The URL can be used to link to this page

RPVCCA_CC_SR_2011_08_02_C_Border_IssuesCrrvOF MEMORANDUM RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS JOEL ROJAS,AICP,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENi.T~~t~ DIRECTOR \:~r DATE:AUGUST 2,2011 SUBJECT:BORDER ISSUES STATUS REPORT",n REVIEWED:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER \.DL--- Project Manager:Kit Fox,AICP,Associate Planner @J RECOMMENDATION Receive and file the current report on the status of Border Issues. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This month's report includes: • A report on the most-recent meeting of the San Pedro Facility Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)for the Navy's Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP)in Los Angeles (San Pedro); •An update on the proposed Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project in Rolling Hills Estates and Torrance; • A final report on the proposal for stadium lights at Palos Verdes Peninsula High School in Rolling Hills Estates; • A brief update on the Rancho LPG butane storage facility in Los Angeles (San Pedro);and, • A brief update on Marymount College's master plan for its campus on Palos Verdes Drive North in Los Angeles (San Pedro). C-1 MEMORANDUM:Border Issues Status Report August 2,2011 Page 2 BACKGROUND The following is the regular bi-monthly report to the City Council on various "Border Issues" potentially affecting the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.The complete text of the current status report is available for review on the City's website at: http://palosverdes.com/rpv/planninglborder issues/2011 /20110802 Borderlssues StatusRpt.cfm DISCUSSION Current Border Issues San Pedro Facility Restoration Advisory Board,US Navy/Los Angeles (San Pedro) The San Pedro Facility Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)held its most recent meeting on June 29,2011.The RAB now deals only with environmental remediation at the active Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP)San Pedro.Discussion at the most recent meeting centered upon the status ofthe remediation plans for so-called "Site 32,"which is located in the southeasterly portion of the facility near North Gaffey Street.Planning for the remediation of so-called "Site 31 "-which is located in the northwesterly portion of the facility,closer to Western Avenue and the City's Peninsula Verde neighborhood and Green Hills Memorial Park-is expected to begin in 2012.Site 31 has been identified as having a "low"probable risk to human health,whereas Site 32 has been identified as a "medium"risk site.Staff will continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues reports. Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club Project,Rolling Hills Estates and Torrance On June 14,2011,the Rolling Hills Estates City Council continued its deliberations on the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project.Issues discussed included supple- mental traffic impact analysis,neighborhood compatibility and school district attendance boundary issues (see attached Staff report and Daily Breeze and PV News articles).Public testimony on the project was received,and the matter was continued to July 26,2011.The Rolling Hills Estates City Council was expected to take action on the project entitlements, development agreement and Final EIR at that meeting.Staff will continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues reports. Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Proposal,Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District/Rolling Hills Estates An e-mail from nearby residents on June 17,2011,suggested that the Board of Education might be taking some action on this proposal at its meeting on July 14,2011.According to the published agenda for that meeting,the Board of Education was scheduled to receive a report on the status of the project (see attached Staff report). C-2 MEMORANDUM:Border Issues Status Report August 2,2011 Page 3 At the meeting on July 14,2011,Superintendent Walker Williams and the District's legal counsel presented an update on the status of the fund raising efforts for the proposed stadium lights.The District's legal counsel raised a number of issues of concern,including the steering committee's ability to raise all of the necessary funds for the project; environmental impacts that were not likely to be fully mitigated;the possible expiration of the EIR if project construction funding was delayed;the District's lack of experience with preparing EIRs for this type of community-funded project;and the likely exposure of the District to litigation.At the conclusion of the District counsel's comments,Superintendent Williams recommended that the Board withdraw its support for further fund raising for the project. Prior to acting on this recommendation,the Board of Education received public testimony from twenty-eight (28)speakers.Project proponents,including members of the Peninsula Stadium Lights Steering Committee,noted that they had proceeded in "good faith"to raise the required funds to begin the EIR process,and urged the Board to allow this process and additional fund raising to continue.Project opponents,including residents from several Peninsula cities,reiterated the concerns that they had been raising since last summer about noise and light;traffic and parking;safety and security;diminished property values; and the wisdom of expending District resources on a non-academic project in the current economic and fiscal climate.Mayor Long also briefly addressed the Board,clarifying earlier comments made by both proponents and opponents,to state that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes had taken no position for or against the proposal. At the conclusion of public testimony,the Board of Education deliberated briefly.The Board acknowledged the fundraising efforts of the steering committee over the past year, and noted that project proponents and opponents had each raised valid arguments.Board members expressed regret that a project that had been intended to unite the community had instead appeared to divide it.Basically,the Board found that the benefits ofthe project would not outweigh its costs,and they then voted unanimously to accept Superintendent Walker's recommendation to withdraw Board support for it.Staff will remove this project from future Border Issues reports. Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility,Los Angeles (San Pedro) At the June 7,2011,City Council meeting,the City Council discussed the previous request to send letters to U.S.Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer regarding the Rancho LPG facility.Staff subsequently prepared these letters for the Mayor's signature (see attachments),which were sent to Senator Feinstein and Senator Boxer on June 21,2011. Staff will continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues reports. Marymount College San Pedro Campus Master Plan,Los Angeles (San Pedro) On June 19,2011,and June 23,2011,the Daily Breeze and PV News,respectively, reported on Marymount College's plans for its property on Palos Verdes Drive North in San C-3 MEMORANDUM:Border Issues Status Report August 2,2011 Page 4 Pedro (see attachments).Staff will continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues reports. New Border Issues There are no new Border Issues on which to report at this time. Attachments: •San Pedro Facility RAB meeting cover letter and agenda (meeting date 6/29/11) •RH E CC agenda and Staff report for the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project (dated 6/14/11) •Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding the Chandler Ranch/Rolling HlIIs Country Club project (published 6/16/11) •E-mail regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal (received 6/17/11) •Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal (published 7/13/11,7/14/11 &7/16/11) •PVPUSD Board of Education Staff report regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal (dated 7/14/11) •Letters to Senators Feinstein and Boxer regarding the Rancho LPG butane storage facility (dated 6/21/11) •Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding Marymount College's San Pedro Campus (published 6/19/11 &6/23/11) M:\Border Issues\Staff Reports\2011 0802_Borderlssues_StaffRpt.doc C-4 San Pedro Facility RAB meeting cover letter and agenda C-5 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL FACIUT1E8 ENGINEERING COUa.tAM>SOUTHWEST 1220 PACIFIC HIGHWAY SAN DIEGO.CA 92132-5190 5090 RECE~E~ Ser JE30.GG/0352 June 15,2011 .;~N 2.2 2011 COMMUNnY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FACILITY RESTORATION ADVISORY BOARD2010SANPEDRO (RAB)MEETING SUBJECT: Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) Community Members Ladies and Gentlemen: The Defense Fuel Support Point (DFSP)San Pedro will be holding a RAB meeting on June 29,2011 from 4:00 to 6:00 PM,at the DFSP San Pedro Facility,Building 100.The enclosed agenda lists the proposed topics to be discussed and the location/address of the RAB meeting. Please note that the San Pedro Facility RAB meets to review ongoing environmental work on the non-BRAC San Pedro sites.The RAB concerning the BRAC portion of the San Pedro Facility has been adjourned. If you have any questions,you may contact me at (619)532-2296 or at grady.gordon@navy.mil GRADY GO.lIDC~ Environmental Project Manager By direction of the Commanding Officer Enclosure:1.Pedro Facility RAB Meeting Agenda Distribution List: Restoration Advisory Board (RAB)Members Community members C-6 4:00pm SAN PEDRO FACILITY RESTORATION ADVISORY BOARD (RAB)MEETING Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro Facility 3171 North Gaffey Street,Building 100 San Pedro,California Wednesday June 29,2011 4:00pm to 6:00pm AGENDA Welcome and Introductions Navy Co-Chair:Grady Gordon Community Co -Chair:Mr.Gilbert Alberio 4:10pm 4:20pm 5:00pm 5:15pm 5:30pm 6:00pm-TBD Installation Restoration (IR)Program Status Mr.Grady Gordon,Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southwest IR Site 32 Remedial Investigation Environmental Project Update Mrs.Kathy Monks,Tetra Tech Chadeux KCH Presentation DLA Environmental Project Update Open Forum for RAB Members and Members of the Audience Meeting Adjourned C-7 RHE CC agenda and Staff report for the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project C-8 CITY OF ROLLING mus ESTATES 4045 PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH •ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CA 90274 TELEPHONE 310.377-1577 •FAX 310.377-4468 www.RollingHillsEstatesCA.gov NEXT RESOLUTION NO.2253 NEXT ORDINANCE NO.678 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REGULAR MEETING JUNE 14,2011 *6:00 P.M. *CLOSED SESSION WILL COMMENCE AT 6:00 P.M. REGULAR AGENDA WILL COMMENCE AT 7:30 P.M. NOTE:REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING TO EACH AGENDA ITEM ARE ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK AND ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION. 1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2.SALUTE TO THE FLAG 3.ROLLCALL 4.CEREMONIAL ITEMS A.WASTE MANAGEMENT DRAWING FOR ONE YEAR'S FREE RESIDENTIAL REFUSE SERVICE 5.ROUTINE MATTERS A.CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MAY 10,2011 B.ADJOURNED BUDGET STUDY SESSION MINUTES OF JUNE 7,2011 Americans with Disabilities Act:In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990,if you require a disability-related modification or accommodation to attend or participate in this meeting,including auxiliary aids or seroices,please call the City Clerk's Office at (310)377-1577 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 14,2011 C-9 C.DEMANDS AND WARRANTS -MAY AND JUNE Recommendation:That the City Council approve Warrants 49230 through 49271 in the amount of $446,835.92;Supplemental Warrants 050111 through 050211;47761 (Void);47797 (Void);49081 through 49085;49086 through 49130;49131 through 49153;49154 through 49203;49204 through 49216;49205 (Void)in the amount of $591,844.15 for a grand total amount of $1,038,680.07 with proper audit. 6.CONSENT CALENDAR:The following routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council.There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote.(Items removed will be considered under New Business.) A.READING OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions presented for consideration to the City Council will be waived and all such ordinances and resolutions will be read by title only. 7.AUDIENCE ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA/WRITTEN AND ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 8.PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS 8:00 P.M. A.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.12-11;APPLICANT:MORGAN'S JEWELERS; LOCATION:50-C PENINSULA CENTER Memorandum from Kelley Thom,Associate Planner,and David Wahba, Planning Director,dated June 14,2011. Recommendation:That the City Council:1)Open the public hearing;2) Take public testimony;3)Discuss the issues;4)Close the public hearing; and 5)Affirm Planning Commission Resolution No.PA-12-11 supporting the project's approval. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 14,2011 2 C-10 B.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.29-07;APPLICANT:MICHAEL COPE; LOCATION:26311 AND 27000 PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST (CHANDLER RANCH/ROLLING HILLS COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT) Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Memorandum from Niki Cutler,AICP,Principal Planner,and David Wahba,Planning Director,dated June 14,2011. Recommendation:That the City Council:1)Continue to take public testimony;2)Discuss the issues;and 3)Continue the public hearing and direct staff to prepare the appropriate Resolutions and Ordinances approving the project,certifying the project's Final Environmental Impact Report,and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the next available City Council meeting. 9.NEW BUSINESS A.PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 16,2011 B.PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 6,2011 C.PARK AND ACTIVITIES COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 17,2011 D.INITIAL PREPARATIONS FOR NOVEMBER GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Memorandum from Douglas R.Prichard,City Manager,dated June 14, 2011. Recommendation:That the City Council review and approve Resolution Nos.2246,2247,and 2248 pertaining to initial preparations for the upcoming November 8,2011 General Municipal Election. 1.RESOLUTION NO.2246 FOR ADOPTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN THE CITY ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 8,2011 FOR THE ELECTION OF CERTAIN OFFICERS OF THE CITY AS REQUIRED BY THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RELATING TO GENERAL LAW CITIES. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 14,2011 3 C-11 2.RESOLUTION NO.2247 FOR ADOPTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CI1Y COUNCIL OF THE CI1Y OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUN1Y OF LOS ANGELES TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF SAID CI1Y TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 8,2011 WITH THE 2011 BIENNIAL SCHOOL AND SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTIONS TO BE HELD ON SAID DATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 10400 ET.SEQ.OF THE ELECTIONS CODE. 3.RESOLUTION NO.2248 FOR ADOPTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CI1Y COUNCIL OF THE CI1Y OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES ADOPTING REGULATIONS FOR CANDIDATES FOR ELECTNE OFFICE,PERTAINING TO MATERIALS SUBMI'ITED TO THE ELECTORATE AND THE COSTS THEREOF FOR THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD IN SAID CI1Y ON TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 8,2011. 10.OLD BUSINESS 11.CITY ATTORNEY ITEMS 12.CITY COUNCIL/REGIONAL COMMITTEE REPORTS:This item provides the opportunity for Members of the City Council to provide information and reports to other Members of the City Council and/or the public on any issues or activities of currently active Council Committees,ad hoc committees,regional or state-wide governmental associations,special districts and/or joint powers authorities and their various committees on which Members of the City Council might serve or have an interest,which are not otherwise agendized. 13.MAYOR AND COUNCIL ITEMS:This item provides the opportunity for Members of the City Council to request information on currently pending projects and/or issues of public concern,direct that an item be agendized for future consideration and/or make announcements of interest to the public. A.MAYOR ZUCKERMAN 1.AUTHORIZATION TO AITEND ANNUAL LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE -SEPTEMBER 21-23,2011 CI1Y COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 14,2011 4 C-12 B.MAYOR PRO TEM SEAMANS 1.LEITER FROM ANGEL CARRILLO,PRESIDENT,LOS ANGELES DIVISION LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES,REGARDING NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)PERMITS AND TOTAL DAILY MAXIMUM LOAD (TMDL) PROGRAM (a)RESOLUTION NO.2252 FOR ADOPTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES SUPPORTING REASONABLE PRACTICABLE AND ECONOMICALLY ACHIEVABLE STORMWATER NPDES PERMIT AND TMDL REQUIREMENTS,THROUGH THE USE OF PROGRESSIVE AND ADAPTIVE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. 14.CLOSED SESSION A.DISCUSSION WITH RESPECT TO PERSONNEL MAITERS:EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION NEGOTIATIONS CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6) 15.ADJOURNMENT IN MEMORY OF JOSEPH VALENTI,LONG-TIME MAESTRO OF THE PENINSULA SYMPHONY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA JUNE 14,2011 5 C-13 AGENDA JUN 14 201I~ Staff RepoltEMNO:rtB City of Rolling Hills Estates DATE:JUNE 14,2011 TO:MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM:NIKI CUTLER,AICP,PRINCIPAL PLANNER DAVID WAHBA,PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT:PLANNING APPLICATION NO.29-07 APPLICANT:MICHAEL COPE; LOCATION:26311 AND 27000 PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST OVERVIEW The sUbject request is for approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map,General Plan Amendments,Zone Changes,Zone Text Amendment,Grading Plan,Development Agreement, Conditional Use Permits,Neighborhood Compatibility Determination,an Annexation/Deannexation,and an Environmental Impact Report under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)for the development of a 114 home single family subdivision, a reconfigured/relocated 18-hole golf course,and a new clubhouse complex on the site of the existing Chandler Sand and Gravel and Rolling Hills Country Club facilities. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION This item was last heard at the City Council meeting of May 10,2011.Minutes of that meeting are included herein as Attachment 1.The project was presented by the developer and discussion ensued.The public hearing was left open and continued to tonight's meeting.As a reminder,all previous staff reports and the Final Environmental Impact Report including all related environmental materials have been provided to you previously and remain available on the City website. A question was raised during the last meeting regarding comments sent by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes regarding contributory impacts at Palos Verdes Drive North/Palos Verdes Drive East as addressed in the Response to Comments of the project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).It was noted that there was a 2.5%change at the intersection in the 2025 PM peak hour on Page 9.0-33 of the DEIR.The City Traffic Engineer investigated this value and determined that it represents the percent of new trips added to the future baseline volume,not a percent change in Level of Service (LOS).By contrast,the calculated change in 2025 LOS for this intersection is 0.0%in the AM hour and 0.3%in the PM hour.Therefore,since the City's criteria is 1.0%change in LOS,there will be no significant impact at the intersection of Palos C-14 Verdes Drive North/Palos Verdes Drive East,resulting in no requirement for any fair-share mitigation.'The intersection will operate at LOS-F with or without the project in 2025. As commented upon in the April 28,2011 letter by Good Local Planning,the City Traffic Engineer also conducted additional traffic analysis related to the Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association v.City of Sunnyvale City Council decision of December 2010 to ensure that the proper baseline was evaluated.As indicated in the Supplemental Traffic Analysis for the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club Traffic Impact Report (see Attachment 2),no additional mitigation measures beyond those described in the project DEIR are required pursuant to this additional analysis. It was also discussed that the Public Services section of the DEIR inaccurately referenced that all children residing in the project will attend the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District. School attendance will actually be split between the Torrance and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School Districts.Accordingly,an Errata Sheet (see Attachment 3)was prepared addressing this correction. Mr.Michael Cope has submitted a letter addressing points discussed at the last meeting.The letter indicates that Rolling Hills Country Club agrees to study alternate architectural styles for the clubhouse to be reviewed concurrent with Neighborhood Compatibility review of the homes, and that a pedestrian/bike path will be constructed on the west side of Palos Verdes Drive East and along the east side as approved by the City.Further,an exhibit accompanying the letter shows the proposed location of three-rail fencing within and along the perimeter of the project site.The letter is included herein as Attachment 4. Finally,one comment letter was received since the last City Council meeting and is included herein as Attachment 5. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council: 1.Continue to Take Public Testimony; 2.Discuss the issues; 3.Continue the public hearing and direct staff to prepare the appropriate Resolutions and Ordinances approving the project,certifying the project Final Environmental Impact Report,and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the next available City Council meeting. Exhibits Attached 1.Minutes Excerpt -Planning Commission Meeting (May 10,2011) 2.Supplemental Traffic Analysis 3.Errata to the Final Environmental Impact Report -Public Services Section 4.Letter From Michael Cope (June 7,2011) 5.Comment Letters C-15 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 1 C-16 MINUTES EXCERPT PA·29-Q7 (CHANDLER RANCH SUBDIVISION/ROLLING HILLS COUNTRY CLUB) MAY 10,2011 PLANNING APPLICATION NO.29-07;APPLICANT:MICHAEL COPE;LOCATION:26311 AND 27000 PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST (CHANDLER RANCH/ROLLING HILLS COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT) Recommendation:That the City Council:1)Open the public hearing;2)Take public testimony;3)Discuss the issues;and 4)Continue the public hearing to the next available City Council and direct staff to prepare the appropriate Resolutions and Ordinances approving the project,certifying the project Final Environmental Impact Report,and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the next available City Council meeting. MAYOR PRO TEM SEAMANS noted that she lives within the 500 foot radius of Chandler Ranch and is a social member of the Rolling Hills Country Club,and therefore,recused Rerself from discussion of this project. Principal Planner Cutler provided .a staff report (as per agenda material). COUNCILWOMAN MITCHELL moved,seconded by COUNCILMAN ADDLEMAN TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE BEING NO OBJECTION,MAYOR ZUCKERMAN SO ORDERED. Dean Shear,EIR Consultant,Willdan,provided an extensive overview of the Rolling Hills Country Club Environmental Impact Report. Bill Cullen,President,Rolling Hills Country Club,presented an extensive overview of their project.He noted the many benefits and fundraisers they have provided for the community. Mike Cope,representing Chandler Ranch Properties,provided an extensive history and overview of the project. Fred Graylee,Applicant's Engineer,provided an extensive presentation regarding the drainage, water quality and infiltration system that meets the Regional Water Quality Control Board's requirement for the Machado Lake TMDL. Mr.Cope reviewed the architectural history behind this project and noted that he will come back with a more detailed design.He stated that the major responses he received in regards to the EIR were from equestrians who were concerned about the possible removal of the horse overlay zone and elimination of two miles of bridle trails.He then noted that the Rolling Hills Country Club has agreed to accept the EIR "mitigation trail"and construct and maintain approximately one mile of a new trail.He emphasized that no horse trails are being eliminated. Mr.Cope pointed out that they will contribute $1 million to the City with no restrictions other than to utilize this amount for equestrian purposes.He noted that in his discussions with the C-17 equestrian c;:ommunity,requests were made to have those funds released within five days of approval of the project.He outlined the early release scenario,noting that they agreed to pay the balance of the $1 million contribution prior to securing their first pentlit.He noted that he has met with many equestrian groups.Additionally,he went on to describe their plan for sidewalks (if the City so desires),bike paths,pedestrian trails,etc. Mr.Cullen summarized the project and what benefits would be provided for the community.He commented that they would like to create a gateway to Rolling Hills Estates. COUNCILMAN ZERUNYAN inquired as to how many of the 114 homes will be built in what is now Rolling Hills Estates.Mr.Cope noted that approximately half the developable area is within Rolling Hills Estates,with the other half being in Torrance.A boundary line adjustment is proposed as part of the project so that all homes will be in Rolling Hills Estates after completion of the project. COUNCILMAN ZERUNYAN then asked Mr.Cope if there will be a dividing line between those two sections for the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District and the Torrance Unified School District.Mr.Cope noted that this will be the case and that he had spoken with the PVPUSD Superintendent who said in 2007 that he could accept all students in the new development into their district. MAYOR ZUCKERMAN noted his concern regarding traffic mitigaticm in the future. Erik Zandvliet,Traffic Engineer,stated that while the report presented meets industry standards,additional infbrmation will be provided. MAYOR ZUCKERMAN asked several questions regarding how traffic will impact various intersections.Mr.Zandvliet noted he will do further research. Don Davis,Assistant City Attorney,referred to a case involving the City of Sunnyvale indicating that the City's study on this project will conform to existing statutory and case law. MAYOR ZUCKERMAN inquired if the Applicant would be open to changing the clubhouse's architectural features to resemble more of a Rolling Hills Estates look,specifically the three- rail white fence. Mr.Cope concurred that the residential units and clubhouse need to blend in,and he will discuss this further with the Country Club. Both MAYOR ZUCKERMAN and COUNCILMAN ZERUNYAN expressed their concern with how the Country Club is considered separately from neighborhood compatibility and believed that they should be taken up together.Mr.Cope noted that they will be prepared to respond to this at the next meeting. COUNCILWOMAN MITCHELL moved,seconded by COUNCILMAN ADDLEMAN TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 14, 2011. THERE BEING NO OBJECTION,MAYOR ZUCKERMAN SO ORDERED. C-18 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 2 C-19 WlllDAN Engineering Memorandum TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Niki Cutler,Principal Planner City of Rolling Hills Estates Ruth Smith,TE,PTP,Traffic Engineering Consultant June 7,2011 Supplemental Traffic Analysis to the April 2009 Chandler RanchlRolling Hills Country Club Project Traffic Impact Report Willdan Engineering has prepared a supplemental traffic impact analysis in response to comments submitted by ~ood Local Planning,Inc.on April 28,2011.A supplemental analysis of the Existing Plus Project Conditions scenario was conducted using the traffic impact report's existing conditions as the baseline physical conditions to address the December 2010 court rUling,to which Good Local Planning, Inco's comments refer.The findings of the analysis of Existing Plus Project Conditions are summarized below.Traffic study assumptions,explanations of methodologies,and the previous analyses and findings can be referenced in Willdan Engineering's April 2009 traffic impact report. Traffic Volumes and Intersection Geometrv For the Existing Plus Project scenario,the net project trips were added to the existing peak hour and daily traffic volumes.No ambient growth factors or related traffic volumes were added.The Existing Plus Project AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are illustrated on Figure 1 and the Existing Plus Project daily traffic volumes are shown on Figure 2.The analysis is based on the existing intersection and roadway geometries in place at the time the original analysis was prepared,as indicated on Figure 3. Level of Service Analyses Table A is a summary of the intersection level of service analyses for Existing Conditions and for Existing Plus Project Conditions,and indicates if the project would have a significant traffic impact on the study intersections,requiring mitigation.Table A also notes the significant traffic impact criteria used in the analyses.As shown on Table A,the proposed project would have a significant traffic impact,under Existing Plus Project Conditions,on five stUdy intersections as listed below.The project would not have a significant traffic impact on any of the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) intersections.The supporting intersection analysis worksheets can be referenced in Attachment 1. •Pacific Coast Highway/Narbonne Avenue •Palos Verdes Drive East/Club View Lane •Palos Verdes Drive North/Crenshaw Boulevard •Palos Verdes Drive North/Rolling Hills Road •Palos Verdes Drive North/Dapplegray School Road C-20 Memo to Niki Cutler Chandler Ranch Supplemental Traffic Analysis June 7,2011 Traffic Signal Warrsmt Analysis A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted for the unsignalized study intersections under Existing Plus Project Conditions.As noted in the April 2009 traffic impact report,the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive North/Silver Spur Road currently meets signal warrants for Existing conditions.This improvement was not included in the analysis,however,since it is City policy not to signalize the intersection.The intersections of Palos Verdes Drive Eastl"A"Street (project entrance)and Palos Verdes Drive East/Club View Lane do not meet the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD)traffic signal warrants for Existing Plus Project Conditions.The estimated side street traffic volumes are less than the minimum required.The signal warrant analysis is based on the Existing Plus Project daily traffic volumes shown on Figure 2.The traffic signal warrant worksheets can be referenced in Attachment 2. Mitigation Measures The analysis of Existing Plus Project Conditions in Table A showed that the addition of project traffic to existing traffic would create a traffic impact requiring mitigation at five of the 12 study intersections.The recommended improvements illustrated on Figure 4 will mitigate the project's impact on the five intersections,as shown in Table A.It should be noted that the mitigation measures proposed for these intersections are the same as those proposed in the April 2009 traffic impact report for 2013 Baseline Plus Project Conditions.The supporting intersection analysis worksheets can be referenced in Attachment 1. Summary A supplemental traffic analysis to the April 2009 traffic impact report was prepared for the Existing Plus Project Conditions scenario using the baseline physical conditions.The Level of Service intersection analysis showed that five of the 12 study intersections would be subject to significant traffic impacts with the addition of project traffic.The traffic signal warrant analysis indicated that traffic signals should not be recommended for the unsignalized study intersections.The previously recommended mitigation measures would reduce the project's.impact on the study intersections to less than significant for Existing Plus Project Conditions.Therefore,no additional mitigation measures.beyond those identified in the project's Draft EIR,are necessary. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continuing service to the City of Rolling Hills Estates.Please contact me at (714)978-8225 if you have any questions . • "jVC,i'WI LLDAN I 'io;,.~Engineering C-21 \.....}60/1 06 .--1750/17 ,'76/100 o~...<0....a:><0,~,3rc 190/220 --.II'"t(1520/169ll--+-) 241/477,~~<; "-...a:>'~~~ PACIFIC COAST HWY 3. Jt( 0><0",N2,- "'"....<ON:l]g- "'-...."'....<0,~, ....0<0 51l LEGEND.-- =PROJECT LOCATION =INTERSECTION NUMBER =AMIPM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES No Soft.le •2 42/93 -$- ~~<»=--10- Qllll --1::1 aim0::1~ce. _::I ~m ~5· 0<0 o ~a ~:i"<0 0§Br '".::1mQ: !!L~m-~ "'::Ieng. ~Qo "2.~~=~e5 ~~ -10 iiJ g 16757/600'/06-160 FIGURE 1ijg:....vy IL.L 0 AN Existing Plus Project Conditions ~~..Englneenng AM/PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes1irCTL----' C - 2 2 No S••le LEGEND -$- ~~Im=--Ie.(>lID--I:;)mm0:;) ~cg. -:;)OlD~lD ~~. m:;) 0<0 •lZZZi =STUDY INTERSECTION =PROJECT SITE 46,671 '<t I') '<t f:i 3. FIGURE 2 Existing Plus Project Conditions Daily Traffic Volumes Ol '<t'<t N !l!I~PACIFIC COAST H' '5'8':'i'51 1 ,64,208 Ij! <Nr.....'"Ol I!:! 34,582 ..gJ ~ 16757/6001/06-160 WILLDAN ~Engineering 18,279 =DAILY VOLUMES (1,000S) o ~a ~~ :I:0,.,i (/l :;) me. s-£f it"",Ill,:;)eng..sllO '2,"lD 03=~<S liiI;i~ IDO:flO(')c:~~ ~01~.§:~I C - 2 3 LOR -+--+--+- f iii:Ilitr -~, o ::0)Hl 3 ITS ~D '\ ~(~ -+-~ 16757/6001/06-160 LEGEND AWS =All.-WAY STOP TS =ffiAFFIC SIGNAL FR =FREE RIGHT lURN LANE DR =OEFACTO RIGHT lURN LANE 2 =INTERSECll0N NUMBER "=STOP SIGN No Scale -$- :!1~ 0>=(1l.g. n~)~~-L 0 -L::0-+-)Hl -+--+--+- f f b)S't V ltr --f litt! o(Q ___ --+---+---+---+-,,'"0 °~ Eo ;;0g ~. :cO_.=r =01 "':::I m9< 5e.~!!l.;;olJ:0l '5cn=r.ell<> ¥~~5':::I(Q-:cll!.= -liii iilo310~j ~WILLOAN FIGURE 3i~~Engineering Existing Intersection Geometry &Traffic Contr~1 C - 2 4 Wlldan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 .S03 SAIJO SSpJS"sOlod .c "<:i '"5w OJ :Ii F ::>< ...J Z Cl <Fzz'i'-'0 iii F filu~Vl G:Vl 0 "-'"a. <I!!0 g:~'"C a. Z II II IILU C>f!!N LaLU -I Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-25 ~~m=--10-<.nlll Ii~~.~@:=!cg. _;:l OeD~eD.J,..:::!. m;:l 0<0 Q9-<Ill o;:l...0-;OlD 0-' I~llg. ;~.;&~! 0=IIIIH1iJi';a;~ 01:~;a.",-< ~g ij;"tT TABLE A INTERSECTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY -EXISTING CONDITIONS I EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS EXISTING EXISTING +PROJECT CHANGE IN WITH IMPROVEMENTS2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICUILOS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICUI ICUI ICUI ICUI TRAFFIC ICUI ICUI INTERSEC1!ION Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM IMPACT?1 Delav LOS Delay LOS 1 Pacffic'CpastHiahwav/Crenshaw BI.(CMP)1.070 F 1.470 F 1.073 F 1.489 F 0.003 0.019 No 2paciflcCoast HiahwavlN~rboMeAve.0.972 E 0.929 E 0.984 E 0.964 E 0.012 0.035 Yes 0.896 D 0.903 E 3 PacifieCoastHighwaylWestem Ave.(CMP)1.054 F 0.977 E 1.059 F 0.987 E 0.005 0.010 No 4 Pa~VeTdes,Dr.EfAWStrilflHDroiect entrance}13.4seo B 16.7 sec C 18.2 sec C 24.3 sec C BtoC CtoC No 5 Palas¥erdes.Or"ElCIUbMew Ln.18.S sec B 21.4 sec C 19.5 see C 25.0seo 0 BtoC CloD Yes - --- 6 Palos Verdes Dr.NI$ilver Sour Rd.20.9 sec C 26.0 sec 0 20.9 sec C 27.2 sec D CtoC DtbD No 7.palosYi:lrdes Dr.NtHawthomeBI.1.094 F 0.911 E 1.094 F 0.919 E 0.000 0.008 No 8 Ral(jsVerdesDr.N/CrenJhaw Bl.0.989 E 1.111 F 0.993 E 1.132 F 0.004 0.021 Yes 0.949 E 0.983 E 9 Palos'\lerdesOr.NIRolliM Hills Rd.1.000 F 1.046 F 1.004 F 1.077 F 0.004 0.031 Yes 0.837 D 0.938 E 10 palosYi:lrdes Dr.NlOapplegray SChOOl Rd.1.043 F 1.043 F 1.047 F 1.076 F 0.004 0.033 Yes 1.011 F 1.019 F 11 PalosVerdesDr.ElPaloS Verdes Dr.N 0.872 0 0.762 C 0.871 0 0.767 C -0.001 0.005 No 12 Palos¥erdesDr.NlWestem Ave.(OMP)0.949 E 0.890 0 0.949 E 0.892 D 0.000 0.002 No ICU =Intesection Capacity Utilization;LOS =Level of Services;CMP =Congestion Management Plan,and denotes an intersection included in Los Angeles County's CMP. 1 The project has a traffic iinpact on an signalized intersection,which must be mitigated,under the following conditions: -There is a change in iLevel of Service (LOS)from C to 0 or from 0 to E -Within LOS Cor 0,an increase in ICU value greater than 0.02 •Within LOS E or F,an increase in ICU value greater than 0.01 The project has a traffic impact on an unsignalized intersection,which must be mitigated,under the following conditions: -The addition of project traffic increases the LOS to an unacceptable level (worse than LOS C) Fora CMP intersection,the project has a traffic impact on a signalized intersection,which must be mitigated,under the following conditions: -There is a change in the VIC ~0.02,resulting in LOS F (VIC>1.00) -If.already operating at LOS F,there is a change in the VlC~0.02 For the City of Lomita,allY development that causes the degradation of traffic operations shall mitigate the impacts caused by the development to the greatest extent possible. Therefore,any increase in the ICU for the intersection of Pacific Coast HighwaylNarbonne has been considered to be a direct impact requiring mitigation. 2 The ICU values for the proposed improvements for the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive EastfClub View Lane are not shown since the ICU methodology has no provisions for the types of improvements being proposed,i.e.the IOU values are the same. C - 2 6 ATTACHMENT 1 Existing Plus Project Conditions Intersection Analysis Worksheets Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-27 Ex+proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:36 Page 2-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jnI6757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1 (Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.073 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R:0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lanes:1 0 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:67 1042 515 172 595 150 163 1008 56 598 1818 449 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:67 1042 515 172 595 150 163 1008 56 598 1818 449 Added Vol:0 0 0 5 0 0 0 4 0 0 10 13 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 0 -2 -2 Initial rut:67 1042 515 177 595 150 163 1010 56 598 1826 460 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:67 1042 515 177 595 150 163 1010 56 598 1826 460 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:67 1042 515 177 595 150 163 1010 56 598 1826 460 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:67 1042 515 177 595 150 163 1010 56 598 1826 460 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 2.40 0.60 2.00 1.89 0.11 2.00 2.40 0.60 Final Sat.:1600 4800 1600 1600 3834 966 2880 3032 168 2880 3834 966 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.04 0.22 0.32 0.11 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.33 0.33 0.21 0.48 0.48 Crit Moves:**** ************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -1 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-28 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:16 Page 2-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #1 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X}:1.489 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R:0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lanes:1 0 3 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:83 757 489 550 1214 163 267 1611 33 595 1844 235 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:83 757 489 550 1214 163 267 1611 33 595 1844 235 Added Vol:0 0 0 23 0 0 0 19 0 0 12 14 Proj Adj Vo:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 0 -5 -4 Initial Fut:83 757 489 573 1214 163 267 1628 33 595 1851 245 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:83 757 489 573 1214 163 267 1628 33 595 1851 245 .Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:83 757 489 573 1214 163 267 1628 33 595 1851 245 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 Fina1Volume:83 757 489 573 1214 163 267 1628 33 595 1851 245 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 2.64 0.36 2.00 1.96 0.04 2.00 2.65 0.35 Final Sat.:1600 4800 1600 1600 4232 568 2880 3136 64 2880 4239 561 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.05 0.16 0.31 0.36 0.29 0.29 0.09 0.52 0.52 0.21 0.44 0.44 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 - 2 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-29 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:36 Page 3-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Narbonne Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.984 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Narbonne Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound west Bound Movement:L T R L T R L l'R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Include Min.Green:0 a 0 a a 0 0 0 a 0 0 a 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 a 1 1 a 1 0 1 1 0 1 a 2 1 a 1 a 2 1 a ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:338 305 107 156 160 147 87 1587 58 88 2353 96 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:338 305 107 156 160 147 87 1587 58 88 2353 96 Added Vol:23 a 26 a a a a a 10 10 a a Subt Quarry:-4 a -8 a a a a a -1 -3 0 a Initial Fut:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 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:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 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:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.42 0.58 1.00 1.04 0.96 1.00 2.88 0.12 1.00 2.88 0.12 Final Sat.:1600 2270 930 1600 1668 1532 1600 4606 194 1600 4612 188 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.22 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.51 0.51 Crit Moves:******** ******** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 - 3 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-30 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:16 Page 3-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Narbonne Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.964 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Narbonne Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:202 206 67 157 271 155 140 2152 95 149 2219 95 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:202 206 67 157 271 155 140 2152 95 149 2219 95 Added Vol:26 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 43 42 0 0 Proj Vol Ad:-9 0 -17 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -4 0 0 Initial Fut:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 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:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 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:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.47 0.53 1.00 1.27 0.73 1.00 2.82 0.18 1.00 2.88 0.12 Final Sat.:1600 2346 854 1600 2036 1164 1600 4515 285 1600 4603 197 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.14 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.48 0.48 0.12 0.48 0.48 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1-4 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-31 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:37 Page 4-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club ElR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report lCU l(Loss as Cycle Length %}Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Western Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.059 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Western Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R:0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lanes:2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 I---------~-----I Volume Module: Base Vol:354 1068 95 174 614 208 184 1505 241 176 1745 160 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:354 1068 95 174 614 208 184 1505 241 176 1745 160 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 3 7 19 0 0 8 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -4 0 0 -3 0 Initial Fut:354 1068 95 174 614 211 190 1520 241 176 1750 160 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:354 1068 95 174 614 211 190 1520 241 176 1750 160 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:354 1068 95 174 614 211 190 1520 241 176 1750 160 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:354 1068 95 174 614 211 190 1520 241 176 1750 160 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.59 0.41 1.00 2.75 0.25 Final Sat.:2880 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 4143 657 1600 4398 402 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.12 0.33 0.06 0.11 0.19 0.13 0.12 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.40 0.40 Cri t Moves:**** ************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WlLLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1-5 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-32 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:17 Page 4-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #3 Western Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.987 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Western Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R:0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lanes:2 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------I 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:284 801 104 156 840 159 213 1682 492 100 1732 106 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:284 801 104 156 840 159 213 1682 492 100 1732 106 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 12 7 18 0 0 30 0 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -15 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:284 801 104 156 840 171 220 1698 477 100 1758 106 User Adj:l.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:284 801 104 156 840 171 220 1698 477 100 1758 106 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:284 801 104 156 840 171 220 1698 477 100 1758 106 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:284 801 104 156 840 171 220 1698 477 100 1758 106 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.34 0.66 1.00 2.83 0.17 Final Sat.:2880 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3747 1053 1600 4527 273 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.10 0.25 0.07 0.10 0.26 0.11 0.14 0.45 0.45 0.06 0.39 0.39 Crit Moves:******** ******** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Wlildan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -6 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-33 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:37 Page 5-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/ A St (EW) ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh):1.7 worst Case Level Of Service:C[18.2] ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Palso Verdes Dr E "A"St. Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Include Include Include Include Lanes:0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1!0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 )---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:4 622 0 0 256 4 12 0 12 0 0 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:4 622 0 0 256 4 12 0 12 0 0 0 Added Vol:12 0 0 0 0 20 49 0 17 0 0 0 subt Quarry:25 -5 0 0 -12 8 -7 0 -5 0 0 0 Initial Fut:41 617 0 0 244 32 54 0 24 0 0 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:41 617 0 0 244 32 54 0 24 0 0 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume:41 617 0 0 244 32 54 0 24 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol:276 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 959 959 260 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.:1299 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 288 259 784 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.:1299 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 280 251 784 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap:0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.19 0.00 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ:0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move:A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement:LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT Shared Cap.:xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 349 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 18.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:A * * * * * *C * * * * ApproachDe1:xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.2 xxxxxx ApproachLOS:**C * ******************************************************************************** Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH VVilldan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -7 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-34 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:17 Page 5-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #4 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/ A St (EW) ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh):3.6 Worst Case Level Of Service:C[24.3] ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Palso Verdes Dr E "A"St. Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Uncontroll~d Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Include Include Include Include Lanes:0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1!0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:0 326 0 0 532 6 26 0 3 0 0 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:0 326 0 0 532 6 26 0 3 0 0 0 Added Vol:74 0 0 0 0 85 51 0 48 0 0 0 Proj Adj vo:18 -17 0 0 -9 3 -9 0 18 0 0 0 Initial Fut:92 309 0 0 523 94 68 0 69 0 0 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:92 309 0 0 523 94 68 0 69 0 0 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume:92 309 0 0 523 94 68 0 69 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnf1ict Vol:617 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1063 1063 570 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.:973 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 249 225 525 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.:973 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 230 203 525 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap:0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 0.00 0.13 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ:0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move:A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement:LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT Shared Cap.:xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 321 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 2.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:9.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 24.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:A * * * * * *C * * * * ApproachDel:xxxxxx xxxxxx 24.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS:**C * ******************************************************************************** Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1-8 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-35 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:38 Page 6-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/Club View Ln (EW) ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh):0.5 Worst Case Level Of Service:C[15.2] ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Palos Verdes Dr E Club View Ln Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movemen t : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Include Include Include Include Lanes:1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:8 656 0 0 300 6 16 0 13 0 0 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:8 656 0 0 300 6 16 0 13 0 0 0 Added Vol:0 12 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subt Quarry:0 20 0 0 -7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut:8 688 0 0 310 6 16 0 13 0 0 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:8 688 0 0 310 6 16 0 13 0 0 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume:8 688 0 0 310 6 16 0 13 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol:316 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1017 xxxx 313 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.:1256 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 266 xxxx 732 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.:1256 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 264 xxxx 732 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap:0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ:0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:7.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 19.5 xxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move:A * * * * *C *B * * * Movement:LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT Shared Cap.:xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:* * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel:xxxxxx xxxxxx 15.2 xxxxxx ApproachLOS:**C * ******************************************************************************** Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -9 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-36 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:18 Page 6-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #5 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/Club View Ln (EW) ******************************************************************************** Average Delay (sec/veh):0.7 Worst Case Level Of Service:C[19.3] *************************~****************************************************** Street Name:Palos Verdes Dr E Club View Ln Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Include Include Include Include Lanes:1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:20 427 0 0 610 18 18 0 17 0 0 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:20 427 0 0 610 18 18 0 17 0 0 0 Added Vol:0 74 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proj Vol Ad:0 1 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut:20 502 0 0 667 18 18 0 17 0 0 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:20 502 0 0 667 18 18 0 17 0 0 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume:20 502 0 0 667 18 18 0 17 0 0 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol:685 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1218 xxxx 676 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.:918 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 201 xxxx 457 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.:918 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 198 xxxx 457 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap:0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.09 xxxx 0.04 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ:0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:9.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 25.0 xxxx 13.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move:A * * * * * C * B * * * Movement:LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT LT -LTR -RT Shared Cap.:xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxx x xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS:* * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel:xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS:**C * ******************************************************************************** Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -10 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-37 Ex+Proj ,-AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:38 Page 7-1 o 22.8 1.00 22.8 C Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #6 Silver Spur Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical VoL/Cap.(X):0.692 Loss Time (sec):0 Average Delay (sec/veh):20.9 Optimal Cycle:0 Level Of Service:C ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Silver Spur Rd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Ignore Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes:0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1!0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 I-----~---------I 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:271 32 545 8 12 7 2 291 383 282 347 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:271 32 545 8 12 7 2 291 383 282 347 17 Added Vol:0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:271 32 546 9 12 7 2 292 383 282 346 17 User Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume:271 32 0 9 12 7 2 292 383 282 346 17 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:271 32 0 9 12 7 2 292 383 282 346 17 PCE Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume:271 32 0 9 12 7 2 292 383 282 346 17 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: 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:0.89 0.11 1.00 0.32 0.43 0.25 0.01 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.05 Final Sat.:392 46 499 127 170 99 4 514 578 485 500 25 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.69 0.69 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.57 0.57 0.66 0.58 0.69 0.69 Crit Moves:************ **** Delay/Veh:25.6 25.6 0.0 11.9 11.9 11.9 17.9 17.9 19.6 19.3 22.8 Delay Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh:25.6 25.6 0.0 11.9 11.9 11.9 17.9 17.9 19.6 19.3 22.8 LOS by Move:D D *B B B C C C C C ApproachDel:25.6 1L 9 18.9 21.3 Delay Adj:1.00 LOO 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel:25.6 11.9 18.9 21.3 LOS by Appr:D B C C AllWayAvgQ:1.8 1.8 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 1.2 1.7 1.3 1.9 1.9 ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH VlJilidan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -11 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-38 EX+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:39 Page 7-2 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Wllldan Engineering #16757/6001101-460 1 -12 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-39 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:19 Page 7-1 o 25.0 1.00 25.0 D Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection *6 Silver Spur Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) *****************************************-*************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.828 Loss Time (sec):0 Average Delay (sec/veh):27.2 Optimal Cycle:0 Level Of Service:D ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Silver Spur Rd Palos Verdes Dr N -Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights:Ignore Include Include Include Min.Green:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lanes:0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1!0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:280 0 339 8 4 4 4 389 366 396 366 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:280 0 339 8 4 4 4 389 366 396 366 3 Added Vol:0 0 9 4 0 0 0 8 0 6 5 - 3 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:280 0 348 12 4 4 4 397 366 402 370 6 User Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume:280 0 0 12 4 4 4 397 366 402 370 6 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:280 0 0 12 4 4 4 397 366 402 370 6 PCE Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Fina1Vo1ume:280 0 0 12 4 4 4 397 366 402 370 6 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: 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:1.00 0.00 1.00 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.01 0.99 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.02 Final Sat.:416 0 466 234 78 78 5 508 567 486 512 8 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.67 xxxx 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.78 0.78 0.64 0.83 0.72 0.72 Crit Moves:**************** Delay/Veh:25.6 0.0 0.0 12.1 12.1 12.1 29.7 29.7 19.2 36.0 25.0 Delay Adj:1.00 1.00 1~00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh:25.6 0.0 0.0 12.1 12.1 12.1 29.7 29.7 19.2 36.0 25.0 LOS by Move:D * *B B B D D C E D ApproachDel:25.6 12.1 24.7 30.7 Delay Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel:25.6 12.1 24.7 30.7 LOS by Appr:D BCD AllWayAvgQ:1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 2.9 1.6 3.5 2.2 2.2 ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -13 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-40 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:19 Page 7-2 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Note:Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -14 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-41 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:39 Page 8-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #7 Hawthorne Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.094 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Hawthorne Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Ignore Include Include Include Min.Green:a a a a a a a a a a a a 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 2 0 1 1 a 2 a 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 a 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:27 1103 521 172 567 190 379 678 29 233 504 168 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:27 1103 521 172 567 190 379 678 29 233 504 168 Added Vol:0 0 2 a a a a 3 a 3 4 a Subt Quarry:0 a a a a a 0 -1 a a -4 a Initial Fut:27 1103 523 172 567 190 379 680 29 236 504 168 User Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume:27 1103 a 172 567 190 379 680 29 236 504 168 Reduct Vol:a 0 a 0 a 0 0 a a 0 a a Reduced Vol:27 1103 a 172 567 190 379 680 29 236 504 168 PCE Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume:27 1103 0 172 567 190 379 680 29 236 504 168 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.04 1.88 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1671 3001 128 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.02 0.34 0.00 0.11 0.18 0.12 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.15 0.32 0.11 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH VVilidan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -15 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-42 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:19 Page 8-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #7 Hawthorne Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.919 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Hawthorne Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Ignore 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 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:17 841 233 179 1184 353 221 514 34 245 468 154 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:17 841 233 179 1184 353 221 514 34 245 468 154 Added Vol:0 0 12 0 0 0 0 21 0 8 14 0 Proj Adj Vo:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:17 841245 179 1184 353 221 535 34 253 481 154 User Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume:17 841 0 179 1184 353 221 535 34 253 481 154 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:17 841 0 179 1184 353 221 535 34 253 481 154 PCE Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume:17 841 0 179 1184 353 221 535 34 253 481 154 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 2994 206 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.01 0.26 0.00 0.11 0.37 0.22 0.14 0.18 0.17 0.16 0.30 0.10 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1-16 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-43 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:39 Page 9-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.993 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase 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 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:113 1085 644 66 683 249 543 644 74 616 546 161 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:113 1085 644 66 683 249 543 644 74 616 546 161 Added Vol:0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 7 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 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:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 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 FinalVo1ume:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.80 0.20 2.00 1.55 0.45 Final Sat.:1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 2880 2872 328 2880 2474 726 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.07 0.34 0.40 0.04 0.21 0.16 0.19 0.23 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -17 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-44 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:20 Page 9-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical VoL/Cap.(X):1.132 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Split Phase split Phase 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 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:106 634 662 160 816 205 261 535 62 896 532 92 Growth Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOO 1.00 Initial Bse:106 634 662 160 816 205 261 535 62 896 532 92 Added Vol:0 0 12 0 0 0 0 33 0 8 21 0 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 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:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 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:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.80 0.20 2.00 1.71 0.29 Final Sat.:1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 2880 2885 315 2880 2743 457 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.07 0.20 0.42 0.10 0.26 0.13 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.31 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH \Nilldan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -18 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-45 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:40 Page 10-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU 1 (Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Rolling Hills Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.004 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Rolling Hills Rd.Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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:I 0 1 0 1 1 0 Ii 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:15 50 34 84 61 18 7 1225 12 84 1034 160 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:15 50 34 84 61 18 7 1225 12 84 1034 160 Added Vol:0 0 1 1 0 0 0 7 0 0 10 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 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:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 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 Fina1Volume:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.74 0.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 1600 1600 1659 1190 351 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.01 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.77 0.01 0.05 0.65 0.10 Crit Moves:**** ************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01·460 1 -19 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-46 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:20 Page 10-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Rolling Hills Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Cdtical Vol./Cap.(X):1.077 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Rolling Hills Rd.Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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 1 0 1 1 0 1!0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:43 66 54 144 83 38 72 1233 53 82 1041 169 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:43 66 54 144 83 38 72 1233 53 82 1041 169 Added Vol:0 0 4 4 0 0 0 45 0 3 29 3 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 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:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 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:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.62 0.28 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 1600 1600 1761 987 452 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.03 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.80 0.03 0.05 0.67 0.11 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -20 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-47 EX+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:40 Page 11-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Dapplegray School Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.047 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Dapplegray School Rd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Split Phase Split Phase 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 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1267 0 0 1091 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1267 0 0 1091 398 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 11 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:0 0 a 1600 0 1600 1600 1600 0 0 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.25 Crit Moves:************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -21 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-48 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:21 Page 11-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Dapplegray School Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.076 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Dapplegray School Rd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Split Phase Split Phase 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 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1441 0 0 1306 23 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 0 0 54 0 68 62 1441 0 0 1306 23 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 35 0 Pro Vol Adj:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 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 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 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 FinalVo1ume:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------) Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:0 0 0 1600 0 1600 1600 1600 0 0 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.93 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.01 Crit Moves:**** ******** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -22 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-49 Ex+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:41 Page 12-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #11 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(Xl:0.871 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:87 Level Of Service:D ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Palos Verdes Dr E Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Ignore 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:2 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:280 390 191 143 148 43 50 1119 127 206 1020 185 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:280 390 191 143 148 43 50 1119 127 206 1020 185 Added Vol:0 2 0 3 3 11 8 0 0 0 0 2 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 -8 0 -4 -1 0 0 0 0 -3 Initial Fut:280 392 191 138 151 50 57 1119 127 206 1020 184 User Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Volume:280 392 191 138 151 50 57 1119 127 206 1020 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:280 392 191 138 151 50 57 1119 127 206 1020 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 0.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 FinalVolume:280 392 191 138 151 50 57 1119 127 206 1020 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.:2880 1600 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.10 0.25 0.12 0.05 0.09 0.03 0.04 0.35 0.08 0.13 0.32 0.00 Crit Moves:**** ************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (cl 2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -23 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-50 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:21 Page 12-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #11 Palos Verdes Drive East (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.767 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:60 Level Of Service:C ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Palos Verdes Dr E Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ~-----------I---------------I I-~-------------I 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Protected Protected Rights:Include Include Include Ignore 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:2 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:292 219 150 203 230 104 66 1015 214 159 924 90 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:292 219 150 203 230 104 66 1015 214 159 924 90 Added vol:0 12 0 5 8 35 53 0 0 0 0 8 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 -2 0 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut:292 231 150 206 238 138 119 1015 214 159 924 98 User Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF volume:292 231 150 206 238 138 119 1015 214 159 924 0 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:292 231 150 206 238 138 119 1015 214 159 924 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 0.00 MLF Adj:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 FinalVolume:292 231 150 206 238 138 119 1015 214 159 924 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.:2880 1600 1600 2880 1600 1600 1600 3200 1600 1600 3200 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.10 0.14 0.09 0.07 0.15 0.09 0.07 0.32 0.13 0.10 0.29 0.00 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -24 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-51 EX+Proj -AM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:51:41 Page 13-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #12 Western Ave (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical VoL/Cap.(X):0.949 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Western Ave Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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:2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:659 939 283 57 639 80 115 1235 215 261 889 35 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:659 939 283 57 639 80 115 1235 215 261 889 35 Added Vol:2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -5 -3 0 -3 0 Initial Fut:661 939 283 57 639 80 115 1230 215 261 886 35 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:661 939 283 57 639 80 115 1230 215 261 886 35 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:661 939 283 57 639 80 115 1230 215 261 886 35 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 1.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume:661 939 283 57 639 80 115 1230 215 261 886 35 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.54 0.46 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat.:2880 2459 741 1600 3200 1600 1600 4800 1600 1600 4800 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.23 0.38 0.38 0.04 0.20 0.05 0.07 0.26 0.13 0.16 0.18 0.02 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -25 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-52 Ex+Proj -PM Fri Jun 3,2011 18:49:21 Page 13-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #12 Western Ave (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.892 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:96 Level Of Service:D ******************************************************************************** Street Name:western Ave Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movemen t : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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:2 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:264 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1091 172 215 799 54 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:264 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1091 172 215 799 54 Added Vol:8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 Initial Fut:272 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1090 176 215 799 54 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:272 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1090 176 215 799 54 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:272 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1090 176 215 799 54 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:272 636 128 70 1076 114 139 1090 176 215 799 54 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.66 0.34 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat.:2880 2664 536 1600 3200 1600 1600 4800 1600 1600 4800 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.09 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.34 0.07 0.09 0.23 0.11 0.13 0.17 0.03 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #1675716001/01-460 1 -26 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-53 Existing Plus Project Conditions With Mitigation Intersection Analysis Worksheets Willdan Engineering #16757/6001101-460 1 -27 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-54 Ex +Proj -AM w/Imps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:44:04 Page 2-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Narbonne Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.896 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:98 Level Of Service:D ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Narbonne Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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:2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:338 305 107 156 160 147 87 1587 58 88 2353 96 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:338 305 107 156 160 147 87 1587 58 88 2353 96 Added Vol:23 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 0 0 Subt Quarry:-4 0 -8 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -3 0 0 Initial Fut:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 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:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:357 305 125156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 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:357 305 125 156 160 147 87 1587 67 95 2353 96 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.42 0.58 1.00 1.04 0.96 1.00 2.88 0.12 1.00 2.88 0.12 Final Sat.:2880 2270 930 1600 1668 1532 1600 4606 194 1600 4612 188 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.12 0.13 0.13 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.06 0.51 0.51 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -28 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-55 Ex +Proj -PM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:41:20 Page 2-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements .PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #2 Narbonne Ave (NS)/Pacific Coast Highway (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.903 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Narbonne Ave Pacific Coast Highway Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movemen t : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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:2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:202 206 67 157 271 155 140 2152 95 149 2219 95 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:202 206 67 157 271 155 140 2152 95 149 2219 95 Added Vol:26 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 43 42 0 0 Proj Vol Ad:-9 0 -17 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -4 0 0 Initial Fut:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 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:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vol:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 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:219 206 75 157 271 155 140 2152 136 187 2219 95 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:0.90 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes:2.00 1.47 0.53 1.00 1.27 0.73 1.00 2.82 0.18 1.00 2.88 0.12 Final Sat.:2880 2346 854 1600 2036 1164 1600 4515 285 1600 4603 197 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.08 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.48 0.48 0.12 0.48 0.48 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -29 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-56 Ex +Proj -AM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:44:05 Page 3-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection *8 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.949 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase 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 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:113 1085 644 66 683 249 543 644 74 616 546 161 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:113 1085 644 66 683 249 543 644 74 616 546 161 Added Vol:0 0 2 0 0 0 0 5 0 3 7 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 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:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 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 Fina1Volume:113 1085 646 66 683 249 543 648 74 619 549 161 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 1.88 1.12 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.80 0.20 2.00 1.55 0.45 Final Sat.:1600 3009 1791 1600 3200 1600 2880 2872 328 2880 2474 726 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.07 0.36 0.36 0.04 0.21 0.16 0.19 0.23 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves:**** ************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (cl 2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -30 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-57 Ex +Proj -PM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:41:20 Page 3-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #8 Crenshaw Blvd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.983 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Crenshaw Blvd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movemen t : L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected Split Phase Split Phase 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 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:106 634 662 160 816 205 261 535 62 896 532 92 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:106 634 662 160 816 205 261 535 62 896 532 92 Added Vol:0 0 12 0 0 0 0 33 0 8 21 0 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 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:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 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:106 634 674 160 816 205 261 568 62 904 552 92 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 Adjustment:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90 1.00 1.00 Lanes:1.00 1.45 1.55 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.80 0.20 2.00 1.71 0.29 Final Sat.:1600 2327 2473 1600 3200 1600 2880 2885 315 2880 2743 457 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.07 0.27 0.27 0.10 0.26 0.13 0.09 0.20 0.20 0.31 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves:************ **** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -31 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Roiling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-58 Ex +Proj -AM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:44:05 Page 4-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions with Improvements AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Rolling Hills Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.837 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:76 Level Of Service:D ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Rolling Hills Rd.Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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 1 0 1 1 0 I!0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:15 50 34 84 61 18 7 1225 12 84 1034 160 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:15 50 34 84 61 18 7 1225 12 84 1034 160 Added Vol:0 0 1 1 0 0 0 7 0 0 10 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 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:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 peE 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:15 50 35 85 61 18 7 1231 12 84 1040 160 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.74 0.22 1.00 1.98 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 1600 1600 1659 1190 351 1600 3169 31 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.01 0.03 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.05 0.65 0.10 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -32 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-59 Ex +Proj -PM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:41:20 Page 4-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #9 Rolling Hills Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):0.938 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:E ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Rolling Hills Rd.Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Protected Protected 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 1 0 1 1 0 1!0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:43 66 54 144 83 38 72 1233 53 82 1041 169 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:43 66 54 144 83 38 72 1233 53 82 1041 169 Added Vol:0 0 4 4 0 0 0 45 0 3 29 3 Proj Vol Ad:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 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:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 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:43 66 58 148 83 38 72 1278 53 85 1069 172 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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:1.00 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.62 0.28 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:1600 1600 1600 1761 987 452 1600 3073 127 1600 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.03 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.05 0.42 0.42 0.05 0.67 0.11 Crit Moves:**************** ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (cl 2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -33 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-60 Ex +Proj -AM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:44:06 Page 5-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements AM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Dapplegray School Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.011 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Dapplegray School Rd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Split Phase Split Phase 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 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1267 0 0 1091 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1267 0 0 1091 398 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 11 0 Subt Quarry:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 0 -4 0 Initial Fut:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:0 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 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 0 0 241 0 123 119 1274 0 0 1098 398 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:0 0 0 1600 0 1600 1600 3200 0 01600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.08 0.07 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.25 Crit Moves:************ ****************************************************************~*************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -34 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-61 Ex +Proj -PM w/lmps Fri Jun 3,2011 18:41:21 Page 5-1 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club EIR (jn16757) Existing Plus Project Conditions With Improvements PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Computation Report ICU l(Loss as Cycle Length %)Method (Future Volume Alternative) ******************************************************************************** Intersection #10 Dapplegray School Rd (NS)/Palos Verdes Drive North (EW) ******************************************************************************** Cycle (sec):100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X):1.019 Loss Time (sec):10 Average Delay (sec/veh):xxxxxx Optimal Cycle:100 Level Of Service:F ******************************************************************************** Street Name:Dapplegray School Rd Palos Verdes Dr N Approach:North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement:L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Control:Split Phase Split Phase 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 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: Base Vol:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1441 0 0 1306 23 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 0 0 54 0 68 62 1441 0 0 1306 23 Added Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 0 0 35 0 Pro Vol Adj:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 Initial Fut:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 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 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 Reduct Vol:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol:0 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 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 0 0 54 0 68 62 1494 0 0 1340 23 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane:1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 1600 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 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.:0 0 0 1600 0 1600 1600 3200 0 0 1600 1600 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat:0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.84 0.01 Crit Moves:************ ******************************************************************************** Traffix 8.0.0715 (c)2008 Dowling Assoc.Licensed to WILLDAN,FOOTHILL RANCH Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 1 -35 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-62 Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 ATTACHMENT 2 Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheets Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates·Supplemental Traffic Analysis C-63 California MUTCD (FHWA's MUTCD 2003.including Revisions 1 and 2.as amended for use in California).WILLDANI Figure 4C·103 (CA).Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheets (Average Traffic Estimate Form) Existing Plus Proiect Conditions Major St:_--::P:-::a:::lo=::s:.:-V::.:e::r-:::d.:::es=--=D;.:.:ri~ve=--=E::as::;t=--_ Minor St "A"Street ----------Dist CO RTE PM COUNT DATE 10/11/2008 CALC RMS DATE 6/3/2011 CHK DATE _ Critical Approach Speed 40 mph Critical Approach Speed N/A mph Speed limit or critical speed on major street traffic>64km/h (40mph)...r or In built up area of isolated community of <10.000 population...r P' SRUral(R) Urban (U) (Based on Estimated AveraQe Dailv Traffic -See Note} URBAN___....._.._....._.__~_.._....._...........RURAL .......................................................Minimum ReCluirements EADT CONDITION A -Minimum Vehicular Volume Vehicles Per Day Vehicles Per Day Satisfied Not Satisfied X On Major Street on Higher-Volume (Total of Both Approaches)Minor Street Approach (One Direction Onlv) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Urban Rural Urban Rural Major Street Major Street 1 x 1 x 8.000 5,600 2,400 1,680 2 or more 1 9.600 6,720 2,400 1,680 2 or more 2 or more 9.600 6,720 3,200 2,240 1 2 or more 8,000 5,600 3,200 2,240 11.697 400 CONDITION B •Interruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles Per Day Vehicles Per Day Sat,sfied Not Satisfied X On Major Street on Higher-Volume (Total of Both Approaches)Minor Street Approach (One Direction Only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Urban Rural Urban Rural Major Street Major Street 1 x 1 X 12,000 8,400 1.200 850 2 or more 1 14,400 10,080 1,200 850 2 or more 2 or more 14,400 10,080 1,600 1,120 1 2 or more 12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120 11697 400 Combination of CONDITIONS A+B Satisfied Not Satisfied X 2 CONDITIONS 2 CONDITIONS 80%80% No one condition satisfied.but following conditions fulfilled 80%or more A B Note:To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where it is not reasonable to count actual traffic volumes January 21,2010 Chandler Ranch &Roiling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates -Supplemental Traffic Analysis2-1 The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. Chapter 4C -Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies Part 4 -Highway Traffic Signals Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 C-64 California MUTCD (FHW A's MUTCD 2003,including Revisions 1 and 2,as amended for use in California) Figure 4C·103 (CA).Traffic Signal Warrants Worksheets (Average Traffic Est/mate Form) Existing Plus Project Conditions .WIlLDAN I Major St:_-=:P~a::.:::lo:::s:..:-V::..:e:::.rd::.e::.:S:..::D:.:ri.:.;ve:..::E::.:as:::.::t:..-_ Minor St Clubview Lane ~~~-------Dist CO RTE PM COUNT DATE:_-=107/=11=12:.:0::::0:::-8:o='::":~ CALC RMS DATE 6/3/2011 CHK DATE _ Critical Approach Speed 40 mph Critical Approach Speed N/A mph Speed limit or critical speed on major street traffic>64km/h (40mph).....................r or In built up area of isolated community of <10,000 population.................................r R' SRUral(R) Urban (U) IBased on Estimated AveraCl e Dailv Traffic -see Note} URBAN.__...................___..!..._...................RURAL ..............................._.....................Minimum Reauirements EADT CONDITION A -Minimum Vehicular Volume Vehicles Per Day Vehicles Per Day Satisfied Not Satisfied X On Major Street on Higher-Volume (Total of Both Approaches)Minor Street Approach (One Direction Onlv) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Urban Rural Urban Rural Major Street Major Street 1 x 1 x 8,000 5,600 2,400 1,680 2 or more 1 9,600 6,720 2,400 1,680 2 or more 2 or more 9,600 6,720 3,200 2,240 1 2 or more 8,000 5,600 3,200 2,240 13.994 438 CONDITION B -Interruption of Continuous Traffic Vehicles Per Day Vehicles Per Day Satisfied Not Satisfied X On Major Street on Higher-Volume (Total of Both Approaches)Minor Street Approach (One Direction Only) Number of lanes for moving traffic on each approach Urban Rural Urban Rural Major Street Major Street 1 x 1 x 12,000 8,400 1,200 850 2 or more 1 14,400 10,080 1,200 850 2 or more 2 or more 14,400 10,080 1,600 1,120 1 2 or more 12,000 8,400 1,600 1,120 13994 438 Combination of CONDITIONS A+B Satisfied Not Satisfied X 2 CONDITIONS 2 CONDITIONS 80%80% No one condition satisfied,but following conditions fulfilled 80%or more A B Note:To be used only for NEW INTERSECTIONS or other locations where it is not reasonable to count actual traffic volumes January 21,2010 Chandler Ranch &Rolling Hills Country Club City of Rolling Hills Estates ..Supplemental Traffic Analysis2-2 The satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant or warrants shall not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. Chapter 4C ..Traffic Control Signal Needs Studies Part 4 ..Highway Traffic Signals Willdan Engineering #16757/6001/01-460 C-65 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 3 C-66 _EsmEFS;77J"FS ETE T 0777 ..7 CHANDLER RANCH/ROLLING HILLS COUNTRY CLUB FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO.2008011027) -ERRATA SHEET - INTRODUCTION This Errata Sheet identifies revisions to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR)for the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills COWltry Club Project (State Clearinghouse Number 2008011027),which have been initiated by the Lead Agency (City of Rolling Hills Estates)to clarify certain portions of the EIR. This Errata Sheet is intended to accompany the Final EIR,when the Final EIR is considered for certification by the Lead Agency. The revisions identified in this Errata Sheet are shown below in excerpts from the Final EIR with Wlderlined text for additions and stfike.tMeogfi text for deletions and/or as a narrative description of the revision.The revisions identified below are shown in the order they appear in the EIR and Wlder their corresponding Chapter heading and page number from the Final EIR. ERRATA TO THE FINAL EIR 3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES The following revisions clarify the discussion ofImpact PS-3 (Schools)on pages 3.12-5 and 3.12-6: Impact PS-3:The proposed project would be expected to generate students at the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District and the Torrance Unified School District.Tltough the school tlistrict is Bot opcratiftg above capacity,the The generation of additional students would increase the use of the schools in the distric~.This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. The proposed project would add Q1..444-new single-family residential units within the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District Q?VPUSD)and 51 new single-family residential units within the Torrance Unified School District (IUSD)1.Based on the respective Districts'Dist'fiet's student generation rates2 of 0.3318 stliaeftts :Pef household,the project I This analysis asswnes that the school district boundary lines would continue to follow the existing City boundary line after the proposed project is approved and constructed.Based on the proposed Tentative Tract Map,57 of the proposed residential parcels are within the existing limits of the City of Rolling Hills Estates,45 are within the existing limits of the City of Torrance,and 12 span across the existing City boundary line.This analysis asswnes that 6 (ie., 50%)of the 12 proposed residential parcels that span across the existing City boundary line would be dedicated to the PVPUSD,with the remaining 6 parcels dedicated to the TUSD. 2Published student generation rates for the PVPUSD and TUSD are as follows:PVPUSD =0.3318 total students per household;TUSD =0.1950 elementary schools students per household,0.1181 middle schools students per household, and 0.1773 high schools students per household. City oJRolling HilLr Estates 8.0-1 Chandler Ranch/Rolling HiILr COllntry Club ProjectC-67 EIR En-ala Sheet would generate a total of 46 3Frstudents.of which 21 would be within the PVPUSD and 26 would be within the TUSD.. Both the PVPUSD and the TUSD The Palos V~des peniflstila Unified School Distriet can accommodate the additional students anticipated to be generated by the proposed residential development with existing facilities.In the local school district,capacity of a school is based upon grade level.If a child cannot be accommodated at their home school (a school located the closest to their residence),the child will be placed in an available school in the district and may be transferred into the home school when the child can be accommodated in the appropriate grade level at that school. The City is stricdy limited in the mitigation measures it may impose against developers of residential projects to address school crowding issues.The presumption of State law is that the developer's payment of school impact fees to the local school district,in an amount established by the school district,would address school capacity impacts.Mitigation Measure PS-18 requires that the developer pay the full development fees that may be charged to a developer by the school district to mitigate the effects of the increased enrollment as a result of the project.With implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts to schools are considered less than significant under CEQA. Citp ofRiJlling Hills Estates 8.0-2 Chandler RalJch/RiJlling Hills Country Club Pro/ectC-68 7ST717S?3?Tnr 7lWZWrrmm 7 2 2zn557"~F TTT F727F?7F 3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES 3.12.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing public services available to the project,and the potential project demands placed on those public services.Public services include fire protection,law enforcement, and schools.The data presented in this section was collected from the City of Rolling Hills Estates General Plan,service provider web sites,and correspondence with service providers.Written correspondence from service providers is contained in Appendix I of this EIR. 3.12.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING FIRE SERVICES The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides fire protection and emergency medical response service within the City of Rolling Hills Estates.Battalion 14 of the Consolidated County Fire Protection District operates fire stations in the project area.Fire Station 106,located at 27413 Indian Peak Road in the City of Rolling Hills Estates,and Fire Station 56,located at 12 Crest Road West in the City of Rolling Hills,are the two closest fire stations to the project site.While these stations are the closest stations to the project area,the Los Angeles County Fire Department as a whole serves the project area.Under normal circumstances,the Fire Department is able to respond to an emergency or fire anywhere in the City of Rolling Hills Estates in an average response time of less than five minutes. It should be noted that the Cities adjacent to the City of Rolling Hills Estates,including Lomita, Rancho Palos Verdes and Rolling Hills,also contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department for emergency services.These Cities also have the following fire stations that serve the area:Station #2,located at 340 Palos Verdes Drive North;Station #6,located at 25517 Narbonne Avenue; Station #53,located at 6124 Palos Verdes Drive South;Station #56,located at 12 Crest Road West; and Station #106 (Headquarters)is located at 413 Indian Peak Road.As with all other Los Angeles County Fire Services,these stations would assist in an emergency situation where assistance was needed.These stations are within five miles of the project site.1 POLICE SERVICES Police protection is provided in the project area by the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department. The Sheriffs station that serves the City of Rolling Hills Estates is located in Lomita at 26123 Narbonne Ave,which is located within three miles of the project area.The Lomita Station presently services a population of approximately 75,000 and covers a geographic area of 23 square miles, which includes the Cities of Rancho Palos Verdes,Rolling Hills,Rolling Hills Estates,and Lomita and two small unincorporated areas of Los Angeles County.There are currently 83 total (all shifts) 1 Infonnation collected from website:www.lacofd.org,November 30,2008. Ci{y of Rolling Hills Estates 3.12-1 Chandler Ranch /Rolling Hills Country Club ProjectC-69 3.12 Pllblic S mJices sworn officers at the Lomita Sheriff Station.The Police Department staffing ratio of officers to residents for the City of Rolling Hills Estates is 1 officer for each 1,000 residents).2 The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is a full service law enforcement agency that is contracted with the City of Rolling Hills Estates to provide police services to the residents of Rolling Hills Estates in the form of enforcement of the municipal and penal code.Services include crime prevention and control,traffic enforcement and collision investigation,parking enforcement, preliminary and follow-up criminal investigations,response to calls for service,proactive patrol,and community oriented policing. SCHOOLS The Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District provides educational services within the project area.The student capacity of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District is currendy 11,900 students.The district is comprised of one early childhood center,ten elementary schools,three 6-8 intermediate schools,two comprehensive high schools and one continuation school.The project site is within the service area of the Palos Verdes Peninsula High School,the Dapplegray Elementary School and the Ridgecrest Intermediate School.Table 3.12.1 identifies the recent enrollment figures for these schools. Operating revenue provided to school districts is funded by local property tax revenue accrued at the state level and then allocated to each school district based on the average daily student attendance.Because state funding for capital improvements has lagged behind enrollment,physical improvements to accommodate new students come primarily from assessed fees on developme11t projects.In 1990,school facilities legislation (California Government Code §65995)was enacted to generate revenue for school districts for capital acquisitions and improvements.Current legislation allows a maximum one-time fee of $1.93 per square foot of residential floor area and $0.31 per square foot of commercial and industrial space for development projects.This fee is subsequendy divided between the primary and secondary schools for future facility improvements. However,the November 1998 passage of Proposition lA,and funding made available through its passage,enacted new legislation (California Government Code §65995.5)that permitted school districts to levy developer fees based upon anticipated development that would add new students to an existing overburdened district.In accordance to the new legislation,the district must demonstrate that it does not have the facility capacity to house these students and/or the students would have to be housed in existing facilities that are not educationally adequate (i.e.,antiquated facilities).Additionally,it must be shown that the amount of developer fees to be collected will not exceed the district's cost for housing students generated by new development.As a result,school districts must demonstrate to the state their long-term facilities needs within a study identifying the projected enrollment growth from the development of new residential units over the next five years. Recendy,the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District amended the fee placed on developers to $2.97 per square foot of new residential building area. 2 Phone conversation with Sergeant LaTonya Clark,Los Angeles County Sheriffs Office,Lomita Station,December 2, 2008. City of Rolling Hills Estates 3.12-2 Chtl1/dler Ranch fRolling Hills COlilltry Clllb Project C-70 3.12 Public Services Table 3.12.1 Schoo]I ~nro]]lll(,llt Enro ent December June September November School 2005'2006 20P;7 200,~ Dapplegrav Elementary School 725 716 707 694 Miraleste Intermediate 988 980 932 929 Palos Verdes Peninsula High 2,493 2,044 2,353 2,449 Souree:RBpresentative ofSujJerintenrknts office ofthe Palos Verdes Peninsula Hi.R.h Schoo/Unified S choo/District LIBRARIES The Palos Verdes Library District (PVLD)provides library services for all four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula,including the City of Rolling Hills Estates,as well as a small portion of unincorporated territory in Los Angeles County.In total,the PVLD currently serves a population of 69,800 residents and is expected to serve a population of 73,800 residents by the year 2030.3 The PVLD maintains three libraries -Peninsula Center Library,Miraleste Library,and Malaga Cove Library.These location and size of these libraries are identified in Table 3.12.2. SFiIi Table 3.12.2 ]J:t!os \('HIes Llbran l)blrlct I aCllttll'S •.ac.~tV ;.'c~t:J,of,\lze (;"J. Peninsula Center Library 701 Silver Spur Road 91,679RollingHillsEstates Miraleste Library 29089 Palos Verdes Drive East 8,635RanchoPalosVerdes Malaga Cove Library 2400 Via Campesina 12,014PalosVerdesEstates Source:City ofRo/lin}!,Hills Estates,Public Facilities Impact Fee RBport,June 13,2008. 3.12.3 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The project would have a significant impact if it will: 1.Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for fire protection; 2.Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order 3 City of Rolling Hills Estates,Public Facilities Impact Fee Report,June 13,2008. City oJRollingHills Bstates 3.12-3 Chandler Ro11ch /Rolling Hills Country Club Project C-71 3.12 Public Services to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for police protection; 3.Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for schools;or 4.Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the proVlSlOn of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities. 3.12.4 IMPACT DISCUSSION TOPICS FOR WHICH THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE NO IMPACT None. TOPICS FOR WHICH THE PROJECT WOULD HAVE POTENTIAL IMPACTS FIRE PROTECTION (THRESHOLD 1) Impact PS-1:The proposed project would incrementally increase demands on the Los Angeles County Fire Department and would create new access roads/drives that would be traversed by Fire Department vehicles.The increase in onsite activity would not require new Fire Department personnel or equipment.However,improper design of project access points and roadways could adversely affect the Fire Department's ability to serve the proposed development.This is a potentially significant impact that can be mitigated to a less than significant level by complying with Fire Department standards and conditions. The proposed residential development and expansion of the private country club would increase the demand for local fire protection services,but is not expected to increase the need for Fire Department personnel,equipment,or stations.Although the proposed project would increase activity on the project site,station response times are not expected to be affected. The Los Angeles County Fire Department was sent three separate requests for comments by the City of Rolling Hills Estates.The Los Angeles County Fire Department Subdivision,Fire Water and Access Division responded to the City's requests with conditions of approval for the project.The Fire Department's requested conditions of approval include project-specific design requirements/modifications as well as typical Fire Code design standards for street width,fire hydrant location,water flow,and other access standards.All of the Los Angeles County Fire Department's conditions of approval are included as mitigation measures in this EIR. Ci(y of Rolling Hills Estates 3.124 Chandler Ranch /Rolling Hills Country Club Project C-72 3.12 Public Services The Fire Department's response did not indicate that any additional personnel,equipment,or fire stations would be necessary to serve the project.Furthennore,there are no unique circumstances as part of this project that would warrant new fire facilities or personnel.The project would comply with Fire Code and Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements regarding the type and design of roadways,access,the location of fire hydrants,and the maximum allowable grade.With the incorporation of mitigation measures to ensure that all Fire Code standards and Fire Department conditions are met,impacts to fire protection service would be considered less than significant. POLICE PROTECTION (THRESHOLD 2) Impact PS-2:The proposed project would incrementally increase demand upon the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.This impact is considered less than significant. The proposed project would increase the number of people utilizing the project area by adding 114 residential units,as well as expanding the private country club.The presence of such a development in the area would be expected to incrementally increase the number of calls to the Department. Calls to the site would likely be due to traffic accidents or for such offenses as theft.Despite the slight increase in calls for service,it is expected that existing staff and equipment resources within the Department are adequate to serve the project. Per the Shetriffs Department,the project vicinity is serviced by 1-2 patrol cars,depending on the time of day.The Department estimates that the proposed project would generate 3-5 additional calls for law enforcement services per month and would cause a moderate increase in traffic in-and- around the proposed development.The Department concludes that the project in.itself should not require an increase in police protection and traffic service.4 Therefore,the project's impact on police protection service is less than significant. It should be further noted that the proposed project would eliminate the Chandler's facility,which is a large unlit space that includes an inert landfill,building materials storage yard,and concrete batch plant.Replacing the Chandler's facility with a residential development oriented around a golf course could improve the defensibility of the project site. SCHOOLS (THRESHOLD 3) Impact PS-3:The proposed project would be expected to generate students at the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District and the Torrance Unified School District.Though the school distriet is ft6t opetatiftg aBove capacity,the The generation of additional students would increase the use of the schools in the district.§..This is considered a significant but mitigable "impact. 4 Memorandum,Subject:Development Project Impact,from Ronene M.Anda,Captain,Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department,Lomita Station,dated February 23,2009. City ofRJJlling Hills Estates 3.12-5 Cha/ldler Ranch /RJJlling Hills C0111Jtry Club ProjectC-73 3.12 Public Services The proposed project would add QJ..:H4-new single-family residential units within the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District Q?VPUSD)and 51 new single-family residential units within the Torrance Unified School District (TUSD)5.Based on the respective Districts'District's student generation rates6 of 0.3318 studeet8 per hotlsehold,the project would generate a total of 46 ~ students,of which 21 would be within the PVPUSD and 26 would be within the TUSD. Both the PVPUSD and the TUSD The Pa-los Veraes Pefl:ifl:S'I:lla Uftified School Di.'itriet can accommodate the additional students anticipated to be generated by the proposed residential development with existing facilities.In the local school district,capacity of a school is based upon grade level.If a child cannot be accommodated at their home school (a school located the closest to their residence),the child will be placed in an available school in the district and may be transferred into the home school when the child can be accommodated in the appropriate grade level at that school. The City is stricdy limited in the mitigation measures it may impose against developers of residential projects to address school crowding issues.The presumption of State law is that the developer's payment of school impact fees to the local school district,in an amount established by the school district,would address school capacity impacts.Mitigation Measure PS-18 requires that the developer pay the full development fees that may be charged to a developer by the school district to mitigate the effects of the increased enrollment as a result of the project.With implementation of this mitigation measure,impacts to schools are considered less than significant under CEQA. OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES (THRESHOLD 4) Impact PS-4:The proposed project would be expected to generate additional patrons of the Palos Verdes Library District.This is considered a significant but mitigable impact. The proposed project is estimated to add 316 residents to the City of Rolling Hills Estates7 ,all of which would be served by the PVLD.The City of Rolling Hills Estates'Public Facilities Impact Fee Report (City of Rolling Hills Estates,2008)identifies a library facilities impact fee of $2,752 per new single-family residential unit to ensure new development projects fund their fair share of costs to improve the library system.With the payment of these fees,as required by Mitigation Measure PS- 19,the proposed project's impact on library facilities would be less than significant. 5 This analysis assumes that the school district boundary lines would continue to follow the existing City boundary line after the proposed project is approved and constructed.Based on the proposed Tentative Tract Map,57 of the proposed residential parcels are within the existing limits of the City of Rolling Hills Estates,45 are within the existing limits of the City of Torrance,and 12 span across the existing City boundary line.This analysis assumes that 6 (i.e., 50%)of the 12 proposed residential parcels that span across the existing City boundary line would be dedicated to the PVPUSD,with the remaining 6 parcels dedicated to the TUSD. 6 Published student generation rates for the PVPUSD and TUSD are as follows:PVPUSD =0.3318 total students per household;TUSD =0.1950 elementary schools students per household,0.1181 middle schools students per household, and 0.1773 high schools students per household. 7114 proposed dwelling units times the City's current household size of 2.83 persons per household =322. City of Rolling Hills Estates 3.12-6 Chandler Ranch /Rolling Hills Country Club ProjectC-74 3.12 Pllblic Services 3.12.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS FIRE SERVICES Cumulative development projects in the City of Rolling Hills Estates area,in combination with the proposed project,would add residential and non-residential development to the City.Such development will continue to increase the City's population and could potentially place development within fire severity zones.Compliance with the Fire Department and emergency design standards will maintain cumulative impacts at a less than significant level. POLICE SERVICES Cumulative buildout from developments within the City of Rolling Hills Estates will increase demands on police protection services by adding residents and non-residential development.Upon culmination of additional development in the area,the Sheriff's Department will conduct a review to determine if an increase in police protection and traffic service is necessary.8 It is anticipated that, despite the incremental increase in demand for police services,increased public revenues generated from property and sales taxes from these new developments would increase the City's General Fund to fulfill its resource needs in the future.Therefore,significant cumulative impacts to police protection service are not anticipated. SCHOOLS Cumulative development within the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District will continue to increase enrollment in local public schools.Since local schools are near capacity,cumulative imp~cts to schools are considered potentially significant.Payment of statutory school impact fees,as required by MM PS 1 M1v.I PS-18,would mitigate the proposed project's contribution to cumulative impacts on schools to a level that is less than considerable. LIBRARIES Cumulative development on the Palos Verdes Peninsula will continue to increase the population served by the PVLD.The fair-share library fees established in the City of Rolling Hills Estates' Public Facilities Impact Fee Report (City of Rolling Hills Estates,2008)are based on future growth projections in the PVLD's service area.These projections account for cumulative growth.As such, payment of library fees,as required by MM PS 2 MM PS-19,would mitigate the proposed project's contribution to cumulate impacts on libraries to a level that is less than considerable. 3.12.6 MITIGATION MEASURES MMPS-1:The City of Rolling Hills Estates shall not approve the project's Final Tract Map before the Los Angeles County Fire Department recommends approval of the project. 8 Memorandum,Subject:Development Project Impact,from Ronene M.Anda,Captain,Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department,Lomita Station,dated February 23,2009. City ofRo/ling Hills Estates '3.12-7 Chl1lldler Ronch IRolling Hills Country Clnb ProjectC-75 MMPS-2: MMPS-3: MMPS-4: MM PS-5: MM PS-6: MM PS-7: MMPS-8: MMPS-9: MMPS-10: 3.12 Public Services Access shall comply with Section 503 of the Fire Code,which requttes all weather access.All weather access may require paving. Fire Department access shall be extended to within 150 feet distance of any exterior portion of all structures. Where driveways extend further than 150 feet and are of single access design, turnarounds suitable for fire protection equipment use shall be provided and shown on the final map.Turnarounds shall be designed,constructed,and maintained to insure their integrity for Fire Department use.Where topography dictates,turnarounds shall be provided for driveways that extend over 150 feet in length. Private driveways shall be indicated on the final map as ''Private Driveway and Fire lane"with the widths clearly depicted and shall be maintained in accordance with the Fire Code.All required fIre hydrants shall be installed,tested,and accepted prior to construction. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to all required fire hydrants.All required fire hydrants shall be installed,tested,and accepted prior to construction. Provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy. The project shall comply with all the water system requirements identified by the Los Angeles County Fire Department.The City shall not issue a certificate of occupancy for the proposed clubhouse or any residential units until such compliance is verified. Every building constructed shall be accessible to Fire Department apparatus by way of access roadways,with an approved all weather surface of not less than the prescribed width,unobstructed,clear to sky.The roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls when measured by an unobstructed route around the exterior of the building.The applicant shall provide the City and the Fire Department with an exhibit of the clubhouse and surrounding structures that clearly shows the required access and dimensions. Bridge-When a bridge is required to be used as part of a fire access road it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with nationally recognized standards and designed for a live load suffIcient to carry a minimum of 75,000 pounds.All water crossing designs are required to be certified by a licensed civil engineer to meet or exceed the current standards.See 2007 California Fire Code (CFC)503.2.6 for additional information.The cross section for the proposed bridge shows 18 feet width for each direction of travel.The bridge shall provide 20 feet minimum travel width in each direction of travel.The cross section shall be corrected to show 20 feet of travel width for each direction of travel and shall City ojRiJlling Hills Estates 3.12-8 Chandler Ranch /RiJl/il1/,Hills Country Club Project C-76 MMPS-l1: MMPS-12: MM PS-13: MM PS-14: MMPS-15: MMPS-16: MMPS-17: 3.12 Public Services be submitted to the City and the Fire Department prior to approval of the Final Tract Map. Turning radii shall not be less than 32 feet for all turns associated with Fire Department access.lbis measurement shall be determined at the centerline of the road.The Final Tract Map shall clearly depict the required 32-feet on centerline turning radius for all turns associated with Fire Department access. This includes all the proposed cul-de-sac designs. Prior to approval of the Final Tract Map and to the satisfaction of the City and the Fire Departmeri.t,the applicant shall clarify the raised median design feature east of the proposed bridge. Streets or driveways·within the development shall be provided with the followmg: II Provide 36 feet in width on all streets where parking is allowed on both sides. II Provide 34 feet in width on cul-de-sacs up to 700 feet in length.This allows parking on both sides of the street. II Provide 36 feet in width on cul-de-sacs from 701-1,000 feet in length.This allows parking on both sides of the street. II For streets or driveways with parking restrictions:The entrance to the street/driveway and intermittent spacing distances of 150 feet shall be posted with Fire Department approved signs stating "NO PARKING FIRE LANE"in three inch high letters.Driveway labeling is necessary to ensure access for Fire Department use. II Turning radii shall not be less than 32 feet.This measurement shall be determined at the centerline of the road. Traffic calming measures (speed humps/bumps/cushions,traffic circles, roundabouts,etc.)shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval,prior to approval of the Final Tract Map. Street "c"is of a cul-de-sac design and is approximately 950 feet in length. Street "c"shall provide 36 feet in width. Prior to approval of the Final Tract Map,the applicant shall provide a cross section for each proposed "motor court"and cul-de-sac"design with a raised median to the City and the Fire Department for review and approval. Prior to approval of the Final Tract Map,the applicant shall submit the site plan (four copies)and architectural elevations (one set)for the proposed clubhouse and all associated structures to the Fire Department for review and approval. Said plans shall show the type of construction,occupancy classification,square Ci{y of&lling Hills Estates 3.12-9 Chandler &Inch /&Uitlg Hills Country ClNb Project C-77 3.12 Public Services footage of proposed structure per floor,and number of floors.Fire Department vehicular access shall be cross-hatched or shaded. MMPS-18: MMPS-19: Prior to issuance of a building permit,the applicant shall pay the established school fee rate for new residential construction. Prior to issuance of a building permit,.the applicant shall pay the library facilities fee rate for new residential construction established in the City of Rolling Hills Estates'Public Facilities Impact Fee Report (City of Rolling Hills Estates,2008) and any corresponding City ordinance. 3.12.7 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION After mitigation,the proposed project would not significantly impact public services.The following table presents a summary of the thresholds of significance,mitigation measures,and the project's corresponding level of impact. Table 3.12.3 ~llllll1l:ln of I 111 (~h()ld~()(SIg1l1 (it ;111('(•:\II II.;~:III()I]:\I(:t ~11 1"(~.,lI1d ],(\l]()r ~1;'~111 f I(.111 (l (()]Puh]1(~LT\1(('1J IIp.lCh Threshold ofSlgndicance Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered govemmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, A..,plicable Mitigation Measures < :M:M PS-1 through MM PS-17 (see Section 3.12.6,above) None needed :M:M PS-18 (see Section 3.12.6,above) Level of Significance Less than significant after mitigation Less than significant Less than significant after mitigation City ofRtJlling Hills Estate.!3.12-10 Chandler Ranch /RoUing Hills Country Club Project C-78 3.12 Public Services Table 3.12.3 SlIl11t1l:ln of I hr('sl101ds of Slgl11fic.uJc('.~lJr1g:ltl()11 '\1c,ISlll ('s.:llld J.n c1 of Stgllltl,allce for Publtc Sen Ke 1t1lI':lCts Threshold of Significance 'At'plicat;Jle'Mitigation Measures response times or other perfonnance objectives for schools. Result in substantial adverse physical MM PS-19:(see Section 3.12.6,above) impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities. Level of Significance Less than significant after mitigation City ofRolli11g Hills Estates 3.12-11 Chandler Ranch /Rolling Hills CounttyClub ProjectC-79 City ofRo/Iing Hills Estates This page intentionallY blank 3.12-12 3.12 Public Services Chandler Ranch /Rolling Hills Country Club Project C-80 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 4 C-81 Chandler Ranch Properties,LLC 26311 Palos Verdes Drive East Rolling Hills Estates,California 90274 310-784-2900 (Office) Via Hand Delivery June 7,2011 Niki Cutler Senior Planner City of Rolling Hills Estates Rolling Hills Estates,California 90274 Re:Rolling Hills Country Club/Chandler Master Plan. Dear Niki, We have reviewed your letter of May 11,2011 and our responses are as follows: 1.Rolling Hills Country Club (RHCC)has agreed to further study alternate architectural styles for the clubhouse.Furthermore,RHCC will as a condition of approval for the Project,coordinate with the residential homebuilder on the architecture for the new homes so as to have the overall Project reflect a compatible and complimentary architectural style.The clubhouse will be brought back to the Planning Commission concurrently with the residential Neighborhood Compatibility review for the homes. 2.The attached exhibit demonstrates the location of the three rail fences.The entire perimeter of the Project along Palos Verdes Drive East will have the three rail fencing.In addition the northerly boundary of the Project up to the westerly end of the new equestrian trail will have three rail fencing.The interior of the Project will contain fencing as shown on the exhibit.The Project will have a total 10,590 lineal feet of new fencing or approximately 2.01 miles. 3.The Project will construct a pedestrian/bike path on the west side ofPVDE from PVDN to the northerly city limits.As approved by the city,a pedestrianlbike path will also be constructed on the east side ofPVDE. Please call with any questions or if you need anything further. s;;~ J.Michael Cope Director of Real Estate C-82 C-83 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENT 5 C-84 Page 1 of 1 Niki Cutler From:Hope Nolan Sent:Wednesday,May 11,2011 10:11 AM To:Niki Cutler SUbject:FW:Chandler Development Mope NoLiAV'v t:>epl,{tl:::J c-~tl:::J C-LeY~ C-Ltl:::J of ROmV'vg H{LLs Sstvrtes 4045PClLos vevdes t:>v~ve Novtitl ROLLLV'v0 Hms Sstvrtes,CA j0::2.74 (3iO)3Y-Y--i5T.T ext.i02 HopeN@cL.RoLLLrf\-f-tLllS-estCltes,Ctl,U$ From:Kathy Gliksman [mailto:kathleen1387@cox.net] Sent:Tuesday,May 10,2011 6:50 PM To:Steve Zuckerman;Susan Seamans;Frank Zerunyan;Judy Mitchell;John Addleman Subject:Chandler Development Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I am unable to attend the public hearing this evening but would have spoken had I been there. Not too long ago,you rejected an expansion proposal for Rolling Hills Covenant Church.Your reasoning for the rejection included the fact that the project was too large for our City,that the traffic problems associated with the project could not be adequately mitigated and that the project was designed to draw non-residents to it rather than provide benefits for residents.I feel that all ofyour reasons fit the Chandler Development to a tee (so to speak). I urge you to apply the same criteria to the Chandler Development as proposed. Sincerely, Kathleen Gliksman 5/11/2011 C-85 Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project C-86 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint ::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18281880 Page 1 of2 Rolling Hills Estates moves closer to approving Chandler Ranch development By Melissa Pamer Staff Writer Posted:06115/2011 05:00:20 PM PDT Updated:06/15/2011 07:04:10 PM PDT Years of debate over a 114-home luxury development at the entrance to Rolling Hills Estates are nearing a close following a City Council vote this week. But there could many more years of waiting -for the right market conditions to develop -before construction begins on Chandler Ranch. On Tuesday,the council signaled its intent to approve the 228-acre project,which would replace a giant rock quarry and aging country club.A final vote is set for July 26. At the meeting,there were echoes of disapproval from a handful of equestrians and those concerned about the development's lack of horse facilities,but most who spoke favored the project. Chandler Ranch has reached the brink of approval after decades of discussion on how to replace a construction-waste landfill that operates in a dusty former rock quarry - Chandler's Palos Verdes Sand and Gravel operation. In 2008,a joint proposal was submitted from Chandler's and the neighboring Rolling Hills Country Club that called for replacing the quarry and upgrading the club's golf course and facilities. Previous plans for the dramatically contoured site included much denser developments that were met with greater opposition. "Some of them almost came to fruition.This is as good as it gets,"said Mike Russo,president of the homeowners association for residents who live on nearby Bridlewood Circle. "For this not to go forward would be a crime, because it's not going to get any better than this,"Russo said. The country club and the Chandlers in recent months have been refining the current project - and negotiating for support from local equestrians.They recently announced a deal that would see $2 million in donations and development fees going to still-undetermined public equestrian improvements. Earlier this year,the Planning Commission approved a development agreement that would give a home builder -yet to be named -up to 10 years to begin work,with a five-year extension possible. Project manager Mike Cope said he expects construction could be completed in 30 months, C.II Now!1...877·835·8373 'HOI(~) http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=130823 7028367 6/16/2011C-87 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18281880 Page 2 of2 but work cannot start until economic conditions change. "This is a project that requires an enthusiastic housing market,"Cope said. He also said that he would follow up with the Torrance Unified School District on the possibility of a boundary change that would allow all students from Chandler Ranch to attend Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified schools. As reported in the Daily Breeze earlier this week, the project's 114 homes would be about evenly split between Torrance and Palos Verdes Peninsula school districts. A small portion of the Chandler's property - where a few homes would apparently be built - also appears to include a corner of the Los Angeles Unified School District. City planner Niki Cutler called that "a mapping error"and noted that the Chandlers had never paid taxes to LAUSD.She said on Wednesday the boundary issue was not clear and the city would continue to look into it. On Tuesday night,Cope said he had met with Torrance Unified administrators several years ago but at that time they indicated there was "no interest"in a boundary change.He said he would follow up with school board President Don Lee, who told the Daily Breeze that he would consider a boundary switch if the school district were financially compensated. Cope repeated a previous statement that potential home builders do not view the school split as an issue for future marketers of the houses. Mayor Steve Zuckerman said he respectfully disagreed and encouraged Cope to consider seeking a boundary change that would place all Chandler Ranch children within the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District. "I think people would pay $100,000 (more)for a lot that's in the Palos Verdes school district,"Z uckerman said."I think it could add real value." Cope nodded.He did not return a call for further comment Wednesday. melissa.pamer@dailybreeze.com DIRECTVhas more of what you DIRECT~want towatchl http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=130823 7028367 6/16/2011C-88 Print Version Page 1 of2 [Print Page I Chandler project hearings continue By Mary Scott Peninsula News Thursday,June 16,201111:56 AM PDT RHE -Continuing a 10-year process of applications,modifications and hearings at the planning stage,the Chandler Ranch/Rolling Hills Country Club project now is under the scrutiny of the Rolling Hills Estates City Council.Council heard a second round of public testimony for and against the 228-acre project Tuesday night and voted to continue the matter on July 26. The project,which straddles the cities of RHE and Torrance (at the club's existing site and the Chandler Gravel and Sand Facility on Palos Verdes Drive East),made it City Council on May 10 for the final stage of approval.At that time,the project's planners presented to council the full scope of the project as well as a draft environmental impact report.The Country Club project includes the development of 114 single-family homes,a new 61,OOO-square-foot clubhouse and related facilities and an Arnold Palmer-designed 18-hole golf course. Although the project recently gained the approval of the equestrian community,there are lingering concerns regarding the architectural look of the project,noise from construction and operation,traffic congestion and about where the children who will live in the residential development will go to school. "In regards to school district segregation,I'm not clear how you can make accurate calculations for noise, traffic and air quality if you've not clearly detailed where the traffic is coming from,"Mitch Carson of Good Local Planning said. In the amended draft environmental impact report,planners estimate that the 46 students expected to live in development,which sits in Torrance and Rolling Hills EstatesHE,will be split between the Torrance Unified School District and the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District.Twenty-six of these students are expected to attend Torrance schools while the other 21 are expected to go to schools in Palos Verdes.While the city of Torrance has agreed to give jurisdiction of its portion of the development to RHE,no such deal has been made between the school districts. It is unclear if students will travel north on PV Drive East to Torrance or south toward PV Drive North, increasing traffic on that already congested road. "Palos Verdes Drive is at a stand-still already,how will this be addressed?"Carson asked. Going off Carson's concern,Mayor Steve Zuckerman considered what effect this uncertainty has on the traffic study. "By not considering the fact that the children may be going to different school districts that in itself may be a problem in the traffic analysis,"Zuckerman said."I'm going to put out there my layman response ...that it does seem to a degree -for better or worse -that children are going to the Torrance district;that would actually reduce impacts as opposed to all of them driving PV Drive North and going to schools here." John Bellas of Willdan Engineering,the firm that conducted the draft EIR,said that what dictates the trip distribution in the study is the deployment center,which will be the exit from the development.The small number of students and the resulting trips,he said,was inconsequential to the study. "It was not a factor that was considered,"he said. 1_..........__1'-I __...L!_1 __/1"\£\1 1 Inr /1 r /1 C-89 Print Version Page 2 of2 The existing traffic on PV Drive East is roughly 10,000 cars a day;its capacity is 20,000 utilizing both lanes, said the city's traffic engineer,Erik Zandvliet. The Chandler Ranch/RHCC project will generate about 2,300 additional trips each day.Remove the 800 daily trips made by trucks from the Chandler quarry,the difference is an additional 1,400 trips. "That's well within the capacity of the streets,"Zandvliet said. The major traffic impact will be at five intersections:PCH and Narbonne Avenue,PV Drive East and Club View Lane,PV Drive North and Crenshaw Boulevard,PV Drive North and Rolling Hills Road,and PV Drive North and Dapplegray School Road. Plans to relieve the congestion at the intersections -adding more turn lanes -already have been proposed. "The conclusion \[of the supplemental traffic study\]was there were no differences or no additional changes to mitigation that would be required that haven't already been addressed,"Zandvliet said. Noise and aesthetics As for noise,residents will have to live with once it gets startedit through the completion of construction. "There will be significant noise impacts during construction,"Bellas said,adding that noise will continue with the use of landscaping eqUipment. Bellas said that the noise produced by the golf course's landscaping eqUipment is similar to that used by commercial landscapers in residential neighborhoods.To restrict the noise disturbance to neighbors near the golf course,the Country Club must curtail the eqUipment's use in the early morning hours. "The annoyance level is reduced,but noise still significant,"Bellas said. A concern brought up at the May 10 council meeting was the architectural design of the clubhouse and residential,in that it didn't meet the city's Neighborhood Compatibility ordinance. In response,Mike Cope assured council at Tuesday night's meeting and in a letter dated June 7 that the Country Club has agreed to more study of the project's architectural style. "Futhermore,RHCC will as a condition of approval for the project,coordinate with the residential homebuilder on the architecture for the new homes so as to have the overall project reflect a compatible and complimentary architectural style,"he wrote."The clubhouse will be brought back to the Planning Commission concurrently with the residential Neighborhood Compatibility review for the homes." The July 26 City Council meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m.Meetings are held in the council chambers,located at 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North. mscott@pvnews.com http://www.pvnews.com/articles/20 11 /06/16/local_news/news2.prt 6/16/2011C-90 E-mail regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal C-91 From: To: cc: Subject: Date: Hi Kit- carolynn Petru "Kit Fox"; "Joel Rojas"; FW:Pen New Letters to the Editor Monday,June 20,2011 9:21:19 AM FYI -Pen High Stadium Lights. CP From:eveits [mailto:eveits@gmail.com] Sent:Friday,June 17,201111:37 AM To:cc@rpv.com Subject:Pen New Letters to the Editor Dear Council Members, If you didn't see the LTE's in Thurday's Pen News,you can view them online at http://www.pvnews.com/artic1es/20 11/06/16/opinion!opinion3.txt. I hope you will take a more pro-active stance on this issue since it will directly affect the lives of nearly 2000 neighbors of Pen Hi.And,although most of you do not live near enough to the school to be impacted by the noise,traffic and lights,you still need to be sensitive to our situation.You can have great influence on the school board's decision if only you will take the time to do so.We believe that an important school board meeting may be held July 14 concerning this issue.Your letters and attendance at that meeting could make an important difference. ,Earl and Nancy Veits Rancho Palos Verdes C-92 Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal C-93 Print Version Page 1 of3 [PrintPa9~J June 16 Letters to the Editor: Thursday,June 16,2011 11:57 AM PDT PV Drive South still hazardous Whenever I can,I avoid Palos Verdes Drive South through the slide area.I will generally use PV Drive East (switchbacks and all),if I have to go anywhere north of my home.Reason:The physical condition of the roadway is at its worst since 1987-88. At that time the city abandoned it and built a new asphalt strip located approximately 600 feet north of the original location.However,that kind of solution is not in the cards today.A drive across the area shows a recently patched (poorly,I must say)strip of asphalt highlighted by dashed white lines which signify areas \[that\]need work -most likely nothing more than removal and replacement of the patched asphalt to make some sort of almost continuous surface on which automobiles may ride without "suspension-breaking" jolts (and some misinformed citizens don't like speed humps).Now if these Band-aid patch jobs would ever fix the problem,we'd be OK,but they don't and never will.Months ago,this citizen pointed out the mechanism by which the segment of PVDS keeps moving and forever seeking to get to sea level.Do any of you need a reminder?At the time I mentioned that a few 6-year-olds who have Ph.D.s in sand castle building could show you graphically why the road moves so much,and so violently,but no one wants to listen.After all,the city (un)wisely uses our tax dollars to payoff experts who incidently don't have a clue as to what is really going on under the asphalt,but the 6-year-olds do.The "patching"to takethat took place on Tuesday6/14 and Wednesday6/15 will have limited life also (as all of the prior patch-jobs have),and a few months down the road it will be done again.The correct solution is to stop the driving force. If there is a long-term solution sitting on the back burner somewhere,it needs to get some attention,before we are all driving at sea level. Barry Hildebrand,Rancho Palos Verdes Why change rural atmosphere? Amy Zeiler-Davis wrote last week that she likes "the quiet evenings and the stars"she sees from her backyard on the Peninsula.And,she pines to relive her high school days as a cheerleader in the South Bay. 1_.......__./'-,...!_'__1,.,.£\.11/n./"'1/' C-94 Print Version Page 2 of3 So why move to a community that cherishes a quiet,rural,small-town atmosphere and try to change it? Stadium lights and late night events at PENHI will not bring back her early years.Nor will they prevent her kids from getting into trouble.Only good parenting skills can do that. Earl Veits,Rancho Palos Verdes Nearby residents oppose lights The 2,000 residents that live within earshot of PENHI are overwhelmingly opposed to the installation of stadium lights at the school.Of those surveyed,nearly all have responded that they have concerns related to excessive noise,impacted views and traffic congestion along residential streets.These concerns are not without basis since those liVing near the school have been living with the impact of afternoon athletic events for years. But the \[Board of Education\]and supporters of stadium lights are now planning late-night athletic events at the school several nights a week throughout the year.You think otherwise?Check out last July's board presentation at www.darkskiesinpv.weebly.com/fnl-proposal.htmlto better understand what's planned for PENHI and their neighbors.If it were really just five to seven nights a year,then why not rent the lights for those few games and donate the nearly $750,000 for the renovation of the pool or saving staff positions that will result from budget cutbacks.I urge all concerned Peninsula residents go to http://darkskiesinpv.weebly.com/help-us.htmland register your support for stopping this project. Shannon Chung,Rancho Palos Verdes Doting mom isn't helping son Dear Gladys Soroyan (Guest commentary,June 9): If your intention is to raise a son to be a male chauvinist,you're doing a wonderful job.In your article,you appear helpless to ask for any changes in your son's purely self-centered behaVior.He puts his sound equipment all over the living room,you suffer and do nothing.He wants an early dinner;you simply fix it for him and then he eats half of what you have prepared for you and your husband to eat later. You let him continue to lounge around as you take care of his every need.He talks with your husband but rarely is interested in relating courteously to you as a human being.You are obViously just a servant to him. I pity the woman he marries because he is learning from you that women are to be used.You may miss the slob when he goes back to school but the next woman with whom he has a relationship will undoubtedly get http://www.pvnews.com/articles/2011/06/16/opinion/opinion3.prt 6/20/2011C-95 Print Version Page 3 of3 tired of this slob's home-trained egocentric attitude.You are the parent.It is your home.You should be in charge.You are not doing the world a favor by helping your son to be so self-centered and inconsiderate.He should learn to keep his things in his own room,make his own early meals and clean up after himself.He will learn a great deal at college but he will learn how to treat a woman from you. Dorothy Gram,Rancho Palos Verdes http://www.pvnews.com/artic1es/20 11 /06/16/opinion/opinion3.prt 6/20/2011C-96 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18464385 Palos Verdes school board to revisit Peninsula High stadium lighting By Melissa Pamer Staff Writer Posted:07112/2011 07:32:48 PM PDT Updated:07/12/2011 07:33:20 PM PDT The Palos Verdes Peninsula school board is set Thursday to revisit a controversial proposal to install stadium lighting at the Peninsula High football field. In July 2010,the board gave a group of parents and alumni permission to raise funds for lights and a sound system.The group has brought in $250,000 and is ready to pay for a review of the environmental effects of the proposal,according to the chairwoman of the Peninsula Stadium Lights Steering Committee. The Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District board is expected to receive an update from staff and give direction on the next steps for the proposal,which has been sharply criticized by neighbors of the Rolling Hills Estates campus. The 6:30 p.m.meeting is at Malaga Cove Administration Center,375 Via Almar,Palos Verdes Estates. -Melissa Pamer Plus,get 3 FREE Gifts Page 1 of 1 If)OldcI:ww'w.i hnahaSil:,ti~s.(om/pr im~I ort,ll1l-8-'~-60r:,-O"!I)6 http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=1310569093659 7/13/2011C-97 Print Version Page 1 of2 L PrintpEige ] Will stadium lights effort go on? By Mary Scott Peninsula News Thursday,July 14,2011 1:13 PM PDT The Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Steering Committee will meet with the Board of Education during the board's regular meeting tonight.Although the progress on the committee's fund raising efforts will be presented as an informational item,the board could decide whether or not to let the effort continue. "The meeting is simply to review where we are at in the process,"Kevin Moen,a Peninsula High football coach and a member of the stadium lights committee,said."The board had asked for the committee to raise a certain amount by July in order to proceed to the EIR process." In July 2010,the committee was given the go-ahead to raise funds to complete the design and for the environmental impact report for four aO-foot-tall light poles and a new sound system for Peninsula High's football stadium.The board at that time did not approve the installation of stadium lights,nor did it approve or pledge any Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District funds for the project.Nevertheless,the board's decision outraged many residents liVing near the school,as previous school boards have denied even initial fund raising for stadium lights because of their impact,including light,noise and traffic,on the surrounding neighborhoods. Since the board's approval of stadium light fundraising last summer,opposition has formed the Peninsula Preservation Committee.Its members are expected to attend tonight's meeting. "Many are expecting a packed house with a number of interesting speakers on both sides of the issue," resident Mark Sturgeon said."The BOE is expected to take a vote,and may authorize continued fundraising or they may end it once and for all." The estimated cost for the stadium light project is between $750,000 and $900,000,according to the district.The final cost will not be known until the bidding process is complete. "Through the financial support from a large number of people we have raised in excess of \[the necessary\] amount and look forward to moving on to the EIR process,"Moen said."This is what was requested by the city of Rancho Palos Verdes,Rolling Hills Estates and the board." The meeting will take place at the Malaga Cove Administration Center board room,375 Via Almar in Palos Verdes Estates.The open session is expected to reconvene at 6:30 p.m. mscott@pvnews.com http://www.pvnews.com/artic1es/2011l07/14/10calyews/newsl.prt 7/14/2011C-98 Print Version http://www.pvnews.com/articles/2011/07/14/localyews/news l.prt Page 2 of2 7/14/2011C-99 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18486989 Page 1 of3 Palos Verdes school board shuts down Peninsula High stadium lighting plan By Melissa Pamer Staff Writer Posted:07115/2011 06:54:42 PM PDT Updated:07/15/201107:15:31 PM PDT Citing the divisive nature of a proposal that generated intense interest over the past year, the Palos Verdes Peninsula school board has shut down a fundraising group that wanted to bring Friday night lights to high school football games on The Hill. The board voted unanimously to halt the efforts of a committee of parents and alumni who had dreamed of seeing football players and cheerleaders perform under stadium lighting at Palos Verdes Peninsula High in Rolling Hills Estates. After it was given the go-ahead by the board a year ago to begin fundraising,the group had brought in more than the $250,000 required by the district to move forward with a study of lighting plans. "Most if not all of our donors are emotionally and materially invested in moving this project to the next phase,"said Nina MacLeay,chairwoman of the Peninsula Stadium Lights Steering Committee. But at a standing-room-only meeting Thursday night that was packed with opponents of the lights,the district brought an end to the committee's efforts. The vote came after an hour of testimony from residents,many of whom said the lights would degrade the quality of life on The Hill. One speaker,Marilyn Forsythe of Rolling Hills Estates,called the Peninsula "an oasis in the middle of a vast,seething Los Angeles metropolis,filled with cars,dust and noise." "A few narrow-minded people want to destroy this pristine area,this very unique paradise," she continued,noting that the school had gone for decades with no lights. Several speakers brought up the prospect of "angry voters"withdrawing their support for an expected district bid to extend a much-needed parcel tax that brings in $7 million annually for school salaries and operations.The tax expires in 2013 and the board will later this month consider when to ask voters for an extension. "Ending the lights proposal tonight will improve community support for our schools when it comes time to pass the hat and ask for another parcel tax,"said resident Mark Sturgeon. Sturgeon represents a group called the Peninsula Preservation Committee,which has organized in opposition to the lights proposal since last summer.Members who crowded the board room wore stickers that said "We love our schools,but http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=1311020162046 7/18/2011C-100 Fonnat Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18486989 Page 2 of3 ...NO LIGHTS Please." Peninsula High co-head football coach Adam Boyd took issue with that. "If you love our schools,then why would you want to deprive your children of this great opportunity -an opportunity that 99 percent of high school Americans get to enjoy?"Boyd asked. Board members said they were driven to their decision by the level of contention the proposal had created. "Friday night lights was going to bring the community together,but somehow what's happened over the past year -it's divided the community.That's what so sad about this situation,"board member Barbara Lucky said. Boyd and fellow coach Kevin Moen,a former football star from what was then Rolling Hills High who went on to play for the University of California,Berkeley,had argued repeatedly that their team -and the broader school community - deserved the experience of night games. "I just wish we weren't so divisive over this issue." Lights proponents pleaded that they had complied with district demands and had pursued their goal "in good faith." Peninsula High,along with the district's other comprehensive high school,Palos Verdes High in Palos Verdes Estates,are the only two large CIF campuses in the South Bay that cannot host night games because they lack lighting. Board President Dora de la Rosa and others said "things have changed"since the initial go-ahead was issued last year. "It's very,very difficult,"she said. You could save up to $343 lID Responsible [ifAffordable Auto Insurance The action was taken under a policy adopted in 2006 -the only one in the state,according to district officials -that guides board oversight of independent fundraising efforts for construction projects.With its wealthy parent and alumni population,the district is in the unusual position of having parents suggest and raise funds for capital projects. Afternoon home games require students to leave class early,and that means working parents often cannot attend. Last July,board members said they worried about impact on close-by neighbors,and had concerns about glare,traffic,trash and parking.But they voted unanimously at the time to allow the lights committee to move forward with fundraising to pay for an environmental impact report to study the effects of the proposed lighting. But the board voted 4-0,with board member Larry Vanden Bos absent,to end the project.The vote came just days after committee members scrambled to meet a July 1 district-imposed deadline to raise $250,000. The committee intended to pay the full cost of installing and maintaining the lights.Members said Thursday that the board was voting based on emotion -a charge denied by board members -instead of on the "facts"that would be provided by a future environmental review. http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=1311020162046 7/18/2011C-101 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint ::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18486989 Page 3 of3 Superintendent Walker Williams and the district's attorney,Terry Tao,both expressed misgivings about the lights. Tao said there were legal concerns,including about a possible court challenge to the planned environmental review.He was skeptical that the group would have enough money to fund contingencies. Williams worried that the district would end up spending its own money on the project.He recommended the board vote to end the fundraising. It's not the first time the district has been embroiled in controversy by a push -and push- back -for stadium lighting.The last conflict over night games occurred in 1993,and on occasions before that. On Friday,Moen and MacLeay both said that members of the lights committee were discouraged that the board had rehashed the merits of the project instead of hearing an update on fundraising -as they expected -at Thursday's meeting.They were surprised by the discussion and the vote. "There were no revelations last night that were different than a year ago,"Moen said."To me, last night's decision to stop the project was unfounded.If they would have made that d ecision a year ago,I could have lived with it.It's hard right now because we've garnered 1,500 supporters of this project who have donated." Moen said the committee would meet in coming days to figure out its next move.If a decision is made to end the group's efforts,money will be returned to donors,he said. But that didn't sound likely just yet. "We have a pretty committed group,"Moen said. "Although we had a setback last night,we're not going to let that deter us from continuing to pursue the project." In an email Friday,Sturgeon called the outcome "a big victory for the community." "One has to ask,are we doomed to repeat this process every 12 years?"Sturgeon wrote."I can only hope that when future booster groups consider promoting stadium lights at any of our high school campuses,they will look at the history of four failed attempts and reconsider their options." melissa.pamer@dailybreeze.com http://www.dailybreeze.com/fdcp?unique=1311020162046 7/18/2011C-102 PVPUSD Board of Education Staff report regarding PVPHS stadium lights proposal C-103 Palos Verdes Peninsula usn :Palos Verdes Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Steeri...Page 1 of I Palos Verdes Peninsulausn Meeting:Regular Meeting:K.Discussion/Action Created:July 08,2011 at 03:47 PM 1.Palos Verdes Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Steering Committee Project (V) July 14,2011 Status:Ready for Meeting Quick Summary /Recommended Action That the Board give staff direction or take action as deemed appropriate and/or necessary regarding the Palos Verdes Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Project. Background Information Per Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 3290.1,if school sites desire to organize a capital campaign for buildings and funds,they must inform the Board of Education of their intent and then obtain conceptual approval from the Board. At the July 22,2010 meeting,the Board of Education approved the concept as presented by the Peninsula Stadium Lights Steering Committee,thereby providing the authority for the Committee to begin fundraising for its proposed Palos Verdes Peninsula High School stadium light project. Current Considerations The Board will be presented with information and an update on the Palos Verdes Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Project. Financial Considerations The estimated cost for this project ranges from $750,000-$900,000.The final cost will not be known until the bid process is complete.Funding for the project will be provided through the fund raising efforts of the Palos Verdes Peninsula High School Stadium Lights Steering Committee. Administrators Deputy Superintendent of Business Services http://pvpusd.csbaagendaonline.net/cgi-bin/WebObjects/pvpusd-eAgenda.woa/wo/8.0.7 .1.3....7/8/2011C-104 Letters to Senators Feinstein and Boxer regarding the Rancho LPG butane storage facility C-105 CITYOF THOMAS D.LONG,MAYOR ANTHONY M.MISETICH,MAYOR PRO TEM BRIAN CAMPBELL,COUNCILMAN DoUGLAS W.STERN,COUNCILMAN STEFAN WOLOWICZ,CoUNCILMAN June 21,2011 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein United States Senate 331 Hart Senate Office Building Washington.DC 20510 RANCHO PALOS VERDES SUBJECT:City of Rancho Palos Verdes'Concerns regarding the Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility,2110 North Gaffey Street,San Pedro,California Dear Senator Feinstein: Residents in San Pedro and Rancho Palos Verdes have been concerned for many years about the Rancho LPG (formerly AmeriGas)butane storage facility at North Gaffey Street and Westmont Drive in San Pedro.Within the past year,these concerns returned to the forefront,particularly in the aftermath of the catastrophic gas pipeline failure in the Bay Area community of San Bruno in September 2010. We understand that plans were made several years ago for this facility to be re-Iocated to the Port of Los Angeles-away from homes,schools and local business-plans that (for some reason)have never come'to fruition.The facility was approved for its current site more than thirty (30)years ago,at a time when less-rigorous environmental review and public participation processes were in effect than is the case today. In September 2010,the City of Los Angeles'Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council (NWSPNC)released a quantitative risk assessment of the Rancho LPG facility,prepared by Cornerstone Technologies.The Cornerstone report identified a variety of possible accident scenarios for the facility.These ranged from a relatively small,on-site mishap with impacts mainly contained to the site,to a sudden,catastrophic failure of the butane storage tanks with impacts extending for a 5-to 7-mile radius from the facility. The facility's operator,Rancho LPG Holdings,LLC,immediately refuted the conclusions of the Cornerstone report,whose authors have not (to the City's knowledge)responded publicly to questions about how the risk assessment was prepared or how its conclusions were reached.Rancho LPG subsequently commissioned its own risk assessment of the 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275·5391 /(310)544·5205/FAX (310)544-5291/WWW.PALOSVERDES.COM!RPV t:.~:PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C-106 Senator Dianne Feinstein June 16,2011 Page 2 facility,prepared by Quest Consultants.The findings of the Quest report,which were publicly released in January 2011,concluded that the area potentially affected by the most catastrophic events that could realistically occur at the Rancho LPG facility.would be several orders of magnitude less than the nearly 7-mile radius affected under the most- catastrophic scenario identified in the Cornerstone report.Despite this,there remain today many unanswered questions about the safety of this facility for residents living nearby. Ideally,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and its residents would like to see this facility relocated to another site that does not pose such a significant "risk of upset"to surrounding property and neighborhoods.Failing that,however,we wish to be assured that the facility is operated as safely as possible,and in complete accordance the regulations of all ,tocal, State and Federal agencies having jurisdiction over this site and these types of f~cilities. To these ends,we respectfully request your assistance in the fulfilling the following community objectives: •Regularly monitor the Rancho LPG site and facility,and enforce (to the maximum extent possible)any applicable Federal regUlations and environmental review processes (Le.,NEPA)with respect to the on-going operation of the facility and any possible future proposals for its modification,renovation and/or expansion;and, •Provide to the general public a transparent and accountable clearinghouse for the dissemination of any information and the discussion of issues about the Rancho LPG site and facility. Our Planning Staff continues to monitor issues related to the Rancho LPG site and facility, and to report these issues regu!arly to our City Council.We look forward to working with you and the facility's owner/operator to ensure the future safety and tranquility of our respective communities and residents. Thomas Mayor cc:Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Carolyn Lehr,City Manager Joel Rojas,Community Development Director Kit Fox,Associate Planner C-107 CITVOF THOMAS D.LONG,MAYOR ANTHONY M.MISETICH,MAYOR PRO TEM BRIAN CAMPBB.L,COUNCILMAN DOUGLAS W.STERN,COUNOLMAN STEFAN WOLDW'CZ,COUNCILMAN June 21,2011 RANCHO PALOS VERDES The Honorable Barbara Boxer United States Senate 112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington,DC 20510 SUBJECT:City of Rancho Palos Verdes'Concerns regarding the Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility,2110 North Gaffey Street,San Pedro, California Dear Senator Boxer: Residents in San Pedro and Rancho Palos Verdes have been concerned for many years about the Rancho LPG (formerly AmeriGas)butane storage facility at North Gaffey Street and Westmont Drive in San Pedro.Within the past year,these concerns returned to the forefront,particularly in the aftermath of the catastrophic gas pipeline failure in the Bay Area community of San Bruno in September 2010. We understand that plans were made several years ago for this facility to be re-Iocated to the Port of Los Angeles-away from homes,schools and local business-plans that (for some reason)have never come to fruition.The facility was approved for its current site more than thirty (30)years'ago,at a time when less-rigorous environmental review and public participation processes were in effect than is the case today. In September 2010,the City of Los Angeles'Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council (NWSPNC)released a quantitative risk assessment of the Rancho LPG facility, prepared by Cornerstone Technologies.The Cornerstone report identified a variety of possible accident scenarios for the facility.These ranged from a relatively small,on-site mishap with impacts mainly contained to the site,to a sudden,catastrophic failure of the butane storage tanks with impacts extending for a 5-to 7-mile radius from the facility. The facility's operator,Rancho LPG Holdings,LLC,immediately refuted the conclusions of the Cornerstone report,whose authors have not (to the City's knowledge)responded publicly to questions about how the risk assessment was prepared or how its conclusions were reached.Rancho LPG subsequently commissioned its own risk assessment of the facility,prepared by Quest Consultants.The findings of the Quest 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALos VERDES,CA 90275-5391/(310)544-5205 /FAX (310)544-5291/WWW.PALOSVERDES.COM!RPV ;::~~PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER C-108 Senator Barbara Boxer June 16,2011 Page 2 report,which were publicly released in January 2011,concluded that the area potentially affected by the most catastrophic events that could realistically occur at the Rancho LPG facility would be several orders of magnitude less than the nearly 7-mile radius affected under the most-catastrophic scenario identified in the Cornerstone .report.Despite this,there remain today many unanswered questions about the safety of this facility for residents living nearby. Ideally,the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and its residents would like to see this facility relocated to another site that does not pose such a significant "risk of upsef'to surrounding property and neighborhoods.Failing that,however,we wish to be assured that the facility is operated as safely as possible,and in complete accordance·the regulations of all local,State and Federal agencies having jurisdiction over this site and these types of facilities.To these ends,we respectfully request your assistance in the fulfilling the following community objectives: •Regularly monitor the Rancho LPG site and facility,and enforce (to the maximum extent possible)any applicable Federal regulations and environmental review processes (Le.,NEPA)with respect to the on-going operation of the facility and any possible future proposals for its modification,renovation and/or expansion; and, •Provide to the general public a transparent and accountable clearinghouse for the dissemination of any information and the discussion of issues about the Rancho LPG site and facility. Our Planning Staff continues to monitor issues related to the Rancho LPG site and facility,and to report these issues regularly to our City Council.We look forward to working with you and the facility's owner/operator to ensure the future safety and tranquility of our respective communities and residents. Thomas D.Long Mayor cc:Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Carolyn Lehr,City Manager Joel Rojas,Community Development Director Kit Fox,Associate Planner C-109 Daily Breeze and PV News articles regarding Marymount College's San Pedro Campus C-110 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint ::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18310579 Page 1 of4 College's new course By Melissa Pamer Staff Writer Posted:06/19/2011 07:02:52 AM PDT Updated:06/20/2011 06:07:46 AM PDT oncrete patios elng aid at Marymount San Pedro housing facility where about 400 students live when the school is in session.The college is turning its expansion plans toward the Los Angeles community.(Brad Graverson Staff Photographer) Less than a year after facing ballot-box defeat in its bid for dormitories in Rancho Palos Verdes, Marymount College is turning its expansion- oriented eye down the hill toward San Pedro. The private Catholic college last week announced a 50-year master plan that would overhaul its 11-acre San Pedro property,erecting new housing for hundreds of students and large new classroom buildings.At the same time,the school is increasing its footprint and rewing up its cultural programming in the harbor community's downtown area. The change was inspired both by rapidly increasing enrollment,which began last year after the college started offering bachelor's degrees,and by students'embrace of San Pedro during courses offered this spring at the Grand Annex and performances at the historic Warner Grand Theatre. "It was a big win.They were in really nice sp~ces. Spaces like the Warner,we've never had in Rancho Palos Verdes.You could make the case that:Why should we even dream of bUilding in Rancho Palos Verdes when this beautiful setting is available to us in San Pedro?"college President Michael Brophy said. The college's plans for its Palos Verdes Drive North property,a former Navy housing site that has remained largely unchanged since Marymount took possession in 1998,were quietly unveiled before Northwest San Pedro and Harbor City neighborhood council members last month. DiRECTVhas mere of what 'you DIRECT~,want to watch! {';""";~,-«.~__-"~~m-_~.~,~.~,,-•.,w~•••-_,,._. Print Powered By l.i~L!:9.!':!2~.tQY.:!l~.~Ls§:J C-111 Format Dynamics::CleanPrint ::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_1831 0579 Page 2 of4 The master plan,which fulfills the "educational park" concept pitched when Marymount bid for the military land,still needs to be submitted to and approved by Los Angeles officials. The new direction for the college comes after a bruising November election battle in which Marymount sought Rancho Palos Verdes voter approval for dormitories -as well as for other improvements that already had City Council backing.Despite spending nearly $1.5 million on the effort,Marymount failed to get Measure P approved. "The lesson that's learned in Rancho Palos Verdes is a Catholic college does not a political candidate make,"Brophy said. But he said he still planned to see improvements, including a new library and athletic center, completed at the main campus - a 25-acre parcel on Palos Verdes Drive East that offers sweeping ocean views and is surrounded by private residences. And Brophy is not giving up on his vision of dormitories at the Rancho Palos Verdes campus, despite the election loss and ongoing opposition from surrounding homeowners. "In the meantime,frankly,we can devote ourselves to that or tum to the city of Los Angeles and meet the needs of our growing student population,"Brophy said. The school this year became only the second Catholic institution in Los Angeles to confer bachelor's degrees,after Loyola Marymount University in Westchester.The new course offerings transformed the two-year college in concept and attracted many more students, despite tuition of about $28,000 this year.Room and board ranges from about $11,000 to $14,000. Full-time enrollment hit its Rancho Palos Verdes-imposed cap of 793 last fall,and Brophy said he expects to exceed that number in the future when classrooms are built at the San Pedro property. That growth is a benefit for fundraising and puts the college in a better position to borrow funds for construction,Brophy said. "We never expected to be this large this quickly," he added. The San Pedro land allows an appropriate response,he said. Marymount's main property in San Pedro is adjacent private Rolling Hills Preparatory Schodl in a slightly isolated area overlooking Wilmington oil refineries.For now,it's occupied by 86 town houses,many of which are getting overhauled this summer to aUow more students to live there,some of them in triples.About 400 are expected in fall. This past academic year,the college created a new quad area with basketball and volleyball courts,and a gathering space with a huge outdoor fireplace. "It's beautiful.Students love it -s'mores,"said Call Nowl '-877...835...8373 -(~~) ,-,""'''''''''1'\.1 1 C-112 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_18310579 Page 3 of4 Susie Mitton Shannon,who lives at the site and is the college's residential life director."It's created much more of a community sense for our students." The college plans to first build a new parking lot -disguised by vegetation -along Palos Verdes 0 rive North.Then a new maintenance yard would come,followed in 2016 by a three-story building with offices,classrooms and dining that's set to be called "Old Main." Marymount is also talking to Rolling Hills Prep about shared athletic facilities,Brophy said. In 2020,Marymount envisions constructing academic buildings with 36 classrooms. Residence halls would eventually be built in a dorm style,followed by a central dining hall, student union and more classrooms by 2055. Initial planning documents said dorms would house 900 students,but Brophy said the figure is not final. The structures would be built in a "California craftsman"style. So far,the plan has been met with cautious enthusiasm by Harbor Area neighborhood council members,despite a bit of surprise as to the extent of the expansion. John Greenwood,chairman of the planning and land-use committee for the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council and a former Los Angeles school board member,said reactions to Marymount's presentation have produced a lot of questions and some concern about effects on traffic. "Some folks were upset that -'gee,you got voted out of Palos Verdes and now you're coming to us,'"said Greenwood,who noted that he generally favors more educational opportunities locally. "The more options we can get for higher education in the community,the better.We just want to make sure the details make sense." Joanne Valle,executive director of the Harbor City/Harbor Gateway Chamber of Commerce, was thrilled. "It's right there,right at our back door,"Valle said."Any time we bring in an educational facility,it's wonderful." Meanwhile,the college is expanding elsewhere in San Pedro.It plans to lease office space on Sixth Street,just down the way from the Warner Grand Theatre and Grand Annex,where art classes will again be offered this year.Student artists will also show work this year in gallery space at the historic Arcade Building. "We'd like to think we can re-enliven some of the spaces on Sixth Street.They're certainly looking for that kind of energy,"Brophy said. He also hopes to see many students interning with local businesses and at the Port of Los Angeles.He touts the 17,000 hours of community service that students performed this year through a partnership with the Boys &Girls Clubs of Los Angeles Harbor. Marymount also recently upgraded its 30-unit DIRECTVhal more of what you DIRECT\{want towatchl r 11"'t.1"\./"""'1 1 C-113 Format Dynamics ::CleanPrint::http://www.dailybreeze.comlnews/ci_18310579 Page 4 of4 Point View West apartment complex on 24th Street. Kelly Curtis,the college's director of communications,said there's been an attitude difference in San Pedro. "We're so welcomed.We're met with enthusiasm instead of a little bit of resistance in Rancho Palos Verdes,"Curtis said."Our students have been residing in San Pedro for 37 years,and there's a misperception that we're a Palos Verdes institution.We're not." In Rancho Palos Verdes,where neighbors still keep an eagle eye on Marymount's activities and plans,the expansion of the San Pedro campus is producing some sense of satisfaction. "We're quite delighted.It's exactly what we had said they should have done 10 years ago,"said Lois Karp,a Rancho Palos Verdes homeowner who founded a nonprofit in part to oppose Marymount's dorm plans. The school's plans for its Palos Verdes Drive East property have,meanwhile,languished.Since the council approved the expansion last year after some 10 years of back and forth,the college has not filed any planning documents that would allow it to begin construction. Under council-approved requirements,the initial phase of the project -demolition,grading,a new parking area,athletic fields and the erection of modular temporary buildings -was supposed to be completed by Sept.30,2012,principal planner Ara Mihranian said. An extension can be requested,but,Mihranian noted,"It appears to be a tight timeline." And as the college seeks permits to upgrade some ventilation equipment on science laboratories,a debate has arisen on whether the new conditions approved last year by the council should be enforced,considering construction hasn't begun. Regardless of those lingering questions in Rancho Palos Verdes,Brophy is filled with optimism about the college's new direction. "The Rancho Palos Verdes campus will always be the academic flagship of Marymount College. The location bestows upon it a serenity,a security that is part and parcel with our transformative experience,"Brophy said. "While 90275 was a very important ZIP code, 90731 has been important and will gain a more prominent role in future years." melissa.pamer@dailybreeze.com Send flowers f~r any occasion Bou<Jl:Iets ~wfrom$191l9 ProFJow-erS' Offer ONLY available at: proflowers.comlhappy or call1.8n.804.1133 C-114 Print Version Page 1 of2 LPrint Page ..J Marymount College announces 50-year plan for San Pedro campus From Staff Reports Thursday,June 23,2011 1:43 PM PDT Development at Rancho Palos Verdes campus to begin in 2012. RPV -The Marymount College board of trustees and Marymount President Michael S.Brophy announced last week the college's proposed master plan for its San Pedro satellite campus,located at 1600 Palos Verdes Drive North,and affirmed its commitment to begin construction at the college's original campl,ls in Rancho Palos Verdes. The long-term plan for the San Pedro campus includes constructing residential and academic facilities by 2055.The college is in the early stages of the mandatory Los Angeles County conditional use permit process and does not anticipate CUP approval before December 2012. The San Pedro master plan centers on developing a small college campus where students will live,attend classes and study.Projects will be completed in steps over the duration of 50 years.Among the first projects will be improving the San Pedro property by constructing an aesthetically pleasing parking lot along Palos Verdes Drive North so that cars do not have to park along the roadway,building a maintenance facility and upgrading the on-campus town homes to accommodate the growing need for student housing.Approximately 400 students will reside at the San Pedro campus in fall 2011. In 2016,the college will construct an educational building,currently referred to as "Old Main,"that also will provide some student facilities,including a dining commons and recreational features.In 2020,more classrooms will be constructed.The exteriors of all proposed new buildings will be styled with a "California craftsman"appearance,with the surrounding grounds maintaining a college campus,park-like ambiance. The new buildings will not interfere with the surrounding neighborhood's aesthetic,and the buildings' exterior projection from the street will not exceed more than two stories in height. In 2035,the existing and older townhomes will be dismantled,with new residential units constructed in their place.In 2055,a student union and more residential units will be constructed. With each phase of construction,adequate parking facilities will be incorporated to accommodate additional students. The college presented its plans to and sought community input from the Harbor City Neighborhood Council and the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council,and it held two community forums for neighbors to attend.Follow-up meetings with the neighborhood councils and community are expected as the plan moves through the entitlement process. The college recognized the need to understand the potential impact that the growing campus will have on local roadways,so in spring 2011 it commissioned a traffic study of 17 intersections and the impact that increased enrollment at the San Pedro campus would have on those intersections.Preliminarily,the study revealed that by using the site for both residential and academic purposes,the number of cars traveling between the San Pedro and RPV campuses would decrease.The detailed report from the traffic study has not yet been completed.Currently and for the foreseeable future,the college provides bus service for its students who reside in San Pedro,thereby reducing traffic on local roads. Marymount College and San Pedro have been in an alliance for nearly four decades. "The San Pedro community offers a classroom for our students,"Brophy said."What it gives our students is as important as lectures and textbooks.Working,volunteering and experiencing the real world all contribute L.LL....__11 I __...L~_1 __'1"\£\1 1 /nr,,,A /1 __1 ___I C-115 Print Version Page 2 of2 to our students'transformation into people who lead lives of leadership and service." Marymount students have resided off campus in San Pedro for 37 years,at first in rented apartments throughout the port community,and now in two locations:one at Palos Verdes Drive North and one to the west in San Pedro in an apartment complex owned by the college.Faculty and staff also choose to reside in San Pedro,with 42 employees currently making their homes there. New opportunities In partnership with San Pedro's community leaders,the college recently formalized arrangements for teaching and performing on Sixth Street in downtown San Pedro.The college's annual Ito/Matsuura Film Series was shown at the Warner Grand Theatre in fall 2010,and students in the jazz ensemble rehearsed at the Grand Annex all year.In spring 2011,students performed the play "You Can't Take It with You"at the Warner Grand. Brophy sees Marymount students continuing their involvement in the San Pedro community. "Looking into our next academic year,we plan to offer film series,theatrical productions,guest lectures and gallery showings of multimedia work at the Arcade Gallery,and we plan to participate in First Thursday Artwalks,"he says.In addition,the college intends to offer classes in music and theater arts,and curricula within its bachelor's degree programs. In summer 2011,Marymount will increase its presence in San Pedro to accommodate growth,serve upper division undergraduates and develop graduate programs to connect to local business,municipal,arts and not-for-profit groups in Los Angeles.A new administrative and institutional center will be located at 222 Sixth St.This building will be the new home for the institutional advancement and communications divisions, the Medeem and Intentional Conversation Institutes and leadership of the business and global studies programs.Academic Affairs and a new enrollment management team specializing in returning-student and graduate study will be represented in the building as well. Additionally,early plans are under way for a bUilding closer to the Warner Grand Theatre that will include visual and media arts learning spaces for students and studios for faculty instruction,research and design as well as a gallery for student,faculty and community art exhibitions. "Our intention is to contribute to and learn from the cultural richness found in downtown San Pedro,"Brophy says. Connections beyond class Beyond the classroom,the college's Catholic mission encourages service to others.In 2010-11,Marymount students volunteered 17,000 hours of service to the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Los Angeles Harbor.First- year students tutored,led activities and served as mentors at the three Los Angeles Harbor locations, encouraging after-school participants to pursue a college education. In 2011-12,the college's students will continue their relationship with the Boys and Girls Clubs of the Los Angeles Harbor and engage in new opportunities,including serving on community committees and providing hands-on assistance with initiatives such as building a skate park,and contributing to a community survey, newsletter or event.College staff and faculty also will be engaged in local civic efforts,including participating in the San Pedro Chamber of Commerce and the Arts Cultural Entertainment committee and service,as well as making philanthropic contributions to the Boys and Girls Clubs,Rainbow Services,Grand Vision Foundation and Mary Star of the Sea High School. Campus development In 2010,the city of RPV approved a conditional use permit for the college to develop its Palos Verdes campus at 30800 Palos Verdes Drive East.Entitlements include a library,athletic facilities and much-overdue infrastructure upgrades to existing structures.These projects will be completed incrementally,beginning with the groundbreaking of the William H.Hannon Library in summer 2012.Final planning and fundraising for this state-of-art library are occurring now. C-116