K 2: Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) Approval Letter

Transcription

1 K 2: Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) Approval Letter

2

3

4 Luci Ibarra -2- October 10, 2014 DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS A. Project Description The proposed project would develop the northeast corner of Sunset Boulevard and Argyle Avenue while renovating the historic Hollywood Palladium at 6215 West Sunset Boulevard. The existing surface parking lots would be replaced with two 28-story buildings. Two options are proposed for the development: Option 1 (Residential) would construct up to 731 residential units and Option 2 (Residential and Hotel) would construct up to 598 residential units and a hotel with up to 250 rooms. Both options would include a lobby with approximately 22,000 square feet of ancillary amenities with Option 2 also providing banquet/meeting facilities and basic hotel-serving retail. Both options would also reoccupy 10,000 square feet of existing Palladium retail space and add up to 14,000 square feet of new retail and/or restaurant space in a low-rise component on the southwest corner of the project site and on the ground floor of the northeast building. The project would provide up to 1,993 automobile parking spaces in a subterranean structure as well as above-grade structured parking along the northern edge of the project site. The project would also provide 820 bicycle parking spaces. As illustrated in the conceptual site plan (see Attachment 2), resident and visitor vehicular access is proposed along Argyle Avenue and Selma Avenue. Access to a Porte Cochere would be provided via an ingress driveway north of the low-rise building. An egress driveway north of the ingress driveway will serve the Porte Cochere and the parking structure. A second ingress driveway just north of the egress driveway will provide access for residents, visitors and trucks to the parking structure. One two-way driveway on Selma Avenue will also provide access to the parking structure. Access to the existing loading docks of the Hollywood Palladium will remain on El Centro Avenue. The project is expected to be completed by B. Trip Generation For Option 1 (Residential), the project is estimated to generate a net increase of 3,734 daily trips, a net increase of 289 trips in the a.m. peak hour and a net increase of 327 trips during the p.m. peak hour. For Option 2 (Residential and Hotel), the project is estimated to generate a net increase of 4,913 daily trips, a net increase of 356 trips in the a.m. peak hour and a net increase of 403 trips during the p.m. peak hour. The trip generation estimates (see Attachment 3) are based on rates and formulas published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9 th Edition, These trip generation rates are typically derived from surveys of similar stand-alone (single) land use projects in suburban areas with little to no transit service. Therefore, DOT s traffic study guidelines allow projects to reduce their total trip generation to account for potential transit usage to and from the site, and for the internal-trip making opportunities that are afforded by mixed-use projects. Consistent with these guidelines, the estimated trip generation includes trip credits to account for the mixed-use nature of the project, and for the expected transit mode share. C. Traffic Impacts The traffic study estimates that the project would result in significant traffic impacts at three intersections under Option 1 and seven intersections under Option 2 before mitigation based on a project build-out year of To off-set these significant traffic impacts, the study identifies a transportation mitigation program designed to fully or

5 Luci Ibarra -3- October 10, 2014 partially reduce these impacts. Physical traffic mitigation improvement options at the impacted intersections were evaluated in an attempt to fully mitigate the impacts; however, feasible mitigations are limited due to the constraints of the existing physical conditions. Street widening was not an option since it was not considered practical or desirable to widen the street at the expense of reduced sidewalk widths or lost on-street parking spaces. According to the results of the study, the transportation mitigation program would partially but not fully mitigate the project s significant traffic impacts during the peak commute hours as follows: OPTION 1 1. Gower Street an Hollywood Boulevard (impact remains during p.m. peak hour) 2. Gower Street and Sunset Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) 3. Gower Street and Santa Monica Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) OPTION 2 1. Vine Street and Sunset Boulevard (impact remains during p.m. peak hour) 2. Vine Street and Santa Monica Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) 3. Gower Street an Hollywood Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) 4. Gower Street and Sunset Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) 5. Gower Street and Santa Monica Boulevard (impact remains during both peak hours) It should be noted that the traffic analysis did not include the anticipated benefit of the proposed traffic signal upgrades (described below) in the LOS summary table; therefore, the reported project impacts are likely overstated. Nonetheless, to further reduce the number of unmitigated traffic impacts, consideration should be given to additional project alternatives that are of a reduced density and would, therefore, generate less traffic and result in less traffic impacts. Additionally, the updated analysis determined that both options of the project would result in three more significantly impacted intersections. This is due to the conservative assumption that each intersection would be operating at one LOS worse than originally estimated (as described above). These impacts are partially mitigated through the implementation of trip reduction measures (described below) but not fully mitigated. No physical mitigations were identified due to the constraints of the existing physical conditions. The impacts at the three following additional intersections would be considered significant and unmitigated after the implementation of the proposed transportation mitigation program: 1. Vine Street and Selma Avenue (p.m. peak hour) 2. Argyle Avenue and Selma Avenue (p.m. peak hour) 3. Gower Street and Fountain Avenue (both peak hours) D. Freeway Analysis The traffic study included a freeway impact analysis that was prepared in accordance with the State-mandated Congestion Management Program (CMP) administered by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). According to this analysis, the project would not result in significant traffic impacts on any of the evaluated freeway mainline segments. To comply with the Freeway Analysis Agreement executed

6 Luci Ibarra -4- October 10, 2014 between Caltrans and DOT in October 2013, the study also included a screening analysis to determine if additional evaluation of freeway mainline and ramp segments was necessary beyond the CMP requirements. Exceeding one of the four screening criteria would require the applicant to work directly with Caltrans to prepare more detailed freeway analyses. However, the project did not meet or exceed any of the four thresholds defined in the agreement; therefore, no additional freeway analysis was required. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS A. Transportation Mitigation Program Consistent with City policies on sustainability and smart growth and with DOT s trip reduction and multi-modal transportation goals, the project mitigation program first focuses on developing a comprehensive trip reduction program and on solutions that promote other modes of travel. The traffic mitigation program includes the implementation of a project Transportation Demand Management program, operational intersection improvements, traffic signal equipment upgrades and new traffic signals. The applicant should be required to implement the following improvements: 1. Transportation Demand Management Program The project proposes to implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the site. The purpose of a TDM program should be to reduce the use of single occupant vehicles (SOV) by increasing the number of trips by walking, bicycle, carpool, vanpool and transit. The design of the development should contribute to minimizing traffic impacts by emphasizing non-auto modes of transportation. Also, a pedestrian-friendly project with safe and walkable sidewalks should be included in the overall design of this mixed-use project. A preliminary TDM program should be prepared and provided for DOT review prior to the issuance of the first building permit for this project and a final TDM program approved by DOT is required prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for the project. The TDM program should include, but is not limited to, the following strategies: Implement enhanced pedestrian connections (e.g., improve sidewalks, widen crosswalks adjacent to the project; install wayfinding signage and pedestrianlevel lighting, etc.); Design the project to ensure a bicycle, pedestrian and transit friendly environment; Provide parking as an option only for all residential unit leases (i.e., unbundle the parking); Coupled with the unbundled parking, provide on-site car share amenities; Provide rideshare program and support for project employees and tenants; Allow for subsidized transit passes for eligible project employees and tenants; Coordinate with DOT to determine if the site would be eligible for one or more of the services to be provided by the future Mobility Hubs program (secure bike parking, bike-share kiosks, and car-share parking spaces); Contribute a one-time fixed-fee of $100,000 to be deposited into the City s Bicycle Plan Trust Fund to implement bicycle improvements within the area of

7 Luci Ibarra -5- October 10, 2014 the proposed project; Guaranteed Ride Home Program; Shuttle/van services for hotel visitors (Option 2) to area major destinations; Consider joining the Hollywood Transportation Management Organization (TMO) that may be created by other major employers in Hollywood in the next few years. 2. Operational Intersection Improvements As discussed above, physical traffic mitigation improvements at impacted intersections were evaluated. However, feasible mitigation options were limited due to the constraints of the existing physical conditions and the need to maintain existing sidewalk widths. The traffic study proposed the following intersection improvements: Cahuenga Boulevard and Franklin Avenue: the applicant proposes to modify the traffic signal at this intersection to allow a protected southbound left-turn lane and a westbound right-turn arrow. This improvement will require that southbound U-turns at the intersection be restricted. This mitigation would reduce the project related traffic impact to less than significant levels. To process this improvement, the applicant should submit a left-turn study analysis pursuant to Section 531 of DOT s Manual of Policies and Procedures to DOT s Signal Timing and Operations Division and to DOT s Hollywood-Wilshire District Office for review, approval, and preparation of an official Traffic Control Report (TCR). Gower Street and Franklin Avenue: the applicant proposes to contribute its fair share to upgrade the traffic signal at this intersection, as needed, to accommodate a northbound right-turn arrow. This mitigation would reduce the project related traffic impact to less than significant levels. This mitigation has been assigned to another development; however, consistent with DOT policy, the cost of mitigation measures can be shared between two developments provided that the improvement can mitigate the combined impact of the projects. 3. Traffic Signal Upgrades Some of the signalized intersections within the project study area require an upgrade to the traffic signal equipment and hardware. Many of the traffic signals at these intersections currently operate using a Type 170 traffic signal controller. Newer controllers (Type 2070) provide for enhanced and real-time operation of the traffic signal timing. The applicant should be required to install 2070 controllers (which may require the replacement of the entire signal cabinet assembly) at the following seven intersections: Yucca Street and Wilcox Avenue Selma Avenue and Wilcox Avenue De Longpre Avenue and Wilcox Avenue Cole Avenue and Fountain Avenue Cahuenga Avenue and Fountain Avenue El Centro Avenue and Fountain Avenue Fountain Avenue and Gower Street

8 Luci Ibarra -6- October 10, 2014 B. Neighborhood Traffic Management Measures According to the residential street impact analysis included in the traffic study, one roadway segment may experience adverse impacts by project related traffic. A local residential street is considered to be impacted based on an increase in the average daily traffic volumes. The objective of the residential street impact analysis is to determine the potential for cut-through traffic impacts on a residential street that can result from the project. Cut-through trips are measured as vehicles that bypass a congested arterial by instead opting to travel along a residential street. These local street impacts are typically mitigated through the implementation of neighborhood traffic calming measures such as installing speed humps. Through the mitigation measures described above, the mitigation program is expected to reduce the project s overall trip generation by encouraging and incentivizing other modes of commuter travel. Therefore, the full extent of the potential for cut-through traffic will not be known until the proposed project is operational. Therefore, DOT recommends that the applicant survey and monitor the residential street segment before and after project occupancy to assess the level of impact, if any, resulting from projectrelated traffic. If the impact is substantiated, then the applicant should be required to work with the affected stakeholders, and consult with DOT and Council District 13 to explore potential neighborhood traffic calming measures. The applicant shall be responsible for conducting the engineering evaluation of the potential measures to determine the feasibility in regards to drainage, constructability, street design, etc. The applicant shall also be responsible in implementing any measures approved by DOT and supported by stakeholders. Improvements should focus solely on non-restrictive traffic calming measures, which may include, but are not limited to, traffic circles, speed humps, roadway narrowing effects (raised medians, traffic chokers, etc.), landscaping features, roadway striping changes, and stop sign pattern. Neighborhood improvements that can offset the effects of added traffic, including street trees, sidewalks, landscaping, neighborhood identification features, and pedestrian amenities should also be evaluated. Such measures can support trip reduction efforts by encouraging walking, bicycling, and the use of public transit. C. Construction Impacts DOT recommends that a construction work site traffic control plan be submitted to DOT for review and approval prior to the start of any construction work. The plan should show the location of any roadway or sidewalk closures, traffic detours, haul routes, hours of operation, protective devices, warning signs and access to abutting properties. DOT also recommends that all construction related traffic be restricted to off-peak hours, as feasible. D. Highway Dedication and Street Widening Requirements As part of the Hollywood Community Plan update process, a Street Standards Committee that included staff from the Community Redevelopment Agency, the Department of City Planning, DOT, and Council District 13, was formed to evaluate the street designations within the Hollywood area. This Committee developed revised street standards that provide an enhanced balance between traffic flow and other important street functions including transit routes and stops, pedestrian environments, bicycle routes, building design and site access, etc. The Committee recommended a

9 Luci Ibarra -7- October 10, 2014 redesignation of Sunset Boulevard to a Modified Major Highway Class II to accommodate a 35-foot half-width roadway within a 50-foot half-width right-of-way. The committee s recommendations have not yet been officially adopted by the City Council; nonetheless, DOT recommends that the applicant be required to provide these dimensions (35-foot half-width roadway / 50-foot half-width ROW) along the project s Sunset Boulevard frontage. Additionally, Selma Avenue, Argyle Avenue, and El Centro Avenue are designated Local Streets which require a 20-foot half-width roadway within a 30-foot half-width rightof-way. The applicant should check with the Bureau of Engineering s Land Development Group to determine the specific highway dedications, street improvements and/or sidewalk requirements for this project. E. Implementation of Improvements and Mitigation Measures The applicant should be responsible for the cost and implementation of any necessary traffic signal equipment modifications, bus stop relocations, and parking meter relocations and/or removals associated with the proposed transportation improvements described above. Also, the removal of any parking meters would require payment to DOT for lost revenues. All improvements and associated traffic signal work within the City of Los Angeles must be guaranteed through BOE s B-Permit process, prior to the issuance of any building permits and completed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. Temporary certificates of occupancy may be granted in the event of any delay through no fault of the applicant, provided that, in each case, the applicant has demonstrated reasonable efforts and due diligence to the satisfaction of DOT. Prior to setting the bond amount, BOE shall require that the developer's engineer or contractor contact DOT's B-Permit Coordinator, at (213) , to arrange a pre-design meeting to finalize the proposed design needed for the project. If a proposed transportation mitigation measure does not receive the required approval, a substitute mitigation measure may be provided subject to the approval of DOT or other governing agency with jurisdiction over the mitigation location, upon demonstration that the substitute measure is environmentally equivalent or superior to the original measure in mitigating the project s significant traffic impact. To the extent that a mitigation measure proves to be infeasible and no substitute mitigation is available, then a significant traffic impact would remain. F. Parking Analysis As referenced in the Project Description section above, the project would provide up to 1,993 automobile parking spaces and 820 bicycle parking spaces. The applicant should check with the Department of Building and Safety on the number of Code-required or Specific Plan-required parking spaces needed for this project. G. Site Access and Circulation The proposed project would provide vehicular access to the parking facilities via four driveways: a two-way driveway on Selma Avenue, an entry only driveway and an exit only driveway via the Porte Cochere on Argyle Avenue and another entry only driveway north of the Porte Cochere on Argyle Avenue. An existing driveway on El Centro Avenue will remain and continue to provide access to the Hollywood Palladium loading docks. Please note that the review of the study does not constitute approval of the driveway dimensions and internal circulation schemes. Those require separate review

10 Luci Ibarra -8- October 10, 2014 and approval and should be coordinated with DOT s Citywide Planning Coordination Section (201 N. Figueroa Street, 4th Floor, Station ) to avoid delays in the building permit approval process. Prior to the commencement of building or parking layout design efforts, the applicant should contact DOT for driveway width and internal circulation requirements so that such traffic flow considerations are designed and incorporated early into the building and parking layout plans. All driveways should be Case 2 driveways - 30 feet and 16 feet wide for two-way and one-way operations, respectively. All pick-up and drop-off activities should take place on-site. Any security gates should be a minimum of 20 feet from the property line. H. Development Review Fees An ordinance adding Section to the Los Angeles Municipal Code relative to application fees paid to DOT for permit issuance activities was adopted by the Los Angeles City Council in This ordinance identifies specific fees for traffic study review, condition clearance, and permit issuance. The applicant shall comply with any applicable fees per this ordinance. If you have any questions, please contact Eileen Hunt of my staff at (213) Attachments K:\Letters\2014\CEN _palladium res_6201 Sunset_REVISED_ltr.docx c: Marie Rumsey, Council District 13 Jeannie Shen, Hollywood-Wilshire District Office, DOT Taimour Tanavoli, Citywide Planning Coordination Section, DOT Gregg Vandergriff, Central District, BOE Tom Gaul / Anjum Bawa, Fehr & Peers

11 ATTACHMENT 1 CEN _Palladium Residences In accordance with LADOT guidelines, unsignalized intersections are analyzed for signal warrants but not for level of service impacts. Therefore, the following study intersections are not shown in this table but rather are part of the signal warrant analysis presented later in this chapter: 17. El Centro Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard; 18. El Centro Avenue & Selma Avenue; 20. El Centro Avenue & De Longpre Avenue; 24. Gower Street & US-101 northbound off-ramp; 25. Gower Street & US-101 southbound off-ramp/yucca Street; 27. Gower Street & Selma Avenue; 38. US-101 southbound on-ramp & Sunset Boulevard. [a] [b] Intersection not significantly impacted under the cumulative scenario. To be conservative, no credit was taken for the proposed signal system equipment upgrades. Intersection will remain significantly impacted under impact criteria.

12 In accordance with LADOT guidelines, unsignalized intersections are analyzed for signal warrants but not for level of service impacts. Therefore, the following study intersections are not shown in this table but rather are part of the signal warrant analysis presented later in this chapter: 17. El Centro Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard; 18. El Centro Avenue & Selma Avenue; 20. El Centro Avenue & De Longpre Avenue; 24. Gower Street & US-101 northbound off-ramp; 25. Gower Street & US-101 southbound off-ramp/yucca Street; 27. Gower Street & Selma Avenue; 38. US-101 southbound on-ramp & Sunset Boulevard. [a] [b] Intersection not significantly impacted under the cumulative scenario. To be conservative, no credit was taken for the proposed signal system equipment upgrades. Intersection will remain significantly impacted under impact criteria.

13 In accordance with LADOT guidelines, unsignalized intersections are analyzed for signal warrants but not for level of service impacts. Therefore, the following study intersections are not shown in this table but rather are part of the signal warrant analysis presented later in this chapter: 17. El Centro Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard; 18. El Centro Avenue & Selma Avenue; 20. El Centro Avenue & De Longpre Avenue; 24. Gower Street & US-101 northbound off-ramp; 25. Gower Street & US-101 southbound off-ramp/yucca Street; 27. Gower Street & Selma Avenue; 38. US-101 southbound on-ramp & Sunset Boulevard. [a] [b] Intersection not significantly impacted under the cumulative scenario. No feasible mitigation possible for intersection due to lack of right-of-way and existing structures.

14 In accordance with LADOT guidelines, unsignalized intersections are analyzed for signal warrants but not for level of service impacts. Therefore, the following study intersections are not shown in this table but rather are part of the signal warrant analysis presented later in this chapter: 17. El Centro Avenue & Hollywood Boulevard; 18. El Centro Avenue & Selma Avenue; 20. El Centro Avenue & De Longpre Avenue; 24. Gower Street & US-101 northbound off-ramp; 25. Gower Street & US-101 southbound off-ramp/yucca Street; 27. Gower Street & Selma Avenue; 38. US-101 southbound on-ramp & Sunset Boulevard. [a] [b] Intersection not significantly impacted under the cumulative scenario. No feasible mitigation possible for intersection due to lack of right-of-way and existing structures.

15 ATTACHMENT 2 CEN _Palladium Residences N Not to Scale SITE PLAN FIGURE 2

16 ATTACHMENT 3 CEN _Palladium Residences

17