Loading...
CC SR 20230620 I - Border Issues Status CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 06/20/2023 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar AGENDA TITLE: Consideration and possible action to review the first biannual 2023 Border Issues report. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Receive and file the first biannual report on the status of Border Issues for 2023. FISCAL IMPACT: None Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: Megan Barnes, Senior Administrative Analyst REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. May 10, 2023 motion regarding Rancho LPG facility (page A-1) B. May 8, 2023 Daily Breeze article on West Harbor (page B-1) C. February 14, 2023 Palos Verdes Estates City Council Staff Report (page C-1) D. May 3, 2023 Palos Verdes Estates Traffic Safety Committee Staff Report (page D- 1) E. January 31, 2023 comment letter on Shen Residence Project (page E-1) F. April 13, 2023 press release on Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (page F-1) G. Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project fact sheet (page G -1) H. Caltrans Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment for the Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (page H- 1) I. May 8, 2023 Daily Breeze article on Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (page I-1) J. May 31, 2023 Daily Breeze article on Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (page J-1) ____________________________________________________________________ 1 BACKGROUND: This is the first biannual report to the City Council on various “Border Issues” potentially affecting residents of Rancho Palos Verdes for 202 3. This biannual report includes an update on the following projects: • 248-unit Butcher Solana apartment project at Hawthorne Boul evard and Via Valmonte in Torrance • Proposed leasing of the Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro fo r commercial fueling operations • Ponte Vista development on a former Navy housing site on Western Avenue in San Pedro • Issues and events related to the Rancho LPG butane storage facility in San Pedro • San Pedro Waterfront Project (West Harbor) • Proposed 11-unit mixed-use residential development at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard in Torrance • Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone in Rolling Hills • Caltrans Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project • Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project in Palos Verdes Estates • George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project in Rolling Hills Estates • Proposed Starbucks drive-thru at 28110 South Western Avenue in San Pedro • Proposed 18-unit mixed-use development on Hawthorne Boulevard near Rolling Hills Road in Torrance • Proposed residence at 77 Portuguese Bend Road in Rolling Hills • Proposed Caltrans Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project The full current status report and archived reports are available on the City’s website at: http://www.rpvca.gov/781/Border-Issues-Status-Report Please note that pursuant to City Council Policy No. 34, the next Border Issues Status Report is tentatively scheduled to be considered on a December 2023 City Council agenda. DISCUSSION: Current Border Issues Butcher Solana Residential Development Project (Torrance) There has been no change in the status of the proposed Butcher Solana apartment project at the southwest corner of Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Valmonte, which would consist of 248 one- and two-bedroom apartments in three five-story buildings with 484 parking spaces in a six-story structure. 2 According to the City of Torrance, in mid-September 2019, the project developer notified planning staff it was putting the project on hold while it reviewed more than 690 comment letters on the project’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was released in June 2019. Planning staff for the City of Torrance has indicated that as of June 2023, the project remains on hold. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Additio nal information about the project is available on the City of Torrance’s website at https://www.torranceca.gov/our-city/community-development/planning/butcher-solana. Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) Negotiations remain ongoing for two leases for Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro (DFSP), the sprawling, inactive U.S. Navy fuel tank farm on North Gaffey Street (which borders the City on a stretch of Western Avenue), and an 8-acre Marine Terminal about five miles southeast in the Port of Long Beach. According to the Navy, the lease for the Marine Terminal is expected to be completed by the end of summer 2023. For the Main Terminal, the Navy is waiting on a formal plan from a potential lessee and will then determine whether a Supplemental Environmental Assessment (EA) is needed. The signing of a Main Terminal outlease would not take place until all environmental documentation is complete. If a Supplemental EA is needed, there would be an additional public review and comment period. No additional information about the leases is available due to Department of Defense solicitation regulations. Once they are signed, the Navy will be able to provide additional information. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Ponte Vista (formerly Highpark) Project (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) Home building continues at Ponte Vista, the 676-unit project on 61.4 acres of former Navy along Western Avenue in San Pedro across from Green Hills Memorial Park, which will consist of single-family homes, townhomes, and flats. According to master developer Harridge Development Group, almost all areas of Ponte Vista are in various phases of construction. No plans have been submitted for Subarea 4A in the northeast corner of the site, the only remaining subarea to be developed. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility, Los Angeles (San Pedro) On May 10, 2023, Los Angeles City Councilmember Tim McOsker introduced a motion in response to photos showing varying levels of water in a water basin at Rancho LPG, the facility on North Gaffey Street in San Pedro, where 25 million gallons of butane are stored in two aboveground tanks and another five horizontal storage tanks each holds 60,000 3 gallons of propane. Rancho LPG has long been the subject of concerns from residents of San Pedro, the Eastview area of Rancho Palos Verdes, and others about safety and the potential for a catastrophic explosion. Plains All American Pipeline, which owns the facility, has defended its safety record and procedures. Councilmember McOsker’s motion (Attachment A) stated that the photos lead to questions of how the varying water levels impact Rancho LPG’s operational capacity. Councilmember McOsker called for an investigation of the water basin and its impact on overall operations and mitigations, noting that should the basin become polluted, the release of contaminated water could impact local water infrastructure. The motion requested a report back from various City of Los Angeles departments with an analysis of regulating authority for the water basin under the purview of the city’s jurisdiction when it comes to the operations of the site and potential water contamination produced by Rancho LPG. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. San Pedro Waterfront Project (West Harbor) (Port of Los Angeles) Construction continues on the West Harbor development at the site of the former Ports O’ Call Village in San Pedro, which will include 375,000 square feet of restaurants, retail, office, open space, and entertainment over 42 acres. In May 2023, the Daily Breeze reported that West Harbor is expected to open in phases as early as late 2024, with a grand opening in 2025 (Attachment B). The now-finished northern section of the promenade, called North Park, is being eyed for events and as a temporary popup location for food and retail vendors. In May, the San Pedro Fish Market relocated to a temporary spot in North Park after closing its longtime location to accommodate construction. Work is set to begin in June 2023 on the remainder of the waterfront promenade. A supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR) remains under development for a proposed 6,200-seat outdoor amphitheater that would host approximately 100 paid events per year, generally from April through November. It is Staff’s understanding that the stage speakers would face south toward the ocean and away from residential neighborhoods to minimize noise impacts. In addition to concerts, 25 offshore barge fireworks displays per year are proposed. In May 2022, t he City submitted comments (PDF) on the Port of Los Angeles’ Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the supplemental EIR raising concerns about noise and environmental impacts from concerts and fireworks displays. According to the Port of Los Angeles, the supplemental EIR is expected to be released in August 2023. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. 4 Mixed-Use Residential Development at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard (Torrance) There has been no change in the status of the proposed mixed-use development on the northwest corner of Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Valmonte in the City of Torrance (across from the Butcher-Solana project). Located at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard, the proposed project consists of an 11-unit, two-story multiple-family residential building over a semi-subterranean parking garage, and a three-story office building. On October 6, 2021, the Torrance Planning Commission was scheduled to review a draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and consider approving a Conditional Use Permit for the project. However, the project developer, Ashai Design Consulting Corporation, agreed to continue the Planning Commission hearing indefinitely to conduct public outreach regarding traffic, density, and neighborhood compatibility concerns from nearby residents, including those in the Valmonte neighborhood . It is Staff’s understanding that Ashai Design has taken public feedback received at outreach meetings into consideration, but that no new Planning Commission hearing date has been set at this time. It is also unknown at this time whether project revisions will occur. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (Rolling Hills) There has been no change in the status of the Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone in the City of Rolling Hills, a mixed -use, multi-family overlay zone on a 31- acre site owned by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD) at 38 Crest Road West, which is included in Rolling Hills’ draft 6th Cycle Housing Element. The overlay zone allows the addition of up to 16 multi-family units by-right, including low- and very low-income units, in an area west of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority (PVPTA) facility. According to planning staff at the City of Rolling Hills, the city has received informal inquiries about developing the site. However, no plans have been submitted. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project (Caltrans) According to Caltrans, Phase II of the Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project, which includes the installation of bike lanes, has been postponed to November 2023 and is expected to take 6-7 months to complete. Staff has requested Caltrans provide the City advance notice so the City can give residents notice and avoid miscommunication like that which occurred when roadwork related to the Ponte Vista project was performed on Western Avenue in 2020. 5 Caltrans is pursuing the Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project to enhance connectivity and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians along Western Avenue from 25th Street in San Pedro to Carson Street in Torrance. The project also includes the installation of curb ramps compliant with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards and pavement markings to create a northbound right -turn lane at Westmont Drive/Delasonde Drive. This portion of Western Avenue is owned, operated, and maintained by Caltrans as part of the state highway system. The City has no jurisdiction over Western Avenue, but can share feedback and public concerns with Caltrans. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports . Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project (Palos Verdes Estates) On February 14, 2023, the Palos Verdes Estates City Council received a report on the proposed Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project, which aims to alleviate traffic congestion along the Palos Verdes Drive West corridor, including its intersections with Via Corta and Palos Verdes Drive North (Attachment C). The Council had previously directed staff to discontinue work on a proposed roundabout design for Palos Verdes Drive West and Via Corta and to return at a future meeting with recommendations related to project implications, improving the intersection’s performance, and community engagement. The City Council decided to seek recommendations from the city’s Traffic Safety Committee on potential options, including implementing smaller improvements, making no changes, or implementing a major change, such as a traffic signal or roundabout, and whether to recombine Phases 1 and 2 into one project. On May 3, 2023, the Traffic Safety Committee (Attachment D) directed staff to return with more information about both smaller and major improvements, including for the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive West and Palos Verdes Drive North (known as the “triangle”) in addition to Palos Verdes Drive West and Via Corta; to conduct public outreach; and to meet in the coming months to make recommendations to the City Council. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project (Rolling Hills Estates) According to the City of Rolling Hills Estates, construction documents have been finalized for the George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project, which includes the demolition of the aging George F Canyon Nature Center on the southwest corner of Palos Verdes Drive North and Palos Verdes Drive East and the construction of a new nature center/community center. The city expects to put the project out to bid in the coming months, with construction anticipated to begin in the first quarter of 2024. 6 The project was approved by the Rolling Hills Estates City Council in August 2022. It will include a single-level, 1,750-square-foot nature center/community room building with a viewing deck, a 1,000-square-foot outdoor classroom area with a photovoltaic (PV) shade canopy, storage enclosures, a boardwalk with a canyon overlook, privacy screen, community-preferred fencing, gate, and associated parking and drop -off spaces, increasing the overall size of the facility to 3,290 square feet. The outdoor amphitheater will remain and be accessed by a new boardwalk ramp from a central court between the nature center and the covered outdoor classroom area. The overall project has been downsized from a 5,500-square-foot version that was considered in 2019. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Starbucks Drive-Thru at 28110 South Western Avenue (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) In May 2023, the Kaidence Group, a Phoenix-based commercial real estate developer, canceled its application to build a 2,178-square-foot drive-thru Starbucks coffee shop on the site of a vacant bank building in the Garden Village Shopping Center in San Pedro on Western Avenue just north of Westmont Drive. According to the Kaidence Group, the developer now plans to submit a new application to build a proposed Starbucks drive-thru in a different location in the shopping center, the site of a vacant Coco’s restaurant space in the southwest corner. Details on the proposed drive-thru are not available, as a formal application has yet to be submitted. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Mixed-Use Residential Development on Hawthorne Boulevard Near Rolling Hills Road (Torrance) According to City of Torrance planning staff, the application for a proposed 18-unit apartment mixed-use development along the east side of Hawthorne Boulevard just north of Rolling Hills Road is being reviewed for completeness. No hearing date has been scheduled. In 2022, silhouettes went up outlining the visual impacts of the proposed project, including 5,745 square feet of office space. The site is located on seven vacant parcels within the city’s Hillside Overlay Area. It is Staff’s understanding that the project will not require an environmental review because it meets the parameters of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332, meaning it is considered an “infill” development project. This exemption is intended to promote infill development, which is defined by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research as “building within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns, typically but not exclusively in urban areas.” Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. 7 New Border Issues 77 Portuguese Bend Road (Rolling Hills) In December 2022, the City of Rolling Hills released a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an initial study and mitigated negative declaration (IS/MND) for a proposed residence on an undeveloped 21.14-acre parcel located at 77 Portuguese Bend Road (referred to as the Shen Residence). The proposed project consists of the construction of an 8,847-square-foot single-family residence, a 2,427-square-foot guesthouse, a 2,766-square-foot pool area, and the re- alignment and potential modification of an existing road and driveway into the easement area located between residences at 73 and 74 Portuguese Bend Road. The home would include two two-car garages, four bedrooms, four bathrooms and two half-bathrooms. Amenities would include an open central courtyard, a gym/workshop, a breakfast nook, a laundry room, and a pantry. The guesthouse would include an open pond courtyard, one bedroom, one bathroom and one half-bathroom. The pool area would include a swimming pool with a pool gate, jacuzzi, walkway, and pool deck. The proposed project would also include a 450-square-foot stable, a 550-square-foot corral, and a trash enclosure near the northern boundary of the project footprint. The NOI, IS/MND, appendices, and other information are available at: https://www.rolling- hills.org/government/planning_and_community_services/index.php#Shen The public comment period for the NOI ended on January 31, 2023. That day, RPV Community Development Department Staff submitted a comment letter, which, among other comments, requested the project’s environmental analysis and mitigation measures incorporate the Habitat Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures and Preserve Public Use Master Plan (PUMP) found in the City’s Natural Communities Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP), as the project site is adjacent to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve (Attachment E). City of Rolling Hills planning staff indicated that the next step is for the applicant’s geotechnical engineer to review and prepare responses to comments. It is Staff's understanding that there is a possibility that the project notice may be reissued due to information that needs to be corrected and updated. This would give Community Development Department Staff another opportunity to provide comments. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. 8 Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (Caltrans) In April 2023, Caltrans announced public meetings seeking feedback on its proposed Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project, which will require a long-term partial or full bridge closure that will result in major traffic impacts (Attachment F). The 60-year-old suspension bridge connecting San Pedro to the west and Terminal Island to the east is traversed by 53,000 vehicles per day on average, including commuters who travel between the Palos Verdes Peninsula and Long Beach/Orange County. Image: Caltrans According to Caltrans, the deck of the Vincent Thomas Bridge is rapidly deteriorating due to concrete fatigue caused by heavy truck traffic, despite a polyester concrete overlay applied to the bridge deck in 2009. The proposed project would preserve the bridge’s structural integrity and enhance the bridge’s overall safety by replacing the deck and upgrading barriers, railings, and seismic sensors (Attachments G and H). Work is expected to take place from 2025 to 2027. Caltrans has proposed three construction staging schedules: • Single-Stage Construction: full closure may last 9-12 months with detours and 24/7 work. • Two-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 18 -24 months one lane open/three closed with night work and 55-hour closures – 24 to 30 months with no closures. • Three-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 24-30 months with one lane open and closed in each direction with night work and 55-hour closures – 30 to 36 months with no closures. 9 Anticipated detour routes will direct traffic to and from Terminal Island via the Commodore Schuyler F. Heim Bridge (SR-47) from the north and the Gerald Desmond Bridge (I-710) from the east. These detour routes potentially include West Harry Bridges Boulevard, Alameda Street, Anaheim Street, Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1), Henry Ford Avenue (SR- 47), and Terminal Island Freeway (SR-103). Official detour routes will be selected during the project’s approval phase. An interactive virtual meeting room with project information is ava ilable at virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ and a recording of a virtual meeting held on May 4, 2023 is available at youtu.be/WZ8WsFdr4ok. After Caltrans’ plans to close the bridge caught many in the harbor area by surprise, the public comment deadline was extended from May 12, 2023 to May 26, 2023 (Attachment I) and then to July 10, 2023 (Attachment J). Written comments can be emailed caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net with the subject line: “VTB Deck Replacement Project” or mailed to: Jason Roach, Senior Environmental Planner Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020) California Department of Transportation, District 7 100 South Main Street, MS 16A Los Angeles, CA 90012 After the public comment period ends, Caltrans anticipates conducting technical studies for the proposed project in the summer and fall of 2023, circulating an environmental document and holding a public hearing in winter 2023, responding to comments, and releasing a final environmental document in winter/spring 2024, and making a decision on how to proceed with the project in spring 2024. On May 25, 2023, Los Angeles City Councilmember McOsker submitted a comment letter, which noted heavy existing port-related traffic impacts to Wilmington residents, and called for, among other things, exploring a potential ferry or water taxi service during construction, and studying additional project alternatives, including adding a second bridge deck, or replacing the bridge entirely. Staff plans to prepare comments on behalf of the City. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. 10 PUBLIC WORKSMOTION The Rancho LPG LLC Holdings Facility is a butane and propane storage facility located adjacent to a residential area of San Pedro. The facility includes two above-ground 12.5 million-gallon refrigerated tanks, as well as five above-ground 60,000-gallon horizontal storage tanks. The refrigerated tanks were constructed in 1973 and 1974 and met all applicable engineering standards and building codes at that time. Holding over 25,000,000 million gallons of butane and propane, which are liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) products, these substances are are commonly used in homes, restaurants and vehicles, and are extremely flammable and explosive gasses. As previously reported out in council files, the facility is regulated by at least nine local, state and federal agencies, including: California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA), Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (DBS), California Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD), Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation Department of Public Works (BOS), and Los Angeles County Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). In addition, as part of the regulations, the facility is required to submit reports for the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program. Recently, photos of a water basin on site have shown varying levels of water in it, leading to questions of how this impacts Rancho LPG’s operational capacity. It’s unclear which agency oversees regulations related to this potential mitigation measure and how it is reported or monitored on a continual basis. Should the basin become polluted, the release of contaminated water could impact local water infrastructure. An investigation of this facility’s water basin and its impact to overall operations and mitigations is necessary. I THEREFORE MOVE that the Board of Public Works, specifically the Office of Petroleum and Natural Gas Administration and Safety, Bureau of Sanitation, Emergency Management Department, Los Angeles Fire Department, Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, Los Angeles Department of Power and Water, and any other relevant department, with the cooperation and coordination of the City Attorney, to report back with an analysis of regulating authority for the water basin under the purview of the City’s jurisdiction, when it comes to the operations of the site, and its potential water contamination produced by the Rancho LPG Facility./I PRESENTED BY: TM McOSKER Councilmember, 15th District MAY i 0 2C23 SECONDED BY: MOTION 0 UBLIC WORKS The Rancho LPG LLC Holdings Facility is a butane and propane storage facility located adjacent to a residential area of San Pedro. The facility includes two above-ground 12.5 million-gallon refrigerated tanks, as well as five above-ground 60,000-gallon horizontal storage tanks. The refrigerated tanks were constructed in 1973 and 1974 and met all applicable engineering standards and building codes at that time. Holding over 25,000,000 million gallons of butane and propane, which are liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) products, these substances are are commonly used in homes, restaurants and vehicles, and are extremely flammable and explosive gasses. As previously reported out in council files, the facility is regulated by at least nine local, state and federal agencies, including: California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA), Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (DBS), California Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Fire Department (LAFD), Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation Department of Public Works (BOS), and Los Angeles County Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). In addition, as part of the regulations, the facility is required to submit reports for the California Accidental Release Prevention (CalARP) program. Recently, photos of a water basin on site have shown varying levels of water in it, leading to questions of how this impacts Rancho LPG's operational capacity. It's unclear which agency oversees regulations related to this potential mitigation measure and how it is reported or monitored on a continual basis. Should the basin become polluted, the release of contaminated water could impact local water infrastructure. An investigation of this facility's water basin and its impact to overall operations and mitigations is necessary. I THEREFORE MOVE that the Board of Public Works, specifically the Office of Petroleum and Natural Gas Administration and Safety, Bureau of Sanitation, Emergency Management Department, Los Angeles Fire Department, Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety, Los Angeles Department of Power and Water, and any other relevant department, with the cooperation and coordination of the City Attorney, to report back with an analysis of regulating authority for the water basin under the purview of the City's jurisdiction, when it comes to the operations of the site, and its potential water contamination produced by the Rancho LPG Facility. ~ ~ j\ PRESENTED BY: / y I -t-~------------~- Councilmember, 15 th District C!J SECONDED BY: 0~ 0 A-1 Next San Pedro waterfront promenade section to start construction in June Donna Littlejohn Work on the next section of San Pedro’s waterfront promenade — from Berths 74 to 83, along what will be the West Harbor attraction — is scheduled to begin next month. Los Angeles harbor commissioners recently approved a $26.8 million bid with the Griffith Company to do the Phase II work on the promenade. The northern portion of what will be a contiguous West Harbor waterside promenade has already been completed and opened to the public a year ago. Planning and construction continues, meanwhile, on the overall 42-acre development that’s set to debut in phases beginning possibly in late 2024 — but with a grand opening planned for 2025. That North Park section is now also slated to be used for events, popup food and other vendors beginning around Mother’s Day weekend. The San Pedro Fish Market and Restaurant has also set a temporary spot on that portion while waterfront construction continues on the more southern part of the West Harbor footprint. The Fish Market’s temporary location, called the “Landing,” opened on Friday, May 5. West Harbor, designed with the aim of keeping the area closest to the water as open and building-free as possible, will feature a contiguous 30-foot-wide walkway with benches and railings — and plenty of room for walkers, skaters and leashed dogs. The West Harbor development, which broke ground in November, has been in the works for more than a decade. It will take the place of the former Ports O’ Call Village, a 1960s outdoor center that was long popular with both San Pedro residents and visitors. The $150 million development will feature myriad attractions, including a 6,200-seat amphitheater and multiple restaurants, including Mario’s Butcher Shop & Delicatessen, Pitfire Pizza, The Win-Dow, Hopscotch and Jay Bird’s Chicken. Harbor Breeze Cruises will also be there, as will Bark Social — a social club and park for dogs and their owners. West Harbor’s buildings will be larger, but fewer in number, than Ports O’ Call. The structures will feature mezzanines, openings to water views and an expansive use of glass to also enhance views of the waterfront. Next San Pedro waterfront promenade section to start construction ... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/next-san-pedro-waterfron... 1 of 2 6/12/2023, 11:27 AM B-1 They will also be placed back from the water, behind and adjacent to the open promenade. The northern, now-finished section of the West Harbor promenade runs from the southern edge of the town square — a small roundabout in front of the Los Angeles Maritime Museum — farther south to a spot that stops just before reaching the now-closed former San Pedro Fish Market location. The new work starting this summer will take the walkway farther south along the linear West Harbor footprint. Benches made of Brazilian walnut wood have been installed along the portion now completed, along with wood railings. Earlier sections of a waterfront promenade were installed several years ago a mile to the north, near the cruise center, and extending south, nearly parallel to Harbor Boulevard, and ending on the north side of the town square. The goal has been to create a “bridge to breakwater” promenade running the length of San Pedro’s portion of the LA Waterfront that also takes in Wilmington. The Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners approved the contract with Griffith Company on April 27. Sign up for The Localist, our daily email newsletter with handpicked stories relevant to where you live. Subscribe here. Next San Pedro waterfront promenade section to start construction ... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/next-san-pedro-waterfron... 2 of 2 6/12/2023, 11:27 AM B-2 Agenda Item _____: Meeting Date: 2/14/2023 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: ANASTASIA SEIMS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR THRU: MARK PRESTWICH, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: RECEIVE REPORT BACK AND CONSIDER OPTIONS AND PROJECT IMPLICATIONS FOR POSSIBLE PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS DATE: FEBRUARY 14, 2023 ______________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION Receive report back and consider options and project implications for possible future Palos Verdes Drive West (PVDW) corridor improvements, and provide direction to the City Manager. BACKGROUND Concerns with traffic along the PVDW corridor at the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive North, also known as the triangle, and at the intersection of Via Corta were considered by the Traffic Safety Committee starting with a Police Department analysis in November 2017. In response to the discussions, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued for a feasibility study to consider options for available for the corridor. A Professional Services Agreement was awarded to Michael Baker International, Inc. (MBI) and the Feasibility Study was completed and presented to City Council in December 2019. A decision was made in December 2019 to bifurcate the Project and split the two intersections, PVDW/Via Corta and the triangle, into two projects: Phase 1 and Phase 2, respectively. For Phase 1 of the Project at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta, the following design alternatives were reviewed: 1.No Build 2.Installation of a Traffic Signal 3.Construction of a Single Lane Roundabout 4.Construction of a Two-Lane Roundabout MEMORANDUM 7 C-1 It was determined through review of the Feasibility Study that the single lane roundabout could not handle the existing traffic flows, so this design alternative was not considered in future discussions. In 2020, the City applied to Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for Measure M grant funding for the Project Approval/Environmental Documentation (PA/ED) phase of Phase 1 of the Project. Metro approved the funding in August 2020. In March 2021, City Council approved including the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) phase of Phase 1 of the Project along with the PA/ED phase. The Funding Agreement, which provides $677,000 of Measure M funds for the PA/ED and PS&E phases, was executed in November 2021 with an effective date of July 2021. On March 3, 2021 the Traffic Safety Committee recommended the City Council consider four interim measures for the PVDW/Via Corta intersection until the permanent improvements could be constructed. The following four interim street and parking measures, which are described and shown in an exhibit in Attachment A and outlined below, were presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting. 1.Widen eastbound PVDW by narrowing the median in order to add a second eastbound lane. The additional lane would accommodate through and right-turn movements. To provide an accepting lane on the east side of the PVDW/Via Corta intersection, the existing on-street parking on the south side of PVDW is recommended for removal to Via Chico. As an alternative, parking between the Malaga Plaza entrance and Via Chico could be restricted during peak hours. Eastbound traffic on the Upper Barrel would be restricted to right turns only by installing a raised diverter median. The existing westbound right-turn lane approach should be modified to allow through and right-turn movements. 2.Simplify turning movements at PVDW/Via Del Puente by closing the southbound traffic lane south of PVDW and converting the existing northbound traffic lane south of PVDW to two-way traffic. This would better align the north and south legs of the intersection and could improve eastbound traffic flow by flaring the striping to allow a needed left turn pocket that currently causes delay when an eastbound driver wishes to turn north onto Via Del Puente. 3.Add on-street parking to the south side of the existing raised median that is west of the PVDW/Via Corta Intersection to offset parking lost on the east side of the intersection under #1. 4.Add a curb extension at the southeast corner. This will reduce delays from pedestrians crossing the intersection by shortening the distance across the intersection. Improved pedestrian access may also encourage parking at the Memorial Garden during peak parking demand. The interim street and parking measures were not implemented, and instead manual traffic control continues to be used to reduce traffic impacts at the PVDW/Via Corta intersection during forecasted periods of congestion. In October 2021, MBI was awarded a Professional Services Agreement to provide PA/ED and PS&E Services for the Phase 1 of the Project. At the March 16, 2022 Joint Meeting of the City Council and Traffic Safety Committee, the two-lane roundabout was selected as the preferred design alternative. The 35% design plans for Phase 1 of the Project were C-2 substantially completed in June 2022 with remaining work including any revisions or additions due to parking mitigation options that were pending public input in late August 2022 and subsequent City Council direction. A Project Update Meeting was presented at the August 22, 2022 City Council Special Meeting. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Council directed staff to discontinue work on a roundabout design at the PVDW /Via Corta intersection. The previously scheduled Parking Mitigation Drop-in Format Open Houses were cancelled. The City Council requested a formal report back to be presented at a future City Council meeting with recommendations related to project implications, improving the intersection’s performance, Traffic Safety Committee involvement, and community engagement. At the September 27, 2022 City Council Meeting, a motion was carried to discontinue work on the roundabout at the PVDW and Via Corta intersection for the Project, and it was discussed that the requested formal report back regarding options for the Project would occur at a future City Council Meeting. DISCUSSION At the August 22, 2022 and September 27, 2022 City Council Meetings, the City Council requested a formal report back at a future City Council meeting with recommendations related to: • Project implications • Improving the intersection’s performance with a specific focus on the entire corridor • Traffic Safety Committee involvement, and • Opportunities for community engagement. Project Implications and Improving Corridor Performance Options for PVDW corridor improvements include: 1. Implementing smaller, City-funded low-cost improvements at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta; or 2. Implementing no improvements to the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta; or 3. Implementing a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal. The following chart provides information about funding implications and intersection performance for each option. Option Funding Source Intersection Performance 1. Implement smaller improvements at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta, such as those presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting. 1. City funds will need to be allocated for the evaluation of possible smaller improvements, public outreach, and the design and construction of any selected improvements. 1. Some improvement is expected, but it will not be to the levels anticipated in the 2019 Feasibility Study. C-3 Measure M funds allocated for future expenditures on the Project will be returned to Metro. 2. Implement no improvements to the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta. 2. No additional funding is needed. The Measure M funds allocated for future expenditures on the Project will be returned to Metro. 2. No improvement. 3. Implement a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal. 3. Measure M Funds, which is the existing grant from Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). 3. Expected to improve as outlined in the 2019 Feasibility Study. If smaller improvements are proposed to be implemented at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta (Option #1 above), it will need to be determined if the interim street measures presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting are still valid and updated cost estimates will need to be prepared. Additional City funds will need to be allocated to complete this evaluation. If a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal (Option #3 above) is proposed to be implemented, the following will need to be considered: 1. If Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project will remain separate or be combined into one Project. 2. Whether interim street measures, such as those presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting, are desired at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta. If so, Additional City funds will need to be allocated to evaluate the optional interim street improvements to determine if they are still valid and to update the associated cost estimates. 3. Whether a traffic signal is a design alternative that may be considered for the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta or at the triangle. 4. Whether a two-lane roundabout is a design alternative that may be considered for the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta or at the triangle. Traffic Safety Committee and Community Involvement Below are options for Traffic Safety Committee and community involvement for the Project: Option Traffic Safety Committee and Community Involvement 1. Implement smaller improvements at the intersection of PVDW and Via a. Smaller improvements would need to be evaluated and cost estimates prepared. It is recommended that any smaller improvements C-4 Corta, such as those presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting. considered be taken to the Traffic Safety Committee for analysis and an eventual recommendation to the City Council. b. It is recommended a referral to the Traffic Safety Committee include request that the Committee implement a minimum one-month public comment period for any considered improvements. It may also be helpful for the Committee to host community open houses, and utilize randomly selected focus groups to to receive community feedback on potential improvements. Public comments/feedback would be compiled for consideration to assist the Committee with developing a Council recommendation. 2. Implement no improvements to the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta. a. No Traffic Safety Committee or community involvement is necessary. 3. Implement a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal. a. This will require the City to complete additional engineering and design services for any major improvement, and mirror the public engagement strategies outlined above for smaller improvements. FISCAL IMPACT The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) awarded grant funding in the amount of $677,000 of Measure M for the PA/ED and PS&E phases of the Project in August 2020. The Funding Agreement for the grant funding was effective July 2021 and executed in November 2021. At the October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting when the Professional Services Agreement with was awarded, a budget appropriation of $58,139 of Prop C Funds was made in addition to the $677,000 of Measure M Funds to cover the $735,139 of MBI’s Agreement, and $70,000 of Prop C Funds were appropriated to project management services from HR Green. To date, $1,695.00 of Prop C funding was expended for services provided by HR Green, and the City is in the process of requesting Measure M reimbursement of $293,579.73 for MBI services provided to date. It is Staff’s understanding from South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), which is involved in the approval and coordination of the Measure M funding awarded by Metro, that if the Project is changed from a roundabout design to a traffic signal design, the City would not need to reapply for the Measure M funding and could coordinate with Metro for a revision to the funding agreement, assuming the design still meets the Measure M funding requirements. If the City does not proceed with the roundabout or traffic signal design, there is a risk that the unspent balance of Measure M grant funding would be lost. RECOMMENDED MOTION C-5 Consider options and project implications for possible Palos Verdes Drive West (PVDW) corridor improvements, and provide direction to the City Manager. ATT ACHMENTS A. March 23, 2021 Staff Report for the Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Improvement Project C-6 1 Agenda Item #: Meeting Date: TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THRU: LAURA GUGLIELMO, CITY MANAGER FROM: TIM JONASSON, CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST CORRIDOR EXPANSION PROJECT – PHASING OPTIONS DATE: MARCH 23, 2021 ACTION REQUIRED CONSENT RECEIVE & FILE Recommendation: In order to expedite improvements to the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection direct staff to: 1. Have Metro revise the draft funding agreement to move forward with Project Approval/Environmental Documentation and Plans, Specifications & Estimates for the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection as Phase 1 of the Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Expansion Project; or, 2. Adopt interim measures for the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection as recommend by the Traffic Safety Committee and continue with Metro on the original project schedule; or, 3. Provide staff with alternate direction Summary The Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Expansion project is at a critical juncture as to whether or not to expedite a portion of the ultimate improvements or remain on the current schedule and construct interim improvements to relieve traffic congestion at the Via Corta intersection. The ultimate improvements include roundabout and signal options for both the Via Corta and Palos Verdes Drive North intersections which are on track for construction in the third quarter of 2023. The ultimate improvement options are scheduled for environmental review with public input this summer. However, in order to expedite improvements to the Via Corta intersection, Metro staff said they are willing to consider moving the environmental (PA/ED) and design (PS&E) phases of the Via Corta portion of the project up approximately one year provided the City pay for any costs in excess of the M E M O R A N D U M X 133-23-2021 C-7 2 $677,000 that was previously approved for the PA/ED phase only of the entire project. Staff estimates the City will need an additional $132,000 to expedite this portion of the project. In the meantime, interim improvements to alleviate the need for manual traffic control (i.e., police or private security directing traffic) have been under consideration by the Traffic Safety Committee. These improvements would reduce delay at the Via Corta intersection, but would involve non reimbursable costs of approximately $402,000. Also, staff does not recommend constructing the interim improvements if the Via Corta intersection ultimate improvements are expedited since the additional cost and disruption to the intersection would not be justified for the short period before the ultimate improvements are under construction. Background and Analysis On January 26, 2021 staff provided an update on the status of the Palos Verdes Drive Corridor interim and ultimate improvements. City Council expressed concern about the schedule and what measures could be taken to expedite construction currently slated for summer 2023. Staff approached Metro on the possibility of expediting the ultimate Via Corta intersection improvements only into the PA/ED and PS&E phases this year in order to be able to request construction funding in early 2022. This would move the construction for the ultimate improvements up approximately one year into summer/fall 2022. Metro staff responded that they would support splitting the project with the following caveats: 1. The City would complete the PA/ED and PS&E phases for Phase 1 (PVD West/Via Corta) within the $677,000 previously approved budget; and 2. The City provide Metro with a revised cost and scope for these phases for Phase 1 Staff worked with Michael Baker International (MBI) who prepared the 2019 feasibility study for the project and developed the scope and budget estimate for completing PA/ED and PS&E phases for Phase 1. Based on MBI’s estimate of $715,000 and HR Green’s estimate of $94,000 to administer MBI’s contract and coordinate the selection of design options through the public process staff estimates there will be a shortfall of approximately $132,000 in the current Metro budget. This additional budget would have to be provided by the City in order to expedite the construction phase of the ultimate improvements approximately one year. Based on phasing the corridor improvements as described staff anticipates the following revised project schedule: Project Phase Estimated Time Period PA/ED & PS&E – Phase 1 June 2021 to April 2022 Construction Authorization from Metro June 2022 Construction – Phase 1 July 2022 to May 2023 PA/ED & PS&E - Phase 2 June 2022 to April 2023 Construction Authorization from Metro June 2023 Construction – Phase 2 July 2023 to May 2024 C-8 3 All funding approvals for design (PS&E) and construction for both phases are subject to approval of Metro and will likely require matching of costs by the City to be determined at the time of the application to Metro. If City Council approves moving forward a draft agreement for Phase 1 would be brought to the council as soon as it is approved as to form by Metro’s attorney which is anticipated to be approximately 45 days. Traffic Safety Committee Action On March 3, 2021 the Traffic Safety Committee recommended the City Council consider four interim measures for the PVD West/Via Corta intersection until the permanent improvements could be constructed. The four interim street and parking measures are shown in Figure 1 and described as follows: 1. Widen eastbound PVD West by narrowing the median. (ISM1.1) The additional lane would accommodate through and right-turn movements. To provide an accepting lane on the east side of the intersection the existing on-street parking on the south side of PVD West is recommended for removal to Via Chico. (IPM1) As an alternative parking between the Malaga Plaza entrance and Via Chico could be restricted during peak hours. Eastbound traffic on the Upper Barrel would be restricted to right turns only by installing a raised diverter median. (ISM1.2) The existing westbound right-turn lane approach should be modified to allow through and right-turn movements. (ISM1.3) 2. Simplify turning movements at Via Del Puente by closing the west side of the street and converting the east side to two-way traffic. (ISM2) This would better align the north and south legs of the intersection and could improve eastbound traffic flow by flaring the striping to allow a needed left turn pocket that currently causes delay when an eastbound driver wishes to turn north onto Via Del Puente. 3. Add on-street parking to the south side of the existing raised median to offset parking lost on the east side of the intersection under the first measure. (IPM3) 4. Add curb extension at the southeast corner. (ISM4) This will reduce delays from pedestrians crossing the intersection by shortening the distance across the intersection. Improved pedestrian access may also encourage parking at the Memorial Garden during peak parking demand. C-9 4 Interim Measures - Level of Service Analysis Table 1 lists the level of service (LOS) and average per vehicle delay at the intersection by movement for both the existing configuration and with the proposed interim improvements. For the comparison section in the top of the table, both scenarios do not include the use of manual traffic control. The delay using manual traffic control is shown in the bottom of the table. Manual control was not analyzed for the interim improvements scenario. The volumes used are from the Fall of 2019, which were the last available pre-COVID counts available were included in the corridor feasibility study report. C-10 5 Table 1: Level of Service and Average Vehicle Delay Estimates Left-Through (2)F 198.5 F 83.5 Through-Right (3)C 17 D 27.1 Through F 61.5 F 52.1 Right B 11.4 B 11.7 Left B 14.3 C 18.9 C 15.7 C 20.6 Through F 180.7 F 241.1 D 31.3 E 40.5 Right B 11.8 B 13 F 53.6 F 80.8 Left-Through B 14.4 C 19.7 C 16.1 C 18.7 Right C 21.9 C 20.5 D 27.8 C 24.2 Southbound Left-Through-Right C 16.7 C 20.5 C 18.5 C 22.3 F 121.1 F 99.4 E 44.8 E 46.9 Left-Through B 13.2 Through-Right B 13.8 Left C 26.6 Through A 7.2 Right A 4.4 Left-Through C 26.3 Right C 26.9 Southbound Left-Through-Right D 41.3 B 15.3 Notes: Traffic assignment for interim improvement condition does not assume vehicle diversion due to 'closed' movements. (1) - Delay in seconds per vehicle. (2) - Approximates the conditions on eastbound PVDW at Via Corta. (3) - Approximates the conditions on the eastbound Inner Barrel at Via Corta. LOS: A - 0 to 10.00 sec.; B - 10.01 to 15.00; C - 15.01 to 25.00; D - 25.01 to 35.00; E - 35.01 to 50.00; F - >50.00 Signal only examined during AM Peak Hour given police- assisted operations N/A Westbound Northbound OverallPalos Verdes Drive West @ Via Corta1 [Four-Way Stop- Controlled] Eastbound Westbound Northbound Overall [Signal, given police- assisted operations] Eastbound Highway Capacity Software Intersection- Node [Traffic Control] Direction / Movement Existing Year 2019 Existing Year 2019 (WO Diversion) Temporary Improvements AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS / Delay (1) FEASIBILITY STUDY PROPOSAL LOS / Delay (1)LOS / Delay (1)LOS / Delay (1) As shown, without manual control the intersection has a very poor LOS condition with an overall average delay of over 121 seconds per vehicle with the highest approach delay on PVD West of nearly 200 seconds. In the afternoon the delay is nearly 100 seconds. With manual traffic control in the morning provided by the Palos Verdes Estates Police Department (PVEPD), that delay is reduced to about 15 seconds per vehicle. No afternoon analyses of conditions with the manual control were conducted. The interim improvements, while not reducing delay to the target level of LOS D, would still substantially reduce the delay in the morning from over 121 seconds per vehicle to just below 45 seconds (a 63% reduction). The afternoon delay would be reduced from 99 seconds to about 47 seconds (a 53% reduction). While those levels are still well above the delay incurred using manual traffic control, they would not require the use of personnel in the street to achieve. Interim Measures – Queuing Analysis Table 2 lists the queue lengths for each of the intersection approach movements for existing conditions without manual traffic control and with the potential intersection improvements. As highlighted in the table, the eastbound and westbound through movements currently experience the longest queues with queues extending back to about 25 to 30 cars in each direction. With the interim improvements, the eastbound and westbound through queue length would be substantially reduced to about 10 to 11 cars per lane. While the through queues would be shortened, the queue length for the westbound right-turn lane would be C-11 6 longer as that movement would no longer be in an exclusive lane. In the proposed westbound shared-lane configuration, the addition of through vehicles along with the right- turning vehicles would result in the shared through/right-turn lane having a longer queue than the exclusive through lane. The queue for the northbound right-turn movement would get slightly longer as it would take additional time to clear the intersection with side-by- side through movements occurring. Table 2: Vehicle Queue Length Estimates # vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1) Left-Through (5)27.5 688 13.3 333 Through-Right (6)2.1 53 4.5 113 Through 10.5 263 8.7 218 Right 0.2 5 0.1 3 Left 485 1 25 2.1 53 1.1 28 2.4 60 Through 485 25.5 638 30.3 758 5.4 135 7.1 178 Right 70 0.6 15 0.8 20 9.5 238 12.9 323 Left-Through 90 0.7 18 1.9 48 0.7 18 1.3 33 Right 20 3.4 85 2.6 65 4.3 108 3.1 78 Southbound Left-Through-Right 265 1 25 1.8 45 1.1 28 1.9 48 Notes: (1) - Feet value assumes 25' per vehicle, but actual value may be longer depending on if queu is stopped or 'rolling'. (2) - Available storage value reports approximate available storage length or distance to next intersection. (3) - Red values represent condition where queue length exceeds available storage. (4) - Queue lengths in italics indicates queues blocked by adjacent lane. (5) - Approximates conditions on eastbound PVDW. (6) - Approximates conditions on the eastbound Inner Barrel.PVDW @ Via Corta [Four-Way Stop- Controlled] Eastbound 285 Westbound Northbound HCS 95th Percentile Queue Length Intersection-Node [Traffic Control]Direction / Movement Available Storage (2) Existing Year 2019 Existing Year 2019 (WO Diversion) Temporary Improvements AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak FEASIBILITY STUDY PROPOSAL It is important to note that the analyses were conducted without diverting traffic from one movement to another. For example, if a westbound driver today cuts through the Malaga Cove Plaza parking lot and turns left onto PVD West from northbound Via Corta trying to bypass the queue of cars in the westbound through lane on PVD West, that cut-through was not diverted from that current path of travel to stay on westbound PVD West. Same applies to eastbound traffic currently using a diversionary route. The conclusion is that the potential interim improvements can substantially reduce delay and traffic queues at the PVD West and Via Corta intersection, but will not bring the operating conditions to LOS D or better, which is what is typically considered to be the minimum acceptable LOS. The operating conditions will also be worse than the operating conditions that would be provided by the use of manual traffic control at the intersection. However, the improvement would be much better than conditions without manual traffic control and would not require personnel in the street to direct traffic during any hours of the day. Interim Measures – Cost Estimate & Schedule The design and construction cost for the interim street and parking measures is estimated by MBI to be approximately $352,000. Additional administrative costs for a design request for proposals, project oversight and construction administration would be approximately $50,000. Since these interim measures would not meet minimum 2040 level of service requirements they would not be eligible for Metro funding. Design could be started within the next 60-90 days with construction possible later this year. C-12 7 Fiscal Impact Should the City Council determine to tentatively adopt the expedited schedule staff would identify potential funding sources for the $132,000 in local funds needed to offset the estimated costs and return to the City Council with a proposed resolution to appropriate such funds in Fiscal Year 2020/2021. Should the City Council determine to tentatively adopt the interim measures, staff would identify potential funding sources for the $402,000 in local funds needed to offset the estimated costs and return to the City Council with a proposed resolution to appropriate such funds in Fiscal Year 2020/2021. Staff reported prepared by: Timothy R Jonasson, PE _______________________________ City Engineer C-13 Agenda Item __1__: Meeting Date: 5/3/2023 TO: TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE FROM: ANASTASIA SEIMS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDER OPTIONS FOR POSSIBLE PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS DATE: MAY 3, 2023 ______________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION Consider options for possible Palos Verdes Drive West (PVDW) corridor improvements, and provide recommendations to be considered by the City Council. BACKGROUND Concerns with traffic along the PVDW corridor at the intersection of Palos Verdes Drive North, also known as the triangle, and at the intersection of Via Corta were considered by the Traffic Safety Committee starting with a Police Department analysis in November 2017. In response to the discussions, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued for a feasibility study to consider options for the corridor. A Professional Services Agreement was awarded to Michael Baker International, Inc. (MBI) and the Feasibility Study was completed and presented to City Council in December 2019. In December 2019, City Council made the decision to bifurcate the Project into two stand- alone projects: •Phase 1 – PVDW at Via Corta •Phase 2 - Triangle For Phase 1 of the Project at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta, the following design alternatives were reviewed: 1.No Build 2.Installation of a Traffic Signal 3.Construction of a Single Lane Roundabout 4.Construction of a Two-Lane Roundabout It was determined through review of the Feasibility Study that the single lane roundabout could not handle the existing traffic flows, so this design alternative was not considered in future discussions. MEMORANDUM D-1 In 2020, the City applied to Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) for Measure M grant funding for the Project Approval/Environmental Documentation (PA/ED) phase of Phase 1 of the Project. Metro approved the funding in August 2020. In March 2021, City Council approved including the plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E) phase of Phase 1 of the Project along with the PA/ED phase. The Funding Agreement, which provides $677,000 of Measure M funds for the PA/ED and PS&E phases, was executed in November 2021 with an effective date of July 2021. On March 3, 2021 the Traffic Safety Committee recommended the City Council consider four interim measures for the PVDW/Via Corta intersection until the permanent improvements could be constructed. The following four interim street and parking measures, which are described and shown in an exhibit in Attachment A and outlined below, were presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting. 1. Widen eastbound PVDW by narrowing the median in order to add a second eastbound lane. The additional lane would accommodate through and right-turn movements. To provide an accepting lane on the east side of the PVDW/Via Corta intersection, the existing on-street parking on the south side of PVDW is recommended for removal to Via Chico. As an alternative, parking between the Malaga Plaza entrance and Via Chico could be restricted during peak hours. Eastbound traffic on the Upper Barrel would be restricted to right turns only by installing a raised diverter median. The existing westbound right-turn lane approach should be modified to allow through and right-turn movements. 2. Simplify turning movements at PVDW/Via Del Puente by closing the southbound traffic lane south of PVDW and converting the existing northbound traffic lane south of PVDW to two-way traffic. This would better align the north and south legs of the intersection and could improve eastbound traffic flow by flaring the striping to allow a needed left turn pocket that currently causes delay when an eastbound driver wishes to turn north onto Via Del Puente. 3. Add on-street parking to the south side of the existing raised median that is west of the PVDW/Via Corta Intersection to offset parking lost on the east side of the intersection under #1. 4. Add a curb extension at the southeast corner. This will reduce delays from pedestrians crossing the intersection by shortening the distance across the intersection. Improved pedestrian access may also encourage parking at the Memorial Garden during peak parking demand. The interim street and parking measures were not implemented, and instead manual traffic control continues to be used to reduce traffic impacts at the PVDW/Via Corta intersection during forecasted periods of congestion. The time of the manual traffic control is listed below, with adjustments that were made to the manual traffic control hours in April 2023. Through the use of stealth radar, informal traffic counts were collected at the intersection and reviewed by the Police Department and Public Works Department. Based on this review, the following are the modifications implemented to the manual traffic control: • Monday through Friday 7:45am to 8:45am (beginning April 20, 2023) - Changed from Monday through Friday from 7:30am to 8:30am • Friday 3:00pm to 6:00pm (beginning April 21, 2023) D-2 - Changed from Friday and Saturday from 2:30pm to 5:30pm In October 2021, MBI was awarded a Professional Services Agreement to provide PA/ED and PS&E Services for Phase 1 of the Project. At the March 16, 2022 Joint Meeting of the City Council and Traffic Safety Committee, the two-lane roundabout was selected as the preferred design alternative. The 35% design plans for Phase 1 of the Project were substantially completed in June 2022 with remaining work including any revisions or additions due to parking mitigation options that were pending public input in late August 2022 and subsequent City Council direction. A Project Update Meeting was presented at the August 22, 2022 City Council Special Meeting. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Council directed staff to discontinue work on a roundabout design at the PVDW/Via Corta intersection. The previously scheduled Parking Mitigation Drop-in Format Open Houses were cancelled. The City Council requested a formal report be presented at a future City Council meeting with recommendations related to project implications, improving the intersection’s performance, Traffic Safety Committee involvement, and community engagement. At the September 27, 2022 City Council Meeting, a motion was carried to discontinue work on the roundabout at the PVDW and Via Corta intersection for the Project, and it was requested a formal report regarding options for the Project would occur at a future City Council Meeting. DISCUSSION At the February 14, 2023 City Council Meeting, a formal report was provided to the City Council and the City Council referred to the Traffic Safety Committee the consideration of PVDW corridor improvements with public outreach. Options for PVDW corridor improvements include: 1. Implementing smaller, City-funded low-cost improvements at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta, such as those presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting; 2. Implementing no improvements to the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta or at the triangle; or 3. Implementing a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal, at the PVDW/Via Corta intersection and at the triangle. If smaller improvements are proposed to be implemented at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta (Option #1 above), it will need to be determined if the interim street measures presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting are still valid and updated cost estimates will need to be prepared. Additional City funds will need to be allocated to complete this evaluation. If a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal (Option #3 above), is proposed to be implemented, the following will need to be considered: 1. If Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project will remain separate or be combined into one Project. D-3 2.Whether interim street measures, such as those presented to City Council at the March 23, 2021 City Council Meeting, are desired at the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta. If so, additional City funds will need to be allocated to evaluate the optional interim street improvements to determine if they are still valid and to update the associated cost estimates. 3.Whether a traffic signal is a design alternative that may be considered for the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta or at the triangle. 4.Whether a two-lane roundabout is a design alternative that may be considered for the intersection of PVDW and Via Corta or at the triangle. It is recommended the City conduct a minimum one-month public comment period for any considered improvements. It may also be considered whether posting a survey on the City’s website would be helpful. Public comments/feedback would be compiled for consideration to assist the Committee with developing a Council recommendation. If a major improvement project, such as a traffic signal is requested (Option #3 above), it will require the City to complete additional engineering and design services and mirror the public engagement strategies outlined above for smaller improvements. FISCAL IMPACT The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) awarded grant funding in the amount of $677,000 of Measure M for the PA/ED and PS&E phases of the Project in August 2020. The Funding Agreement for the grant funding was effective July 2021 and executed in November 2021. At the October 26, 2021 City Council Meeting when the Professional Services Agreement with MBI was awarded, a budget appropriation of $58,139 of Prop C Funds was made in addition to the $677,000 of Measure M Funds to cover the $735,139 of MBI’s Agreement. Additionally, $70,000 of Prop C Funds were appropriated to project management services from HR Green. To date, $1,695.00 of Prop C funding was expended for services provided by HR Green, and the City is in the process of requesting Measure M reimbursement of $293,579.73 for MBI services provided to date. It is Staff’s understanding from South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), which is involved in the approval and coordination of the Measure M funding awarded by Metro, that if the Project is changed from a roundabout design to a traffic signal design, the City would not need to reapply for the Measure M funding and could coordinate with Metro for a revision to the funding agreement, assuming the design still meets the Measure M funding requirements. If the City does not proceed with the roundabout or traffic signal design, there is a risk that the unspent balance of Measure M grant funding would be lost. RECOMMENDED MOTION Consider options for possible Palos Verdes Drive West (PVDW) corridor improvements, and provide recommendations to be considered by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS A. March 23, 2021 Staff Report for the Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Improvement Project D-4 1 Agenda Item #: Meeting Date: TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS THRU: LAURA GUGLIELMO, CITY MANAGER FROM: TIM JONASSON, CITY ENGINEER SUBJECT: PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST CORRIDOR EXPANSION PROJECT – PHASING OPTIONS DATE: MARCH 23, 2021 ACTION REQUIRED CONSENT RECEIVE & FILE Recommendation: In order to expedite improvements to the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection direct staff to: 1. Have Metro revise the draft funding agreement to move forward with Project Approval/Environmental Documentation and Plans, Specifications & Estimates for the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection as Phase 1 of the Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Expansion Project; or, 2. Adopt interim measures for the Palos Verdes Drive West/ Via Corta intersection as recommend by the Traffic Safety Committee and continue with Metro on the original project schedule; or, 3. Provide staff with alternate direction Summary The Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Expansion project is at a critical juncture as to whether or not to expedite a portion of the ultimate improvements or remain on the current schedule and construct interim improvements to relieve traffic congestion at the Via Corta intersection. The ultimate improvements include roundabout and signal options for both the Via Corta and Palos Verdes Drive North intersections which are on track for construction in the third quarter of 2023. The ultimate improvement options are scheduled for environmental review with public input this summer. However, in order to expedite improvements to the Via Corta intersection, Metro staff said they are willing to consider moving the environmental (PA/ED) and design (PS&E) phases of the Via Corta portion of the project up approximately one year provided the City pay for any costs in excess of the M E M O R A N D U M X 133-23-2021 ATTACHMENT A D-5 2 $677,000 that was previously approved for the PA/ED phase only of the entire project. Staff estimates the City will need an additional $132,000 to expedite this portion of the project. In the meantime, interim improvements to alleviate the need for manual traffic control (i.e., police or private security directing traffic) have been under consideration by the Traffic Safety Committee. These improvements would reduce delay at the Via Corta intersection, but would involve non reimbursable costs of approximately $402,000. Also, staff does not recommend constructing the interim improvements if the Via Corta intersection ultimate improvements are expedited since the additional cost and disruption to the intersection would not be justified for the short period before the ultimate improvements are under construction. Background and Analysis On January 26, 2021 staff provided an update on the status of the Palos Verdes Drive Corridor interim and ultimate improvements. City Council expressed concern about the schedule and what measures could be taken to expedite construction currently slated for summer 2023. Staff approached Metro on the possibility of expediting the ultimate Via Corta intersection improvements only into the PA/ED and PS&E phases this year in order to be able to request construction funding in early 2022. This would move the construction for the ultimate improvements up approximately one year into summer/fall 2022. Metro staff responded that they would support splitting the project with the following caveats: 1. The City would complete the PA/ED and PS&E phases for Phase 1 (PVD West/Via Corta) within the $677,000 previously approved budget; and 2. The City provide Metro with a revised cost and scope for these phases for Phase 1 Staff worked with Michael Baker International (MBI) who prepared the 2019 feasibility study for the project and developed the scope and budget estimate for completing PA/ED and PS&E phases for Phase 1. Based on MBI’s estimate of $715,000 and HR Green’s estimate of $94,000 to administer MBI’s contract and coordinate the selection of design options through the public process staff estimates there will be a shortfall of approximately $132,000 in the current Metro budget. This additional budget would have to be provided by the City in order to expedite the construction phase of the ultimate improvements approximately one year. Based on phasing the corridor improvements as described staff anticipates the following revised project schedule: Project Phase Estimated Time Period PA/ED & PS&E – Phase 1 June 2021 to April 2022 Construction Authorization from Metro June 2022 Construction – Phase 1 July 2022 to May 2023 PA/ED & PS&E - Phase 2 June 2022 to April 2023 Construction Authorization from Metro June 2023 Construction – Phase 2 July 2023 to May 2024 D-6 3 All funding approvals for design (PS&E) and construction for both phases are subject to approval of Metro and will likely require matching of costs by the City to be determined at the time of the application to Metro. If City Council approves moving forward a draft agreement for Phase 1 would be brought to the council as soon as it is approved as to form by Metro’s attorney which is anticipated to be approximately 45 days. Traffic Safety Committee Action On March 3, 2021 the Traffic Safety Committee recommended the City Council consider four interim measures for the PVD West/Via Corta intersection until the permanent improvements could be constructed. The four interim street and parking measures are shown in Figure 1 and described as follows: 1. Widen eastbound PVD West by narrowing the median. (ISM1.1) The additional lane would accommodate through and right-turn movements. To provide an accepting lane on the east side of the intersection the existing on-street parking on the south side of PVD West is recommended for removal to Via Chico. (IPM1) As an alternative parking between the Malaga Plaza entrance and Via Chico could be restricted during peak hours. Eastbound traffic on the Upper Barrel would be restricted to right turns only by installing a raised diverter median. (ISM1.2) The existing westbound right-turn lane approach should be modified to allow through and right-turn movements. (ISM1.3) 2. Simplify turning movements at Via Del Puente by closing the west side of the street and converting the east side to two-way traffic. (ISM2) This would better align the north and south legs of the intersection and could improve eastbound traffic flow by flaring the striping to allow a needed left turn pocket that currently causes delay when an eastbound driver wishes to turn north onto Via Del Puente. 3. Add on-street parking to the south side of the existing raised median to offset parking lost on the east side of the intersection under the first measure. (IPM3) 4. Add curb extension at the southeast corner. (ISM4) This will reduce delays from pedestrians crossing the intersection by shortening the distance across the intersection. Improved pedestrian access may also encourage parking at the Memorial Garden during peak parking demand. D-7 4 Interim Measures - Level of Service Analysis Table 1 lists the level of service (LOS) and average per vehicle delay at the intersection by movement for both the existing configuration and with the proposed interim improvements. For the comparison section in the top of the table, both scenarios do not include the use of manual traffic control. The delay using manual traffic control is shown in the bottom of the table. Manual control was not analyzed for the interim improvements scenario. The volumes used are from the Fall of 2019, which were the last available pre-COVID counts available were included in the corridor feasibility study report. D-8 5 Table 1: Level of Service and Average Vehicle Delay Estimates Left-Through (2)F 198.5 F 83.5 Through-Right (3)C 17 D 27.1 Through F 61.5 F 52.1 Right B 11.4 B 11.7 Left B 14.3 C 18.9 C 15.7 C 20.6 Through F 180.7 F 241.1 D 31.3 E 40.5 Right B 11.8 B 13 F 53.6 F 80.8 Left-Through B 14.4 C 19.7 C 16.1 C 18.7 Right C 21.9 C 20.5 D 27.8 C 24.2 Southbound Left-Through-Right C 16.7 C 20.5 C 18.5 C 22.3 F 121.1 F 99.4 E 44.8 E 46.9 Left-Through B 13.2 Through-Right B 13.8 Left C 26.6 Through A 7.2 Right A 4.4 Left-Through C 26.3 Right C 26.9 Southbound Left-Through-Right D 41.3 B 15.3 Notes: Traffic assignment for interim improvement condition does not assume vehicle diversion due to 'closed' movements. (1) - Delay in seconds per vehicle. (2) - Approximates the conditions on eastbound PVDW at Via Corta. (3) - Approximates the conditions on the eastbound Inner Barrel at Via Corta. LOS: A - 0 to 10.00 sec.; B - 10.01 to 15.00; C - 15.01 to 25.00; D - 25.01 to 35.00; E - 35.01 to 50.00; F - >50.00 Signal only examined during AM Peak Hour given police- assisted operations N/A Westbound Northbound OverallPalos Verdes Drive West @ Via Corta1 [Four-Way Stop- Controlled] Eastbound Westbound Northbound Overall [Signal, given police- assisted operations] Eastbound Highway Capacity Software Intersection- Node [Traffic Control] Direction / Movement Existing Year 2019 Existing Year 2019 (WO Diversion) Temporary Improvements AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS / Delay (1) FEASIBILITY STUDY PROPOSAL LOS / Delay (1)LOS / Delay (1)LOS / Delay (1) As shown, without manual control the intersection has a very poor LOS condition with an overall average delay of over 121 seconds per vehicle with the highest approach delay on PVD West of nearly 200 seconds. In the afternoon the delay is nearly 100 seconds. With manual traffic control in the morning provided by the Palos Verdes Estates Police Department (PVEPD), that delay is reduced to about 15 seconds per vehicle. No afternoon analyses of conditions with the manual control were conducted. The interim improvements, while not reducing delay to the target level of LOS D, would still substantially reduce the delay in the morning from over 121 seconds per vehicle to just below 45 seconds (a 63% reduction). The afternoon delay would be reduced from 99 seconds to about 47 seconds (a 53% reduction). While those levels are still well above the delay incurred using manual traffic control, they would not require the use of personnel in the street to achieve. Interim Measures – Queuing Analysis Table 2 lists the queue lengths for each of the intersection approach movements for existing conditions without manual traffic control and with the potential intersection improvements. As highlighted in the table, the eastbound and westbound through movements currently experience the longest queues with queues extending back to about 25 to 30 cars in each direction. With the interim improvements, the eastbound and westbound through queue length would be substantially reduced to about 10 to 11 cars per lane. While the through queues would be shortened, the queue length for the westbound right-turn lane would be D-9 6 longer as that movement would no longer be in an exclusive lane. In the proposed westbound shared-lane configuration, the addition of through vehicles along with the right- turning vehicles would result in the shared through/right-turn lane having a longer queue than the exclusive through lane. The queue for the northbound right-turn movement would get slightly longer as it would take additional time to clear the intersection with side-by- side through movements occurring. Table 2: Vehicle Queue Length Estimates # vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1)# vehicles Feet (1) Left-Through (5)27.5 688 13.3 333 Through-Right (6)2.1 53 4.5 113 Through 10.5 263 8.7 218 Right 0.2 5 0.1 3 Left 485 1 25 2.1 53 1.1 28 2.4 60 Through 485 25.5 638 30.3 758 5.4 135 7.1 178 Right 70 0.6 15 0.8 20 9.5 238 12.9 323 Left-Through 90 0.7 18 1.9 48 0.7 18 1.3 33 Right 20 3.4 85 2.6 65 4.3 108 3.1 78 Southbound Left-Through-Right 265 1 25 1.8 45 1.1 28 1.9 48 Notes: (1) - Feet value assumes 25' per vehicle, but actual value may be longer depending on if queu is stopped or 'rolling'. (2) - Available storage value reports approximate available storage length or distance to next intersection. (3) - Red values represent condition where queue length exceeds available storage. (4) - Queue lengths in italics indicates queues blocked by adjacent lane. (5) - Approximates conditions on eastbound PVDW. (6) - Approximates conditions on the eastbound Inner Barrel.PVDW @ Via Corta [Four-Way Stop- Controlled] Eastbound 285 Westbound Northbound HCS 95th Percentile Queue Length Intersection-Node [Traffic Control]Direction / Movement Available Storage (2) Existing Year 2019 Existing Year 2019 (WO Diversion) Temporary Improvements AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak FEASIBILITY STUDY PROPOSAL It is important to note that the analyses were conducted without diverting traffic from one movement to another. For example, if a westbound driver today cuts through the Malaga Cove Plaza parking lot and turns left onto PVD West from northbound Via Corta trying to bypass the queue of cars in the westbound through lane on PVD West, that cut-through was not diverted from that current path of travel to stay on westbound PVD West. Same applies to eastbound traffic currently using a diversionary route. The conclusion is that the potential interim improvements can substantially reduce delay and traffic queues at the PVD West and Via Corta intersection, but will not bring the operating conditions to LOS D or better, which is what is typically considered to be the minimum acceptable LOS. The operating conditions will also be worse than the operating conditions that would be provided by the use of manual traffic control at the intersection. However, the improvement would be much better than conditions without manual traffic control and would not require personnel in the street to direct traffic during any hours of the day. Interim Measures – Cost Estimate & Schedule The design and construction cost for the interim street and parking measures is estimated by MBI to be approximately $352,000. Additional administrative costs for a design request for proposals, project oversight and construction administration would be approximately $50,000. Since these interim measures would not meet minimum 2040 level of service requirements they would not be eligible for Metro funding. Design could be started within the next 60-90 days with construction possible later this year. D-10 7 Fiscal Impact Should the City Council determine to tentatively adopt the expedited schedule staff would identify potential funding sources for the $132,000 in local funds needed to offset the estimated costs and return to the City Council with a proposed resolution to appropriate such funds in Fiscal Year 2020/2021. Should the City Council determine to tentatively adopt the interim measures, staff would identify potential funding sources for the $402,000 in local funds needed to offset the estimated costs and return to the City Council with a proposed resolution to appropriate such funds in Fiscal Year 2020/2021. Staff reported prepared by: Timothy R Jonasson, PE _______________________________ City Engineer D-11 SENT VIA EMAIL January 31, 2023 John F. Signo, AICP Director of Planning and Community Services 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT AN INITIAL STUDY (IS)/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS/MND) FOR THE SHEN RESIDENCE PROJECT Dear Mr. Signo, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced environmental review documents for the Shen Residence Project located at 77 Portuguese Bend Road in the City of Rolling Hills. The project site is adjacent to the Palos Verdes Nature Preserve (Preserve) within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV). As you may know, the Preserve is the environmental mitigation component of the City’s Natural Communities Conservation Plan/ Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) and there are specific regulations for development of vacant lots that abut the Reserve captured in #7 below. While the City is Rolling Hills will be pursuing its own environmental analysis of this project, including adjacent impacts, the City requests that the environmental analysis and mitigation measures incorporate the Habitat Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures and Preserve Public Use Master Plan (PUMP) found in the City’s NCCP/HCP. The City’s Community Development Department offers the following comments for your consideration regarding the various project components and analyses outlined in the IS/MND. The information is presented by subject headings in the IS/MND followed City Staff’s comments. Review of IS/MND Shen Residence Project 1.Page 4 & 28. Lighting. Please ensure that project approvals, conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures require that all site lighting includes design components (i.e. shields) that reduce excessive glare, light trespass, or over-lighting of the adjacent Preserve. Also, please ensure that site lighting is placed in a direction away from the Preserve. City Staff is available to further discuss environmental protection components of the City’s Municipal Code and (NCCP/HCP) aimed at protecting properties from environmental nuisances and hazards. At a minimum, a lighting plan shall be required that includes specifications for all outdoor lighting and a photometric plan measuring the light spread on the surface along the property line adjacent to the Preserve. 2.Page 5. Construction. Please ensure project approvals, conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures require that all grading, landscaping and construction activities E-1 exercise effective dust control techniques, either through screening and/or watering in the immediate area of the City’s Preserve. Also, please ensure that contractor information is available and posted at the project site if concerns regarding construction activities need to be addressed. 3. Page 5. Utilities. Please ensure project approvals, conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures require mitigation of any potential impacts to the Preserve’s geology and hydrology related to the proposed biofiltration areas. The proposed leech field should be located closer to the primary residence and away from the Preserve areas so as to limit environmental impacts and any issues related to downhill runoff. 4. Page 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes currently does not allow private property owners to create individual access points into The Preserve as it creates a potential disturbance to the vegetation and wildlife. The project site is proposing keeping the existing private walking trail for access into the Preserve for members of the Rolling Hills Community. Access points should not be allowed to encroach into The Preserve and all members of the public should be directed towards the City’s public trail entrances at designated points. Please consider removing the proposed walking trail from the project site into The Preserve to minimize the impacts on vegetation and wildlife. 5. Page 26. Aesthetics. Please ensure that during the analysis of whether the project has an adverse effect on a scenic vista that the public trails of the nearby open space areas are taken into account. Furthermore, the City of RPV is of the opinion that the proposed walls and retaining walls, due to the varying topographic conditions in the area, would be visible from the public trails in the Preserve and should be designed in a manner to be screened from public view in order to maintain the natural aesthetic character of the area. This could be achieved with landscaping such as vines. 6. Page 27. Aesthetics. Please ensure that all proposed retaining walls are properly screened from the open space areas of the Preserve to limit the aesthetic impact of developments and walls along the Preserve. The project scope details a 13 feet tall retaining wall, but it is not included in the plans. Please consider the use of natural screening methods to screen any retaining walls that may be visible from the Preserve. 7. Page 37 Biological Resources. City Staff is concerned that Fuel Modification requirements for the development of the project site may have an adverse impact on sensitive habitat and other natural communities in the Preserve. Additional analysis should be conducted to assess impacts to identify possible mitigation measures consistent with the City’s NCCP/HCP. Section 5.3.3 of the NCCP/HCP establishes that fuel modification required by the Los Angeles County Fire Department and/or Los Angeles County Department of Agricultural Commissioner as a result of new projects will occur outside of the Preserve unless the Fire Department and/or County Department of the Agricultural Commissioner agree that no other options exist. If Fuel Modification is required to occur in the Preserve that will result in a loss of habitat, the applicant shall be required to mitigate the loss. Mitigation formulas/ratios established in the NCCP/HCP are described in Section 5.3.3 of the NCCP/HCP. Additional information on acceptable methods for fuel modification are included in NCCP/HCP Section 9.2.3. Such mitigation must be included in any project approvals prior to permit issuance. 8. Page 37 Biological Resources & Page 83. Land Use and Planning. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes’ NCCP/HCP requires the application of certain measures on projects that involve the development of vacant lots adjacent to the Preserve. Without the incorporation of the measures, City Staff is of the opinion that the project proposes a significant impact on the environment and land use/planning in the area. City Staff is available to discuss this concern and to further elaborate on the NCCP/HCP provisions and requirements. Below are the Habitat Impact Avoidance and Minimization Measures E-2 provided in NCCP/HCP Section 5.5 that apply to development of vacant lots adjacent to the Preserve: • 5.5 (3): The responsible private project applicants will be responsible for ensuring that an Erosion Control Plan is developed and implemented for any Covered Projects and Activities in the Preserve or abutting the Preserve that might result in erosion as determined by the City. Potential erosion control measures include siltation fencing, straw bales, sand bags, etc. • 5.5 (4) When stockpiling topsoil in the Preserve or on vacant lots abutting the Preserve, please be sure that it will be placed only in areas that minimize the damage to habitat. If fill or topsoil is imported into the Preserve, the fill will be clean and free of foreign debris and non-native plant material.5.5 (5) For any new development on vacant lots abutting the Preserve, construction staging areas will be located at least 15 meters (50 feet) away from the Preserve boundary and natural drainages. No fueling zones will extend a minimum distance of 15 meters (50 feet) from all drainages and away from the Preserve boundary. • 5.5 (6) Construction footprints for Covered Projects and Activities in the Preserve or abutting the Preserve will be clearly defined with flagging and/or fencing and will be removed upon completion of the Covered Activities. • 5.5 (9) Dust generated by the construction vehicles for Covered Projects and Activities on non-paved trails that accommodate authorized vehicles within the Preserve or on vacant lots abutting the Preserve will be minimized using a speed limit restriction to 10 miles per hour (mph) and, where appropriate, watering unpaved surfaces. • 5.5 (10) Any temporary safety or security night lighting for Covered Projects and Activities in the Preserve or on vacant lots abutting the Preserve must be selectively placed, shielded, and directed away from all native vegetative communities. • 5.5 (13) For bird species that are not federally listed or a Covered Species identified in the NCCP/HCP, if vegetation clearing must occur in the Preserve during the bird breeding season under the circumstances described in Sections 5.6.9 and 5.6.10 below (defined here as February 15-August 31), a pre- construction nest survey will be conducted and a 100-feet avoidance/exclusion zone or a buffer/barrier zone to attenuate noise (consistent with Section 5.6.9 and 5.6.10 below) will be placed around all active nests (i.e., active nests with eggs or chicks) until the nestlings fledge or the nest fails. Further, no take of Fully Protected Species is allowed under this Plan (see Section 1.2.2 of the Plan). • 5.5 (17) Pre-construction surveys for raptor during the breeding season (January 31-September 30), where evidence of suitable nesting habitat is present, shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no later than four days prior to any project vegetation removal or grading activities within or on vacant lots abutting the Preserve. If nesting raptors are present, a 500-foot avoidance/exclusion zone or a buffer/barrier zone to prevent disturbance and attenuate noise will be placed around all active nests (i.e., active nests with eggs or chicks) and monitored until the nestlings fledge or the nest fails. If requested by the City or other entity, the qualified biologist may evaluate site conditions and determine that nest-specific buffers which vary from the avoidance/exclusion zone above are warranted based on topography, vegetation, type and duration of activity, and other factors. The Wildlife Agencies, in coordination with the City and qualified biologist, will be notified of the status of all raptor surveying and monitoring, including if less than 500-foot avoidance/exclusion zone or buffer/barrier zone is proposed for the E-3 raptor species and what additional measures/monitoring are necessary. No take of Fully Protected Species is allowed under this Plan (see Section 1.2.2). • 5.7.2 Fencing and Lighting: The following practices shall apply to new development projects on vacant lots abutting the Preserve: Fencing, Barriers, and Edge Treatment: (1) Fencing, barriers, or functional edge treatment will be required for all new projects developed on existing vacant lots abutting the Preserve and shall be designed to prevent intrusion of domestic animals into the Preserve. This requirement may be waived with written approval from the Wildlife Agencies. (2) Prohibiting the use of gates, openings, or other entry means in project fencing, barriers and edge treatment that would allow direct human access to the Preserve, which would degrade the natural habitat. This requirement may be waived with written approval from the Wildlife Agencies. Lighting (1) All light sources abutting the Preserve shall be designed and constructed to be oriented downward and away from habitat areas and shielded, if necessary, to ensure there are no impacts to wildlife and native vegetation. (2) Lighting in new developments on vacant lots abutting the Preserve shall be avoided and/or minimized as appropriate through appropriate placement and shielding of light sources in compliance with the City’s Municipal Code requirements for exterior lighting. • 5.7.4 Landscaping: Landscaping can create conflicts with biological objectives of the Preserve by increasing the potential for introduction of non-native and invasive plant species in natural areas. These non-native species can displace native species in natural communities. Horticultural regimes can alter site conditions in the Preserve adjacent to landscaping by increased runoff, fertilization, pesticides, and other factors, all of which promote a shift from native to non-native flora. Additionally, the use of native cultivars not collected on site or in the proximity of the site can create genetic contamination through hybridization. Therefore, the following practices shall apply to all activities within the Preserve, including new development projects on vacant lots abutting the Preserve, and shall be incorporated as enforceable conditions in all permits, operations, and authorizations to proceed with work. (1) Landscaping shall avoid those species listed on the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal-IPC) Invasive Plant Inventory (see Section 5.6.4 and Appendix D of the Plan). (2) Irrigation shall be designed and maintained to avoid overspray or runoff into the Preserve. • 5.7.5 Stormwater and Urban Runoff New development projects on vacant lots abutting the Preserve must include mitigation measures or other conditions, as appropriate, to reduce the likelihood that a flood would adversely impact Covered Species and the conserved habitat. As a co-permittee of the RWQCB National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) is required. The large majority of new development projects and significant redevelopment projects must meet SUSMP requirements to reduce pollution and runoff flows. The SUSMP shall include a list of recommended source control and structural treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs). Additionally, mitigation measures shall be imposed to ensure that improvements accommodate flood events that approximate the rate, magnitude, and duration of natural flood flows. • It does not appear that equestrian use is part of the proposed development. If it were, the City’s Community Development Department would request that the project comply with NCCP/HCP Section 5.7.3 E-4 • Per the PUMP, no private entry points are allowed into the Preserve. The new residence must be separated from the Preserve by a fence with no pedestrian, vehicle, or any gate type that would provide access to the Preserve from the Rolling Hills property. • Linked below are the full NCCP/HCP and PUMP documents. https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/17121/NCCPHCP https://www.rpvca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/17127/Public-Use-Master-Plan- Review of Appendix B – Bio Resources Assessment 1. Page 7. Literature Review. The City of RPV is concerned that the studies used for the basis of the environmental findings are outdated since the newest study is from 2017 and might not represent a complete assessment of the environmental impacts to the area. 2. Page 15. Special Status Wildlife Species. It is concerning to the City of RPV that additional studies weren’t performed with regards to wildlife species. Specifically, the Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly, which is federally endangered. The report details that the PV Blue Butterfly did not receive a botanical survey and that the timing of the survey was not conducive to detection as indicated in the report. A botanical survey should be conducted to ensure the development proposal will not result in a negative impact to this species. Review of Appendix D – Geotechnical Assessments 1. Page 5. Landslides. The City of RPV is concerned that there is insufficient data to support overturning Converse Consultant’s original opinion that the project site along Section A-A within the report is within a landslide area. The City of RPV also concurs with the planning level geotechnical peer review performed by GMU in 2019, that additional slope stability analyses should be performed to provide adequate keyway dimensions and show adequate safety factors in this area. 2. Page 8. Conclusions and Recommendations. The report concludes that the area is best suited for a small residence with minimal grading and that a variation from this could affect the area in a negative manner. The current proposal is requesting 2 large structures on the site, an 8,847 square feet single-family residence, a 2,427 square foot guest house, a 2,766 square feet of pool area, and a total gross grading amount of 8,036 cubic yards, which in the City’s opinion, far exceeds what is considered a small residence with minimal grading. Based on the history of landslides and shifting earth within the surrounding area, further analysis should be taken when reviewing this project’s geotechnical aspects. 3. Page 160. Findings and Conclusions. Please ensure that the project proposal meets the recommendation listed on page 160 of Appendix D, that site waters shall not be allowed to flow off the graded pad into descending slopes. Furthermore, the City of RPV prohibits any runoff flows to be directed to the Preserve. All runoff on the project site shall be properly collected and diverted to a City of RH storm drain system. The City of RPV request that a drainage plan, prepared and wet-stamped by a licensed engineer, be included in the final project decision. Review of Appendix E – Hydrology study and water quality plan 1. Page 9. Proposed Stormwater Management System. Please indicate on the site plan or a separate plan, the location of the five stormwater planter boxes being used to capture and treat the calculated storm water quality design volume (SWQDv) as detailed within Appendix E, the plans currently indicate 3 LID planters are being used. E-5 Miscellaneous Comments and Concerns 1. All work adjacent to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes public property shall be conducted so as not to adversely impact the hydrology and environmental conditions of the site. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes takes great pride in working with neighboring jurisdictions on projects and issues that affect the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The City’s Community Development Department appreciates the opportunity to provide comments regarding the proposed project and looks forward to working with your agency in further evaluating impacts to the community. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the Community Development Department’s comments, please feel free to contact, Associate Planner, Steven Giang at (310) 544-5222 or via email at sgiang@rpvca.gov. Sincerely, Steven Giang Associate Planner Cc: Ara Mihranian, Rancho Palos Verdes City Manager Octavio Silva, Rancho Palos Verdes Interim Director of Community Development E-6 News Release April 13th 2023 Home Caltrans Near Me District 7 District 7 News News Release April 13th 2023 Published: Apr 18, 2023 News Release Date: April 13, 2023 District: 7 – Los Angeles & Ventura counties Contact: Allison Colburn Phone: (213) 200-8694 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Upcoming Public Meetings for Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project Community Feedback Sought Regarding Major Tra�ic Impacts LOS ANGELES ― The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is seeking public feedback regarding project plans to replace the deck of the Vincent Thomas Bridge, which connects the San Pedro neighborhood to Terminal Island on State Route 47 (SR 47). The purpose of the project is to preserve the bridgeʼs structural integrity and to enhance the bridgeʼs overall safety. Construction is anticipated to impact travel along SR 47 and on nearby local and state roadways. Three construction staging alternatives are being presented to the community for input. Caltrans is o�ering multiple ways to participate, including two public meetings – one in person and one virtual – for community members to learn about the project and submit feedback. The in-person meeting will be held on Thursday, April 27, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at East Wilmington Greenbelt Community Center, 918 N.Sanford Ave., Wilmington, CA 90744. As parking at the site and along nearby streets may be limited, Caltrans encourages attendees to travel via rideshare or taxi service or by using public transportation. For interested persons who prefer to attend virtually, a virtual public meeting will be held the following week on Thursday, May 4, from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. To access the meeting, please visit the project website at virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ at the time of the event. Attendees may also call in to the meeting by dialing (669) 444-9171 and entering meeting identification number 851 3202 5564 when prompted. Both meetings will provide opportunities to share written and verbal public comments. Alternatively, anyone interested in submitting a public comment may do so at any time via: •Email. Please send written comments to caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net. •The project website. An interactive virtual meeting room with project information and a comment submittal form will be available through May 12. Visit the project website at virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/. •Mail. Letters should be addressed to: About Caltrans Contact Us ADA Certification Request ADA Compliant Documents  Settings  Translate  Travel  Work with Caltrans  Programs  Caltrans Near Me  Search F-1 Copyright © 2023 State of California Jason Roach, Senior Environmental Planner Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020) California Department of Transportation, District 7 100 S. Main Street, MS 16A Los Angeles, CA 90012 Please submit public comments by no later than Friday, May 12. Comments submitted a�er this date will not be included in the projectʼs public record. Spanish interpretation will be made available at each meeting. Individuals who require special accommodation (American Sign Language interpreter, accessible seating, documentation in alternate formats, etc.) are requested to contact Caltrans District 7, Alex Brown at (213) 310-2590 at least seven days prior to the scheduled public hearings. TDD users may contact the California Relay Service TTY line at 711. Caltrans reminds motorists to be “Work Zone Alert” and “Slow for the Cone Zone.” ### | CleanCA.com | #BeWorkZoneAlert | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Statewide Campaigns ADA Access Adopt-A-Highway Amber Alert Be Work Zone Alert CAL FIRE California Climate Investments  California Connected California Transportation Plan 2050  Clean California Energy Upgrade Go Safely California Keep Your Home Move Over Law CalOES: Power Outage and Fire Recovery Resources  REAL ID Save Our Water Stormwater Education Campaign  Tenant and Landlord Resources  Unclaimed Property Back to Top Accessibility Privacy Policy Conditions of Use Register to Vote  F-2 OVERVIEW The deck of the Vincent Thomas Bridge (VTB) on State Route 47 in the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, is rapidly deteriorating due to concrete fatigue caused by heavy truck trac. Caltrans is proposing the VTB Deck Replacement Project (Project) to replace the entire bridge deck and seismic sensors of the bridge to preserve the bridge’s structural integrity and to enhance the bridge’s overall safety. https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-7 FACT SHEET Spring 2023 VINCENT THOMAS BRIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS Caltrans is the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) lead agency. The Environmental Document is anticipated to be an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) / Environmental Assessment (EA). The Project is in the initial stage of the environmental process with the formal scoping process starting spring 2023. Members of the public and stakeholders are encouraged to participate and provide feedback at public engagement activities including the scoping meetings. CONSTRUCTION STAGING Due to its location, type of structure, and physical and environmental constraints, construction staging options are of vital importance to minimizing port operational impacts and achieving the construction completion deadlines required by the funding of the project. The following preliminary construction staging options are being considered: •Single-Stage Construction: full closure may last 9-12 months with detours and 24/7 work. •Two-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 18-24 months one lane open/three closed with night work and 55-hour closures – 24 to 30 months with no closures. •Three-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 24-30 months with one lane open and closed in each direction with night work and 55-hour closures – 30 to 36 months with no closures. Anticipated detour routes will direct trac to and from Terminal Island via the Commodore Schuyler F. Heim Bridge (SR-47) from the north and the Gerald Desmond Bridge (I-710) from the east. These detour routes potentially include West Harry Bridges Boulevard, Alameda Street, Anaheim Street, Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1), Henry Ford Avenue (SR-47), and Terminal Island Freeway (SR-103). Ocial detour routes will be selected during the project’s approval phase. This alternative would replace the entire bridge deck and upgrade barriers, railings, and seismic sensors. Construction staging options are included with the Build Alternative. ALTERNATIVE 1 Build Alternative This alternative would not preserve the life of the Vincent Thomas Bridge and does not address the deficiency in the structure. ALTERNATIVE 2 No Build Alternative PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Follow Us... @CaltransDist7 facebook.com/CaltransD7 @CaltransD7 G-1 VINCENT THOMAS BRIDGE Jason Roach, Division of Environmental Planning General Project Contact Information (213) 310-2653 For more information visit virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net PROJECT LOCATION AND SCOPING MEETING LOCATION PROJECT INITIATION PUBLIC SCOPING CONDUCT TECHNICALSTUDIES CIRCULATE DRAFTENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT &PUBLIC HEARING RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT & FINAL ENVIRONMENTALDOCUMENT DECISION PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT WE ARE HERE WINTER 2022 SPRING 2023 SUMMER/FALL 2023 WINTER 2023 SPRING 2024WINTER/SPRING 2024 SCHEDULE ATTEND IN PERSON OR ONLINE Location: East Wilmington Greenbelt Community Center 918 Sanford Ave, Wilmington, CA 90744 Date: Thursday, April 27, 2023 Time: 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Location: Virtual Meeting Room at virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ or scan the QR code Date: Thursday, May 4, 2023 Time: 5:30 to 7:30 p.m. Spanish interpretation will be made available at eachmeeting. Individuals who require special accommodation(American Sign Language interpreter, accessible seating, documentation in alternate formats, etc.) are requested tocontact Caltrans District 7, Alex Brown at (213) 310-2590 atleast 14 days prior to the scheduled public hearings. TDD users may contact the California Relay Service TTY line at 711. In-Person Virtual HOW TO COMMENT Provide comments from Thursday, April 13, to Monday, July 10, through: Written and Verbal: Written and Verbal: comments at the scoping meetings Email to: caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net with the subject line: VTB Deck Replacement Project Mail to: Jason Roach, Senior Environmental Planner Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020) California Department of Transportation, District 7 100 South Main Street, MS 16A Los Angeles, CA 90012 Virtual Meeting Room: virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ Written and Verbal: Written and Verbal: comments at the scoping meetings Email to: caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net with the subject line: VTB Deck Replacement Project Mail to: Jason Roach, Senior Environmental Planner Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020) California Department of Transportation, District 7 100 South Main Street, MS 16A Los Angeles, CA 90012 Virtual Meeting Room: virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ Mormon Island East Basin Channel Smith Island TERMINAL ISLAND N Front St Southwest Slip WILMINGTON Pichard St Fer ry S t Termin al W a y Los Angeles WorldCruise Center SAN PEDRO END PROJECT PM 2.00 BEGIN PROJECT PM 0.9 710N Gaey St LONG BEACHSanford AveEast Wilmington Greenbelt Community Center 1 2 E L St W Capitol Dr Westmont Dr W Anaheim St W Harry Bridges Blvd Alameda StPROJECT AREA LEGEND Project Area In-person Scoping Meeting Location DASH Wilmington Clockwise, Stop #5517 L St & Sanford Ave (Westbound)1 LACMTA Bus Station Anaheim / Sanford2 1 47 Vincent Thomas B r i d g e G-2 1 LA-47 - Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement (EA 07-39020) Project Description The project proposes to replace the entire bridge deck and seismic sensors of the Vincent Thomas Bridge (VTB), Bridge # 53-1471, on State Route 47 in the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County. Route 47 is a freeway that extends from Route 110 in San Pedro via the Vincent Thomas Bridge to Route 710. The Vincent Thomas Bridge is a cable suspension steel bridge spanning the main channel of Los Angeles Harbor between San Pedro and Terminal Islands. The structure, which was completed in 1963, has a total length of 6,062 feet. The bridge, which is the main gateway to the Port of Los Angeles, carries an average of 44,500 vehicles daily of which 11% are heavy trucks. Need The deck of the bridge is rapidly deteriorating due to concrete fatigue caused by heavy truck traffic. In 2009, a polyester concrete overlay was applied to the bridge deck to address spalling in the bridge deck. Starting in 2011, new deck spalls began to occur and have been increasing in severity with each subsequent bridge inspection. In-depth investigation of the bridge deck has been ongoing using ground penetrating radar equipment, rapid automated sounding equipment, and physical and chemical concrete testing. Concrete test samples showed that the deck was failing below the polyester overlay causing the subsequent spalling. According to the latest bridge inspection (2022), the deck conditions have deteriorated from fair to poor. As a result of the evident grade of deterioration of the deck and the results of the physical and chemical testing performed a technical team of the Office of Structure Maintenance and Investigation determined and recommended that the best strategy to extend the life of the bridge and provide a safe operation for the traveling public was to remove and replace the deck of both the suspended and approach spans. Purpose This project proposes to preserve the structural integrity of the Vincent Thomas Bridge (Bridge #53-1471) structure, restore gritty and ride conditions, and improve its overall safety features in an economical manner. In addition, the existing median barrier and railings which currently do not meet the requirement of the new Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH), will be also upgraded. The overall stability of the bridge will be monitored with the replacement of seismic sensors. H-1 2 Project Proposal, Alternatives Two alternatives are being considered: Alternative 1 - Programmable Project Alternative This alternative would replace the entire bridge deck and upgrade barriers, railings, and seismic sensors. Within this full deck replacement alternative, the Bridge Design team performed a feasibility study, and several options for the bridge types were investigated. It was determined that the strategies for the deck replacement shall meet the following requirements: • Minimize the impact on the existing bridge’s load rating (LR) to avoid major structure strengthening. • Minimize unbalanced loading effects on the existing bridge. The unbalanced loading due to dead and live loads may cause significant torsional movement of the existing truss superstructure that may cause overstress of the bridge towers and the cable system. • Minimize the impact on existing traffic due to the deck replacement process. The Feasibility Study deck replacement options include: • Orthotropic steel deck • Precast/Prestressed (PC/PS) concrete deck • Cast-in-Place/Reinforced Concrete (CIP/RC) deck Other major items associated with the removal and replacement of the bridge deck are: • Replacement of 18 joint seals at approach spans. • Replacement of 11 joint seals at suspension spans. • Removal of 4 finger joints at suspension spans and replacement with seismic joints. • Removal of the existing Type 2 Barrier Railing/steel plate curb and replace it with CA ST- 75 Bridge Rail with Chain Link on the Railing (Type 7). • Removal and replacement of the median concrete barrier Type 50 with Type 60G. • Install /Upgrade of Sign and Pavement Marking per current standards. The analysis and final determination of the type of deck will be based on technical, economical, riding quality, life span, constructability, and environmental impact factors which will be assessed during the execution of a Project Report, leading to the design phase of the project. In addition, the participation and input of the impacted community and stakeholders like the City of Los Angeles, City of Long Beach, Port of Los Angeles, and Port of Long Beach will be considered in the decision-making process. Alternative 2. - No Build Alternative This alternative would not preserve the life of the Vincent Thomas Bridge and does not address the deficiency in the structure. H-2 3 Stage Construction – Traffic Impacts and Closures Options Due to its location, type of structure, and physical and environmental constraints, bridge closure options due to staging considerations are of vital importance to limiting port operational impacts and achieving the constrained construction completion deadlines required by the funding of the project, the following preliminary staging options are being considered: • Single-Stage Construction: full closure may last 9-12 months with detours and 24/7 work. • Two-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 18-24 months one lane open/three closed with nightly and 55-hour closures – 24 to 30 months with no 55-hour closures. • Three-Stage Construction: partial closure up to 24-30 months with one lane open and closed in each direction with nightly and 55-hour closures – 30 to 36 months with no 55-hour closures. The closure durations are conservative estimates that are based on staff work experience who have performed deck repairs, finger joint repairs, and deck overlays on the Vincent Thomas Bridge over the years. Most of the work in the multistage options will be done during 55-hr and overnight bridge closures. Anticipated detour routes will direct traffic to and from Terminal Island via the Commodore Schuyler F. Heim Bridge (SR-47) from the north and the Gerald Desmond Bridge (I-710) from the east. These detour routes potentially include West Harry Bridges Boulevard, Alameda Street, Anaheim Street, Pacific Coast Highway (SR-1), Henry Ford Avenue (SR-47), and Terminal Island Freeway (SR-103). Official detour routes will be selected during the project’s approval phase. Potential Environmental Impacts The Environmental Document is anticipated to be an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) / Environmental Assessment (EA) depending on the outcome of public scoping and preliminary results of studies during PA&ED. No significant right-of-way involvement is anticipated. The project will not require permanent right of way takes. Once the means and methods of construction are determined and chosen, there may be a need for construction staging area(s). Coordination with the railroad will be required, but further utility field surveys will be conducted in the PA&ED phase. Public Scoping Meeting An in person scoping meeting will be held on, Thursday, April 27, 2023 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at East Wilmington Greenbelt Community Center 918 Sanford Ave, Wilmington, CA 90744. H-3 4 A virtual meeting will also be available on Thursday, May 4, 2023 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Virtual Meeting Room at virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb/ or scan the QR code Spanish interpretation will be made available at each meeting. Individuals who require special accommodation (American Sign Language interpreter, accessible seating, documentation in alternate formats, etc.) are requested to contact Caltrans District 7, Alex Brown at (213) 310- 2590 at least 14 days prior to the scheduled public hearings. TDD users may contact the California Relay Service TTY line at 711. Both the in person and virtual meeting will provide you an opportunity to obtain first-hand project information and to express your comments and concerns about the proposed project. All comments received will become part of the project record and will provide valuable input to our environmental and design personnel. Scoping comments must be submitted by July 10, 2023. Comments can be submitted via regular mail, email, or at the scoping meeting. Mail comments to: Jason Roach Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020-0) California Department of Transportation, District 7 100 South Main Street, MS 16A Los Angeles, CA 90012 Email comments to: caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net If you have any questions, please contact Jason Roach, Division of Environmental Planning, at (213) 310 - 2653. Thank you for your interest in this important project. H-4 5 LA-47 VINCENT THOMAS BRIDGE DECK REPLACEMENT PROJECT LOCATION MAP H-5 Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with complaints, questions Donna Littlejohn Caltrans image showing some of the existing conditions on the roadway of the Vincent Thomas Bridge. A $628.5 million project to replace the entire deck for the first time in its 60-year history is needed to maintain the use and safety of the heavily-traveled mile-long span that connects San Pedro to Terminal Island and, by extension, to the city of Long Beach. The road has been damaged by saltwater and heavy use. 1 of 5 Caltrans image showing some of the existing conditions on the roadway of the Vincent Thomas Bridge. A $628.5 million project to replace the entire deck for the first time in its 60-year history is needed to maintain the use and safety of the heavily-traveled mile-long span that connects San Pedro to Terminal Island and, by extension, to the city of Long Beach. The road has been damaged by saltwater and heavy Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 1 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-1 use. Expand Caltrans has extended the public comment period for a massive proposed project that could partially or entirely close the Vincent Thomas Bridge, which officials say is necessary so they can make major repairs on the heavily trafficked San Pedro icon. That announcement came at the end of a recent online-only public meeting that drew about 100 viewers — most of them complaining they’d only just heard about the upcoming project in recent days. News of the California Department of Transportation project has sent shockwaves throughout San Pedro and Wilmington as residents, including longshore workers who rely on the mile- long bridge daily, grapple with the prospect of a full or partial bridge closure that could span from 2025 to 2027. At the end of the 90-minue virtual meeting, which took place last week, Caltrans officials announced the public comment deadline had been extended from Friday, May 12, to May 26. “I just barely found out about this through the Daily Breeze the other day,” said San Pedro resident Carol Lee. The same apparently goes for Ray Regalado, president of the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council. The original 30-day time period for comments was simply not enough, Regalado said, especially “when I’m hearing about this today for the first time.” Los Angeles Councilmember Tim McOsker, who represents the Harbor Area, said that while he was disappointed in how Caltrans notified people about the project, the long lead time before work begins will help ensure everyone has a voice in the process. “While this (lack of outreach) is disappointing and we’ve started out very slowly,” McOsker said, “we do have time if the (construction) start date is 2025 and the opportunity to make sure we are considering everyone’s comments.” The project will replace the entire concrete roadway on the bridge for the first time since the bridge opened 60 years ago. The work is necessary, Caltrans officials said, to ensure the bridge continues to serve the busy twin-harbor area safely. The schedule calls for: Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 2 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-2 A design phase to be completed by July 2025. Construction to begin in October 2025. Bridge reopening by the end of March 2027. Caltrans officials said they’d put out 11,000 notices about the project but many, including the area’s several neighborhood councils and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Local 13, said they’d not heard about it until recently. “I just found out about it today,” said another speaker, Valerie Rodriguez of Wilmington. The major concerns expressed in comments during the Thursday, May 4, virtual meeting were: Detour traffic that could primarily impact Wilmington, a community already hard hit by port- related traffic, with trucks cutting through the community, which causes road damage, pollution and safety concerns among residents. Disruption of regular port-related work traffic, with three daily longshore shifts that rely on the bridge throughout the day and night. Increased truck and other emissions, along with impacts on local streets, that will result from re-routing traffic through neighboring communities. How lane closures will impact first-responder times should crashes occur on a partially shuttered bridge, which only has two lanes in each direction. While some have half-joked about bringing the ferry service back from the days before the bridge opened in 1963, Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn urged Caltrans during the meeting to consider that as part of its mitigation efforts. She asked Caltrans “to take a look at funding a water taxi (service) to give commuters and workers used to taking the bridge” to Terminal Island and Long Beach a way to cope with the loss of part or all of the bridge for so long. The project is needed, Hahn said, but will be “a major headache” to area residents and workers. Several speakers chimed in that an efficient water commuter service of some kind will be necessary. “That has to be doable,” said James Campeau of San Pedro. “You’ve got to get people to work.” As for port operations, ILWU member Henry Trejo said shift changes and lunch times make the bridge a much-needed commuter route for longshore workers. Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 3 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-3 “This is going to be detrimental,” Trejo, a San Pedro resident, said. “Can we have ferries in multiple locations?” Going home or to a local restaurant for lunch, he added, won’t be possible with even partial bridge closures “because I won’t make it back to work on time.” Caltrans officials stressed that they are only in the beginning of a thorough and required state and federal study for the project. “We’re still in the initial phase,” said Brad Jensen, the facilitator of the meeting. The process, he said, formally began on April 13 and requires extensive studies to be done on traffic and other impacts. A traffic study is currently underway and will be released this summer, officials said. That study will concentrate on detour routes and how traffic will be impacted for each of the three options Caltrans has identified for construction: A single-stage construction project that would result in a full bridge closure for up to nine to 12 months, with detours and work ongoing 24/7. A two-stage process that would require a partial bridge closure for 18-24 months, with one lane open and three closed, and with night work and extended weekend closures. A three-stage plan that would result in partial bridge closures for up to 24-30 months; one lane would be open and one closed in each direction, with night work and extended weekend closures, expanding the total work time to 30-36 months, but with no full closures. Caltrans, Hahn said, should choose the option that causes the least disruption possible. The bridge currently handles a daily traffic load of 53,000 vehicles, with 8.8% of that — or about 4,664 — being heavy trucks, according to Caltrans figures presented at the meeting. The bridge is 58 feet wide with two lanes traveling in each direction, making it among the smaller bridges by today’s standards, especially considering it goes over the busiest port in the nation. Besides the new roadway to replace the “rapidly deteriorating” original that is 6.5 inches thick, Caltrans said, the project also calls for upgrading existing bridge railings and the median barrier, and replacing deck seismic structures. While not many weighed in on a preferred construction option at the hearing, a couple speakers suggested the first (and shortest) option — to completely close the bridge for up to Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 4 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-4 one year — made the most sense. “My idea is to rip the bandage off all at once,” said Louis Dominguez of San Pedro, who travels the bridge to Long Beach on most days. “It won’t be easy, but it will get it over with and (get the bridge) back open the way it should be.” Closing a single lane because of truck breakdowns or crashes already backs up the bridge significantly, he and others said of the longer construction options that would keep at least one lane closed on the bridge at all times. Caltrans official said the agency wants to work closely with the community going forward and has offered several avenues for comments to be submitted. The environmental studies will take in a host of issues, said Jason Roach, senior environmental planner for the project, including impacts on the community; aesthetics (the bridge has historic status and the appearance is not expected to change under the project); traffic; air quality and greenhouse gas; energy use; and water quality. Major stakeholders listed in the project include both the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach; the communities of San Pedro and Wilmington specifically and, more generally, the regions surrounding the cities of Los Angeles and Long Beach; area schools; emergency and first responders; the California Department of Fish and Wildlife; and the U.S. Coast Guard. A peregrine falcon nest is active on the bridge, Roach said, which will require working with the state to see if the nest can be relocated or how to deal with that issue otherwise. “It really behooves this agency to get it right,” said Luke Klipp, Hahn’s senior transportation deputy. Michael-Patrick Hogue, who has worked with Caltrans and the community for 14 years to organize an annual Labor Day run over the bridge, agreed. “Spend as much time as you can with these people (in the affected communities),” he said. “Their concerns are real.” The three staging options, Roach said, all involve detours — which Caltrans is primarily concerned with. He urged residents to get and stay involved in the project via its informational website, virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb. Folks can submit comments in multiple ways, including: By email to caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net, with the subject line “VTB Deck Replacement Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 5 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-5 Project.” By mail to Jason Roach, senior environmental planner, Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-39020), California Department of Transportation, District 7, 100 South Main Street, MS 16A, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article included an incorrect number of trucks crossing the Vincent Thomas Bridge daily. Sign up for The Localist, our daily email newsletter with handpicked stories relevant to where you live. Subscribe here. Vincent Thomas Bridge closure hearing brings large crowd with c... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/08/vncent-thomas-bridge-cl... 6 of 6 6/12/2023, 12:29 PM I-6 Vincent Thomas Bridge drivers get 45 more days to comment on closure, construction Donna Littlejohn The public comment period for a massive proposed project that could close the heavily traveled Vincent Thomas Bridge for one to three years starting in 2025 has been extended to July 10 The bridge, State Route 47, which connects San Pedro to Terminal Island (and, by extension, to both the ports of LA and Long Beach, and the neighboring city of Long Beach), needs a full roadbed deck replacement. The California Department of Transportation announced the additional 45-day comment extension this week, which will allow more community members and others to send in comments, questions and concerns. The roadway of the Vincent Thomas Bridge has been damaged by saltwater and heavy use. Vincent Thomas Bridge drivers get 45 more days to comment on cl... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/31/caltrans-gives-a-45-day-e... 1 of 4 6/12/2023, 12:27 PM J-1 (Image courtesy of Caltrans) The work is needed to preserve the bridge’s structural integrity and overall safety. Construction is anticipated to begin in late 2025 and will impact travel on State Route 47, as well as nearby local and state roadways, as detours are set up. The bridge is a key connector for both ports, with trucks traversing it as they haul cargo in and out of the terminals. The bridge is also a key port connector roadway for the many longshore workers who need to travel to and from work, sometimes for more than one shift in a single day or night. Caltrans recently embarked on what will be an extensive environmental scoping process as studies and plans for the project move forward. Still in its early stages, the planning relies on public feedback. Comments received through July 10 will be included as part of the public record in the process. Among the decisions that will have to be made is whether to partially close the four-lane suspension bridge, which dates back to the early 1960s, for the work, which would result in a longer timeline; or fully closing the entire bridge, which would shorten the timeline to an estimated one year but could also be more inconvenient for motorists, especially for port- related traffic. Caltrans has held two public meetings about the project so far. The plans call for the bridge, which is classified as a historic structure by California, to retain its original design. But there currently are no plans to replace the bridge, which is considered small by current port-related standards. The Port of Long Beach recently replaced its iconic Gerald Desmond Bridge, which opened in 1968, with the new Long Beach International Gateway Bridge at a cost of $1.5 billion. The new span provides more room for larger ships and more lanes for the heavily traveled port-connected route. The now-defunct Gerald Desmond Bridge, by comparison, cost $13 million to build and replaced the pontoon bridge that had been in place since the 1940s, according to information provided on the Port of Long Beach website. By the mid-2010s, it was estimated that around 15% of the nation’s waterborne container traffic passed over the Gerald Desmond Bridge. The new bridge, which is higher and wider, opened in October 2020. Among the reasons there are no plans, at the moment, to entirely replace the Vincent Thomas Bridge, on the San Pedro side of the twin port complex, is because of the prohibitive cost. Port Vincent Thomas Bridge drivers get 45 more days to comment on cl... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/31/caltrans-gives-a-45-day-e... 2 of 4 6/12/2023, 12:27 PM J-2 of L.A. Executive Director Gene Seroka said in May that it would cost an estimated $6 billion in today’s dollars to do so. The Vincent Thomas Bridge replaced a water ferry service when it opened in November 1963. This map shows possible detour routes identified by Caltrans if the project to repair the Vincent Thomas Bridge moves forward. (Photo courtesy of Caltrans) Another opportunity for feedback later in the scoping period, according to a Caltrans news release, will be included in the process when project plans and alternatives have been “further refined” and a draft environmental impact report is made available for public viewing. Three construction staging alternatives and potential detour routes were presented at the public meetings held on April 27 and May 4. All meeting materials and a video recording of the May virtual meeting are available at the project website, virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb. Comments and feedback can be provided in these ways: Email: Send written comments to caltransvtb@virtualeventroom.net. Through the website: An interactive virtual meeting room with project information and a comment submittal form is available through July 10. Visit virtualeventroom.com/caltrans/vtb. Vincent Thomas Bridge drivers get 45 more days to comment on cl... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/31/caltrans-gives-a-45-day-e... 3 of 4 6/12/2023, 12:27 PM J-3 By mail: Letters should be addressed to Jason Roach, senior environmental planner, Division of Environmental Planning (Project EA 07-3902), California Department of Transportation – District 7, 100 S. Main St., MS 16A, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Sign up for The Localist, our daily email newsletter with handpicked stories relevant to where you live. Subscribe here. Vincent Thomas Bridge drivers get 45 more days to comment on cl... https://www.dailybreeze.com/2023/05/31/caltrans-gives-a-45-day-e... 4 of 4 6/12/2023, 12:27 PM J-4