 325 0.0014 1.3362 0.1978 0.5899 0.53 1.4059 0.1978 0.6292 0.54 B01-A10 B01-A10 B01-A09 15 325 0.0014 1.3551 0.2083 0.5947 0.54 1.4247 0.2083 0.6340 0.55 B01-A09 B01-A09 B01-A08 15 325 0.0014 1.3740 0.2187 0.5994 0.54 1.4436 0.2187 0.6388 0.55 B01-A08 B01-A08 B01-A07 15 325 0.0014 1.3929 0.2292 0.6042 0.55 1.4624 0.2292 0.6435 0.56 B01-A07 B01-A07 B01-A06 15 325 0.0014 1.4118 0.2396 0.6090 0.55 1.4813 0.2396 0.6483 0.56 B01-A06 B01-A06 B01-A05 15 325 0.0014 1.4476 0.2501 0.6233 0.55 1.5170 0.2501 0.6627 0.57 B01-A05 B01-A05 B01-A04 15 300 0.0014 1.4665 0.2605 0.6281 0.56 1.5359 0.2605 0.6674 0.58 B01-A04 B01-A04 B01-A03A 15 245 0.0014 1.4854 0.2710 0.6328 0.57 1.5547 0.2710 0.6722 0.58 B01-A03A B01-A03A B01-A02A 18 48 0.0041 1.5372 0.2919 0.6504 0.32 1.6064 0.2919 0.6897 0.33 B01-A02A B01-A02A B01-A01A 18 209 0.0050 1.5372 0.2919 0.6504 0.31 1.6064 0.2919 0.6897 0.32 AKM: Table 2
General Information Ex. without West Ed Dev. With West Ed Dev.

Hydraulic Analysis Results for Sewers Downstream of West Ed Development Sewer reaches highlighted in yellow exceed the City's depth to diameter criteria (PDWF d/D < 0.50 for 15" and smaller) for new pipe construction when the West Ed development loads are added to the system AKM: TABLE 2
HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR SEWERS DOWNSTREAM OF WEST ED DEVELOPMENT Page 2919 of 3005 ID From ID To ID
Diameter
(ft) Slope
PDWF
Total
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Unpeak
able
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Peakable
Flow
(cfs)
Total
ADWF
(cfs)
PDWF
d/D
PDWF
Total
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Unpeak
able
Flow
(cfs)
ADWF
Peakable
Flow
(cfs)
Total
ADWF
(cfs) PDWF d/D
B15-M04 B15-M04 B15-M03 0.67 0.0280 0.0050 0.0004 0.0015 0.0019 0.04 0.1444 0.0004 0.0624 0.0628 0.18 B15-M03 B15-M03 B15-M02 0.67 0.0020 0.0094 0.0008 0.0029 0.0037 0.09 0.1480 0.0008 0.0638 0.0646 0.22 B15-M02 B15-M02 B15-M01 0.67 0.0020 0.0137 0.0013 0.0044 0.0056 0.11 0.1515 0.0013 0.0653 0.0665 0.23 B15-M01 B15-M01 B15-A39 0.67 0.0019 0.0179 0.0017 0.0058 0.0075 0.13 0.1550 0.0017 0.0667 0.0684 0.37 B15-A39 B15-A39 B15-A38 0.67 0.0016 0.1493 0.0165 0.0571 0.0736 0.38 0.2755 0.0165 0.1180 0.1345 0.54 B15-A38 B15-A38 B12-A37 0.67 0.0020 0.1550 0.0172 0.0594 0.0766 0.36 0.2809 0.0172 0.1203 0.1375 0.51 B12-A37T B12-A37 B12-H14 0.67 0.0016 0.1591 0.0177 0.0611 0.0788 0.39 0.2848 0.0177 0.1220 0.1397 0.55 B12-H14 B12-H14 B12-H13 0.67 0.0020 0.1633 0.0182 0.0629 0.0810 0.37 0.2888 0.0182 0.1238 0.1419 0.52 B12-H13 B12-H13 B12-H12 0.67 0.0022 0.1674 0.0187 0.0646 0.0833 0.37 0.2928 0.0187 0.1255 0.1442 0.51 B12-H12 B12-H12 B12-H11 0.67 0.0020 0.1716 0.0192 0.0663 0.0855 0.39 0.2967 0.0192 0.1272 0.1464 0.52 B12-H11 B12-H11 B12-A32 0.67 0.0022 0.1918 0.0216 0.0747 0.0964 0.40 0.3161 0.0216 0.1356 0.1573 0.53 B12-A32 B12-A32 B08-A31 1.00 0.0018 0.3554 0.0420 0.1452 0.1872 0.33 0.4746 0.0420 0.2061 0.2481 0.39 B08-A31 B08-A31 B08-A30 1.00 0.0018 0.3591 0.0425 0.1468 0.1892 0.33 0.4781 0.0425 0.2077 0.2501 0.39 B08-A30 B08-A30 B08-A29 1.00 0.0018 0.3627 0.0429 0.1484 0.1913 0.33 0.4817 0.0429 0.2093 0.2522 0.39 B08-A29 B08-A29 B08-A28 1.00 0.0019 0.3664 0.0434 0.1500 0.1934 0.33 0.4853 0.0434 0.2109 0.2543 0.38 B08-A28 B08-A28 B08-A27 1.00 0.0019 0.3700 0.0438 0.1516 0.1955 0.33 0.4888 0.0438 0.2125 0.2564 0.39 B08-A27 B08-A27 B08-A26 1.00 0.0019 0.3736 0.0443 0.1532 0.1975 0.33 0.4924 0.0443 0.2141 0.2584 0.39 B08-A26 B08-A26 B08-A25 1.00 0.0019 0.3773 0.0448 0.1548 0.1996 0.30 0.4959 0.0448 0.2157 0.2605 0.39 B08-A25 B08-A25 B08-A24 1.00 0.0019 0.4066 0.0485 0.1678 0.2163 0.35 0.5246 0.0485 0.2287 0.2772 0.40 B08-A24 B08-A24 B07-A23 1.25 0.0014 0.5569 0.0685 0.2351 0.3037 0.33 0.6722 0.0685 0.2960 0.3645 0.36 B07-A23 B07-A23 B06-A22 1.25 0.0014 0.5789 0.0714 0.2451 0.3165 0.33 0.6938 0.0714 0.3060 0.3774 0.37 B06-A22B B06-A22 B06-A22A 1.50 0.0009 0.5855 0.0720 0.2483 0.3203 0.29 0.7003 0.0720 0.3092 0.3812 0.32 B06-A22A B06-A22A B06-A21 1.50 0.0010 0.5855 0.0720 0.2483 0.3203 0.26 0.7003 0.0720 0.3092 0.3812 0.31 B06-A21 B06-A21 B06-F01 1.50 0.0018 0.5948 0.0731 0.2526 0.3257 0.25 0.7095 0.0731 0.3135 0.3866 0.27 B06-F01 B06-F01 B06-F01A 1.50 0.0011 0.5948 0.0731 0.2526 0.3257 0.28 0.7095 0.0731 0.3135 0.3866 0.31 B06-F01A B06-F01A B05-A20 1.50 0.0015 0.5948 0.0731 0.2526 0.3257 0.26 0.7095 0.0731 0.3135 0.3866 0.28 B05-A20 B05-A20 B03-A19 1.25 0.0014 0.6052 0.0750 0.2571 0.3321 0.34 0.7198 0.0750 0.3180 0.3930 0.37 B03-A19 B03-A19 B03-A18 1.25 0.0014 0.6055 0.0751 0.2572 0.3323 0.34 0.7200 0.0751 0.3181 0.3932 0.37 B03-A18 B03-A18 B03-A17 1.25 0.0014 0.6058 0.0752 0.2573 0.3325 0.34 0.7203 0.0752 0.3182 0.3934 0.37 B03-A17 B03-A17 B03-A16 1.25 0.0014 0.6061 0.0753 0.2574 0.3327 0.23 0.7206 0.0753 0.3183 0.3936 0.37 B03-A16 B03-A16 B03-A15 1.50 0.0011 0.6900 0.0868 0.2957 0.3826 0.30 0.8033 0.0868 0.3566 0.4435 0.33 B03-A15 B03-A15 B03-A14 1.50 0.0011 0.6940 0.0875 0.2976 0.3850 0.30 0.8073 0.0875 0.3585 0.4459 0.33 B03-A14 B03-A14 B01-A13 1.50 0.0011 0.7493 0.0930 0.3242 0.4172 0.31 0.8619 0.0930 0.3851 0.4781 0.34 B01-A13 B01-A13 B01-A12 1.25 0.0020 0.7686 0.1034 0.3290 0.4324 0.39 0.8811 0.1034 0.3899 0.4933 0.38 B01-A12 B01-A12 B01-A11 1.25 0.0014 0.7879 0.1139 0.3337 0.4476 0.39 0.9003 0.1139 0.3946 0.5085 0.42 B01-A11 B01-A11 B01-A10 1.25 0.0014 0.8072 0.1243 0.3385 0.4628 0.40 0.9195 0.1243 0.3994 0.5237 0.43 B01-A10 B01-A10 B01-A09 1.25 0.0014 0.8265 0.1348 0.3433 0.4780 0.40 0.9387 0.1348 0.4042 0.5389 0.43 B01-A09 B01-A09 B01-A08 1.25 0.0014 0.8458 0.1452 0.3480 0.4932 0.41 0.9578 0.1452 0.4089 0.5541 0.44 B01-A08 B01-A08 B01-A07 1.25 0.0014 0.8651 0.1557 0.3528 0.5085 0.41 0.9770 0.1557 0.4137 0.5694 0.44 B01-A07 B01-A07 B01-A06 1.25 0.0014 0.8843 0.1661 0.3576 0.5237 0.42 0.9961 0.1661 0.4185 0.5846 0.45 B01-A06 B01-A06 B01-A05 1.25 0.0014 0.9213 0.1766 0.3719 0.5485 0.43 1.0328 0.1766 0.4328 0.6094 0.46 B01-A05 B01-A05 B01-A04 1.25 0.0014 0.9405 0.1870 0.3767 0.5637 0.43 1.0519 0.1870 0.4376 0.6246 0.46 B01-A04 B01-A04 B01-A03A 1.25 0.0014 0.9597 0.1975 0.3815 0.5789 0.44 1.0710 0.1975 0.4424 0.6398 0.47 B01-A03A B01-A03A B01-A02A 1.50 0.0041 1.0128 0.2184 0.3990 0.6173 0.26 1.1237 0.2184 0.4599 0.6782 0.28 B01-A02A B01-A02A B01-A01A 1.50 0.0050 1.0128 0.2184 0.3990 0.6173 0.25 1.1237 0.2184 0.4599 0.6782 0.26 Measu
red
Avg
MGD
Measur
ed
Avg cfs
B08-A26 B08-A26 B08-A25 0.129 0.1996
B06-A22A B06-A22A B06-A21 0.207 0.3203
B03-A17 B03-A17 B03-A16 0.215 0.3327
Units
(du)
Flow
(gpd/du)
Total
Flow
Total
Flow
Site 246 160 39360 0.0609
W/ West Ed Dev. (Existing Flow + Site [0.0609 cfs])
Flow Monitored MH's
General Information Ex. without West Ed Dev.

C&V Consulting Inc. Table: Flows calculated based on the ratio of flow from the monitored manholes and flows provided by AKM from Table 2 Flow monitored MH's are highlighted green.

C&V CONSULTING INC. TABLE

FLOWS CALCULATED BASED ON THE RATIO OF FLOW FROM THE MONITORED MANHOLES AND FLOWS PROVIDED BY AKM Page 2920 of 3005
Appendix B

FLOW MONITORING DATA

Page 2921 of 3005 ends

SealBeach.KHR.TFM.CA22
4665 Lampson Ave Sewer Study
Final Report Submitted to SealBeach.KHR.TFM.CA22
September 21, 2022

Page 2922 of 3005 ends

Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022
September 21, 2022
James H. Kawamura, P.E.

KHR Associates
17530 Von Karman Avenue – Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
SUBJECT: 4665 Lampson Ave Sewer Study
Dear Mr. Kawamura,
ADS is pleased to submit the report for the 4665 Lampson Ave Sewer Study completed on behalf of KHR Associates. The metering was conducted at three (3) locations. The study was conducted during the period of Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022.

The report contains depth, velocity, and quantity hydrographs as well as daily long tables for the metering period. An Excel file containing depth, quantity, and velocity entities for the monitoring location in 5-minute format has been provided.

In addition, we would be happy to further explain any details about the report that may seem unclear. Should you have any questions or comments, you may contact the Project Manager, Shay Koerber at (619) 520-9168.

It has been our pleasure to be of service to you in the performance of this project. Thank you for choosing ADS products and services to meet your flow monitoring needs.

Sincerely,

ADS ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Justin Hatch
Data Analyst
562-488-7346

Page 2 of 22 ends

Page 2923 of 3005 ends

4665 Lampson Ave Sewer Study
Prepared For:

James H. Kawamura, P.E.

KHR Associates
17530 Von Karman Avenue – Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
Prepared By:

ADS, LLC
15201 Springdale St
Huntington Beach, CA 92649

Page 3 of 22 ends

Page 2924 of 3005 ends

KHR Associates entered into an agreement with ADS Environmental Services to conduct flow monitoring at (3) three locations in the Seal Beach Sanitary Collection System. The study was scheduled for a period of (14) fourteen days. Once in place, the flow monitoring equipment was used to measure depth, velocity, and to quantify flows. Data obtained from the study will be used to determine existing sewer flow rates and capacity to support development of a new residential redevelopment project tributary to these locations.

Project Scope
The scope of this study involved using a flow monitor to quantify wastewater flow at the designated locations for the 14-day time period. Specifically, the study included the following key components. • Investigate the proposed flow-monitoring sites for adequate hydraulic conditions • Flow monitor installations
• Flow monitor confirmations and data collections
• Flow data analysis
Equipment installation was completed on August 22, 2022. The monitoring began on August 23, 2022 and was completed on September 5, 2022. Upon completion of the study, equipment was removed from the system.

The ADS Trinton+ monitor was selected for this project. This flow monitor is an area velocity flow monitor that uses both the Continuity and Manning's equations to measure flow.

The ADS Triton+ monitor consists of data acquisition sensors and a battery-powered microcomputer. The microcomputer includes a processor unit, data storage, and an on-board clock to control and synchronize the sensor recordings. The monitor was programmed to acquire and store depth of flow and velocity readings at 5-minute intervals.

The Triton+ monitor features cross-checking using multiple technologies in each sensor for continuous running of comparisons and tolerances. The Triton+ monitor can support two (2) sets of sensors. The sensor option used for this project was:

The Peak Combo Sensor installed at the bottom of the pipe includes three types of data acquisition technologies.

The up looking ultrasonic depth uses sound waves from two independent transceivers to measure the distance from the sensor upward toward the flow surface; applying the speed of sound in the water and the temperature measured by Scope and Methodology
Introduction
Flow Monitoring Equipment

Page 4 of 22 ends

Page 2925 of 3005 ends

sensor to calculate depth.

The pressure depth is calculated by using a piezo-resistive crystal to determine the difference between hydrostatic and atmospheric pressure. The pressure sensor is temperature compensated and vented to the atmosphere through a desiccant filled breather tube.

To obtain peak velocity, the sensor sends an ultrasonic signal at an angle upward through the widest cross-section of the oncoming flow. The signal is reflected by suspended particles, air bubbles, or organic matter with a frequency shift proportional to the velocity of the reflecting objects. The reflected signal is received by the sensor and processed using digital spectrum analysis to determine the peak flow velocity.

Installation
Installation of flow monitoring equipment typically proceeds in four steps. First, the site is investigated for safety and to determine physical and hydraulic suitability for the flow monitoring equipment. Second, the equipment is physically installed at the selected location. Third, the monitor is tested to assure proper operation of the velocity and depth of flow sensors and verify that the monitor clock is operational and synchronized to the master computer clock. Fourth, the depth and velocity sensors are confirmed and line confirmations are performed.

In pipes up to 42 inches in diameter, the sensors were mounted on expandable stainless steel rings, inserted at least a foot upstream into influent pipes and tightened against the inside walls of the pipes. Influent pipe installations reduce the influences of turbulence and backwater often caused by changes in channel geometry in manholes.

Page 5 of 22 ends

Page 2926 of 3005 ends

Data Collection, Confirmation, and Quality Assurance
Data collection was done remotely via wireless connect on a weekly basis via ADS Field Representatives. During the monitoring period, field crews visit each monitoring location to verify proper monitor operation and document field conditions. The following quality assurance steps are taken to assure the integrity of the collected data:

Measure power supplies: monitors were powered by dry cell battery packs. Voltages were recorded and battery packs replaced, as necessary. Separate batteries provided back-up power to memory allowing primary batteries to be replaced without loss of data.

Clock synchronization: Field crews synchronized monitor clocks to master clocks.

Confirm depth and velocity readings: Field crews descended into meter manholes to manually measure depths and velocities and compare them meter readings to confirm that they agreed. They also measured silt levels, if any, in the inverts of the pipes. Silt areas were subtracted from flow areas to compute true areas of flow.

Confirm average velocities through cross-sectional velocity profiles: Since ADS velocity sensors measure peak velocity, field crews collected cross-sectional velocity profiles in order to develop a relationship between peak and average velocity in lines that meet the hydraulic criteria.

Upload and Review Data: Data collected from the monitors were uploaded and reviewed by a Data Analyst for completeness, outliers and deviations in the flow patterns, which indicate system anomalies or equipment failure.

There are two main equations used to measure open channel flow: the Continuity Equation and the Manning Equation.

The Continuity Equation, which is considered the most accurate, can be used if both depth of flow and velocity are available. In cases where velocity measurements are not available or not practical to obtain, the Manning Equation can be used to estimate velocity from the depth data based on certain physical characteristics of the pipe (i.e. the slope and roughness of the pipe being measured). However, the Manning equation assumes uniform, steady flow hydraulic conditions with non-varying roughness, which are typically invalid assumptions in most sanitary sewers. The Continuity Equation was used exclusively for this study.

Continuity Equation
The Continuity Equation states that the flow quantity (Q) is equal to the wetted area (A) multiplied by the average velocity (V) of the flow.

Flow Quantification Methods

Page 6 of 22 ends

Page 2927 of 3005 ends

Q = A * V
This equation is applicable in a variety of conditions including backwater, surcharge, and reverse flow.

Data Analysis
A flow monitor is typically programmed to collect data at 5-minute intervals throughout the monitoring period. The monitor stores raw data consisting of (1) the ultrasonic depth, (2) the peak velocity and (3) the pressure depth. The data is imported into ADS's proprietary software and is examined by a data analyst to verify its integrity. The data analyst also reviews the daily field reports and site visit records to identify conditions that would affect the collected data.

Velocity profiles and the line confirmation data developed by the field personnel are reviewed by the data analyst to identify inconsistencies and verify data integrity. Velocity profiles are reviewed and an average to peak velocity ratio is calculated for the site. This ratio is used in converting the peak velocity measured by the sensor to the average velocity used in the Continuity equation. The data analyst selects which depth sensor entity will be used to calculate the final depth information.

Silt and/or debris are often present in sewer lines. When present, silt levels are measured at each site visit. They are reviewed by the data analyst and representative silt levels established. Silt reduces the cross sectional area of the flow where as debris causes depth to become deeper and slower. Calculated flow should remain consistent in both hydraulic conditions.

Debris may result in reduced line capacity.

Occasionally the velocity sensor's performance may be compromised resulting in invalid readings sporadically during the monitoring period. This is generally caused by excessive debris (silt) blocking the sensor's crystals, shallow flows (~< 1") that may drop below the top of the sensor or very clear flows lacking the particles needed to measure rate. In order to use the Continuity equation to quantify the flow during these periods, a Data Analyst and/or Engineer will use the site's historical pipe curve (depth vs. velocity) data along with valid field confirmations to reconstitute and replace the false velocity recordings with expected velocity readings for a given historical depth along the curve.

Selections for the above parameters can be constant or can change during the monitoring period. While the data analysis process is described in a linear manner, it often requires an iterative approach to accurately complete.

Data Presentation
This type of flow monitoring project generates a large volume of data. To facilitate review of the data, results have been provided in graphical and tabular formats. The flow data is presented graphically in the form of scattergraphs and hydrographs. Hydrographs are based on 5 minute averaging. Tables are provided in daily average format. These tables show the flow rate for each day, along with the daily minimum and maximums, the times they were observed, the total daily flow, and total flow for the month (or monitoring period). The following explanation of terms may aid in interpretation of the tables and hydrographs.

DFINAL - Final calculated depth measurement (in inches) QFINAL - Final calculated flow rate (in MGD)
VFINAL - Final calculated flow velocity (in feet per second) REPORT TOTAL - Total volume of flow recorded for the indicated time period (in MG) Data Analysis and Presentation

Page 7 of 22 ends

Page 2928 of 3005 ends

Bass01
Site Commentary

SITE INFORMATION

OBSERVATIONS
Average flow depth, velocity, and quantity data observed during Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022, along with observed minimum and maximum data, are provided in the following table.

Observed Flow Conditions
Item DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total
MG)
Average 3.48 1.45 0.215
Minimum 2.09 0.79 0.055
Maximum 4.52 1.94 0.391
Min Time 08/30/2022 05:05:00 09/03/2022 05:20:00 08/30/2022 05:15:00 Max Time 08/29/2022 21:20:00 08/29/2022 21:15:00 08/29/2022 21:15:00 Based upon the quality and consistency of the observed flow depth and velocity data, the Continuity equation was used to calculate flow rate and quantities during the monitoring period.

Values in the Observed Flow Conditions and data on the graphical reports are based on the five minutes average.

DATA UPTIME
Data uptime observed during Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022 is provided in the following table:

Percent Uptime
DFINAL (in) 100
VFINAL (ft/s) 100
QFINAL (MGD - Total MG) 100
Pipe Round (15 in H)
Silt 0.00 (in)

Page 8 of 22 ends

Page 2929 of 3005 ends

ADS Site Report
Project Name: FM Initials:

Site Name:

City:

Access: Type of
System:

Sanitary
Investigation Information:

Manhole Depth:

Manhole Material /
Pipe Material / Condition:

Commercial
Oxygen:

Safety Notes:

Date/Time of Investigation:

Site Hydraulics:

Upstream Input: (L/S, P/S)
Upstream Manhole:

Downstream Manhole:

Depth of Flow:

Range (Air DOF):

Peak Velocity:

Silt: Inches
fps
+/-
+/-
Cross Section
Installation Information
Installation Type: Standard
Sensors Devices: Ultrasonic/Velocity/Pressure
Surcharge Height:

Rain Gauge Zone:

Yes No ? Distance
Trunk
Lift / Pump Station
WWTP
Other
Monitor Type
Pipe Height:

Pipe Width:

Data Acquisition
Manhole ID
Quality Form
Address/Location:

VM
Drive
Storm Combined
X
Manhole Information: Investigation Information:

Condition
Land Use:

Residential Industrial Other
N N
Other Information:

Additional Site Information / Comments:
x
x
x
x
Monitor Model
x
Install Date:

Agency:

Triton +
Peak Doppler
0 Backup
SealBeach.KHR.TFM.CA22 Seal Beach
Bass01
Good straight through flow
Not investigated

0.25"

1.89 12'-3"
Precast/Good
VCP/Good

3.88 3/4/22 @ 8:22 AM
Standard Traffic Control with No Safety Concerns
3580 Aster St.

Not Investigated
Sensor
Location
12'-3"

15.00 x 15.00
15 15
--
0 Plan N

20.9 H2S: 0 LEL: 0 CO: 0
2 man crew required and one blower is to be
operated at all times.

Manual/Wireless Collect
"
ADS Site
Location ADS Site
Location
flow
dir.

KHR
8/22/22
“
“
A-16

Page 9 of 22 ends

Page 2930 of 3005 ends

Hydrograph Report
Bass01

Page 10 of 22 ends

Page 2931 of 3005 ends

Scattergraph Report
Bass01

Page 11 of 22 ends

Page 2932 of 3005 ends

Daily Tabular Report
08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
Bass01Pipe: Round (15 in H), Silt0.00 in
DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total MG)
Date Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Total 08/23/2022 04:20 2.28 21:05 4.38 3.47 04:20 0.88 20:10 1.88 1.45 04:20 0.067 20:30 0.361 0.212 0.212 08/24/2022 03:35 2.30 08:20 4.30 3.49 03:30 0.90 21:15 1.85 1.46 03:30 0.070 08:20 0.346 0.215 0.215 08/25/2022 05:10 2.17 21:25 4.31 3.42 02:50 0.83 21:25 1.84 1.42 05:00 0.060 21:25 0.348 0.205 0.205 08/26/2022 05:15 2.22 08:30 4.23 3.42 05:10 0.87 10:10 1.81 1.43 05:10 0.063 08:35 0.325 0.204 0.204 08/27/2022 04:25 2.17 10:10 4.37 3.48 03:40 0.86 10:55 1.85 1.45 04:20 0.062 10:15 0.350 0.216 0.216 08/28/2022 04:55 2.18 10:55 4.47 3.57 05:00 0.86 20:55 1.93 1.49 05:00 0.061 20:55 0.382 0.231 0.231 08/29/2022 03:35 2.38 21:20 4.52 3.63 03:35 0.93 21:15 1.94 1.52 03:35 0.075 21:15 0.391 0.237 0.237 08/30/2022 05:05 2.09 08:10 4.37 3.50 05:15 0.81 08:05 1.86 1.46 05:15 0.055 08:10 0.351 0.215 0.215 08/31/2022 05:15 2.30 08:25 4.37 3.44 04:05 0.88 08:25 1.86 1.43 04:05 0.070 08:25 0.356 0.207 0.207 09/01/2022 04:50 2.22 21:15 4.26 3.42 04:50 0.86 21:00 1.85 1.43 04:50 0.063 21:00 0.341 0.205 0.205 09/02/2022 05:40 2.26 08:20 4.33 3.40 03:35 0.87 08:20 1.84 1.41 03:35 0.066 08:20 0.350 0.201 0.201 09/03/2022 04:40 2.17 11:00 4.37 3.45 05:20 0.79 11:10 1.85 1.44 05:20 0.056 11:10 0.355 0.212 0.212 09/04/2022 05:25 2.19 10:45 4.44 3.46 04:55 0.86 10:35 1.89 1.45 04:55 0.063 10:35 0.371 0.213 0.213 09/05/2022 04:45 2.16 11:30 4.49 3.57 04:40 0.83 21:25 1.93 1.49 04:40 0.058 11:35 0.384 0.232 0.231 08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
DFINAL
(in)
VFINAL
(ft/s)
QFINAL
(MGD -
Total MG)
Total 3.003
Average 3.48 1.45 0.215

Page 12 of 22 ends

Page 2933 of 3005 ends

Cand02
Site Commentary

SITE INFORMATION

Observed Flow Conditions
Item DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total
MG)
Average 4.67 0.89 0.207
Minimum 3.06 0.46 0.060
Maximum 5.84 1.25 0.377
Min Time 08/30/2022 04:55:00 08/30/2022 04:25:00 08/30/2022 04:25:00 Max Time 09/05/2022 10:45:00 09/05/2022 11:25:00 09/05/2022 11:25:00 Based upon the quality and consistency of the observed flow depth and velocity data, the Continuity equation was used to calculate flow rate and quantities during the monitoring period.

Values in the Observed Flow Conditions and data on the graphical reports are based on the five minutes average.

DATA UPTIME
Data uptime observed during Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022 is provided in the following table:

Percent Uptime
DFINAL (in) 100
VFINAL (ft/s) 100
QFINAL (MGD - Total MG) 100
Pipe Elliptical (17.88 in H x 17 in W)
Silt 0.00 (in)

Page 13 of 22 ends

Page 2934 of 3005 ends

ADS Site Report
Project Name: FM Initials:

Site Name:

City:

Access: Type of
System:

Sanitary
Investigation Information:

Manhole Depth:

Manhole Material /
Pipe Material / Condition:

Commercial
Oxygen:

Safety Notes:

Date/Time of Investigation:

Site Hydraulics:

Upstream Input: (L/S, P/S)
Upstream Manhole:

Downstream Manhole:

Depth of Flow:

Range (Air DOF):

Peak Velocity:

Silt: Inches
fps
+/-
+/-
Cross Section
Installation Information
Installation Type: Standard
Sensors Devices: Ultrasonic/Velocity/Pressure
Surcharge Height:

Rain Gauge Zone:

Yes No ? Distance
Trunk
Lift / Pump Station
WWTP
Other
Monitor Type
Pipe Height:

Pipe Width:

Data Acquisition
Manhole ID
Quality Form
Address/Location:

VM
Drive
Storm Combined
X
Manhole Information: Investigation Information:

Condition
Land Use:

Residential Industrial Other
N N
Other Information:

Additional Site Information / Comments:
x
x
x
x
Monitor Model
x
Install Date:

Agency:

Triton +
Peak Doppler
0 Backup
SealBeach.KHR.TFM.CA22 Seal Beach
Cand02
Good straight through flow
Not investigated

0.25"

1.13 9'-7"
Precast/Good
PVC/Good

5.00 3/4/22 @ 10:30 AM
Standard Traffic Control with No Safety Concerns
4156 Candleberry Ave
Not Investigated
Sensor
Location
9'-7"

17.88 x 17.00

17.88 17.00
--
0 Plan N

20.9 H2S: 0 LEL: 0 CO: 0
2 man crew required and one blower is to be
operated at all times.

Manual/Wireless Collect
"
ADS Site
Location
ADS Site
Location
flow
dir.

KHR
8/22/22
“
“
A-21

Page 14 of 22 ends

Page 2935 of 3005 ends

Hydrograph Report
Cand02

Page 15 of 22 ends

Page 2936 of 3005 ends

Scattergraph Report
Cand02

Page 16 of 22 ends

Page 2937 of 3005 ends

Daily Tabular Report
08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
Cand02Pipe: Elliptical (17.88 in H x 17 in W), Silt0.00 in DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total MG)
Date Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Total 08/23/2022 05:10 3.39 20:25 5.65 4.67 04:05 0.48 21:15 1.17 0.91 04:05 0.068 21:15 0.334 0.209 0.209 08/24/2022 04:50 3.39 21:10 5.61 4.70 04:50 0.57 21:55 1.13 0.89 04:50 0.081 20:30 0.312 0.207 0.207 08/25/2022 05:00 3.21 21:15 5.57 4.60 04:30 0.48 08:25 1.13 0.85 04:30 0.064 08:25 0.321 0.194 0.194 08/26/2022 05:05 3.31 08:25 5.61 4.60 04:15 0.48 08:25 1.07 0.84 04:15 0.066 08:25 0.307 0.189 0.189 08/27/2022 04:10 3.21 10:00 5.60 4.65 06:25 0.50 10:10 1.14 0.86 04:05 0.073 10:10 0.322 0.200 0.200 08/28/2022 04:50 3.20 10:50 5.73 4.74 04:45 0.50 12:40 1.19 0.93 04:45 0.065 10:30 0.343 0.222 0.222 08/29/2022 04:10 3.46 21:10 5.80 4.80 03:00 0.51 21:20 1.24 0.94 03:00 0.079 21:15 0.368 0.228 0.228 08/30/2022 04:55 3.06 21:00 5.63 4.67 04:25 0.46 21:05 1.15 0.92 04:25 0.060 21:05 0.332 0.212 0.212 08/31/2022 05:05 3.35 08:20 5.73 4.63 04:40 0.51 19:25 1.14 0.89 04:40 0.073 08:25 0.325 0.204 0.204 09/01/2022 04:40 3.28 21:10 5.60 4.61 03:20 0.48 21:00 1.16 0.88 03:20 0.067 21:00 0.330 0.201 0.201 09/02/2022 03:25 3.37 08:10 5.62 4.59 04:55 0.49 08:15 1.13 0.89 04:55 0.072 08:15 0.325 0.201 0.201 09/03/2022 04:30 3.23 10:55 5.67 4.65 03:50 0.49 10:20 1.23 0.90 03:50 0.066 10:20 0.346 0.210 0.210 09/04/2022 05:15 3.26 10:40 5.73 4.66 05:15 0.48 10:35 1.20 0.89 05:15 0.064 10:35 0.355 0.206 0.206 09/05/2022 04:30 3.24 10:45 5.84 4.79 04:30 0.47 11:25 1.25 0.91 04:30 0.062 11:25 0.377 0.222 0.221 08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
DFINAL
(in)
VFINAL
(ft/s)
QFINAL
(MGD -
Total MG)
Total 2.904
Average 4.67 0.89 0.207

Page 17 of 22 ends

Page 2938 of 3005 ends

Elder03
Site Commentary

SITE INFORMATION

Observed Flow Conditions
Item DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total
MG)
Average 3.59 0.96 0.129
Minimum 2.18 0.45 0.030
Maximum 4.75 1.35 0.249
Min Time 08/30/2022 04:35:00 09/03/2022 03:55:00 08/25/2022 04:40:00 Max Time 08/29/2022 20:45:00 08/29/2022 20:35:00 08/29/2022 20:50:00 Based upon the quality and consistency of the observed flow depth and velocity data, the Continuity equation was used to calculate flow rate and quantities during the monitoring period.

Values in the Observed Flow Conditions and data on the graphical reports are based on the five minutes average.

DATA UPTIME
Data uptime observed during Tuesday, 23 August 2022 to Monday, 05 September 2022 is provided in the following table:

Percent Uptime
DFINAL (in) 100
VFINAL (ft/s) 100
QFINAL (MGD - Total MG) 100
Pipe Round (12 in H)
Silt 0.00 (in)

Page 18 of 22 ends

Page 2939 of 3005 ends

ADS Site
Location
ADS Site Report
Project Name: FM Initials:

Site Name:

City:

Access: Type of
System:

Sanitary
Investigation Information:

Manhole Depth:

Manhole Material /
Pipe Material / Condition:

Commercial
Oxygen:

Safety Notes:

Date/Time of Investigation:

Site Hydraulics:

Upstream Input: (L/S, P/S)
Upstream Manhole:

Downstream Manhole:

Depth of Flow:

Range (Air DOF):

Peak Velocity:

Silt: Inches
fps
+/-
+/-
Cross Section
Installation Information
Installation Type: Standard
Sensors Devices: Ultrasonic/Velocity/Pressure
Surcharge Height:

Rain Gauge Zone:

Yes No ? Distance
Trunk
Lift / Pump Station
WWTP
Other
Monitor Type
Pipe Height:

Pipe Width:

Data Acquisition
Manhole ID
Quality Form
Address/Location:

VM
Drive
Storm Combined
X
Manhole Information: Investigation Information:

Condition
Land Use:

Residential Industrial Other
N N
Other Information:

Additional Site Information / Comments:
x
x
x
x
Monitor Model
x
Install Date:

Agency:

Triton +
Peak Doppler
0 Backup
SealBeach.KHR.TFM.CA22 Seal Beach
Elder03
Good straight through flow
Not investigated

0.25"

1.40 8'-6"
Precast/Good
VCP/Good

3.88 3/4/22 @ 12:25 PM
Standard Traffic Control with No Safety Concerns
4233 Elder Ave
Not Investigated
Sensor
Location
8'-6"

12.00 x 12.00

12.00 12.00
--
0 Plan N

20.9 H2S: 0 LEL: 0 CO: 0
2 man crew required and one blower is to be
operated at all times.

Manual/Wireless Collect
"
ADS Site
Location
flow
dir.

KHR
8/22/22
“
“
A-25

Page 19 of 22 ends

Page 2940 of 3005 ends

Hydrograph Report
Elder03

Page 20 of 22 ends

Page 2941 of 3005 ends

Scattergraph Report
Elder03

Page 21 of 22 ends

Page 2942 of 3005 ends

Daily Tabular Report
08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
Elder03Pipe: Round (12 in H), Silt0.00 in
DFINAL (in) VFINAL (ft/s) QFINAL (MGD - Total MG)
Date Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Time Min Time Max Avg Total 08/23/2022 03:55 2.34 20:55 4.45 3.54 05:25 0.57 21:00 1.27 0.98 05:25 0.040 21:00 0.216 0.129 0.129 08/24/2022 04:45 2.45 07:45 4.44 3.58 03:15 0.62 07:45 1.25 0.98 05:00 0.047 07:45 0.213 0.130 0.130 08/25/2022 04:40 2.22 21:35 4.38 3.48 04:40 0.47 21:40 1.22 0.94 04:40 0.030 21:35 0.204 0.121 0.121 08/26/2022 04:15 2.29 07:55 4.55 3.54 04:10 0.50 07:55 1.27 0.92 04:10 0.034 07:55 0.223 0.121 0.121 08/27/2022 05:15 2.43 10:40 4.44 3.61 03:55 0.51 10:00 1.23 0.94 03:55 0.039 10:00 0.209 0.127 0.127 08/28/2022 05:55 2.37 11:50 4.60 3.68 05:20 0.52 11:55 1.32 0.98 05:20 0.037 11:55 0.236 0.137 0.137 08/29/2022 03:10 2.37 20:45 4.75 3.76 03:50 0.57 20:35 1.35 1.02 03:50 0.041 20:50 0.249 0.147 0.147 08/30/2022 04:35 2.18 08:35 4.50 3.61 04:40 0.50 08:30 1.26 0.98 04:40 0.031 08:30 0.216 0.132 0.132 08/31/2022 04:55 2.50 08:05 4.50 3.55 02:10 0.60 08:05 1.30 0.97 02:10 0.046 08:05 0.225 0.127 0.127 09/01/2022 04:50 2.21 08:00 4.43 3.48 04:20 0.53 08:00 1.29 0.95 04:50 0.035 08:00 0.220 0.122 0.122 09/02/2022 05:20 2.40 08:15 4.42 3.53 02:55 0.48 08:00 1.29 0.91 05:20 0.035 08:00 0.209 0.120 0.120 09/03/2022 04:05 2.37 11:05 4.49 3.59 03:55 0.45 09:55 1.26 0.92 03:55 0.032 10:50 0.208 0.125 0.125 09/04/2022 04:25 2.39 10:20 4.73 3.60 05:00 0.48 10:20 1.31 0.93 05:00 0.035 10:20 0.243 0.126 0.126 09/05/2022 05:25 2.36 11:25 4.68 3.68 04:15 0.47 11:55 1.31 0.96 04:15 0.033 11:30 0.234 0.136 0.135 08/23/2022 00:00 - 09/05/2022 23:59
DFINAL
(in)
VFINAL
(ft/s)
QFINAL
(MGD -
Total MG)
Total 1.801
Average 3.59 0.96 0.129

Page 22 of 22 ends

Los Alamitos City CouncilNovember 18, 2024

Los Alamitos City Council
November 18, 2024