City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report|1010|RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve The Culver Studios Comprehensive
Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068, subject to the Recommended Conditions
of Approval as stated in City Council Resolution No. 2006-R_____ (Attachment No.
1).
PROCEDURE:
1. Mayor seeks motion to receive and file affidavit of mailing and posting and
publishing of public notice.
2. Mayor calls on staff for a brief staff report and City Council poses questions to
staff as desired.
3. Mayor declares the public discussion open, providing the applicant the first
opportunity to speak, followed by the general public.
4. Mayor seeks a motion to close the public discussion after all testimony has been
presented.
5. City Council thoroughly discusses the matter and arrives at its decision.
Meeting Date: August 21, 2006 Item Number: JPH-1
AGENDA ITEM: Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency Consideration to
Approve The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, Amend the
Design For Development for The Culver Studios Area, and Determine that the
Project is Consistent with the Redevelopment Plan for Component Area No. 3 of
the Culver City Redevelopment Project.
Contact Person/Dept.:
Sherry Jordan/CDD Planning
Todd Tipton/CDD/Redevelopment
Phone Number:
(310) 253-5746
(310) 253-5783
Fiscal Impact: Yes [X] No [] General Fund: Yes [] No [X]
Public Hearing: [X] Action Item: [] Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: Signs were posted on the studio property. Notices were mailed July
28, 2006, to all property owners, and occupants within an expanded mailing radius of
the site. Courtesy notices were mailed to the Downtown Business Association, Culver
City Homeowner Association, Culver City News, Culver City Observer, Culver City
Chamber of Commerce, and other interested parties, City Council, Planning
Commission, City Manager, Department Heads, and emailed to the Master Notification
List on July 31, 2006. Notice was published in the Culver City News on July 27, 2006.
Department Approval:
Susan Evans 8/14/06
CAO Approval:
Martin Cole for Jerry Fulwood 8/16/06
City Controller Approval:
Marlee Chang 8/15/06City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report|1010|BACKGROUND:
To allow consideration of innovative site planning and other aspects of project
design, and more effective design responses to site features, uses on and off-site,
and impacts, the zoning code requires property zoned Studio (S) to be developed
subject to a Comprehensive Plan rather than the standard regulations for other
zoning districts. The Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios was adopted in
1988. A brief history of the studio and the entitlements are provided as an
attachment to the July 26, 2006, Planning Commission staff report.
The Culver Studios is requesting an amendment to their Comprehensive Plan to
permit:
Construction of a 49,500 sq. ft. four-story (56 foot high) office building in
approximately the same foot print as Building J with a zero street facing
setback;
Construction of a two and one-half story (200 space) parking structure over
an existing 60 space surface parking lot and the area of Building R;
Amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 1/263 for up to
30,000 GSF and 1/294 for over 30,000 GSF to 1/350 GSF; and
Other minor on and off-site improvements.
This amendment would only apply to the West Parcel (main studio lot) of the
Comprehensive Plan area addressed 9336 Washington Boulevard.
A discussion of the history of the The Culver Studios and analysis of the requested
action is contained in the July 26, 2006, Planning Commission Staff Report
(Attachment No. 4)
On July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2006-P018
(Attachment No. 2) conditionally recommending approval to the City Council of
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5. Draft minutes from the meeting are
included in the agenda packet (Attachment No. 3).
DISCUSSION:
Findings
The Planning Commission has conditionally approved and recommends that the City
Council approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment based on the findings City of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report|1010|pursuant to CCMC Section 17.560.25, for Comprehensive Plan Modifications, as
outlined in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-P018.
Related Redevelopment Agency Actions
The Design for Development for the studio site was originally adopted in 1986 at a
time when there was concern about the continued viability and existence of the
studio facility. Certain amendments to the DFD are required in order for the
proposed development to occur. Staff is also taking this opportunity to update the
DFD. The passage of time has rendered some sections of the DFD obsolete or
unnecessary because of required improvements having been completed.
Additionally this item is being presented to the Redevelopment Agency for
consideration because any develop within the Culver City Redevelopment Project,
which requires Planning Commission or City Council approval, must also be
reviewed by the Agency. Please refer to the Redevelopment staff report and
agenda for a complete discussion.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CECA) guidelines this project
has been determined to have less than significant impacts on the community
provided certain mitigations relating to cultural resources and noise are incorporated;
a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared. The MND containing
the Initial Study and mitigation measures are attached to the July 26, 2006, Planning
Commission staff report and the mitigation measures are recommended as
conditions of approval in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-P018.
Fiscal Impact
The project will result in a net new increase of approximately 35,400 square feet on
the Studio lot along with a 200 space parking structure allowing for increased leasing
opportunities for The Culver Studios. This will result in an increase in property tax
both for the City and Agency and will increase business and utility user’s tax. The
amount of such increase is unknown at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft City Council Resolution No. 2006-R______
2. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission Resolution No. 2006-P018
3. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission minutes excerpt
4. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission staff report and attachmentsCity of Culver City, California
City Council Agenda Item Report|1010|MOTION:
That the City Council:
Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Resolution No. 2006-R____,
approving The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M
P-2006068, subject to the Recommended Conditions of Approval.
8/21/2006
Joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency Consideration to
Approve The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan
Amendment No. 5, Amend the Design For Development for
The Culver Studios Area, and Determine that the Project is
Consistent with the Redevelopment Plan for Component
Area No. 3 of the Culver City Redevelopment Project.
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
ATTACHMENTS
Pages
1. Draft City Council Resolution No. 2006-R 1-4
2. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission 5-17
Resolution No. 2006-P018
3. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission minutes excerpt 18-22
4. July 26, 2006, Planning Commission staff report
23-117 plus
and attachments
Attachments
10, 11, & 12Attachment No. 1
RESOLUTION NO 2006-R
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5, CP/M
P2006068 FOR THE CULVER STUDIOS AT 9000
THROUGH 9336 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD IN THE
STUDIO (5) ZONE.
(Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068)
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01, was
approved by the City Council on January 25, 1988, and has subsequently been amended;
and
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios filed an application for approval of an
amendment to a portion of the Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios to permit the
construction of a 49,500 gross square feet, 56 feet high, office building in the same foot
print as Building J with a zero street facing setback, the construction of a two and one half-
story 200 space parking structure, and amendment of the required parking ratio for office
use from 1/263 for up to 30,000 gross square feet and 1/294 for over 30,000 gross square
feet to 1/350 gross square feet, and other minor on and off-site improvements. This
amendment applies only to the West Parcel (Lots 182 through 190 of the Nolan Park Tract,
Lots 1 through 3 excluding that portion dedicated for Washington Boulevard [80 feet wide]
street purposes and 1 through 6 of Tract 2530), addressed 9336 Washington Boulevard;
and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission after conducting a
duly noticed public hearing on this application, fully considering the application, plans, staff
report, environmental information, and all testimony presented, adopted Resolution No.|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
282006-P018 recommending approval to the City Council of Comprehensive Plan No. 5,
CP/M P2006068; for The Culver Studios at 9336 Washington Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CECA), the City provided public notice of the intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for this project and based upon the Initial Study, public comments, and the
record before the City Council, the project was determined to not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment provided that certain mitigations are required, and the
City Council hereby adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, following conclusion of the public discussion and thorough
deliberation of the subject matter, the City Council approves Comprehensive Plan No. 5
CP/M P2006068, subject to Conditions of Approval stated herein below.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Culver City, California,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and the provisions of Culver City
Municipal Code (CCMC) Title 17, Section 17.560.025, required findings for Comprehensive
Plan Modifications, the following findings are hereby made:
A. The proposed changes are consistent with the intent of the approved
Comprehensive Plan.
The 1987 original Comprehensive Plan, and subsequent amendments, was
designed to facilitate the continued operation of a modern motion picture and TV
studio facility. The proposed amendments are designed to meet the changing use
needs of a studio facility in the 21 st century by providing more office space to
accommodate the growing demand for such use. The site will continue to operate
as a studio lot|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-B. The proposed changes will not adversely impact the environment.
In accordance with CEQA, an Initial Study was completed. This was supplemented
with a traffic study, shade and show study, and historical technical assessment and
documentation. It was determined that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect relating to cultural resources and noise, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because of conditions of approval agreed to by the
applicant. With the adoption of the conditions of approval contained in this
resolution, the project will not adversely impact the environment.
C. The proposed changes will not be detrimental to the surrounding uses.
The West Parcel is surrounded by commercial, industrial, and residential uses.
Through its use of vegetative screening, low height, and high parapets, the
proposed parking structure has been designed to blend into and mitigate any
significant impacts to the adjacent neighborhood. The addition of 49,500 square
feet of office space, and the amendment of the office parking ratios, also will not
have a significant impact on the surrounding uses as analyzed in the traffic study.
Additionally, the studio has agreed to implement conditions of approval contained in
this resolution that will benefit the project and the surrounding neighborhoods.
D. The proposed changes will not significantly increase traffic levels on
existing streets and thoroughfares within the surrounding the development.
A total of 18 intersections were analyzed in the traffic study. Analysis of the
cumulative (projected future traffic volumes) plus the added project conditions
indicate that the proposed project would not create any significant traffic impacts at
any of the analyzed intersections. The emergency access only gate will remain
along Van Buren Place continuing the prohibition of access to the studio lot from
Van Buren Place. Additionally, the studio has agreed to implement conditions of
approval contained in this resolution that will benefit the project and the surrounding
neighborhoods. The studio is served by numerous established transit routes and
there is not expected to be any significant project related impacts on the regional
transit system.
E. Any proposed change which requires exception from standard
ordinance requirements, is warranted by the design and amenities
incorporated into the approved Comprehensive Plan.
The Zoning Code establishes that all development standards (except for building
heights) in the Studio (5) Zone be established in a Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed office building will not exceed the maximum height permitted (without a
height exception per CCMC Section 17.300.025) in the Studio (S) Zone of 56 feet.
Setbacks for structures are established in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for
flexibility in site planning and design for specific or special land uses and locations,
The location of the proposed parking structure and office building are appropriate for
-3-
I|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28AB, City Attorney
placement within the studio lot and as conditioned will have less than significant
impacts on surrounding adjacent uses. The proposed amendment of the office
parking ratio will bring the ratio inline with the ratio for office parking required
citywide.
2. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and findings, the City Council of
the City of Culver City, California, hereby approvals Comprehensive Plan Amendment No.
5, CP/M P-2006068, subject to all conditions of approval contained in Planning
Commission Resolution No, 2006-P018.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of 2006.
GARY SILBIGER, MAYOR
City of Culver City, California
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CHRISTOPHER ARMENIA, City Clerk
A06-00472
-4-Attachment No. 2
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-P018
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY
COUNCIL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT Na 5, CP/M P2006068
FOR THE CULVER STUDIOS AT 9000 THROUGH 9336 WASHINGTON
BOULEVARD IN THE STUDIO (S) ZONE.
(Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068)
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan, OP No. 87-01, was approved
by the City Council on January 25, 1988, and has subsequently been amended; and
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios filed an application for approval of an amendment to
a portion of the Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios to permit the construction of a
49,500 gross square feet, 56 feet high, office building in the same foot print as Building J with
a zero street facing setback, the construction of a two and one half-story 200 space parking
structure, and amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 1/263 for up to
30,000 gross square feet and 1/294 for over 30,000 gross square feet to 1/350 gross square
feet, and other minor on and off-site improvements. This amendment applies only to the
West Parcel (Lots 182 through 190 of the Nolan Park Tract, Lots 1 through 3 excluding that
portion dedicated for Washington Boulevard [80 feet wide] street purposes and 1 through 6
of Tract 2530), addressed 9336 Washington Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing on this application, fully considering the application, plans, staff report,
environmental information, and all testimony presented; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CECA), the
City provided public notice of the intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Page 1 2006-P018project and based upon the Initial Study, public comments, and the recorded before the
Planning Commission, the project was determined to not have a significant adverse impact
on the environment provided that certain mitigations related to Cultural Resources and Noise
are required, and the Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, following conclusion of the public discussion and thorough deliberation of
the subject matter, the Planning Commission determined by a vote of 5 to 0 that
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068, should be recommended to the
City Council for approval as set forth herein below.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CULVER
CITY, CALIFORNIA, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and the provisions of Culver City
Municipal Code (CCMC) Title 17, Section 17.560.025, required findings for Comprehensive
Plan Modifications, the following findings are hereby made:
A.
The proposed changes are consistent with the intent of the approved
Comprehensive Plan.
The 1987 original Comprehensive Plan, and subsequent amendments, was designed
to facilitate the continued operation of a modern motion picture and TV studio facility.
The proposed amendments are designed to meet the changing use needs of a studio
facility in the 21 st century by providing more office space to accommodate the growing
demand for such use. The site will continue to operate as a studio lot
The proposed changes will not adversely impact the environment
In accordance with CEQA, an Initial Study was completed. This was supplemented
with a traffic study, shade and show study, and historical technical assessment and
documentation. It was determined that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect relating to cultural resources and noise, there will not be a significant
effect in this case because of conditions of approval agreed to by the applicant. With
the adoption of the conditions of approval contained in this resolution, the project will
not adversely impact the environment.
Page 2 2006-P018|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29The proposed changes will not be detrimental to the surrounding uses.
The West Parcel is surrounded by commercial, industrial, and residential uses.
Through its use of vegetative screening, low height, and high parapets, the proposed
parking structure has been designed to blend into and mitigate any significant impacts
to the adjacent neighborhood. The addition of 49,500 square feet of office space, and
the amendment of the office parking ratios, also will not have a significant impact on
the surrounding uses as analyzed in the traffic study. Additionally, the studio has
agreed to implement conditions of approval contained in this resolution that will benefit
the project and the surrounding neighborhoods.
D. The proposed changes will not significantly increase traffic levels on existing
streets and thoroughfares within and surrounding the development.
A total of 18 intersections were analyzed in the traffic study. Analysis of the
cumulative (projected future traffic volumes) plus the added project conditions indicate
that the proposed project would not create any significant traffic impacts at any of the
analyzed intersections. The emergency access only gate will remain along Van Buren
Place continuing the prohibition of access to the studio lot from Van Buren Place.
Additionally, the studio has agreed to implement conditions of approval contained in
this resolution that will benefit the project and the surrounding neighborhoods. The
studio is served by numerous established transit routes and there is not expected to
be any significant project related impacts on the regional transit system.
E. Any proposed change which requires exception from standard ordinance
requirements, is warranted by the design and amenities incorporated into the
approved Comprehensive Plan.
The Zoning Code establishes that all development standards (except for building
heights) in the Studio (S) Zone be established in a Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed office building will not exceed the maximum height permitted (without a
height exception per CCMC Section 17.300.025) in the Studio (S) Zone of 56 feet.
Setbacks for structures are established in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for
flexibility in site planning and design for specific or special land uses and locations.
The location of the proposed parking structure_and office building are appropriate for
placement within the studio lot and as conditioned will have less than significant
impacts on surrounding adjacent uses. The proposed amendment of the office
parking ratio will bring the ratio inline with the ratio for office parking required citywide.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to the foregoin g recitations and findings, the Planning
Commission of the City of Culver City, California, hereby and recommends to the City
Page 3 2006-P018
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29Council approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P-2006068, subject to the
following conditions:
Planning Division
General
1. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall not become effective until the effective
date of the Redevelopment Agency's approval of an amendment to the Design for
Development for The Culver Studios Area and approval of preliminary development
plans.
2. The approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 shall expire if new construction
building permits have not been issued and work has not commenced within one (1)
year after the date the entitlement becomes effective, unless prior to the expiration
date, a written extension request with fee is submitted by the applicant and the Planning
Manager, Planning Commission and/or City Council grants said extension. The
effective date of the entitlement shall be considered to be the latest date of either the
City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan and/or Redevelopment Agency
approval of the project's preliminary development plans.
3. As Amendment No. 5 to Comprehensive Plan CP No. 87-01, only applies to the West
Parcel of the entire Comprehensive Plan area, City Council Resolution No. 94-R055,
approving Amendment No. 3 to the Comprehensive Plan, remains in effect except as
modified by Comprehensive Plan Amendment No 5.
4. Conditions of approval herein shall apply to the applicant, all tenants, the
contractor/builder of the project, and any successor property owner that may legally
assume benefit of this Comprehensive Plan.
The site shall be developed in conformance with, and the final site plan and
architectural design shall conform to, the plans, documents, and related narrative the in
The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 narrative and plans
received July 10, 2006, materials board received April 25, 2006, and related
documents, and the conditions of approval herein as approved by the Planning
Commission and as noted below and during the building permit review process. The
Planning Manager may approve minor modifications to the project siting, design,
landscaping treatment, colors and materials, provided such adjustments do not result in
a significant change to the architectural design and/or site plan of the project as a
whole. Minor modifications approved by the Planning Manager shall not be in conflict
with any other condition of approval or Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC)
requirement, or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties.|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Page 4 2006-P0186. The conditions of approval herein shall be referenced on the cover sheet and repeated
in full at the beginning portion of the final working drawings.
7. All applicable development standards and requirements in Planning Commission
Resolution No. 92-P001, "Revised Comprehensive Standard Conditions of Approval for
Site Plan Reviews and Other Discretionary Planning and Zoning Application", except as
otherwise required herein, shall be met. These standards as well as other conditions
required in this approval shall be reflected on the plans submitted for building plan
check.
8. The applicant shall use reasonable best efforts to actively advertise or post all
opportunities for employment, contract services and purchasing of materials to Culver
City-based businesses and residents. Reasonable best efforts shall include, but not be
limited to, advertising on various Internet sites. The applicant shall use reasonable best
efforts to solicit and utilize economical and qualified services from Culver City-based
employees and businesses. The applicant shall also require the construction
contractor(s) and subcontractors related to the project to advertise all construction
opportunities to Culver City-based businesses and residents. This condition shall not
be construed so as to require the applicant to conduct business with, or purchase from,
Culver City-based employees and businesses.
9. The applicant and contractors shall use all reasonable cost-effective efforts to reuse
and recycle construction and demolition debris, to use environmentally friendly
materials, and to provide energy efficient buildings, equipment, and systems.
10. The project and its operations shall comply with all applicable local, special district or
authority, county and federal statutes, codes, standards, and regulations including, but
not limited to, Building Safety Division, Fire Department, Planning Division and Public
Works Department code requirements and it shall comply with all applicable comments
and code requirements as determined during the City's building permit review process.
This includes the requirements of CCMC Chapter 7.05 concerning Transportation and
Air Quality Management.
11. The City reserves the right to periodically inspect the project site without prior
notification to ensure continuing compliance with all conditions of approval.
12. The name and telephone number of a contact person for the applicant, contractor, and
City shall be posted at the project site so as to be visible to the public until issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy. These contact information postings shall be placed along
Van Buren Place and Ince Boulevard.
13. During all phases of construction and once the development becomes operational, all
graffiti upon the premises shall be removed within 48 hours after its application.
14. The public notification signs installed in accordance with the CCMC public notification
requirements for this review process shall be removed within ten (10) days of the end of
the appeal period or the final decision of the City Council / Redevelopment Agency,
whichever occurs last.
Page 5 2006-P018|10101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2915. All parking areas shall be developed pursuant to CCMC Chapter 17.320, Off-Street
Parking and Loading. The ramps and parking surfaces in the parking structure shall be
provided with an anti-squeal finish. (Environmental Mitigation Measure)
16. All planted areas shall be landscaped, irrigated, and maintained pursuant to CCMC
Chapter 17.310 Landscaping. After issuance of the building permit, a minimum of three
(3) sets of detailed landscaping and irrigation plans separate from the final working
drawings shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval.
17. The plants proposed to cover the "green screen" on the parking structure shall be of a
fast growing variety capable of covering the screen within one year of planting and
approved by the Park's Manager. Said plant shall be continually maintained, and
replaced if necessary, to provide the required screening.
18. In addition to the screening requirements for onsite parking areas including loading
areas, refuse storage / trash compacter facilities, and Fire Department connections, the
following items shall be screened from surrounding and nearby public and private
properties in a manner consistent with City standards and suitable to the subject
development as approved by the Planning Manager. In general, the height of any
required screening device shall be no lower on any side than the height of the highest
feature requiring screening and:
A. All exteriors of the proposed buildings shall be free of all unaesthetically treated,
exposed elements (i.e., plumbing pipes, electrical conduits, downspouts and
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) elements) which shall
be placed within the exterior walls. Where exposed wall-mounted features or
equipment may be necessary (i.e., ventilators and utility meters), recessed wall
mounted cabinets or other similar devices shall be constructed within the wall,
whenever possible, to accommodate such features and equipment so that they are
flush with and do not project out from the main exterior wall plane. With or without
recesses, the exposed portions of such features or equipment shall be of a color to
blend, not contrast, with the adjoining finished building color, subject to the
approval of the Planning Manager;
B. All roof-mounted mechanical equipment, duct vents and the like shall not project
above the horizontal plane of the building's lowest primary opaque architectural
feature(s) (i.e., parapet walls, penthouse structures or screening walls); and
C. All ground-mounted equipment (i.e., transformers and air conditioners) shall be
located within the building or in underground vaults if the equipment is located
within a street facing setback, or it shall be screened with walls and/or landscaping
if not located within a street facing setback. Ground-mounted equipment shall not
be located in the landscaped areas fronting any public right-of-way.
M construction and permanent equipment shall be modified so as to insure the
lapwing noise standards:
Page 6 2006-P018|1010101010101010 10
10|•1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28A. Installation of mufflers and sound control devices (Le., intake silencers and noise
shrouds) that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment
and no equipment shall be operated without an exhaust muffler;
B. Properly maintained to minimize noise emissions;
C. If serviced at a location onsite, the service vehicle(s) shall be setback from any
street so as to maintain the greatest distance from the public right-of-way;
D. Noise impacts from stationary sources (i.e., mechanical equipment, ventilators and
air conditioning units) shall be minimized by proper selection of equipment and the
installation of acoustical shielding as determined necessary by the Planning
Manager and the Building Official in order that compliance with the CCMC Noise
Regulations and Standards is achieved; and
E. Stationary source equipment (i.e., compressors) shall be located so as to maintain
the greatest distance possible from the public right-of-way.
19. The applicant shall ensure efficient parking management during construction so as not
to impact surrounding properties. Construction workers shall park on site or at other
locations approved by the City. No parking on surrounding residential neighborhood
streets shall be allowed.
20. A certificate of occupancy for the approved project will be issued only upon completion
of all applicable conditions of approval and required on and off-site improvements.
21. Guest parking for evening live audience tapings shall not be permitted in the parking
structure adjacent to Van Buren Place. (Environmental Mitigation Measure)
22. Attendants shall be required for the efficient use of the tandem parking in the
subterranean parking structure.
Prior to the Issuance of Any Grading, Excavation and/or Building Permit, the Applicant shall:
23. Submit to the Planning Manager for approval an exterior light fixture plan. The plan
shall identify the location and type of all exterior light fixtures to be installed by the
applicant. All lighting shall be directed onsite and-light sources shall be shielded so as
not to be intrusive to surrounding properties.
24. Provide the construction contractor(s) and each subcontractor related to the project a
copy of the final project conditions of approval The applicant and the City agree that
these conditions shall be enforceable through all legal and equitable actions and any
remedies, including the imposition of fines against each and every person who
conducts any activity on behalf of the applicant on or near the project site. The
applicant, property owner, and general construction contractor are ultimately
responsible for all actions or omissions of a subcontractor.
Page 7 2006-P018
II|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29Engineering Division
25. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, three sets of Site Improvement Plans
prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California, shall be submitted to
the Engineering Division for review, approval, and permitting. The Plans shall include,
but not limited to, detailed drainage and grading of the site indicated by topographical
lines and spot elevations. Show all existing and proposed drive approach(es),
driveway(s), sidewalk, curb, gutter, indicate all proposed and existing utilities (sanitary
sewer, water, etc.), and fully dimensioned plans to include up to the centerline of Ince
Boulevard and Van Buren Place.
26. Provide an existing site topographic survey map prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor
in the State of California. This survey shall include existing property lines, existing
utilities and meters, existing structures, street trees, all above ground facilities within the
public parkway, include existing development within 50 feet of project site, etc. A
survey (horizontal and vertical location) of the existing public sewer shall be noted on
the plan.
27. Prior to the issuance of any demolition (except Building J), grading excavation and/or
building permit, the applicant shall submit concurrent with the submittal of the Site
Improvement Plan, the Local Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (LSWPPP) and the
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for review and approval by the
City Engineer as outlined in CCMC Chapter 5.05. Prior to the start of design of these
plans and of necessary reports, the applicant's civil engineer shall meet with the City's
Stormwater Program Manager to obtain information on the City-specific SUSMP and
LSWPPP requirements. The LSWPPP and SUSMP shall be developed and
implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Municipal
Stormwater NPDES Permit No. CA5614001 (Order No. 01-182). The LSWPPP shall
include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that effectively prohibit the entry of
pollutants from the construction site into the public street or storm drain system. The
SUSMP shall provide BMPs that adequately address the pollutants generated during
the post-construction stage. The site improvement plans shall note that the contractor
shall comply with the "California Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbooks".
28. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy (CO) the applicant shall submit to
the City Stormwater Program Manager a notarized Master Covenant and Agreement
(regarding on-site BMP maintenance) to be recorded by the County Recorder of Los
Angeles County. Prior to getting the Agreement notarized, the applicant's civil engineer
shall contact the City's Stormwater Program Manager for review of the Agreement and
for information on other requirements associated with the recording process.
29 After the construction of the SUSMP-related BMPs, the applicant shall submit to the City
Stomwater Program Manager a completed Stormwater Observation Report Form
(stamped and signed by the civil engineer or architect responsible for the SUSMP
desizr) to certify, based on his or her observations, that all SUSMP-related BMPs have
been constructed per the specs and the drawings.
Page 8 2006-P018
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
J2-10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30. The applicant shall reconstruct all damaged and uplifted sidewalk panels along property
frontage on Van Buren Place per APWA Standards and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer or his/her designee.
31. The two existing driveway approaches proposed to be removed on Van Buren Place
shall be reconstructed into a sidewalk, parkway, curb, and gutter per APWA Standards
and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or his/her designee.
32. The gate on Van Buren Place shall be for emergency entry only and the driveway
approach shall be constructed to Culver City standards.
33. A landscape plan for parkway landscaping and irrigation within the public right-of-way
on Van Buren Place shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer.
The owner shall maintain the parkway area to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department.
34. The existing streetlight along the project's frontage on Van Buren Place shall be
upgraded to low voltage power. This work shall include, but not limited to, the
replacement of light fixtures, ballasts, and the installation of new pull boxes, conduit,
and wiring. A new service connection shall be provided as directed by and to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. All streetlights on Van Buren Place that are not
converted to low voltage shall remain in operation.
35. All onsite drainage shall be pretreated prior to being conveyed to the street or storm
drain system per SUSMP requirements.
36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a geotechnical
report from a State licensed Geotechnical Engineer reporting on the suitability of the
onsite soils to support the proposed construction and shall include a liquefaction
analysis. The report shall also identify any special considerations necessary to satisfy
California Building Code requirements.
37. Upon completion of the rough grading and prior to the issuance of a building permit the
following reports and drawings and any supplements thereto shall be submitted to the
City Engineer:
A. An as-built grading plan prepared by the Civil Engineer.
B. A certification by the civil engineer that the grading has been completed in
conformance with the approved plan and California Building Code Appendix
Chapter 33 and with this certification, a survey showing the final rough pad grade
elevations shall be submitted.
C. A certification by the soils engineer that the grading has been completed to his
satisfaction and is in compliance with the California Building Code Chapter 33.
Page 9 2006-P018
/-3D. A final compaction report prepared by the soils engineer.
38. The applicant shall be responsible for the expense to repair or replace any damage to
the public right-of-way caused by the construction of the proposed project. Such repair
or replacement shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
39. Dirt hauling and construction material deliveries or removal are prohibited during the
morning (7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M.) and afternoon (4:00 RM. to 6:00 RM.) peak traffic
periods.
40. During construction, dust shall be controlled by regular watering and as directed by the
Culver City Public Work Inspector.
41. All staging and storage of construction equipment and materials, including the
construction dumpster, shall be on-site only. The applicant shall obtain written
permission from adjacent property owners for any construction staging occurring on
adjacent property.
42. Prior to the commencement of any excavation, the applicant shall install a temporary
construction fence with screening around the site. The height, fence and screening
materials are subject to approval by the City Engineer or his/her designee.
43. The construction contractor shall advise the Culver City Public Works Inspector of the
construction schedule and shall meet with the inspector prior to commencement of
work.
44. Due to the change of use, this project is subject to the City's Sewer Facility Charge
(SFC). The existing and proposed uses and square footages shall be provided for the
proposed development to the Engineering Division. The SFC shall be paid directly to
Engineering Division prior to the issuance of any permit.
45. Per the CCMC Section a01 .010, Solid Waste Management, the Culver City Sanitation
Division has the exclusive franchise for all solid and recyclable waste material handling
within the City limits. To arrange for waste management activities, contact a Sanitation
representative at (310) 253-6400.
46. The applicant shall dedicate an easement for street purposes along the project's West
Parcel frontage with Washington Boulevard. The easement shall be seven feet in width
in order to provide for a total right-of-way of 80 feet for Washington Boulevard.
47_ The applicant shall dedicate an easement for street purposes along the easterly side of
Ince Boulevard between Washington Boulevard and Lindblade Street to provide for a
total street right-of-way of approximately sixty-six (66) feet. The actual width of the
easement shall be determined by a field survey and shall encompass the full width of
the existing public street improvement.|10101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Page 10 2006-P01810|1010|12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Traffic
48. Ince Boulevard shall be restriped with two southbound lanes from Washington
Boulevard to Gate 2. The curb lane will be a right-turn-only lane into Gate 2, and the
number one lane will be a combination through/right-turn lane. Culver Studios will be
responsible for all the engineering and implementation costs associated with this
mitigation measure to the satisfaction to the City.
49. "No right-turn" signs for motorists exiting Studio property at Gates 2 and 3 shall be
installed. "No left-turn" signs for northbound motorists on Ince Boulevard at Gates 2
and 3 shall be installed. Culver Studios will be responsible for all costs to post signs
indicating the turn prohibitions on Culver Studios property and on City right of way.
Access Gates 2 and 3 shall only be via right turn-in/left turn-out only.
50. A Traffic Monitoring Program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning
Manager and Public Works Director. Culver Studios shall take "before-project" base
traffic counts prior to construction, and "after-project" counts six months and one year
after the certificate of occupancy is issued for Building J. Culver Studios is responsible
to take all the counts and report the findings to the City. If the Planning Manager and
Public Works Director determine that the project significantly increases traffic on
Krueger Street, Lucerne Avenue, and the residential portion of Ince Boulevard, then
Gate 3 will be restricted to trucks only. For the monitoring process in each of the three
periods, the Studio shall take baseline 24-hour machine traffic counts for one week for
Kruger Street, and one 12-hour manual traffic count (6 AM to 6 PM) showing turning
movements for one weekday at the intersection of Ince Boulevard and Kruger Street.
51. The Culver Studios shall submit three times (dates and scope of study as determined by
the City) over an 18 month period following occupancy . of Building J, a parking study
evaluating the parking demand of their on-site facilities and the Studio's employee,
tenant, and visitor off-site parking impact in the nearby residential area. The residential
area shall be defined as the residential portions of Lucerne Avenue, Carson Street,
Hubbard Street, Krueger Street, and Poinsettia Court between Ince Boulevard and
Higuera Street, and that portion of Ince Boulevard which is residential between Krueger
Street and Lucerne Avenue. One of the evaluations shall occur after the realignment of
the Culver Boulevard/Washington Boulevard intersection. If the City determines, based
on the study findings, there is a significant amount of parking off-site by the Studio, the
Studio shall present to the Planning Manager and Public Works Director a plan to
address the off-site overflow parking issue. For the on-site facilities, remedial measures
are needed if 95% of the total amount of on-site parking spaces are occupied. For off-
site parking on the residential streets, remedial measures shall be required if 25% or
more of the parked vehicles are by non-residents, The remedial measures may include,
but are not limited to, the establishment of the deferred parking referenced in Condition
of Approval No. II.H. of City Council Resolution No 94-R055 (as amended by this
resolution) and other measures approved by the Planning Manager and Public Works
Director.
Page 11 2006-P018
Ii-52. Condition of Approval No. II.H. of City Council Resolution No. 94-R055 is hereby
amended to read:
The City defers the Studio's obligation to provide 100 of the required parking spaces on-
site unless and until the City determines there are parking deficiencies found by the City
to be causing significant adverse impacts on traffic flow, availability of parking, and/or
safety in the neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the site. Pursuant to the same
procedures used for the adoption of this comprehensive plan, and based on a finding of
parking deficiencies, the City may require all or any portion of the 100 deferred parking
spaces to be provided within a reasonable time.|1010|53. The Studio shall implement a public relations program that will regularly inform all|109| employees, vendors, tenants, and visitors of the designated routes to and from the|10 9| studios to help prevent vehicles using residential streets to access the site.
10
54. All gates along Van Buren Place shall continue to remain for emergency access only to
the studio lot.
11
12
Fire Prevention Division
13 55. The following shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal before filing for a building permit:
14
A. A fire plan shall be provided showing access routes for fire apparatus to all
15
proposed renovated buildings and new structures. Gate(s) shall be provided for fire
apparatus and fire personnel on Van Buren Place. A KNOX Box and key access
16 system shall be provided at all new gates and doors.
17 B. Detailed drawings indicating proposed 20 foot wide fire lanes and location of
18 proposed fire hydrants.
19
a A plan for upgrading all portions of the life safety system and suppression
infrastructure. The spacing between fire hydrants shall not exceed 300 feet.
20
56. Per Culver City Fire Department regulations, a fire hydrant shall to be located 30 to 50
21 feet from the Fire Department Connection (FDC).
22
57. All new buildings with environmental controlled interior space shall have a manual and
23 automatic fire alarm system.
24 58. The proposed 200 space parking structure shall have a standpipe system with 2 112"
25 valves and 1 112" reducing caps.
26
Cultural Affairs
27
59. An new construction (Building J, Parking Structure) shall comply with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Final drawings for the
28 new structures shall be reviewed by a qualified historic preservation professional and a
29
Page 12 2006-P018|1010101010|5A
Yvonne Hunt
Administrative Secretary
SJ/sj
by:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
statement of appropriateness shall be submitted to the Planning Manager prior to
application for any building permit.
60. A complete historical documentation package, prepared by a qualified professional
following National Park Service Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards,
shall be submitted to the City for Building J prior to issuance of any building permit for
new construction. Photographic documentation for Building R shall be submitted prior
to issuance of any demolition permits for Building R and the complete historical
documentation package, prepared by a qualified professional following National Park
Service Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards, shall be submitted to the
City prior to issuance of any building permit for the new parking structure. Information
included in these documentation packages for Building J and R shall be made publicly
available as an educational resource by the applicant (e.g., via The Culver Studios' web
site) prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (Environmental Mitigation
Measure)
61. The applicant shall fulfill the City's public art requirement as outlined in Sections
15.06.100 et seq. of the Municipal Code prior to issuance of any Certificate of
Occupancy for new construction resulting from approval of this Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
Building Safety Division
62. The location of the handicapped parking spaces within the new 200 space parking
structure shall not compel users to wheel behind parked vehicles other than their own,
and an accessible route shall be provided from all handicapped parking to all buildings
to the satisfaction of the Building Official.
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of July 2006.
711 '77)q MAUREEN M. MURANAKA, CHAIRPERSON
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA
Page 13
2006-P018
/7Attachment No. 3
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CULVER CITY, CA
July 26, 2006
7:00 p.m.
Mike Balkman Council Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT:
ADVISORY PRESENT:
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Muranaka called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Thomas Gorham.
Roll Call. Muranaka, Tiggs, Rockwell, Kuechle, Weissman.
•
PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
PH-1.
PH-2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 — CP/114 P2006068 for 9000 through 9336
Washington Boulevard (The Culver Studios)
Motion for receive and file the Affidavit of Mailing of Notices was moved by Vice Chair Tiggs,
seconded by Commissioner Rockwell.
Sherry Jordan gave a brief summary of the project.
Vice Chair Tiggs inquired about the following:
• The amount of parking provided, surface parking, the proposed office parking ratio, and
the availability of production parking.
• Truck use of the gates.
• Proposed vegetation on the parking structure.
Sherry Jordan responded.These Minutes are not official
until approved
by the Planning Commission
**********************************
Wayne Rauschenberger (General Manager of the Culver Studios)
• Addressed the need for office space at the studio.
• Stated that they agree to all of the conditions of approval in the resolution.
• Addressed truck use of the gates.
Commissioner Rockwell
a Per residents in the area, studio parking is occurring in the neighborhood.
Wayne Rauschenberger
• Will probably have to implement valet and tandem parking in the parking structure.
• They keep a close eye on parking in residential neighborhoods and have not received any
reports or comments recently regarding that.
• Has agreed to put ordinance signs outside the lot to prevent right turns into the residential
neighborhood.
• During the peak periods tandem parking will have to be tandem/valet.
Eric Stultz (Design Director for Gensler)
a Described the proposed structures and architecture of the existing and proposed
structures.
S. Larkey (Resident)
• Inquired about the architecture of Building J.
• Inquired about the height of the building and the number of employees expected after the
completion of the project.
• Inquired about shuttle service to the studio.
Wayne Rauschenberger
• Responded to the questions of Ms. Larkey.
Vice Chair Tiggs
• Inquired about the number of employees and use of Gate I.
Wayne Rauschenberger
• The 75 employee number does not include the lessees. The number varies and there may
be up to 300-400 on the lot in any given day.
• The only long term tenant at this time is the Sony Television Group which resides in the
mansion in the front. There are approximately 60 people in the mansion. Everyone else
are "production' tenants.
• Gate I is primarily used by the Sony Television Group in the mansion and that gate is
closed at 5:00 p.m.
Motion to close the public hearing was moved by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by
Commissioner Weissman. Vote 5-0.
2These Minutes are not official
until approved
by the Planning Commission
**********************************
Commissioner Rockwell
• Supports the project.
• Discussed the traffic and parking issues in the area.
• Inquired about proposed condition of approval concerning the traffic study to be
conducted after occupancy of Building J.
John Muggridge (Kaku & Associates Traffic Consultants)
• Responded to the questions concerning the traffic study
Sherry Jordan suggested a possible condition of approval for studying the impact of parking in
the surrounding neighborhood.
Commissioner Rockwell
• The problem is not the traffic going into the lot, but potentially what parking is occurring
in the neighborhoods.
Barry Katz (City Consulting Traffic Engineer)
• Discussed restricted or permit parking for residential streets and the monitoring parking
in residential areas.
Sherry Jordan described the permit parking process.
Commissioner Weissman
• Inquired about the realignment of Washington Boulevard and the effect on the
Ince/Washington intersection.
Barry Katz
Informed the Commission that the traffic study was performed assuming the realignment of
Washington Boulevard and there will be a worsening of traffic.
Commissioner Kuechle discussed
• His belief that in addition to traffic, parking impact of the project should be studied.
• That the 100 deferred parking space requirement should be clarified to apply to any
shortfall of parking not just for stage use.
• The use of attendants for tandem parking.
• The need for a condition of approval for maintenance of "green screen" on parking
structure and that the plants fully developed within one year.
Vice Chair Tiggs
• Inquired about the use of Gates I, 2, and 3.
3These Minutes are not official
until approved
by the Planning Commission
**********************************
Sherry Jordan described the use of the gates.
Commissioner Weissman
• Supports the project.
• Inquired about Gate I access following the Washington Boulevard realignment.
• Believes the complaints regarding studio parking on residential street has lessened but
that it is important to be mindful of the residents' concerns.
Sherry Jordan explained Washington Boulevard street realignment and Gate 1 access.
Chair Muranaka
• In favor of requiring a parking study.
• Would be in favor of a condition of approval that would require onsite and offsite parking
demand studies.
A page by page review of the Findings was done by the commissioners and responses to
questions and concerns were addressed by Sherry Jordan and Thomas Gorham.
Commissioner Kuechle
• Expressed concerns on Page 6 — Condition #13 regarding graffiti, but agreed that the
condition was adequate as written.
• Suggested adding Conditions of Approval with respect to the tandem parking with
parking attendant and/or valets, clarifying that the 100 space deferred parking
requirement is not limited to stage use parking, and plant growth rate and maintenance of
the green screen on the proposed parking structure.
Chair Muranaka supported the recommendation.
Sherry Jordan responded.
Commissioner Rockwell
• Project needs parking and level of occupancy studies.
• Expressed concern with vehicle queuing on Ince Boulevard.
Commissioner Tiggs
•
Concerned about the one year traffic monitoring before and after the realignment of
Washington Boulevard.
Barry Katz read a proposed draft additional condition of approval regarding the parking
concern and a separate condition for monitoring the parking. A condition regarding the 100
deferred parking spaces was read by Sherry Jordan.|1010|;1,/These Minutes are not official
until approved
by the Planning Commission
**********************************
There was a general consensus that it was acceptable for staff to write the additional conditions
of approval for Chair Muranaka's signature.
Motion to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) finding that the project will not have
a significant impact on the environment provided certain mitigations are implemented as
described in the MND and that the Commission recommend to the City Council approval of
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M, P2006068, subject to Resolution No. 2006-P018
as amended, was moved by Vice Chair Tiggs, seconded by Commissioner Rockwell.
Vote 5-0.Attachment No. 4
City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
Meeting Date: July 26, 2006 Item Number: PH-2
AGENDA ITEM: The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment No 5 CP/M
P2006068, for 9000 through 9336 Washington Boulevard.
Contact Person/Dept.: Sherry Jordan, Phone Number (310) 253-5746
Senior Planner 9
Fiscal Impact: Y 1 N X1 General Fund: Yes [1 No X
Public Hearing: [X] Action Item: Attachments: [X]
Public Notification: Signs were posted on the studio property. Notices were mailed July
3, 2006, to all property owners, and Occupants within an expanded mailing radius of the
site Courtesy notices were mailed to the Downtown Business Association, Culver City
Homeowner Association, Culver City News, Culver City Observer, Culver City Chamber
of Commerce
/ f 1 1 and other interested parties City Council Planning Commission City
.
Manager, Department Heads, and &mailed to the Master Notification List on June 3,
2006. Notice was published in the Culver City News on June 15 1 2006.
Planning Approval:
Thomas Gorham, Planning Manager, July 1 .7, 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) finding that the project will not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment provided certain
mitigations are implemented (Attachment No. 2);
2, Recommend that the City Council approve Comprehensive Plan Amendment
No. 5, CP/M P2006068, subject to Conditions of Approval as stated in draft
Resolution No. 2006-P018 (Attachment No. 3); and
PROCEDURES:
1. Chair seeks motion to receive and file affidavit of mailing of notices.
2. Chair calls on staff for a brief staff report and Commission poses questions to
staff as desired.
3. Chair opens the public hearing, providing the applicant the first opportunity to
speak, followed by the general public.
4. Chair seeks a motion to close the public hearing after all testimony has been
presented.
5. Commission discusses the matter and arrives at its decision.
Page 1 of 10
2,3City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
BACKGROUND:
Request
To amend the Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios to permit:
• Construction of a 49,500 sq. ft. four-story (56 foot high) office building in
approximately the same foot print as Building J with a zero street facing
setback;
• Construction of a two and one-half story (200 space) parking structure
over an existing 60 space surface parking lot and the area of Building R;
• Amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 11263 for up to
30,000 GSF and 1/294 for over 30,000 GSF to 1/350 GSF; and
• Other minor on and off-site improvements.
This amendment would only apply to the West Parcel (main studio lot) of the
Comprehensive Plan area addressed 9336 Washington Boulevard.
General Information
See Attachment No. 1, Project Summary
History
The studio was originally developed by Thomas H. Ince in 1918 and has been
used for motion picture and television production ever since. Attachment No,
4 provides a brief history of the studio. See Attachment No. 5 for an
abbreviated history of the entitlements associated with the development of the
studio over the last 20 years
Existing Conditions
As described in the Culver City Redevelopment Agency's Design for
Development for The Culver Studios Area (DFD), the site is made up of two
parcels (Attachment No. 7), The West Parcel, addressed as 9336
Washington Boulevard, contains The Culver Studios and currently houses
approximately 70,600 sq. ft. of office, 86,000 sq. ft. of support, and 155,500
sq. ft of stage uses. The East Parcel, addressed as 9050 Washington
Boulevard, contains approximately 164,000 sq. ft. of studio related office use.
The East Parcel, while subject to the City's Comprehensive Plan and the
Redevelopment Agency's DFD, is not owned by the applicant and is not part
Page 2 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
of this request. Should the requested amendment be approved it would only
apply to the West Parcel. The existing Comprehensive Plan regulations
would remain effective for the East Parcel. See Page 4 of Attachment No. 12
for an aerial map illustrating the two parcels.
ANALYSIS:
The current Comprehensive Plan requirements are contained in Resolution No.
94-R055 (Attachment No. 8). The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan for the West Parcel (Attachment 1\11p 12) consists of the following main
points:
A. Construction of a 49,500 gross square foot four-story (56 foot high) office
building within approximately the same footprint of Building J.
Building J was demolished in April of this year. It consisted of an 11,852
square foot, 49 foot high building used as a support facility for the
operation of the studio. The building had a zero street facing setback
along Ince Boulevard. The proposal is to construct a 49,500 gross square
foot, 56 foot high (four-story), office building on approximately the same
footprint of Building J. As with Building J, the street facing side of the
building would be located on the Ince Boulevard property line thereby
eliminating the need for a perimeter studio wall. The new building will be
7'6" shorter in length than the former building but will project 7'6" more in
width towards the inside of the studio lot.
The new building is proposed to be a precast concrete structure in a
contemporary architectural style. A discussion of the reasoning behind
the design and its relationship to the historic nature of the studio site is
contained on Page 12 of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5
narrative and plans (Attachment No. 12).
The Studio (S) zoning regulations require that all the development
standards for sites within the Studio Zone, except for the building height
limit, be established by a Comprehensive Plan. In the zoning code, the
maximum height for buildings in the Studio Zone is 56 feet without a
Height Exception per Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC) Section
17.300.025.
The existing Comprehensive Plan narrative adopted with the original
Comprehensive Plan in 1988, illustrates street facing zoning setback
requirements in affect at the time. The requirement is for a 15 foot
Page 3 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
.2(7
setback for the first 27 feet of height and a 17.5 foot setback for the
remaining portion of the building over 27 feet in height.
The Comprehensive Plan process (Attachment No. 9) was developed to
allow for flexibility in the application of zoning code standards for a
particular development. The purpose is to allow consideration of creative
site planning and design in relation to the site specific location, site
features, onsite and surrounding land uses, and other zoning code
standards.
Approval of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment as proposed would
allow new Building J to be constructed with a zero street facing setback
along Ince Boulevard and be 56 feet in height. Staff believes the building
will be compatible with the surrounding industrial neighborhood. The
building will be on the studio lot with other taller stage structures and
would be across Ince Boulevard from industrial uses and buildings. The
location on the lot is the only place where a four-story building could be
located that would not visually impact any residential area. The zero
street facing setback will allow the continued use of building walls as the
perimeter wall for the studio lot along Ince Boulevard.
The current DFD limits the height of new building construction to 43 feet
and requires building setbacks to conform to applicable zoning standards.
Should the Comprehensive Plan Amendment be approved, it would not
become effect until the Redevelopment Agency approved an amendment
to the DFD. The proposed project will require amendments to the DFD
that would amend the parking ratio for office use (discussed below),
increase the allowable building height to 56 feet for Building J, eliminate
the street facing setback for the reconstruction of Building J, provide a
general clean-up of the DFD to remove obsolete provisions, and update
CCMC citations. The Redevelopment Agency would consider the
amendment to the DFD at the same time the City Council considers the
Planning Commission's recommendation on the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
B. Amending the parking ratio for office use on the west parcel lot to be
consistent with the office parking ratio citywide.
The parking requirements for the Comprehensive Plan area is currently
established in the DFD and the Comprehensive Plan. The parking ratios
that were in existence in the zoning code at that time for office use were
adopted. Specifically, the parking requirement for office use established is
as follows:
Page 4 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
Office
Up to 30,000 sq. ft.
3.8 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
of Gross Floor Area
of Gross Floor Area (1/263)
Over 30,000 sq. ft.
3.4 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.
of Gross Floor Area
of Gross Floor Area (1/294)
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposes to change the ratio for
office use on the West Parcel to 2.86 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross
floor area (1/350). This is currently the parking requirement for office use
citywide. With this ratio, the proposed 117,872 sq. ft. of office use on the
parcel (including new Building J) would require 337 parking spaces. With
the existing parking ratio, 413 spaces would be required. See Page 28 of
the Attachment No, 12 for a detailed parking breakdown of the required
parking for the West Parcel. In total, the studio would be required to
provide 752 parking spaces with the proposed amendment (337 spaces
for office use and 415 spaces for all other uses). The preliminary plans
provide 754 spaces.
Number of Parking Spaces on the West Parcel
Existing Onsite
196 Surface parking
419 Subterranean parking
615
Per Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5
135 Surface parking
419 Subterranean parking
2QSL Structure parking
754
C. Construction of a 200 space parking structure over the location of an
existing 60 space surface parking lot and Building R.
To accommodate the required parking (as amended) for the West Parcel,
the applicant is proposing to construct a parking structure to supplement
the existing surface and subterranean parking. The proposed structure
would accommodate 200 parking spaces on two and one-half levels
incorporating subterranean and roof parking. The site plan, floor plans,
and elevations for the structure are contained in Attachment No. 12.
The height of the structure ranges from 26 feet at the southeasterly end
down to 21 feet at the other end adjacent to the residential dwelling along
Van Buren Place. It is designed with a six foot high parapet around the
Page 5 of 10
27City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
ce
exterior of the floors to screen the vehicles and headlights. The elevations
facing the residential dwelling and street will be designed to accommodate
a "green screen" of vines to cover the structures concrete exterior. The
setbacks around the structure will be planted to add additional screening.
Due to the location of the parking structure, one of the existing emergency
gates along Van Buren Place will be relocated to align with the internal
drive aisle leading to the structure. These gates will remain for emergency
access only and will not provide access to the studio lot.
DISCUSSION:
Project Applicant's Community Meetings
The applicant held two informational community meetings for the neighborhood
on Mayl 6th and 17 th. At these meetings representatives of The Culver Studios
presented the project and answered questions from the attendees.
Traffic
A traffic study was prepared by Kaku Associates to evaluate the potential traffic
impacts of the proposed development (Attachment No. 10). A total of 18
intersections were analyzed within the study area for this project. Analysis of the
projected cumulative plus project conditions indicates that the proposed project
would not create any significant traffic impacts at any of the analyzed
intersections or exceed a level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The study
did however list various traffic related improvements that will benefit the
proposed project and the surrounding neighborhood. Staff concurred with the
findings and has included the following recommendations as conditions of
approval in proposed Resolution No. 2006-P018:
• Implementation of a public relations program to inform visitors to the site of
designated routes to and from the studios to help prevent vehicles using
residential streets to access the site.
• Installation of new traffic signs along Ince Boulevard on studio property and in
the public right-of-way to make Gates 2 and 3 right turn-in/left turn-out only.
• Restripe southbound Ince Boulevard at Gate 2 to provide a through/right and
a dedicated right-turn lane to provide better access to the studio site.
• Implementation of a traffic monitoring program over a one-year period. If the
City determines that the project significantly increases traffic on Kruger Street,
Page 6 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
Lucerne Avenue, the residential portion of Ince Boulevard, or any other
residential street, then the City would propose restricting access at Gate 3 to
trucks only.
Art in Public Places Program
The applicant is proposing to meet their Art in Public Places requirement by
installing an art piece onsite facing Ince Boulevard near Gate 2. To date no
proposed art piece has been submitted for review. The Cultural Affairs
Commission will review and approve the proposed art piece concept prior to
installation. The art requirement must be satisfied prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Historic Resources
In 1987, Thirtieth Street Architects conducted a survey in Culver City with the
intention of identifying structures of historical/architectural/cultural significance at
the local level. Buildings surveyed were rated A, B, C, or D. "A" rated buildings
included potential candidates for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places; "B" rated buildings included those not architecturally distinctive or
historically significant enough to be considered for the National Register but
maintained a local importance; "C" rated buildings included those not individually
distinctive architecturally or historically but potentially important when grouped in
a district; and, "D" rated buildings were structures that had been altered but might
be restorable. The "+" symbol was added to any of the four ratings for those
buildings considered contributors to a potential historic district. The 1987
Thirtieth Street Architects survey became the basis for Culver City's 1990
Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (HPAC) Report which made
recommendations for historic designations under Culver City's historic
preservation program. Structures were designated by the City Council, based on
the I--IPAC Report recommendations, as either "Landmark," "Significant" or
"Recognized."
The Thirtieth Street Architects' survey included 36 structures (some of these
were combined into one building for rating purposes) on The Culver Studios lot,
with 13 rated A+, nine rated 8+, and eight rated C+. Of these, the Mansion
(Administration) Building — including the DeMille Theatre — and Bungalows S, T,
U, and V were included in Culver City's list of designated historic resources. The
Mansion Building was given the local designation of "Landmark" and the four
bungalows the designation of "Significant." Although all buildings surveyed at
that time were considered contributors to a potential historic district, The Culver
Studios lot was not formally given a district designation at the local level.
Page 7 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
In the fall of 2005, The Culver Studios hired Historic Resources Group (HRG) to
update the 1987 structures survey according to current guidelines and existing
conditions at the site. HRG's evaluation included 32 buildings and structures
(including the four gates), of which 24 (75%) were determined to be contributors
to a potential historic district. The period of significance of the site was from
1918 to 1946; 81% of the structures surveyed in 2005 were constructed within
the period of significance. The Culver Studios site functions today as it did at its
inception in 1918 and, with little exception, the current configuration of the site
resembles the layout from 1946. It was concluded by HRG that The Culver
Studios site is determined eligible for listing as a district on the National Register
of Historic Places today (as it was in 1987) due to its associated value within the
context of motion picture studios at the local level.
Because of The Culver Studios' eligibility for listing on the National Register as a
district, the site is also considered an historic resource under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21084.1 and Public Resources Code
(PRC) Section 5024.1(c).
Staff has outlined the following requirements as mitigation measures to retain
The Culver Studios' eligibility as a district for listing on the National Register and
thereby avoiding a significant impact on the existing environment of the proposed
project as outlined in Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5. These
requirements are included as conditions of approval in proposed Resolution No.
2006 P018.
• Documentation of Buildings J and R following the Historic American Building
Record (NABS) criteria. Documentation is to include photographs,
architectural drawings and a narrative outlining the historical context of each
building to the site; and,
• All new construction shall comply with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation, specifically Standards No, 2, 9 and 10
(Attachment No. 6).
This project ensures retention of the majority of the structures that have been
identified as contributors to the historical district's eligibility from the period of
significance (1918-1946).
The Historical Documentation Package for Building J has been completed by
HRG and submitted to the City for review. Documentation of Building R is in
progress_ With regard to the requirements for new construction, the narrative
Page 8 of 10City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
included on Page 12 of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment narrative and plans
(Attachment No. 12) summarizes the relationship of the new construction to the
site.
Legal Standard for Decision/Project Findings
CCMC Title 17, Section 17.560.025, lists the findings required for
Comprehensive Plan Modifications. The Planning Commission can recommend
to the City Council to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment based on the applicable findings. Staff
believes the findings for Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P-
2006068, can be made as outlined in proposed Resolution No, 2006 P018.
Comments Received During Public Comment Period
As of July 11th staff has received six inquiries about the project. Most of the
callers inquired about parking structure access from Van Buren Place and
expressed that that they would be concerned if access would be permitted from
Van Buren Place. One caller just wanted more information about the overall
project.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, an Initial
Study was completed on July 3, 2006 (Attachment No. 2). Based on the review
of the submitted development plans, Initial Study analysis and City procedures,
the Planning Division required the applicant to submit a traffic study (Attachment
No. 10), shade and shadow analysis (Attachment No. 12), and historical
resources information (Attachment Nos. 4 & 5). The Initial Study was filed with
the Los Angeles County Clerk and posted at the Planning Division public counter.
The project has been determined to have less than significant impacts on the
community provided certain mitigations are incorporated relating to Cultural
Resources and Noise. The MND containing the Initial Study and mitigation
measures are contained in Attachment No, 2 to this report and the mitigation
measures have been recommended as conditions of approval in proposed
Resolution No. 2006-P018.
Page 9 of 10
31City of Culver City, California
Planning Commission Agenda Item Report
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS:
The following alternative actions may be considered by the Planning
Commission:
1. Recommend to the City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment application with the recommended conditions of approval if the
application is deemed to meet the required findings.
2. Recommend to the City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment application with additional or different conditions of approval, if
deemed necessary to meet the required findings and mitigate any new project
impacts identified at the meeting.
3. Recommend to the City Council disapproval of the Comprehensive Plan if it
does not meet the required findings.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Project Summary
2. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Proposed Resolution No. 2006-P018
4, A Brief History of The Culver Studio by Historic Resources Group, 2006
5. Abbreviated History of Major Entitlements for The Culver Studios 9336 and
9050 Washington Boulevard
6. The Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
7. Design for Development for The Culver Studios Area (Amended June 20,
1994
8. City Council Resolution No. 94-R055
9. CCMC Chapter 17.560 - Comprehensive Plan Regulations
10. Traffic and Parking Study for Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan
Amendment #5, received July 10, 2006
11. Appendix Documentation to Traffic and Parking Study for Culver Studios
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5, received July 10, 2006, concerning
Gate 4 policies
12. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 narrative and plans received July
10, 2006
13. Color and materials boards received April 25, 2006 (available at meeting)
Page 10 of 10Attachment 1
PROJECT SUMMARY
APPLICATIONTITLE-A 'CASE: N
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No, 5, CP/M P2006068, for 9000 through 9336 Washington
Boulevard
P AL)DRg ON
9000 through 9336 Washington Boulevard.
4ONTYFE.
:
Administrative Use Permit
• Conditional Use Permit
n Administrative Site Plan Review
E Site Plan Review
E Administrative Variance
0 Variance
LI Master Sign Program
LI
Certificate of Appropriateness
LI Certificate of Exemption
DOBI
APRUCAVriNfORMAPPN:-...
The Culver Studios
Li
Tentative Parcel Map
E Tentative Tract Map
El
Lot Line Adjustment
E Zoning Code Amendment - Text
0 Zoning Code Amendment -Map
LI
General Plan Amendment - Text
0 General Plan Amendment - Map
O Planned Unit Development
E Specific Plan
Ak
Other: Comprehensive Plan Amendment
API2R, Pu Hear n [jp.0 bi tgAlle.0119 Administrativ
0 Administrative El Redevelopment Agency
Z
Planning Commission 0 Other:
Z
City Council
MENTAL DETERM N AND NOTICINQ: ENV
-- CEQA fl
Categorical Exemption, Class Determination 0 Negative Declaration or Z Mitigated Negative Declaration
0 Environmental Impact Report, Type: CEQA Noticing
Notice of Exemption (w/in 5 days of decision)
Notice of Intent to Adopt (21 days prior to decision)
Z Notice of Determination (w/in 5 days of decision)
Z Fish & Game Certificate of Fee Exemption (w/in 5 days of decision)
0 Notice of Preparation 1—INotice of Availability
Notice of Completeness
• -:: P tilAi. - , TIFI PATON :
Mailing
Date:7/3/06
n Property Owners
Z Occupants
El Adjacent Property Owners & Occupants
Lj w/in 300' foot radius
Z
w/in 300' foot radius / Extended
E Other:
Posting
Date:6112106
W Onsite • Offsite 1J Other:
Publication
Date:6/15/06
Z Culver City News
E
Other:
Courtesy
Date:
Z City Council
7 Commissions
Z Master Notification List
0 Culver City Website
T Cable Crawler
0 Press Release
Z HOA /Neighborhood Groups
Z
Culver City Organizations
Eg Other: Interested parties
Updated 07/13/2006
Page 1 of 2
Project Summary – Attachment 1
33PROJECT SUMMARY
r- GENERAL INFORMATION:
General Plan
Studio
Zoning
Studio
Redevelopment Plan
Component Are No. 3
Overlay Zone/District
N/A
Legal Description
Lots 182 through 190 of the Nolan Park Tract, Lots
1 through 3 excluding that portion dedicated for
Washington BI. (80 feet wide) street purposes and
1 through 6 of Tract 2530, and Lots A, B, and C of
Tract 4419
Existing Land Use
Studio
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USES
Location
Zoning
Land Use
North (across Wash. BO: Commercial Downtown &
Commercial General
South:
Light Industrial &
Two Family Residential
East: Light Industrial &
Two Family Residential
West: Commercial Downtown,
Two Family Residential, &
Medium Density Family
Residential
Surface parking lot, municipal
parking structure, & car sales
Light industrial uses, & multiple
family dwellings
Light industrial & single and
multiple family dwellings
Offices, single & multiple family
dwelling units & an
elementary school
SeeComprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 narrative and plans received July 10, 2006,
(Attachment No. 11 to the July 26, 2006 staff report) for parking, site, and development
information.
,TNATEp:F0
[531 New Development Impact: TBD
Li In Lieu Parkland:
El
School District: TBD
El Art: TBD
NPlan Check: TBD
Z
Sewer: TBD
Wit RDEWARTMENTAL REVIEW' Planning, Public Works/Engineering, Building Safety, Fire Prevention, Redevelopment Agency,
Economic Development, and City Attorney reviewed the project. Comments have been incorporated
into the plans or where made part of the recommended conditions of approval.
FART IN PU -BLIC PLACE-6: The applicant has submitted his intention to satisfy the requirement by providing art on the project
site. This will require future review by the Cultural Affairs Commission.
Updated 07/13/2006
Page 2 of 2 Project Summary - Attachment 1
3'1PLANNING DIVISION
9770 CULVER BOULEVARD, CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA 90232-0507
Attachment No. 2
(310) 253-5710
FAX (310) 253-5721
INITIAL STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Project Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 , CP/M P-2006068, and
Amendment/Rescission of the Design for Development for the Culver Studios
Area
ead Agency Name & Address: City of Culver City, Planning Division
9770 Culver Blvd., Culver City, CA 90232
Contact Person & Phone No.: Sherry Jordan, Senior Planner
(310) 253-5746
Project Location/Address: 9000-9336 Washington Boulevard, Culver City, CA
Nearest Cross Street: Inca Boulevard APN: 4206-022-001
4206-022-002
4206-023-002
Project Sponsor's Name &
Address:
The Culver Studios
9336 Washington Boulevard
Culver City, CA 90232
Attn: Hal Katersky
(Phone #: 202-3335)
General Plan Designation: Studio Zoning: Studio (5)
Redevelopment Project Area: Component Area No. 3
Overlay Zone/Special District: N/A
Project Description and Requested Action: The project consists of an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan and the amendment/rescission of the Redevelopment Agency Design for
Development for The Culver Studios Area to permit the demolition of 51,746 sq. ft. of office and
support area (Buildings J and R), the construction of a 49,500 sq. ft. four-story office building in the
same foot print as Building J (zero street facing setback), the construction of a two and one half-
story (200 space) parking structure over an existing 60 space surface parking lot and the area of
Building R, the amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 1/263 for up to 30,000
GSF and 1/294 for over 30,000 GSF to 1/350 GSF, and other minor on and off-site improvements.
Additionally, there is proposed to be a public art project placed on the new Building J. The parking
ratio amendment would make the parking requirement for office use on the studio lot consistent
with the office parking requirement throughout the city.
Form Updated 3/16/04 35-Comprehensive Plan Amendment Np---5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Resr' —iion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area •
Page 2 of 19
Existing Conditions of the Project Site: The site of the Comprehensive Plan is relatively flat with
approximately 312,000 square feet of stage, support, and office space, with surface and
subterranean parking. Vehicle access to the site is from Washington Boulevard and Ince Avenue
with only emergency access from Van Buren Place. The existing buildings vary in height from
single story structures to approximately 80 feet (Stage 16) in height with varying setbacks.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
West: Offices, single and multiple family dwelling units and an elementary school
East: Light industrial and single and multiple family dwelling units
North: Surface parking lot, municipal parking structure, and car sales lot (across Washington BI.)
South: Light industrial uses, and multiple family dwellings
The studio complex is located within a developed urban area at one end of the commercial
downtown district of the city and projects into a residential neighborhood.
Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g„ permits, financing approval, or participation
agreement)
The Culver City Planning Commission, Cultural Affairs Commission, City Council, and
Redevelopment Agency will be reviewing and approving various components of the project.
Permits will be required from various City departments for the physical on and off-site
improvements following_approval of the project.
36
Form Updated 3/16104
Page 2 of 19Ier-71
Comprehensive Plan Amendment,,--'- 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Rr sion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 3 of 19
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages:
O Aesthetics 0 Mineral Resources
7 Agriculture Resources E Noise
• Air Quality E Population / Housing
— 1 Biological Resources E Public Services
fl
Cultural Resources E Recreation
0 Geology /Soils 0 Transportation/Traffic
fl
Hazards & Hazardous Materials Utilities I Service Systems
Pi Hydrology / Water Quality 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Land Use / Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
LiI find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
N I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed
to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared,
O I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'potentially significant impact' or 'potentially significant
unless mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed
by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed.
D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier ER or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
FISH AND GAME FEE (AB 3158)
I find that the proposed project WILL NOT have an impact on fish or wildlife resources or habitat
upon which fish and wildlife depend. I find that the proposed project IS EXEMPT from the Fish and
Game fee. A 'Certificate of Fee Exemption' will be prepared for this project.
find that the proposed project IS NOT EXEMPT from the Fish and Game fee.
Signature
Date
Sherry Jordan Title: Senior Planner
37
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 3 of 191.:PESTHETI
Potentially
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comprehensive Plan Amendment N- 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Resr- l-ion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 4 of 19
Potentially
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
SIgnificant
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a- state scenic highway?
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
It. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
fatmlandlWould the project: ;•=9.
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
Involve other changes in the existing environment which,
due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
ilL AIR Qt.I .ALITY :7.11 Where available, the significance criteria established by the abblicabie a ir
quality management ore
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
z
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 4 of 19Potentialfy
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number
of people?
RESOURCES — Would the proje
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected
wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
(
z
TUR,AL RESOURCES — Would the project:
-
Cu
LI
LI z
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 5 of 19
Comprehensive Plan Amendment r- 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re, lssion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 5 of 19
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource as defined in 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?Potentially
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project:
LI
LI
LI
Comprehensive Plan Amendment N
(
r, , CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Rest'-'ion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 6 of 19
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of
the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
risks to life or property?
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
1,...HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS --Would the project
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school??
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 6 of 19N
LI
LI
LI E
Comprehensive Plan Amendment r 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/ReP' '-sion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 7 of 19
Potentially
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
iVtl4AZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS (continued)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildiand fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
VIIL HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY — Would the projec
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
N
mJJpdatd
3/16/04
Page 7 of 19
141Comprehensive Plan Amendment Nif- -5, CP/M P-2006068, and AmendnientJResion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 8 of 19
Potentially
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
LI
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
XL NOISE --Would the project result in:
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
[I]
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
LI
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 8 of 19a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation
to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system
(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or
congestion at intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
LI
• Comprehensive Plan Amendmen
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 9 of 19
5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re 'sion of the DFD
Potentially
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would
the project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
XII.' POPULATION A HOUSING — Would the proj
a) induce substantial population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
,,-
)(11AP #.11;ATION AND HOUSING
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
a)
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? El El 1.-- El
Police protection? 0 0 C. El
Schools? ri E E RI
Parks? E 0 0 IZ
Other public facilities? E l
El
Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
E.orni LJndated .3L1. .tiQ4
Page 9 of 19PotentIallY
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
PotentfalIy
Significant
Impact
SignifiGant
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Incorporated
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Result in inadequate emergency access?
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
d)
e)
9)
a
LI
[5<1
El
LI
P+I
Comprehensive Plan Amendment I\)a"- CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re( ' ,lion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 10 of 19
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS --Would the project:
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
I. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE —
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
sity
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 10 of 19Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Significant
Impact
Impact Unless
Mitigation
Significant
Impact
Impact
Incorporated
Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (`Cumulatively
considerable' means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
LI
AESTHETICS
a) through d) No Impact: There are no scenic vistas or resources in the vicinity of the project site that is currently
located in a fully developed urbanized area No adverse impacts relative to scenic vistas and resources is
expected of the proposed project because there are no scenic vistas and resources.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None reguired.
e) through d) Less Than Significant Impact: Construction of the parking structure (21 to 26 feet in height) would occur
on the site of a surface parking lot. An eight foot wall currently surrounds the parking lot beyond which the
back side of a large production stage is visible from Van Buren Place. The parking structure will partially
block the view of the stage building. The parking structure will be covered on the north and west sides
with a "green screen" to accommodate the growing of vines to cover the parking structure. The existing
surface parking lot contains lighting but the parking structure will add additional lighting to the area. The
green screen, when covered with vegetation, wili conceal some of the light from the internal floors of the
structure. The development will conform to all applicable City zoning standards and design guidelines
that include a requirement that all lighting not project onto, or create a nuisance for, adjacent public rights-
of-way and private properties. The proposed office building on Ince Boulevard will be subject to these
same regulations. Through the proposed design of the project, and code and design requirements, any
impacts to the visual character or quality of the site, or new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area will be less than significant. Utilizing these
existing regulations, aesthetic impacts will be less than significant.
MITIGATION. MEASURE(S): None required.
AGRICUILTURE-RESOURCES
a) through c) No Impact: The project site is not located on land identified, utilized, or zoned for agricultural purposes,
and there is no known Williamson Act contract in effect on the project site.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required
1411L1-AIR:QUALl...
Form Updated 3/16104
Page 11 of 19
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Rer-' sion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 11 of 19
XVII. DISCUSSION:
Discussion of Initial Study Checklist responses:Comprehensive Plan Amendment N c--9, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/R r'sion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 12 of 19
Li (a
Less Than Significant Impact: Future new development in any portion of Culver City will contribute both at
the project level and cumulatively, to pollutant emissions over existing non-attainment conditions due to
both construction and operation of individual projects. Construction activities and future operation of the
proposed office building and parking structure are anticipated to be below the thresholds of significance
identified and established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The project
applicant will also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which provides specific control actions
to be implemented during construction activities to control fugitive dust.
It is anticipated there will not be vehicle congestion entering or exiting the parking structure in the morning
and afternoon peak times due to the nature of the activities occurring on the site All access to the
parking structure will be through the studio lot away from the elementary school as no vehicular access is
permitted on Van Buren Place (except for emergency vehicles). The traffic study did not indicate any
significant increase of traffic on Van Buren Place.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
a) through e)
a) through f) No Impact: The project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by existing disturbed land and
development. There are no identified biological resources, as identified by the California Department of
Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service, and the project site is not a federally protected wetlands,
as defined by the Clean Water Act.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES:
Form Updated 3/16/04 Page 12 of 19totoditAkittiitg
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment No - CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Res& en of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 13 of 19
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated: The Culver Studios qualifies as an historic
district at the National level (and subsequently state and local level) under National Register Criterion A
due to its associative value within the context of motion picture studios at the local level. The demolition
of Buildings J and R will not threaten the district's eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places. Documentation packages for both buildings have been prepared following Historic American
Building Survey (HABS) guidelines and include images of all elevations and significant interior spaces,
drawings, and documentation of the history of each structure.
New construction on the studio lot will be limited to the approximate footprint of Building J and to the
footprint of an existing surface parking lot (which includes the Building R footprint) and will not
substantially alter existing circulation patterns on the lot. Conceptual drawings for the new structures
have been reviewed by staff and the new construction shall meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for the Treatment of Historic Properties with regard to design, materials and use of spatial area.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S):
• A complete historical documentation package, prepared by a qualified professional following
National Park Service Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards, shall be submitted to
the City for Building J prior to issuance of any building permit for new construction. Photographic
documentation for Building R shall be submitted prior to issuance of any demolition permits for
Building R and the complete historical documentation package, prepared by a qualified
professional following National Park Service Historic American Building Survey (NABS)
standards, shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permit for the new
parking structure. Information included in these documentation packages for Building J and R
shall be made publicly available as an educational resource by the applicant (e.g., via The Culver
Studios' web site) prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
No Impact: The project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by existing disturbed land and
development. The proposed project will not have an impact on any archaeological resource,
paleontological resource, unique geologic feature, or human remains.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None Required.
No Impact: The project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by existing disturbed land and
development. The project site is on flat land with no topsoil and has access to sewer mains. The office
building and parking structure will be constructed to meet all Uniform Building Code requirements and
state seismic standards. The site is considered suitable for the proposed development relative to
geotechnical concerns.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None reauired.
a.iii) Less Than Sienificant Impact The project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by existing
disturbed land and development and is in a liquefaction zone as identified on the City of Culver City
Natural Hazards Map. The office building and parking structure will be constructed to meet all Uniform
Building Code requirements and state seismic standards. Utilizing these existing regulations, geology and
soil impacts will be less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
'ARDS AND HAZARDOUSAATEWAL
Form Updated 3/16/04
Page 13 of 19No Impact: The proposed use is consistent with the Studio General Plan Land Use designation and is
permitted in Studio (S) Zone. Development standards for sites within the Studio Zone are established by
a Comprehensive Plan. Upon the City's review and approval of the application, the project will be
consistent with the City's Zoning Code. Future uses will also be reviewed for consistency and compliance
with Zoning and General Plan requirements.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
a) and b) No Impact: Review of the project, shows that mineral resources have not been identified on or within the
project site. The site is not identified as a locally-important mineral resource recovery site.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
'ff Form Updated 3/16/04
Page 14 of 19
a) through c)
MINERAL RESOURCES:
Comprehensive Plan Amendment N I- 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Res' 7ion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 14 of 19
a) through n) No impact: The proposed office building and parking structure will not be located an a hazardous
materials site. No hazardous materials will be in the office building or parking structure. The proposed
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan will not alter the existing use of hazardous materials on the
studio lot. The project site is not in an airport land use area and is not near wildlands subject to wild land
fires. Adverse impacts relative to health hazards are expected to be less than significant. Any future use
of hazardous materials will be required to obtain the necessary approvals from the Culver City Fire
Department, in compliance with applicable Fire Code regulations.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
No Impact: The project will not be located in a flood hazard area, nor impede or redirect flood flows, nor
expose people or structures to loss from levee or dam failure or inundation by seiche, tsuami or mudflow.
The new office building and parking structure will be located on areas that are currently paved.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
a) and c)
through f)
Less Than Significant Impact: Grading and building plans will be reviewed and approved by the City's
Building and Engineering Divisions to assure that on and off-site drainage will not create significant
impacts to drainage facilities, groundwater quality and quantity. An erosion control plan will be required
by the City Engineer to ensure compliance with the Los Angeles County Stormwater Quality Management
Program, NPDES Permit No. CAS614001. The erosion control plan must include the design and
placement of recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs) to effectively prohibit the entry of
pollutants from the construction site into the public street or storm drain system. The construction
contractor will be required to comply with the 'California Storm Water Best Management Practice
Handbook'. Utilizing these existing regulations the impacts will be less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Comprehensive Plan Amendment h 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Arnenciment/Rer sion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 15 of 19
a) through b) No Impact: The site for the parking structure is located adjacent to an urbanized residential area. The
and e) site for the office building is adjacent to a light industrial/office area. All access to the parking structure will
through f) be through the studio lot away from the elementary school as no vehicular access is permitted on Van
Buren Place (except for emergency vehicles). The traffic study did not indicate any significant increase of
traffic on Van Buren Place. The proposed project is not expected to generate significant noise levels or
be in excess of standards established in the General Plan Noise Element and the City's Noise Ordinance.
All grading and construction activities will be conducted during the appropriate hours as allowed by the
Culver City Municipal Code. Contact information will be posted on the project site to direct residents
wishing to report noise and other construction activity complaints. The project is not located within an
airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
) through d) Less Than Significant Impact: There will be temporary increases in noise levels during the construction of
the project. However, all construction activities will be conducted during the appropriate hours as allowed
by the Culver City Municipal Code and noise levels are anticipated to not be in excess of standards
established in the General Plan Noise Element and the City's Noise Ordinance. Standard procedures
require the applicant to adhere to use of construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and
muffling devices to alleviate potential noise impacts. Contact information will be posted on the project site
to direct residents wishing to report noise and other construction activity complaints. The increase of the
number of vehicles parking at the site of the parking structure is not anticipated to substantially increase
the ambient noise level in the areas adjacent to the structure as the only access to the parking structure
will be through the studio lot from the east. No access will be available from Van Buren Place. A potential
for an increase in the amount of noise. during the evening hours could occur if the proposed parking
structure were used to accommodate guests for the live audience tapings occurring in the evenings. It will
be required that the parking for evening live audience tapings not be permitted within the proposed
parking structure. A non-squeal finish will be required on the parking structure ramp surfaces to eliminate
possible squealing sounds from tires. Once completed, the project is not expected to generate significant
noise levels in excess of the standards established in the General Plan Noise Element.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S):
• A non-squeal finish will be required on the parking structure ramp surfaces to eliminate possible
squealing sounds from tires.
• Guest parking for evening live audience tapings shall not be permitted in the parking structure
adjacent to Van Buren Place.
a) through c) No Impact: The proposed project is for additional office square footage and related parking within an
existing studio complex containing no housing units. No significant adverse impacts to population or
housing are associated with the project.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
PU
No Impact: The project will comply with all applicable California Building and Fire Codes. Impacts to fire
and police protection are expected to be less than significant. No significant adverse impacts to schools
are expected to result from the project. Maintenance of public facilities and requirements for other public
services associated with the project are expected to be incidental, and no significant adverse impacts are
expected.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
I iaaaw:.(0116.1.94
Page 15 of 19
SF'ORTATIONFTRAFFIC:
TILITIE'S'AND SERVICE SYSTE
Comprehensive Plan Amendment IY
for the Culver Studies Area
Page 16 of 19
CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re .3ion of the DFD
a) through b) No Impact: The proposed project will add office space to an existing studio facility. No significant adverse
impacts relative to recreation are associated with the project.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
a) through b) Less Than Significant: A traffic and parking study was completed by Kaku Associates, Inc. to evaluate the
potential traffic and parking impacts of the proposed development. A total of 18 intersections were
analyzed within the study area for this project. Analysis of the projected cumulative plus project
conditions indicates that the proposed project would not create any significant traffic impacts at any of the
analyzed intersections or exceed a level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. The study did however list various traffic related
improvements that will benefit the proposed project and the surrounding neighborhood. Staff concurred
with the findings and recommends that the following conditions be made a part of the pending
recommended conditions of approval:
• Implementation of a public relations program to inform visitors to the site of designated routes to
and from the studios to help prevent vehicles using residential street to access the site.
• Installation of new traffic signs on along Ince IR on studio property and in the public right-of-way
to make Gates 2 and 3 right-turn-in/left-turn-out only.
• Restripe southbound Irice BI. at Gate 2 to provide a through/right and a dedicated right-turn lane
to provide better access to the site.
• Implementation of a traffic monitoring program over a one-year period. If the City determines that
the project significantly increases traffic on Kruger Street, Lucerne Avenue, the residential portion
of Ince BI., or any other residential street, then the City would propose restricting access at Gate 3
to trucks only.
c) through g)
No Impact: There will not be any increased hazards to the area due to changes in air traffic patterns,
design features, or inadequate emergency access, Emergency-only access will be maintained from Van
Buren Place. The studio is served by numerous established transit routes and there are no anticipated
significant project-related impacts on the regional transit system. One component of the project is to
amend the parking ratio for office use from the Comprehensive Plan required parking ratio of 1/263 for up
to 30,000 GSF, and 1/294 for over 30,000 GSF, to the citywide office parking ratio of 1/350 GSF. This
would make the parking requirement for office use on the studio lot consistent with the office parking
requirement throughout the city. There are no proposed changes to the support or stage use parking
ratios or conditions.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
a) through g) No Impact: The proposed project will connect to existing utilities available to the project site. No significant
adverse impacts to utilities are expected from project implementation.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
5737
Form Updated 3116/04 Page 16 of 19Comprehensive Plan Amendment r 5, CP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re' -ision of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 17 of 19
a) No Impact: The surrounding area and site of the proposed project does not contain any threatened or
endangered species, sensitive habitats, or cultural or historic resources. The project will not degrade the
environment and it does not involve any potential impacts to any plant or animal wildlife.
MITIGATION MEASURE): None required.
b)through c) Less Than Significant: The initial Study did not identify any potential significant impacts that could be
cumulatively considerable. The construction and operation of the proposed project will not cause adverse
direct or indirect impacts on human beings, and no further evaluation of potential impacts associated with
the environmental effects on humans is required.
MITIGATION MEASURE(S): None required.
_For, Updated / .16/0 41- Page 17 of 19MITIGATION MEASURE TIMING VERIPICATIONIDF.COMPIIANCE
. .
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 1) fr" 5, P/ P-2006068, and Amendment/Ref ion of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 18 of 19
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
The following environmental mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the project development as conditions of
approval. The project applicant shall secure a signed verification for each of the mitigation measures which indicate that
mitigation measures have been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City environmental and other
requirements (Public Resources Code Section 21081,6.) Final clearance shall require all applicable verification as
included in the following table. The City of Culver City will have primary responsibility for monitoring and reporting the
implementation of the mitigation measures unless otherwise indicated. The mitigation measures have been identified by
impact category and numbered for ease of reference.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Comprehensive Plan Modification No. 5, P2006068,
and Amendment/Rescission of the Design for Development for the Culver Studios Area
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Prior to
issuance of
building
permits.
Cultural Affairs
Cl. . A complete historical documentation
package, prepared by a qualified professional
following National Park Service Historic American
Building Survey (HABS) standards, shall be
submitted to the City for Building J prior to
issuance of any building permit for new
construction. Photographic documentation for
Building R shall be submitted prior to issuance of
any demolition permits for Building R and the
complete historical documentation package,
prepared by a qualified professional following
National Park Service Historic American Building
Survey (HABS) standards, shall be submitted to
the City prior to issuance of any building permit
for the new parking structure. Information
included in these documentation packages for
Building J and R shall be made publicly available
as an educational resource by the applicant (e.g.,
via The Culver Studios' web site) prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
NOISE
Planning
Ni. . A non-squeal finish will be required on the
parking structure ramp surfaces to eliminate
possible squealing sounds from tires.
N.2. Guest parking for evening live audience
tapings shall not be permitted in the parking
structure adjacent to Van Buren Place.
Prior to
issuance of
Certificate
of
Occupancy
On going Planning
Form Updated 3116/04
Page 18 of 19Comprehensive Plan Amendment t
DP/M P-2006068, and Amendment/Re n of the DFD
for the Culver Studios Area
Page 19 of 19
References Utilized:
1. Traffic and Parking Study for Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5, June 2006
Form Updated 3/16104
Page 19 of 19Attachment No. 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-P018
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY
COUNCIL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 5, CP/M P2006068
FOR THE CULVER STUDIOS AT 9000 THROUGH 9336 WASHINGTON
BOULEVARD IN THE STUDIO (5) ZONE.
(Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068)|1010 10| WHEREAS, The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01, was approved
10
by the City Council on January 25, 1988, and has subsequently been amended; and
11
12
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios filed an application for approval of an amendment to
13
a portion of the Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios to permit the construction of a
14
49,500 gross square feet, 56 feet high, office building in the same foot print as Building J with
15
a zero street facing setback, the construction of a two and one half-story 200 space parking
16
structure, and amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 1/263 for up to
17
18
30,000 gross square feet and 1/294 for over 30,000 gross square feet to 1/350 gross square
19 feet, and other minor on and off-site improvements. This amendment applies only to the
20
West Parcel (Lots 182 through 190 of the Nolan Park Tract, Lots 1 through 3 excluding that
21
portion dedicated for Washington Boulevard I:80 feet wide] street purposes and 1 through 6
22
23
of Tract 2530), addressed 9336 Washington Boulevard; and
24
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2006, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
25
public hearing on this application, fully considering the application, plans, staff report,
26
environmental information, and all testimony presented; and
27
28
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CECA), the
29
City provided public notice of the intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for this
Page 1 2006-P018|101010101010|64|10101010|a|10 10
10|11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
project and based upon the Initial Study, public comments, and the recorded before the
2
Planning Commission, the project was determined to not have a significant adverse impact
3
on the environment provided that certain mitigations related to Cultural Resources and Noise
are required, and the Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, following conclusion of the public discussion and thorough deliberation of
the subject matter, the Planning Commission determined by a vote of to that
Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P2006068, should be recommended to the
City Council for approval as set forth herein below.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CULVER
CITY, CALIFORNIA, RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and the provisions of Culver City
Municipal Code (CCMC) Title 17, Section 17.560.025, required findings for Comprehensive
Plan Modifications, the following findings are hereby made:
A.
The proposed changes are consistent with the intent of he approved
Comprehensive Plan.
The 1987 original Comprehensive Plan, and subsequent amendments, was designed
to facilitate the continued operation of a modern motion picture and TV studio facility.
The proposed amendments are designed to meet the changing use needs of a studio
facility in the 21 St century by providing more office space to accommodate the growing
demand for such use. The site will continue to operate as a studio lot
B. The proposed changes will not adversely impact the environment.
In accordance with CEQA, an Initial Study was completed. This was supplemented
with a traffic study, shade and show study, and historical technical assessment and
documentation. It was determined that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect relating to cultural resources and noise, there will not be a significant
effect in this case because of conditions of approval agreed to by the applicant. With
the adoption of the conditions of approval contained in this resolution, the project will
not adversely impact the environment.
28
29
22
23
24
25
26
27
53- Page 2 2006-P018(p|10101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29|1010101010|C. The proposed changes will not be detrimental to the surrounding uses.
The West Parcel is surrounded by commercial, industrial, and residential uses.
Through its use of vegetative screening, low height, and high parapets, the proposed
parking structure has been designed to blend into and mitigate any significant impacts
to the adjacent neighborhood. The addition of 49,500 square feet of office space, and
the amendment of the office parking ratios, also will not have a significant impact on
the surrounding uses as analyzed in the traffic study. Additionally, the studio has
agreed to implement conditions of approval contained in this resolution that will benefit
the project and the surrounding neighborhoods.
1). The proposed changes will not significantly increase traffic levels on existing
streets and thoroughfares within the surrounding the development.
A total of 18 intersections were analyzed in the traffic study. Analysis of the
cumulative (projected future traffic volumes) plus the added project conditions indicate
that the proposed project would not create any significant traffic impacts at any of the
analyzed intersections. The emergency access only gate will remain along Van Buren
Place continuing the prohibition of access to the studio lot from Van Buren Place.
Additionally, the studio has agreed to implement conditions of approval contained in
this resolution that will benefit the project and the surrounding neighborhoods. The
studio is served by numerous established transit routes and there is not expected to
be any significant project related impacts on the regional transit system.
E. Any proposed change which requires exception from standard ordinance
requirements, is warranted by the design and amenities incorporated into the
approved Comprehensive Plan.
The Zoning Code establishes that all development standards (except for building
heights) in the Studio (S) Zone be established in a Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed office building will not exceed the maximum height permitted (without a
height exception per CCMC Section 17.300.025) in the Studio (S) Zone of 56 feet.
Setbacks for structures are established in the Comprehensive Plan to allow for
flexibility in site planning and design for specific or special land uses and locations.
The location of the proposed parking structure and office building are appropriate for
placement within the studio lot and as conditioned will have less than significant
impacts on surrounding adjacent uses. The proposed amendment of the office
parking ratio will bring the ratio inline with the ratio for office parking required citywide.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to the foregoing recitations and findings, the Planning
Commission of the City of Culver City, California, hereby and recommends to the City
Page 3 2006-P0182|101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Council approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5, CP/M P-2006068, subject to the
following conditions:
Planning Division
General
1. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall not become effective until the effective
date of the Redevelopment Agency's approval of an amendment to the Design for
Development for The Culver Studios Area and approval of preliminary development
plans.
2. The approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 shall expire if new construction
building permits have not been issued and work has not commenced within one (1)
year after the date the entitlement becomes effective, unless prior to the expiration
date, a written extension request with fee is submitted by the applicant and the Planning
Manager, Planning Commission and/or City Council grants said extension. The
effective date of the entitlement shall be considered to be the latest date of either the
City Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan and/or Redevelopment Agency
approval of the project's preliminary development plans.
3. As Amendment No. 5 to Comprehensive Plan CP No. 87-01, only applies to the West
Parcel of the' entire Comprehensive Plan area, City Council Resolution No. 94-R055,
approving Amendment No. 3 to the Comprehensive Plan, remains in effect except as
modified by Comprehensive Plan Amendment No 5.
4. Conditions of approval herein shall apply to the• applicant, all tenants, the
contractor/builder of the project, and any successor property owner that may legally
assume benefit of this Comprehensive Plan.
5. The site shall be developed in conformance with, and the final site plan and
architectural design shall conform to, the plans, documents, and related narrative the in
The Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 5 narrative and plans
received July 10, 2006, materials board received April 25, 2006, and related
documents, and the conditions of approval herein as approved by the Planning
Commission and as noted below and during the building permit review process. The
Planning Manager may approve minor modifications to the project siting, design,
landscaping treatment, colors and materials, provided such adjustments do not result in
a significant change to the architectural design and/or site plan of the project as a
whole. Minor modifications approved by the Planning Manager shall not be in conflict
with any other condition of approval or Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC)
requirement, or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties.
Page 4 2006-P01818
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10|10 1010101010101010|19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
6.
The conditions of approval herein shall be referenced on the cover sheet and repeated
in full at the beginning portion of the final working drawings.
7.
All applicable development standards and requirements in Planning Commission
Resolution No, 92-P001, "Revised Comprehensive Standard Conditions of Approval for
Site Plan Reviews and Other Discretionary Planning and Zoning Application", except as
otherwise required herein, shall be met. These standards as well as other conditions
required in this approval shall be reflected on the plans submitted for building plan
check.
8.
The applicant shall use reasonable best efforts to actively advertise or post all
opportunities for employment, contract services and purchasing of materials to Culver
City-based businesses and residents. Reasonable best efforts shall include, but not be
limited to, advertising on various Internet sites. The applicant shall use reasonable best
efforts to solicit and utilize economical and qualified services from Culver City-based
employees and businesses. The applicant shall also require the construction
contractor(s) and subcontractors related to the project to advertise all construction
opportunities to Culver City-based businesses and residents. This condition shall not
be construed so as to require the applicant to conduct business with, or purchase from,
Culver City-based employees and businesses.
9.
The applicant and contractors shall use all reasonable cost-effective efforts to reuse
and recycle construction and demolition debris, to use environmentally friendly
materials, and to provide energy efficient buildings, equipment, and systems.
10.
The project and its operations shall comply with all applicable local, special district or
authority, county and federal statutes, codes, standards, and regulations including, but
not limited to, Building Safety Division, Fire Department, Planning Division and Public
Works Department code requirements and it shall comply with all applicable comments
and code requirements as determined during the City's building permit review process.
This includes the requirements of CCMC Chapter 7.05 concerning Transportation and
Air Quality Management,
11.
The City reserves the right to periodically inspect the project site without prior
notification to ensure continuing compliance with all conditions of approval.
12.
The name and telephone number of a contact person for the applicant, contractor, and
City shall be posted at the project site so as to be visible to the public. These contact
information postings shall be placed along Van Buren Place and Ince Boulevard.
13.
During all phases of construction and once the development becomes operational, all
graffiti upon the premise shall be removed within 48 hours after its application.
14.
The public notification signs installed in accordance with the CCMC public notification
requirements for this review process shall be removed within ten (10) days of the end of
the appeal period or the final decision of the City Council / Redevelopment Agency,
whichever occurs last.
28
29
Page 5 2006-P01815. All parking areas shall be developed pursuant to CCMC Chapter 17.320, Off-Street
Parking and Loading. The ramps and parking surfaces in the parking structure shall be
provided with an anti-squeal finish. (Environmental Mitigation Measure)
16. All planted areas shall be landscaped and irrigated pursuant to CCIVIC Chapter 17.310
Landscaping. After issuance of the building permit, a minimum of three (3) sets of
detailed landscaping and irrigation plans separate from the final working drawings shall
be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval.
17. In addition to the screening requirements for onsite parking areas including loading
areas, refuse storage / trash compacter facilities, and Fire Department connections, the
following items shall be screened from surrounding and nearby public and private
properties in a manner consistent with City standards and suitable to the subject
development as approved by the Planning Manager. In general, the height of any
required screening device shall be no lower on any side than the height of the highest
feature requiring screening and:
A. All exteriors of the proposed buildings shall be free of all unaesthetically treated,
exposed elements (i.e., plumbing pipes, electrical conduits, downspouts and
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) elements) which shall
be placed within the exterior walls. Where exposed wall-mounted features or
equipment may be necessary (i.e., ventilators and utility meters), recessed wall
mounted cabinets or other similar devices shall be constructed within the wall,
whenever possible, to accommodate such features and equipment so that they are
flush with and do not project out from the main exterior wall plane. With or without
recesses, the exposed portions of such features or equipment shall be of a color to
blend, not contrast, with the adjoining finished building color, subject to the
approval of the Planning Manager;
B. An roof-mounted mechanical equipment, duct vents and the like shall not project
above the horizontal plane of the building's lowest primary opaque architectural
feature(s) (i.e., parapet walls, penthouse structures or screening walls); and
C. All ground-mounted equipment (i.e., transformers and air conditioners) shall be
located within the building or in underground vaults if the equipment is located
within a street facing setback, or it shall be screened with walls and/or landscaping
if not located within a street facing setback. Ground-mounted equipment shall not
be located in the landscaped areas fronting any public right-of-way.
18. All construction and permanent equipment shall be modified so as to insure the
following noise standards:
A. Installation of mufflers and sound control devices (i.e., intake silencers and noise
shrouds) that are no less effective than those provided on the original equipment
and no equipment shall be operated without an exhaust muffler;
B. Properly maintained to minimize noise emissions;
Page 6 2006-P018|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29C. If serviced at a location onsite, the service vehicle(s) shall be setback from any
street so as to maintain the greatest distance from the public right-of-way;|1010|D. Noise impacts from stationary sources (i.e., mechanical equipment, ventilators and
air conditioning units) shall be minimized by proper selection of equipment and the
installation of acoustical shielding as determined necessary by the Planning
Manager and the Building Official in order that compliance with the CCMC Noise
Regulations and Standards is achieved; and
E. Stationary source equipment (i.e., compressors) shall be located so as to maintain
the greatest distance possible from the public right-of-way.
19. The applicant shall ensure efficient parking management during construction so as not
to impact surrounding properties. Construction workers shall park on site or at other
locations approved by the City. No parking on surrounding residential neighborhood
streets shall be allowed.
10
20. A certificate of occupancy for the approved project will be issued only upon completion
of all applicable conditions of approval and required on and off-site improvements.
12 21. Guest parking for evening live audience tapings shall not be permitted in the parking
13
structure adjacent to Van Buren Place. (Environmental Mitigation Measure)
14
Prior to the Issuance of Any Grading, Excavation and/or Building Permit, the Applicant shall:
15 shall identify the location and type of all exterior light fixtures to be installed by the
22. Submit to the Planning Manager for approval an exterior light fixture plan. The plan
16 applicant. All lighting shall be directed onsite and light sources shall be shielded so as
not to be intrusive to surrounding properties.
17
23. Provide the construction contractor(s) and each subcontractor related to the project a
18 copy of the final project conditions of approval. The applicant and the City agree that
19 these conditions shall be enforceable through all legal and equitable actions and any
remedies, including the imposition of fines against each and every person who
20
conducts any activity on behalf of the applicant on or near the project site. The
applicant, property owner, and general construction contractor are ultimately
21 responsible for all actions or omissions of a subcontractor.
22
Engineering Division
23
24. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, three sets of Site Improvement Plans
24 prepared by a Civil Engineer registered in the State of California, shall be submitted to
25 but not limited to, detailed drainage and grading of the site indicated by topographical
the Engineering Division for review, approval, and permitting. The Plans shall include,
26 lines and spot elevations. Show all existing and proposed drive approach(es),
driveway(s), sidewalk, curb, gutter, indicate all proposed and existing utilities (sanitary
27 sewer, water, etc.), and fully dimensioned plans to include up to the centerline of Ince
Boulevard and Van Buren Place.
28
25, Provide an existing site topographic survey map prepared by a licensed Land Surveyor
29 in the State of California. This survey shall include existing property lines, existing
( 0 o
Page 7 2006-P018|101010101010 10|11utilities and meters, existing structures, street trees, all above ground facilities within the
public parkway, include existing development within 50 feet of project site, etc. A
survey (horizontal and vertical location) of the existing public sewer shall be noted on
the plan.
26. Prior to the issuance of any demolition (except Building J), grading excavation and/or
building permit, the applicant shall submit concurrent with the submittal of the Site
Improvement Plan, the Local Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (LSWPPP) and the
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for review and approval by the
City Engineer as outlined in CCMC Chapter 5.05. Prior to the start of design of these
plans and of necessary reports, the applicant's civil engineer shall meet with the City's
Stormwater Program Manager to obtain information on the City-specific SUSMP and
LSWPPP requirements. The LSWPPP and SUSMP shall be developed and
implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles County Municipal
Stormwater NPDES Permit No. CAS614001 (Order No. 01-182). The LSWPPP shall
include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that effectively prohibit the entry of
pollutants from the construction site into the public street or storm drain system. The
SUSMP shall provide BMPs that adequately address the pollutants generated during
the post-construction stage. The site improvement plans shall note that the contractor
shall comply with the "California Stormwater Best Management Practice Handbooks".
27. Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy (CO) the applicant shall submit to
the City Stormwater Program Manager a notarized Master Covenant and Agreement
(regarding on-site BMP maintenance) to be recorded by the County Recorder of Los
Angeles County. Prior to getting the Agreement notarized, the applicant's civil engineer
shall contact the City's Stormwater Program Manager for review of the Agreement and
for information on other requirements associated with the recording process.
28. After the construction of the SUSMP-related BMPs, the applicant shall submit to the City
Stormwater Program Manager a completed Stormwater Observation Report Form
(stamped and signed by the civil engineer or architect responsible for the SUSMP
design) to certify, based on his or her observations, that all SUSMP-related BMPs have
been constructed per the specs and the drawings.
29. The applicant shall reconstruct all damaged and uplifted sidewalk panels along property
frontage on Van Buren Place per APWA Standards and to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer or his/her designee.
30. The two existing driveway approaches proposed to be removed on Van Buren Place
shall be reconstructed into a sidewalk, parkway, curb, and gutter per APWA Standards
and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or his/her designee.
31. The gate on Van Buren Place shall be for emergency entry only and the driveway
approach shall be constructed to Culver City standards.
Page 8 2006-P018|101010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
6/2|1010101010 10
10|•1
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
(0)-
32. A landscape plan for parkway landscaping and irrigation within the public right-of-way
on Van Buren Place shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer.
The owner shall maintain the parkway area to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department.
33. The existing streetlight along the project's frontage on Van Buren Place shall be
upgraded to low voltage power. This work shall include, but not limited to, the
replacement of light fixtures, ballasts, and the installation of new pull boxes, conduit,
and wiring. A new service connection shall be provided as directed by and to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. All streetlights on Van Buren Place that are not
converted to low voltage shall remain in operation.
34. All onsite drainage shall be pretreated prior to being conveyed to the street or storm
drain system per SUSMP requirements.
35. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a geotechnical
report from a State licensed Geotechnical Engineer reporting on the suitability of the
onsite soils to support the proposed construction and shall include a liquefaction
analysis. The report shall also identify any special considerations necessary to satisfy
California Building Code requirements.
36. Upon completion of the rough grading and prior to the issuance of a building permit the
following reports and drawings and any supplements thereto shall be submitted to the
City Engineer:
A. An as-built grading plan prepared by the Civil Engineer.
B. A certification by the civil engineer that the grading has been completed in
conformance with the approved plan and California Building Code Appendix
Chapter 33 and with this certification, a survey showing the final rough pad grade
elevations shall be submitted.
C, A certification by the soils engineer that the grading has been completed to his
satisfaction and is in compliance with the California Building Code Chapter 33.
D. A final compaction report prepared by the soils engineer.
37. The applicant shall be responsible for the expense to repair or replace any damage to
the public right-of-way caused by the construction of the proposed project. Such repair
or replacement shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
38. Dirt hauling and construction material deliveries or removal are prohibited during the
morning (7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M.) and afternoon (4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M.) peak traffic
periods.
Page 9 2006-P01839. During construction, dust shall be controlled by regular watering and as directed by the
Culver City Public Work inspector.|101010|40. All staging and storage of construction equipment and materials, including the
construction dumpster, shall be on-site only. The applicant shall obtain written
permission from adjacent property owners for any construction staging occurring on
adjacent property.|10101010|41. Prior to the commencement of any excavation, the applicant shall install a temporary
construction fence with screening around the site. The height, fence and screening
materials are subject to approval by the City Engineer or his/her designee.
42. The construction contractor shall advise the Culver City Public Works Inspector of the
construction schedule and shall meet with the inspector prior to commencement of
work.
10
19
20
21
22
43. Due to the change of use, this project is subject to the City's Sewer Facility Charge
(SFC). The existing and proposed uses and square footages shall be provided for the
proposed development to the Engineering Division. The SFC shall be paid directly to
Engineering Division prior to the issuance of any permit.
13
44. Per the COMO Section 5.01.010, Solid Waste Management, the Culver City Sanitation
Division has the exclusive franchise for all solid and recyclable waste material handling
15 within the City limits. To arrange for waste management activities, contact a Sanitation
representative at (310) 253-6400.
16
17 45. The applicant shall dedicate an easement for street purposes along the project's West
Parcel frontage with Washington Boulevard. The easement shall be seven feet in width
18 in order to provide for a total right-of-way of 80 feet for Washington Boulevard.
46. The applicant shall dedicate an easement for street purposes along the easterly side of
Ince Boulevard between Washington Boulevard and Lindblade Street to provide for a
total street right-of-way of approximately sixty-six (66) feet. The actual width of the
easement shall be determined by a field survey and shall encompass the full width of
the existing public street improvement.
11
12
23
Traffic
24
25
26
27
28
47. Inca Boulevard shall be restriped with two southbound lanes from Washington
Boulevard to Gate 2. The curb lane will be a right-turn-only lane into Gate 2, and the
number one lane will be a combination through/right-turn lane. Culver Studios will be
responsible for all the engineering and implementation costs associated with this
mitigation measure to the satisfaction to the City.
48. No right turn signs for motorists exiting Studio property at Gates 2 and 3 shall be
installed. No left turn signs for northbound motorists on Ince Boulevard at Gates 2 and
29
Page 10 2006-P018
6.31|1010101010101010 10
10|11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3 shall be installed. Culver Studios will be responsible for all costs to post signs
indicating the turn prohibitions on Culver Studios property and on City right of way.
Access Gates 2 and 3 shall only be via right turn-in/left turn-out only.
49. A Traffic Monitoring Programs shall be established. Culver Studios shall take "before-
projecr base traffic counts prior to construction, "after-project" counts six months after
the certificate of occupancy is issued and one year after the certificate of occupancy is
issued. Culver Studios is responsible to take all the counts and report the findings to
the City. If the City determines that the project significantly increases traffic on Krueger
Street, Lucerne Avenue, the residential portion of Inca Boulevard, or any other
residential street, then Gate 3 will be restricted to trucks only.
50. The Studio shall implement a public relations program that will regularly inform all
employees, vendors, tenants, and visitors of the designated routes to and from the
studios to help prevent vehicles using residential streets to access the site.
51. All gates along Van Buren Place shall continue to remain for emergency access only to
the studio lot.
Fire Prevention Division
52, The following shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal before filing for a building permit:
A. A fire plan shall be provided showing access routes for fire apparatus to all
proposed renovated buildings and new structures. Gate(s) shall be provided for fire
apparatus and fire personnel on Van Buren Place, A KNOX Box and key access
system shall be provided at all new gates and doors.
B. Detailed drawings indicating proposed 20 foot wide fire lanes and location of
proposed fire hydrants.
A plan for upgrading all portions of the life safety system and suppression
infrastructure. The spacing between fire hydrants shall not exceed 300 feet.
53. Per Culver City Fire Department regulations, a fire hydrant shall to be located 30 to 50
feet from the Fire Department Connection (FDC).
54. All new buildings with environmental controlled interior space shall have a manual and
automatic fire alarm system.
55. The proposed 200 space parking structure shall have a standpipe system with
2 1/2"
valves and 1 1/2" reducing caps.
Cultural Affairs
56.
All new construction (Building J, Parking Structure) shall comply with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Final drawings for the
new structures shall be reviewed by a qualified historic preservation professional and a
Page 11 2006-P018statement of appropriateness shall be submitted to the Planning Manager prior to
application for any building permit.
57. A complete historical documentation package, prepared by a qualified professional
following National Park Service Historic American Building Survey (NABS) standards,
shall be submitted to the City for Building J prior to issuance of any building permit for
new construction. Photographic documentation for Building R shall be submitted prior
to issuance of any demolition permits for Building R and the complete historical
documentation package, prepared by a qualified professional following National Park
Service Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards, shall be submitted to the
City prior to issuance of any building permit for the new parking structure. Information
included in these documentation packages for Building J and R shall be made publicly
available as an educational resource by the applicant (e.g., via The Culver Studios' web
site) prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (Environmental Mitigation
Measure)
58. The applicant shall fulfill the City's public art requirement as outlined in Sections
15.06.100 at seq. of the Municipal Code prior to issuance of any Certificate of
Occupancy for new construction resulting from approval of this Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
13
Building Safety Division
14 59. The location of the handicapped parking spaces within the new 200 space parking
15 structure shall not compel users to wheel behind parked vehicles other than their own,
and an accessible route shall be provided from all handicapped parking to all buildings
16 to the satisfaction of the Building Official.
17
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of July 2006.
19
20
21
, CHAIRPERSON
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA
Attested by:
24
25
26
Yvonne Hunt
27
Administrative Secretary
28
SJ/sj
29
Page 12 2006-P018|1010101010101010 10
10|•1
18
22
23Figure 1: Aerial View, during
Irice Studio Era, Photo courtesy
of Bison Archives, 2005.
Attachment No. 4
HISTORIC RESOURCES GROUP
The Culver Studios
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Culver Studio site today consists of approximately twenty acres of land in downtown
Culver City. Thomas H. Ince initially purchased these twenty acres in 1918 as the main
studio site with administrative offices Find filming and production capability, plus an
additional forty-acre back lot behind the main studio site for filming. The most prominent
structures at this site are massive production stages. Other significant structures consist of
administrative offices and production support services.
Brief History
Ownership
There have been multiple owners of The Culver Studios over the last eight decades.
Originally developed by Thomas H. Ince in 1918, this became the second major motion
picture concern in Culver City. After Ince's sudden death in 1924, his widow sold the
studio to Cecil B. DeMille. From February 1925 through 1927, DeMille ran the Culver
Studio site, overseeing the first large-scale site renovations, including construction of the
DeMille Theatre. In 1928 a conglomerate of several companies, known as RKO, took
over the studio lot, and by the end of 1930 two of the subsidiaries merged to form RKO-
Pathe' studios. Another round of site renovations were initiated throughout the RKO-
Pathe' studio era. Selznick International Studios leased the entire site from 1935 to 1946,
although it was still held by RKO-Pathe'; more renovations were commenced during
Selznick's leadership at the studio site.
When Selznick International suspended operations, RKO-Pathe once again ran the studio
site, leasing space to Selznick's new Vanguard pictures company, amongst other various
independent production companies. Howard Hughes
bought the studio site in 1950, leasing out the space for
productions. Following Hughes' ownership, Desilu
productions purchased the site in 1957. After several
owners in the intervening years, the studio was acquired by
Columbia Pictures Entertainment Inc. in 1991, followed by
the most recent ownership change of The Culver Studios in
April 2004.
Site Development
Paralleling the contraction and expansion of the lot acreage,
the main studio site underwent a variety of configurations,
consistent with motion picture studio lots during this time.
A small land addition was made to the main studio site in
the early years of the studio site. Sometime between 1929
and 1931, RKO acquired several parcels of land on the
western edge of the main studio site, according to a Sanborn
The Culver StudiosFigure 2: Back Lot (located at right side of photo). Photo courtesy of Bison Archives,
Figure 3: Aerial Photograph, RKO Studio Era, Photo courtesy
of Bison Archives, 2005.
map from 1929 and an aerial photograph dated 1931.
A requisite component of the motion picture production studios are the back lots, where
different scene backdrops and sets were built for filming purposes. The old back lot
connected with present-day Culver Studios covered forty acres south of the main studio
lot. It was best known as the site where Atlanta burned during filming of "Gone with the
Wind". As the
needs of the
motion industry
evolved, the
owners of the
studio site (Perfect
Film and
Chemical) sold off
the back lot in
1968.
Major Periods of Renovation
Thomas H. Ince's studio initiation was followed by three phases of development. Exhibit
E, located at the end of this document, shows the site layout of the 1924 Sanborn map.
An aerial photograph depicting the studio layout at this time is provided in Figure 1:
Aerial View, during ince Studio Era.
When DeMille took over the site in early 1925, the first massive site renovations were
initiated. He re-oriented the existing glass stages and moved numerous office bungalows
and production service buildings. To
match production needs, Stage 2
(now known as Stages 2/3/4), four
new double-barrelled projection
rooms and seven new cutting rooms
were added to the studio site. See
Exhibit F for a site plan during this
studio era.
The second significant period of
renovations on the site began in 1930
with the merging of two companies to
form the RKO-Pathe' Studio. Figure
3 Aerial Photograph, RK0 Studio
Era displays the site design at this
time. In 1929 talking movie
technology brought a change to the
motion picture industry, which
involved different methods of
The Culver Studios
2Figure 4: Aerial Photograph, Selznick Studio Era. Photo
courtesy of Bison Archives, 2005.
production and a rise in consumer demand for movies. The new production company
adapted to this innovation by constructing two large stage facilities (now known as
Stages 7/8/9 and Stages 11/12/14) and several production service buildings.
During David 0. Selznick's tenure at the site from 1935-1946, the site was almost
completely built out, as seen in Figure 4: Aerial Photograph, Selznick Studio. Two
significant bungalows (Building S & T) and one addition to Building D facing
Washington Blvd. were constructed
during this time; the last stage facility
(Stages 15/16) was erected in 1940,
which expanded the production
capability of Stages 11/12/14. The
development on the main studio site
at this time most closely resembles its
current configuration in site layout
and scale. Exhibit A Existing Site
Plan adequately illustrates this site
layout.
To fully illustrate the growth of the
studio during the period of
significance, Exhibit H Existing Site
Plan, Coded by Studio Era has the
buildings and structures labeled
according to studio era constructed.
Site Description
Comprised of a variety of buildings, some retaining a high degree of integrity in design
and utilization, reflective of both the historic and contemporary uses on The Culver
Studios lot. These structures are the defining features of the potential Culver Studios
historic district. Each illustrates the types of activity required for a functioning studio lot:
stages for film production; office buildings for administrative functions; dressing rooms
for production support; support buildings for activities including set design, storage and
power; and a commissary for service functions.
Offices and administrative uses are located predominantly at the front northern portion
and the southwestern portion of the studio lot. Stages run the along the central spine of
the studio lot from a mid-northern point to the back of the lot, in some locations forming
the western boundary line. Support and service buildings line the front portion of the
studio boundary along Ince Blvd, with some interspersed around the studio lot.
The studio lot consists of one major thoroughfare running north-south from the
Administration Building area at the front of the lot back to Building Y, connecting
smaller internal pathways on the lot. Circulation within the studio lot evolved as building
placement and studio access changed.
The Culver Studios
3Attachment No., 5
Abbreviated History of Major Entitlements
For The Culver Studios
9336 and 9050 Washington Boulevard
1986 The Redevelopment Agency adopts the Culver Studios Design for
Development for 9336 Washington Boulevard (West Parcel).
1987 The Planning Commission approves Conditional Use Permits for
shared parking to fulfill the parking requirement for live audience
tapings and for beer and wine sales from the commissary for onsite
consumption.
1988 City Council approves Comprehensive Plan CP No. 87-01 and other
entitlements enabling the addition of live television projection facilities
(Stages 5 & 6) and related onsite and offsite improvement at 9336
Washington Boulevard, hereinafter also referred to as the Main Studio
lot.
1990 City Council approves Amendment No. 1 the Comprehensive Plan
concerning various parking amendments to the original comprehensive
plan, in connection with a then proposed office building on the corner of
Ince Boulevard and Lindblade Street. The studio chose, however, not
to go forward with that proposal, and Amendment No. 1 approval was
allowed to expire.
1992 City Council approves Amendment No. 2 to the Comprehensive Plan
allowing the existing 84 surplus tandem parking spaces in the
subterranean parking structure, plus three parallel surplus parking
spaces in front of the Mansion Building to replace 87 required parking
spaces located offsite on the corner of Ince Boulevard and Lindblade
Street.
1994 City Council approves Amendment Na, 3 to the Comprehensive Plan
for the phased construction of 163,594 gross square feet of new office
space at 9050 Washington Boulevard [9000 block bounded by Ince
Boulevard, Washington Boulevard, Higuera Street, and Lindblade
Street (with the exception of the Kahn property at the corner of
Washington Boulevard and Higuera Street], construction of an exterior
6 ?The Culver Studios Abbreviated History
Page 2 of 2
elevator on the west side of Stage 2, 3, and 4 on the Main Studio lot,
and related improvements. Additional actions taken to implement the
project consisted of:
General Plan Amendment
Zone Change
Design and Physical Development Plan amendment
Conditional Use Permit
Historic Preservation Certificate of Appropriateness
Street Tree Master Plan Amendment
Alley Vacation
The Redevelopment Agency enters into an Owner Participation
Agreement with the studio for development of the project. Additionally,
the Redevelopment Agency replaces the existing Culver Studios
Design for Development and the existing Ince-Higuera Block Design for
Development separately governing the Main Studio lot and the Ince-
Higuera Block, respectively, with the new Culver Studios Area Design
for Development.
2000 City Council continued their consideration of Amendment. No. 4 to the
Comprehensive Plan that would have permitted the 100 deferred
required parking spaces for the studio to be provided either onsite or in
the Ince Parking structure that was being designed. This application
was withdrawn and never acted upon.
2006 Application is filed for Amendment No. 5 to the Comprehensive Plan To
amend the Comprehensive Plan for The Culver Studios to permit the
demolition of 51,746 sq. ft. of office and support area (Buildings J and
R), the construction of a 49,500 sq. ft. four-story office building in the
same foot print as Building J with a zero street facing setback, the
construction of a two and one half-story (200 space) parking structure
over an existing 60 space surface parking lot and the area of Building
R, the amendment of the required parking ratio for office use from 1/263
for up to 30,000 GSF and 1/294 for over 30,000 GSF to 1/350 GSF,
and other minor on and off-site improvements.
70ATTACHMENT NO. 6
THE SECRETARY OF INTERIORS STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
The Secretary of Interior's Standards play a crucial role in the historic preservation
process: they are the nationally accepted standards for how historic buildings should be
rehabilitated. The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a
reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility.
1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that
requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site
and environment.
2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal
of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a
property shall be avoided.
3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and
use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding
conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
undertaken.
4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic
significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the
severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new
feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities
and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be
substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to
historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if
appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and
preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be
undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy
historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale,
and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its
environment.
10.New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in
such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of
the historic property would be unimpaired.
7/Attachment No. 7
DESIGN FOR DEVELOPMENT
A Portion of
Washington-Culver Redevelopment Project No. 3
The Culver Studios Area
9336 Washington Boulevard
Adopted June 20, 1994
by the
Culver City Redevelopment AgencyDESIGN FOR DEVELOPMENT
A Portion of
Washington-Culver Redevelopment Project No. 3
The Culver Studios Area
9336 Washington Boulevard
PURPOSE AND INTENT
The Culver City Redevelopment Agency (Agency) has the authority to direct
and guide the use and development of property within adopted project
areas. Pursuant to Section 422 of the Redevelopment Plan for the
Washington-Culver Redevelopment Project No. 3, the Agency wishes to
establish design standards for a particular area within Project Area No. 3.
The Agency wishes to adopt a specific Design for Development (DFD) to
direct the use and redevelopment of a particular site in order to insure
that the health, safety and welfare of the residents and business
community are not adversely affected. This DFD addresses three specific
development parcels (collectively the "Site").
The purpose of this DFD is to provide a guide to the potential
redevelopment of the Site by describing the type of development which is
acceptable to the Agency considering the known site and planning
constraints of the area, based on the Environmental Impact Report
prepared for the Project Area and certified in 1975, (the EIR) augmented
by various supplemental EIRs prepared, certified, and focused on specific
development locations and/or issues (the SEIRs) within the Project Area.
The Agency will endeavor to insure that this DFD continues to be a
relevant and useful document. The DFD is subject to revision by
appropriate future amendments formally approved by the Agency.
This document supplements, augments, enhances and focuses the
various goals, policies and objectives of the various planning and
redevelopment documents affecting this Site. However, the standards
established herein are not inclusive of all applicable City procedures,
provisions, regulations and requirements which will apply to development
of the Site.|1010|73II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The Site, known as The Culver Studios Area, consists of approximately
21 acres, is addressed as 9000 Block and 9336 Washington Boulevard,
and is bounded by Washington Boulevard on the north, Higuera Street on
the east, Lindblade Street on the south, Ince Boulevard on the east,
private residentially-developed properties on the south and west, a short
portion of Van Buren Place on the west, and commercial structures on the
northwest.
The Site is illustrated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The
letters and numbers shown on page 1 of the map correlate to the letters
and numbers contained in Section V.F. of this Design for Development.
The Site consists of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Tract 2530 (MB 35-10) and
Lots 182 through 190 of Nolan Park Tract (MB 32-45)(collectively "the
West Parcel". Lots A, B and C of Tract 4415 (MB 48-1) except the most
northerly 7.900 square feet of Lot A (collectively "the East Parcel") and
the most northerly 7,900 square feet of Lot A ("the North Parcel").
The existing zoning of the East Parcel and the West Parcel consists of
Motion Picture Studio (S-1). The existing zoning of the North Parcel
consists of Extended Commercial (C-3E).
The City's General Plan, as amended in 1984, designates the East Parcel
and the West Parcel as Studio, and the North Parcel as Industrial.
The City's Design and Physical Development Plan (DPDP) adopted in
1973 and as subsequently amended designates Lots 1, 2 & 3 of the West
Parcel as Primary Office, Lots 4, 5 & 6 and Lots 132 through 190 of the
West Parcel as Manufacturing/Sales and the North and East Parcels as
Primary Office. These designations are desirable building type
designations reflecting the General Plan Land Use Element designations
prior to the 1984 General Plan amendment. As a result of the 1984
General Plan amendment, which designated the entire Site as Studio, the
Design and Physical Development Plan should be appropriately amended.
However, because the DPDP contains no specific building type standards
for "Studio", the standards specified in Section V.H of this DFD shall
apply instead of those currently designated in the DPDP.
Ill. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION
The Redevelopment Plan designates the Site as follows: Lots 1, 2, 3 and the|1010|7northerly third of Lot 4 as Commercial, the southerly two-thirds of Lot 4 and
Lots 5, 6, 182 through 190 as Residential or Park, and the East and North as
Commercial-Industrial Parcels.
Additionally, the , Redevelopment Plan includes the following provisions
regarding non-conforming uses:
"(S 410) Nonconforming Uses
The Agency is authorized to permit an existing use to remain in an
existing building in good condition, which use does not conform to the
provisions of this Plan, provided that such use is generally compatible
with the developments and uses in the Project area. The owner of such a
property must be willing to enter into a participation agreement and agree
to the imposition of such reasonable restrictions as are necessary to
protect the development and use of the Project area.
The Agency may authorize additions, alterations, repairs or other
improvements in the Project area for uses which do not conform to the
provisions of this Plan where such improvements are within a portion of
the Project where, in the determination of the Agency, such
improvements would be compatible with surrounding and Project uses
and development."
IV. USES PERMITTED
The West and East Parcels shall continue to be used as a motion, picture
(including television and video) studio including studio-related offices
pursuant to Section 410 of the Redevelopment Plan and shall be
redeveloped in accordance with this Design for Development and
applicable zoning standards.
The North Parcel shall be used and maintained as set forth in Section J.
North Parcel Standards
V. REDEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Redevelopment of the West and East Parcels shall conform to
Comprehensive Plan, OP No. 87-01 approved by the City Council and
Agency on January 25, 1988 and as amended on June 20, 1994
applicable City zoning standards, the most recently adopted edition of the
Uniform Building Code, the Redevelopment Plan and this Design for
Development, as set forth herein. In all cases the more restrictive
3standards shall apply. Comprehensive Plan, OP No. 87-01, as amended,
is attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
The basic type of development for the East Parcel shall be new
construction of approximately 160,000 square feet of studio-related office
space, including parking therefore, plus 45 additional parking spaces
pursuant to Covenant and Agreement Regarding Parking recorded as
Instrument No. 90 1556576. The basic type of development for the West
Parcel shall be a rehabilitation of existing motion picture and video
studios, with supporting offices, sets, props, and lighting storage and
distribution facilities to effect a full operating status of all such facilities.
Buildings C, D, and E (Mansion) and the lawn area between the Mansion
and Washington Boulevard shall be rehabilitated as necessary and
maintained according to the provisions of this DFD.
A. Plans
The redevelopment [of the Site} shall be carried out according to plans
and drawings approved by the Agency and City. Such plans and
drawings shall conform to the requirements for submittal of plans
for a Site Plan Review to the City according to Section 37-76 of the
City's Municipal Code. Such plans shall include, but not be limited
to, a plot plan, parking plan and landscaping plan for the entire Site
and floor plans and four-sided elevations for all proposed
improvements.
B. Building and Parking Area Setbacks
Rehabilitation of existing buildings (excluding demolition of entire
buildings) may occur with the continuance of existing setbacks
providing such rehabilitation occurs pursuant to Section 37-84 of the
City's Municipal Code.
Rehabilitation of or addition to existing buildings in excess of said Code
section shall include building setback requirements conforming to
applicable zoning standards. Rehabilitation of the main building facing
Washington Boulevard shall retain the building's existing setback. All
new building and/or additions to existing buildings shall meet S-1 zone
setback requirement.
Architectural projections such as cornices, canopies, eaves, balconies
and similar architectural features not providing additional floor space
within the building may encroach into the setback area a maximum of
4three feet (3') or twenty-five percent (25%) of the required setback,
whichever is greater; provided that in no case shall such encroachment
exceed fifteen feet (15'). Walkways and drives may exist within the
front setback area where necessary for access and where approved by
the City/Agency. No parking shall be allowed within the required front
setback areas nor within the existing area between the main building
facing Washington Boulevard and the street, except on the existing
driveway areas. Parking will be permitted in the required side and rear
setback areas subject to the requirements of installation of a minimum
three foot (3.00) planter between the Ince Boulevard property line and
the parking area and between the Van Buren Place property line and
the parking area. The front setback area adjacent to Washington
Boulevard shall be maintained according to the provisions of this DFD
and no modifications shall be made to this area.
Traffic Mitigation Measures
Redevelopment pursuant to this DFD is anticipated to result in
additional traffic utilizing local streets in the immediate area as well as
adjacent arterial streets. Specific traffic mitigation measures will be
imposed on the Site during review of the plans submitted by the
property owner. Those traffic mitigation measures may include, but not
be limited to:
1. Imposition of a Transportation System Management (TSM)
plan similar to that imposed on other large land uses by the
Agency, to achieve an overall goal 1.3 Site occupants per
vehicle (excluding production vehicles) parked on or in
conjunction with the Site,
2. Street widening dedication and improvement along
Washington Boulevard and for Ince Boulevard that may be
reasonably required by the City Engineer consistent with the
plans submitted.
3. In the event street widening dedication is not required, in
whole or in part, improvement of the existing Washington
Boulevard and Ince Boulevard abutting public rights of way
to current City standards including the construction of bus
shelters at existing and proposed bus stops on said abutting
streets. Bus shelter designs must meet the advance
approval of the City Planner, City Engineer and
Transportation Director.|1010|774. Payment to the City of the New Development Impact Fund
Fee pursuant to Chapter 33 H of the Municipal Code, and
City Council Resolution No. 83-R115.
Access through Lots 182-190 to Van Buren Place shall be
limited to emergency access and subject to the approval of
the City Planner, City Engineer and Fire Chief,
6. Improvements identified in Traffic Recommendations for the
East Parcel attached as Exhibit "E".
D. Parking Requirements
The Site shall be developed with off street parking spaces as follows:
Office
Up to 30,000 s.f. of Gross Floor Area
Over 30,000 s.f. of Gross Floor Area
Production Stage
3.8 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of
Gross Floor Area
3.4 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of
Gross Floor Area
2.46 spaces per 1,000 s.f.
of Gross Floor Area
Plus up to 100 additional parking spaces shall be provided upon a
finding by the City that a parking deficiency exists which is causing
significant adverse impacts on traffic flow and safety in the
neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the site.
Live Audience 1 space per 2.5 audience
seats
Support Facilities * 0.52 space per 1,000 sJ.
of Gross Leasable Floor Area
(GLFA) defined as 85% of
gross building area or per
detailed floor plans, whichever
yields the greater GLFA
* consisting of set/furniture storage/construction, dressing, editing,
commissary & security facilities.
The design and layout of parking shall meet applicable Culver City
Redevelopment Agency standards and C.A.C. P.H.C.24 Standards for
handicap access.|1010|7rRequired of-street parking may be located on Site or off Site. If located
off Site, required parking shall be located within 500 feet (walking
distance) of the Site.
Building Height
No new building or structure on the West Parcel shall exceed the
height of the tallest existing building on the West Parcel or as permitted
by Section 37-64 of the-Code. Existing buildings on the West Parcel
may remain at their existing heights subject to Code Section 37-64. A
copy of this Section is attached as Exhibit "D".
F. Minimum Building Rehabilitation Requirements
This section sets forth the minimum building rehabilitation
requirements as the City Building Official determines necessary.
1. All roofs on existing buildings shall be inspected and re-
roofed or repaired as necessary.
2. All building exteriors shall be inspected and rehabilitated as
necessary. This shall include repair of stucco, brick or
concrete facings,- replacement of wood exteriors unless
such wood facings are appropriate to the scale of the
building and are in reasonable repair, replacement of all
sash and glazing where appearance or water tightness is
questionable, and painting.
3. All buildings shall be thoroughly inspected for termites and
pests. Any such termites and/or pests shall be exterminated
as necessary, and any damage repaired. Additionally, all
identified areas of pest entrance shall be repaired. A
certification of compliance from a reliable exterminator shall
be provided.
4. Carry out a thorough structural inspection of all structures,
make necessary repairs and provide certification of
compliance from a qualified licensed structural engineer.
5. Inspect and replace or repair all wiring and electrical
services in all buildings not installed pursuant to a building
permit issued by the Culver City Building Division and/or
which constitute safety hazards.
6. Provide electrical service and distribution for stage 10 in
7order to allow for full utilization of this stage facility.
7. Add heating, ventilating, and air conditioning to all office
uses, where such systems do not exist and repair such
heating, ventilating, and air conditioning in office uses as
necessary where it is presently supplied.
8. Provide toilet and lavatory facilities commensurate with full
utilization of the studios, consistent with current industry
standards by addition of facilities or rehabilitation of existing
facilities, if adequate in quantity.
9. The rehabilitation and restoration of Stage I and Building P is
strongly encouraged.
10. Provide acoustical isolation for stage 10.
11 Buildings H, I, R, S, T, U, and V may be relocated to site
periphery or demolished in order to develop large areas into
parking.
12. Upgrade security systems with more lighting, better
perimeter control, video surveillance.
13. Buildings C, D, and E shall be rehabilitated as necessary
and maintained according to the standards set forth herein,
and shall not be demolished.
Landscaping
The development shall be landscaped and irrigated in accordance with
landscape plans approved by the City and the Agency. Landscape
improvements shall be installed as part of the rehabilitation plans.
Such landscaped areas shall be maintained thereafter in a sightly and
well kept condition.
All areas not required to be paved between property lines and the
buildings or between property lines and security fences where such
fences are located between property lines and buildings shall be
landscaped. To the extent possible, landscaped berms shall be utilized
to shield parking areas from the street. All landscape areas shall be
provided with automatic irrigation systems, hose bibs, bubblers to
parkway trees and minimum 6" high masonry or concrete curb borders,
including at back of the public sidewalk. Landscaping shall be installed
prior to the final building inspection by the City of the building.The following guidelines are intended to assist in the preparation of
acceptable landscaping plans.
1. General
It is the objective of the landscape guidelines to integrate the
physical architectural elements of the building with the
streetscape and to visually screen undesirable elements
such as parking, loading, refuse collection, transformers,
and similar areas from view from the street and adjacent
properties.
Landscape elements shall be of the "long lived" variety.
Short lived materials can be utilized, but only as accent
supplements to longer lived elements.
Landscape elements shall relate to architectural design
elements. Landscape materials are considered to be strong
unifying elements and, therefore, should reflect the physical,
functional and aesthetic qualities of the Site.
2. Building Landscaping
Where the building is physically separated from required
landscaped setbacks by paved vehicular areas, landscaping
shall be provided adjoining the building. Generally, such
landscaping shall consist of continuous planters of not less
than 5 feet in width. In cases of restricted access or visibility,
spot planters for trees may be utilized. In both cases, the
equivalent of not less than one tree per 30 lineal feet of
building shall be provided.
3. Parking Area Landscaping
Not less than one tree shall be provided for each 1,750 s.f.
of paved vehicular area on the Site, and such trees shall
generally be dispersed within planter islands dividing parking
rows of five (5) or more spaces. In areas of restricted
visibility, credit for trees within property line and building line
planters may be given towards meeting this requirement
under City/Agency plan review.
Screening planting shall meet City/Agency approval taking
into consideration existing and proposed structures and
other Site features.Special Features Screening
Storage and loading facilities shall be screened from view
from adjoining properties and rights-of-way by suitable
combinations of primary architectural elements of the
building, berming, and/or dense landscaping (including vines
and decorative masonry walls) as may be approved or
required under City/Agency plan review.
5. Maior Landscape Components
For purposes of this DFD, the following four major landscape
component categories shall each be addressed in detail on
landscape plans required to be submitted for City and
Agency review and approval: trees, shrubs and vines,
ground cover, and appurtenant improvements. Species and
size selection for all plant materials should be varied and
appropriate keyed to the style of the particular development
proposed, and West Los Angeles area climatic conditions.
a. Trees:
1) In quantities and placements required
hereinabove, the following size ratios shall be
observed for all on site trees planted:
a) Not less than 20% shall. be 36" - box or
larger specimens;
b) Not less than 20% shall be 24" - box
specimens; and
c) The remaining 60% shall be not less than
15 gallon size.
2) A detailed sketch or note of the method
proposed for the staking or guying of all trees
shall be provided.
3) Detailed landscape plans shall include the
planted heights, spreads and trunk calipers of
all trees to be planted.
10b. Shrubs and Vines:
Utilized primarily to serve as dense opaque screens
for parking, loading and storage areas and to provide
intermittent visual transitional relief between trees and
ground cover, evergreen shrubs shall not be less than
5 gallons in size, except where serving as a screening
device their size and spacing shall be, sufficient to
achieve a three (|1010|) foot hedgerow appearance upon
initial planting.
c. Ground Cover:
Ground cover shall be utilized to supplement trees,
shrubs and vines in all landscaped areas. Generally,
the use of sod in relatively large, open flat areas and
other materials such as ice plant in smaller,
obstructed slope areas is encouraged. Flowering
ground cover shall be utilized to add color and variety
at key focal points.
Appurtenant Improvements:
1) An automatic, permanent irrigation system to
all landscaped areas, including bubblers to
street trees;
2) Street tree well covers where required;
3) Soil amendments;
4) Topographical contours or berms;
5) Jute or other methods proposed for surface
stabilization of steeper slope areas; and
6) 6" high concrete curbing shall be constructed
to separate all planted areas from paved
vehicular areas and public sidewalks,
H. Architectural Design
1. General Parameters
The development shall be designed, constructed and
11maintained in a manner consistent with plans approved by
the Agency and City encompassing the following.
2. Building Exteriors
a) All buildings on the Site shall be generally consistent in
quality and appearance and consistent with the visual
character of the surrounding area.
b) Shall not produce excessive reflective glare from the
sun which would adversely affect the comfort or safety
of pedestrians or drivers.
c) No modifications shall be made to the exterior
elevations of Buildings C, D and E except for
maintenance and repair.
3, Fire Safety
Fire Department emergency vehicles and equipment access
shall be provided to all structures on the lot subject to the
approval of the Fire Chief. Automatic sprinkler and/or alarm
systems and built-in fire protection systems may be required.
4. Lighting and Visibility
a) Adequate lighting shall be provided at the base of the
buildings and adjacent to Ince Boulevard to preserve
the amenity and safety of those spaces for night-time
pedestrian use and to reduce dangerous places of
concealment and areas of deep shadow.
b) Luminaires for display, spot, and flood lighting of
facades, display cases, or landscaping must not be
visible from streets and other public spaces nor
neighboring structures.
c) Light from display, spot, flood, or other lighting shall not
be allowed to spill or reflect on to adjacent properties
and/or public rights-of-way.
Building Siting and Window Placement
New or relocated buildings shall be sited to minimize shade,
shadow, light and/or glare impacts on the nearby residential
properties. Building windows similarly shall be so located to
12minimize to the maximum extent possible any visual
intrusion into adjoining residential areas.
6. Equipment Screening
a) Building-Mounted
All mechanical or electrical support equipment including
but not limited to motors, compressors and air
conditioning or heating units, and all vents, shafts, duct
work, skylights, pipes and similar equipment or devices
on or projecting through the roof or exterior walls of a
building shall be screened from view from adjoining
properties and rights-of-way by the primary or integral
architectural features or elements of the building and
shall not exceed parapet height.
b) Ground-Mounted
No mechanical or electrical equipment including but not
limited to motors, compressors and transformers shall
be located within a street-facing building setback area
except within an underground vault. Elsewhere on the
site all such equipment shall be fully screened from
view from adjoining properties and rights-of-way by
solid masonry walls with opaque gates and
landscaping.
7 Notwithstanding the CCMC Section 37-78, "Street Graphics
Design Standards" the only signing permitted within the
development shall be as specifically permitted by the
Agency, taking into consideration the unique architectural
style and use of the Site.
8. Detailed plans for refuse containers/enclosures shall be
included for any/all new buildings or offices. Plans shall be
developed in coordination with the City Sanitation Manager.
9. Security fencing on the perimeters of the Site shall be
consistent in design, material, finish and color with adjacent
buildings on the Site. Such perimeter fencing shall not
consist of chain link fencing or include barbed wire or razor
ribbon. All such fencing shall be subject to approval of the
Agency.
13Demolition
Demolition of the East Parcel shall incorporate measures from the
Phase I Environmental Assessment Report to properly eliminate on-
site contamination. Documentation of proper disposal of contaminated
materials shall be provided to the Agency.
The Certificate of Appropriateness shall be obtained prior to any
alteration to 9050 Washington Boulevard
J. North Parcel Standards
1. Plans.
The redevelopment of the North Parcel shall be carried out
according to plans and drawings approved by the Agency
and City. Such plans and drawings shall conform to the
requirements for submittal of plans for a Site Plan Review to
the City according to Section 37-76 of the City's Municipal
Code. Such plans shall include, but not be limited to, a plot
plan, parking plan, drainage plans, landscaping plans, floor
plans and four-sided elevations for all proposed
improvements.
2. Building and Parking Area Standards
Rehabilitation of existing buildings (excluding demolition of
entire buildings) may occur with the continuance of existing
setbacks providing such rehabilitation occurs pursuant to
Section 37-84 of the City's Municipal Code. All new
construction shall meet C-3E zone setbacks requirements
Walkways and drives may exist within the front setback
areas where necessary for access and where approved by
the City/Agency. No surface parking shall be allowed within
the required front setback areas.
3. Parking Requirements
Parking for new construction and existing buildings shall
meet the applicable City Municipal Code requirements in all
respects notwithstanding any nonconforming status of
existing buildings. On-street curb-side parking may be
prohibited at the discretion of the City Engineer.
144. Building Height
No new building or structure shall exceed forty-three (43)
feet excluding mechanical and equipment penthouse.
Building height shall be determined as measured per
Chapter 37 (Zoning) of the Culver City Municipal Code.
5. Maximum Sire Coverage
All new construction shall confirm to the following restrictions
on maximum site coverage and minimum site open space.
For the purposes of this restriction, open space means
landscaped areas, pedestrian areas, surface parking, or
other areas not covered by a buildin_g„
Development Height
(Height of Highest Building}
1 Story_
2 Story
3 Story 6. Landscaping
Minimum
Site venge_
25%
65 /0 35%
— _ .
50% . 50%
Maximum
Site Coverage
75%
The development shall be landscaped and irrigated in
accordance with landscape plans approved by the City and
the Agency. Landscape improvements shall be installed as
part of the new construction or rehabilitation plans. Such
landscaped areas shall be maintained thereafter in a sightly
and well kept condition.
All open areas not required to be paved for vehicular or
pedestrian access shall be landscaped. To the extent
possible landscaped berms shall be utilized to shield parking
areas from the street. Landscaping shall be installed prior to
the final building inspection by the City.|109| Signage
Notwithstanding the CCMC Section 37-768, "Street Graphics
Design Standards" the only signing permitted to be installed
shall be as specifically permitted by the Agency, taking into
consideration the unique architectural style and use of the
Parcel.
158. Refuse Enclosure Area
Detailed plans for refuse containers/enclosures shall be
installed for any/all new construction rehabilitation and reuse
of existing buildings. Plans shall, be developed in
coordination with the City's Recourse and Sanitation
Manager.
9. Fire Safety
Access shall be provided for Fire Department emergency
vehicles and equipment to all structures subject to the
approval of the Fire Marshall. Automatic sprinkler, alarm,
smoke detector and/or other systems may be required.
Modification to water supply systems serving the Parcel may
be required for new developments or rehabilitation projects
in order to ensure sufficient water supply for appropriate fire
protection as determined by the Fire Marshall.
VI. PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION AND IMPROVEMENTS
A. The following land areas shall be offered for dedication to the
City for public right of way purposes:
1 Sufficient land area along the easterly side of Ince
Boulevard between Lindblade Street and Washington
Boulevard to result in a sixty foot (60') Ince Boulevard
right of way width with a twenty-five foot (25) curb line
radius at the southeast comer of Washington
Boulevard and Ince Boulevard.
2. Sufficient land area along the westerly side of Higuera
Street abutting the East Parcel to result in the existing
sidewalk being located within a public right-of-way
easement.
B. The following public right of way improvements shall be
installed:
The curb return at the Washington and Ince Boulevard
intersection shall be reconstructed to a 25.00 foot curb
radius. Reconstruction shall include the relocation of all
conflicting traffic signal and street light equipment,
16provided said construction does riot interfere with the
present location of any existing buildings on the studio lot
or the brick decorative fencing at the corner.
2. All off-grade, broken, deteriorated or otherwise
substandard curb, parkway and/or. sidewalk along
Washington Boulevard shall be replaced with new
concrete improvements.
3. Street trees shall be installed of a size and species
compatible with the architectural character of the Site,
and be of a size and location meeting the approval of the
City's Manager, Environmental Management Division,
along the southerly side of Washington Boulevard from
Higuera Street to Ince Boulevard and along the westerly
side of Higuera Street, northerly side of Lindblade Street
and easterly side of Ince Boulevard abutting the East
Parcel. Street trees along the Washington Boulevard
frontage of the West Parcel shall not be required.
4. Improvements identified in Traffic Recommendations for
the East Parcel attached as Exhibit "E".
VII. CITY ZONING. ARCHITECTURAL. AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS
The City of Culver City has adopted zoning, architectural and other
requirements relating to. the development of land within its jurisdiction. These
requirements shall be adhered to in the planning and implementation of ail
developments. The requirements contained in this Design for Development
shall be construed as being in addition to City requirements and, in the case
of conflict, the more stringent shall prevail.
VIII. RESPONSIBILITY FOR SECURING PERMITS AND PAYING
APPLICABLE FEES
Nothing contained in this Design for Development or in subsequent
agreements shall be construed in any way to exempt the Developer (or his
assignee, buyer, transferee, conveyee, or lessee) from securing all permits
and paying all fees required of developers of private property within the City
of Culver City.
17IX. OPPORTUNITIES FOR OWNER AND TENANT PARTICIPATION.
-The following is excerpted from Section 306 of the Redevelopment Plan:
The Agency shall extend preferences to persons who are engaged in
business in the Project area, to reenter in business within the redeveloped
area if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed by the Plan. The
Agency shall also extend preferences to other owners and tenants in the
Project area if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed by the Plan.
The Agency is authorized to permit business, residential," institutional and
semi-public owners and tenants, if they so desire, to purchase and develop or
develop real property in the Project area.
The Agency is also authorized to permit persons who are owners of
residential, business and other types of real property in the Project area to be
given the opportunity to participate in redevelopment by rehabilitation, by
retention of improvements, or by new development by retaining all or a
portion of their properties, by acquiring adjacent or other properties from the
Agency and purchasing other properties in the Project area.
If conflicts develop between the desires of participants for particular sites or
land uses, the Agency is authorized to establish reasonable priorities and
preferences among the owners and tenants and to determine a solution by
consideration of such factors as length of time in the area; accommodation of
as many participants as possible; ability to perform; conformity with intent and
purpose of this Plan.
In addition to opportunities for participation by individual persons and firms,
participation to the extent it is feasible shall be available for two or more
persons, firms or institutions, to join together in partnerships, corporations, or
other joint entities.
Participation is desired in the redevelopment of the Project area by as many
business and residential owners and tenants as possible. Participation
opportunities shall necessarily be subject to and limited by such factors as the
expansion of public facilities; elimination and changing of land uses;
realignment of streets; the ability of owners to finance acquisition and
development in accordance with the Plan; any reduction in the total number of
individual parcels in the Project area; and assembly and development of
areas for public and/or private development in accordance with this Plan."
Interest in participating in the redevelopment of the Site has already been
expressed by some property owners. Participation opportunity schedule shall
be as follows:
18
0A. Following adoption of this DFD, the property owner and tenant
shall each be provided with his participation opportunity
pursuant to Section 306 of the Redevelopment Plan and
pursuant to the Agency's Rules Governing Participation and
Preferences by Owners, Operators of Businesses and Tenants
in the Project Area, attached as Exhibit "C".
B. If the participation solicited above results in one or more
proposals from the existing owner and/or tenant, the Agency will
evaluate the proposal(s) and either authorize the
commencement of negotiations with the selected proposer or
call for the next step.
C. If no acceptable proposal is received by the Agency based on
the participation solicitation, - the Agency may call for proposals
from other owners and/or tenants in the Project Area. The
Agency may establish criteria for evaluation of proposals, which
criteria may include an understanding/knowledge of the motion
picture business. Upon receipt of proposal(s), the Agency will
evaluate those submitted and either authorize commencement
of negotiations with the selected proposer or call for solicitation
of proposals from other potential developers/users. Developers
are encouraged to remain receptive to participation
opportunities with the existing property owner or tenant which
may result, providing the participation is consistent with the plan
and the Design for Development.
X.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE INCE-HIGUERA BLOCK DESIGN FOR
DEVELOPMENT
The substance of the Ince-Higuera Block Design for Development, previously
adopted by the Redevelopment Agency on March 6, 1989, has been included
in this DFD. As a result, by adoption of this DFD, the Ince-Higuera Block
Design for Development is superseded.
19
7/Attachment No. 8|1010|RESOLUTION NO. 94-R055|1010|A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CULVER CITY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 3|1010|TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, OP NO. 87-01 FOR THE|1010|CULVER STUDIOS, AND RELATED APPLICATIONS, AND
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM.|101010|(General Plan Amendment, Design and Physical Development Plan Amendment and
71! Street Tree Master Plan Amendment)|109| I
I
I
WHEREAS, The Culver Studios filed an application for approval of an
10
H
phased construction of 163,594 gross square feet of new office space and related
improvements within the 9000 block of Washington Boulevard, known as "Television
Building Complex", and applications for modifications to the Main Studio Lot at 9336
Washington Boulevard, including a General Plan Amendment, GPA No. 93-02; Zone
Change, ZC No. 93-02; Conditional Use Permit, CUP No. 93-07; Historic Preservation
Certificate of Appropriateness, HP/CA No. 93-05; and Street Tree Master Plan
Amendment, STMPA No. 93-01; and
WHEREAS, based on the applicant's request, the Culver City
Redevelopment Agency (CCRA) initiated replacement of The Culver Studios Design for
Development with a new Culyer Studios Area Design for Development, and the City
initiated an amendment to the Design and Physical Development Plan, DPDPA
No. 93-01;
WHEREAS, on December 6, 1993, the CCRA, as Lead Agency, adopted
a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the development of the Television Building
Complex and related applications;
25 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due notice as required by
26 II law, hold a public hearing on December 15, 1993, on the various applicant-, CORA-
]
27 I and City-initiated development applications;
28
9 Iamendment to Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01, and related applications for the
!
11
12
13
1 4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
242
18
19
23
21
22
2.3
24
1 Amendment from "Industrial" to "Studio" for the Television Buildin g Complex on the
I"Ince-Hilguera Block" bounded by Washington Boulevard, Higuera Street, Lindblade
Street and Ince Boulevard (excluding therefrom the "Kahn Property") results in the
most appropriate land use designation for the site as proposed to be developed, and
does not result in a land use designation inconsistent with adjoining Land Use Element
Map designations.
A(1) The General Plan Amendment, GPA No. 93-02, is approved and
the Land Use Element Map of the General Plan is hereby amended to cha nge the
25 1
46 1
1 designation of the "Ince-Higuera Block" from "Industrial" to "Studio."
27
-2-
28
WHEREAS, at the close of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolutions (No. 93-P031, 93-P032 and 93-P033) recommending and conditionally
3 approving the applications;
41
WHEREAS, after due notice as required by law, a joint public hearing by
5 1 the CCRA and the City Council on the applications was held on June 20, 1994, and
6 I , all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and|1010| WHEREAS, the City Council, acting as ...a Responsible Agency, has
reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration for this Project adopted by the CCRA as
9 I the Lead Agency, and has determined, in accordance with the California
10 Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as subsequently amended, that no other
11 . environmental review or actions are required, and that the apPlications should be
12 approved —
13
14
15
16
WHEREAS, the proposed General Plan Land Use Element Map
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Culver City DOES
HEREBY FIND AND RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION A
(APPROVIiVG GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, GPA No. 93-02)
17
94—R055• SECTION B
(APPROVING DESIGN AND PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT|109| PLAN AMENDMENT, DPDPA No. 93-01))
WHEREAS, the proposed Design and Physical Development Plan
5 Amendments to change the Architectural Design District designations for a portion of
u
llThe Culver Studios Main Lot and for the block bounded by Washington Boulevard,
7 Higuera Street, Lindblade Street and Ince Boulevard will be most appropriate for the
existing-to-remain and proposed building types on these properties.|10 10| The City Council of the City of Culver City, DOES FURTHER RESOLVE as
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
17
18
19
20
21
22
24
follows:
6(1) The Design and Physical Development Plari,Amendment, DPDPA
No. 93-01, is approved and the Architectural Design District Map designation of
property is hereby amended, as follows:
(a)
' The Culver Studios Main Lot is changed from "Residential •
Complex" to "Manufacturing/Sales", except for the Mansion Building portion thereof
which will retain its current "Primary Office" designation; and
(b) The property located within the block bounded by Ince Boulevard,
Washington Boulevard, Higuera Street and Lindblade Street (including the "Inc n
-Higuera Block" and the "Kahn Property") is changed from "Manufacturing/Sales" to
"Primary Office."
SECTION C
(APPROVING AMENDMENT No. 3 TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CP No. 87-01)
The City Council of the City of Culver City, DOES FURTHER RESOLVE as
follows:
25
26 II Code, Amendment No. 3 to Comprehensive Plan, OP No. 87-01, consisting of
27j
- -3-
28
C(1) In compliance with Section 37-64 of the Culver City Municipal|10 10|94-R05528|1010|narrative and plans file dated November 2, 1987, supplementaF plans file dated
2 January 18, 1988, and plans file dated December 9, 1993, for the Television Building
3 Complex, is approved subject to the Conditions of Approval attached herein as Exhibit
4 A by this reference.|1010|0(2) By adoption of this Resolution and attached Exhibit A, the City
A 11
Council hereby supersedes the prior Resolutions approving the original Comprehensive
7
Plan, CP. No. 87-01 (Resolution 88-R013), and subsequent Amendment No. 2|1010| 92-R107), and the approval of Amendment No. 1, so as to incorporate
9 into a single Resolution all of the Conditions of Approval of Comprehensive Plan,
101
1 1 1 SECTION D
12
13
CP No. 87-01. for The Culver Studios.
(APPROVING STREET TREE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, STMPA No, 93-01)
The City Council of the City of Culver City, DOES FURTHER RESOLVE as
14
follows:
15 D(1) In order to fulfill the urban design goals of the development
16 applications and to provide aesthetically attractive streetscapes, the City's adopted
17 Street Tree Master an is hereby amended by changing the official street tree, as
18 follows:
a) On the west side of Higuera Street between Washington Boulevard
and Lindblade Street, the official street tree is "Podocarpus gracilior (Fern Pine);
b) On the north side of Lindblade Street between Ince Boulevard and
Higuera Street, the official street tree is "Quercus Agrifolia" (California Live Oak) and
"Platanus Acerifolia" (London Plane Tree).
25 11
26 11
27
19
20
21
22
2.3
94-R055ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
-ZP-14"40.44
NORMAN Y.
City Attorney
ERRING Tb CRUN
City clerk
SECTION E
(ADOPTING A MITIGATIOAI MONITORING PROGRAM AND
DIRECTING POSTING OF NOTICE OF DETERMINATION)
The City Council of the City of Culver City, DOES FURTHER RESOLVE as|1010101010|5 follows:
E(1) In compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code,
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by
reference herein, is adopted
E(2) A Notice of Determination shall be prepared and with the Los
Angeles County Clerk.|101010 10
10|11
12
APPROVED and ADOPTED this 20th day of June 1994.
13.
14
ALBERT VERA, MAYOR
City of Culver City
15
16
17
13
19
20
21
22
2.3
25
26 ri
• IL.
27
28
-5-
94-R055EXHIBIT A
The following conditions shall apply only to the Television Building Complex
property and shall be completed prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy,
except as otherwise indicated.
A. The Culver Studios, Tara Partners Ltd., or a direct or indirect wholly
owned subsidiary of Sony Corporation of America, shall have acquired the
irrevocable right and obligation, subject to the completion of remediation
of soil and groundwater contamination and to any court approval required
for conveyance, to obtain title to all property within the Television Building
Complex site before the expansion of Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01,
to include the Television Building Complex site becomes effective.
B. The site shall be developed in conformance with the plans file dated
December 9, 1993, related documents, and the conditions of approval
herein, with the exception that parkways shall be paved to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
C. All applicable development standards and improvements in Planning
Commission Resolution No. 92-P001 (Comprehensive Site Plan Review
and Select Discretionary Review pevelopment Standards) shall be met,
except as otherwise specified herein.
D. A City approved Agreement Containing Covenants, duly executed by the
property owner, shall be submitted for recording to hold all of the lots as
one parcel.
E. All architectural materials, colors and textures shall be consistent with the
materials board approved by the Planning Commission.
F. The studio shall proceed diligently to complete construction in accordance
with the Schedule of Performance to be contained in the Owner
Participation Agreement applicable to the site. As described and illustrated
in the Owner Participation Agreement, the development phases shall
consist of the following:
Phase A consists of the improvements to be built on portions of Parcel I as
illustrated on the Phase Location Map attached to the Scope of
Development and Parcel 2.
94-R055Page 2
Phase B consists of the improvements to' be built on Parcel 3.
Phase C consist of the improvements to be built on the portion of Parcel 1
northerly of Parcel 2 not included in Phase A and is comprised of two
alternatives:
Alternate 1 consists of site improvements including not less than
30 trees, shrubs, special water and landscape elements, planted
ground cover, stone pavers, patterned concrete and decorative
benches.
Alternate 2 consists of building improvements of not more than
28,000 square feet and related site improvements.
G. As part of Phase A, B and Alternate 1 of Phase C construCtion:
All public improvements shall be completed to the Satisfaction of
the City Engineer a-nd Fire Marshal;
2. All perimeter walls, access gates, and landscaping outside the
perimeter walls shall be completed; and
3. The artwork shall be completed, or an in lieu fee paid, per the Art
In Public Places program.
H. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the property owner shall enter into
an agreement, as approved by the City Attorney, with the City for the
installation and maintenance of public improvements that differ in material,
color, or surface texture from standard City specifications.
Demolition on the site shall incorporate measures from the "Phase 1
Environmental Assessment Report" prepared by Targhee, Incorporated and
dated June 14, 1991, to properly eliminate onsite contamination,
Identification Of 'disposal destinations for contaminated materials to be
removed shall be made with the Fire Department prior to issuance of any
demolition permits. Documentation of the proper disposal of contaminated
materials shall be given to the Fire Department within 30 days after the
completion of the disposal of the contaminated materials.
3. The ramps and Subten-anean parking surfaces shall have a tire squeal
retardant finish.
94-R055Pace 3
K.
The construction, specifications, and access route for the trash compactor,
as well as a plan showing the location of the storage area(s) for recyclables
bins, shall be submitted for the Resource and Sanitation Manages review
and approval.
L.
The following shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal:
1.
The water main in Lindblade Street between Ince Boulevard and
Hirruera Street shall be upgraded to an eight (8) inch line.
2.
An additional Fire Department personnel access to the west end of
the parking structure from either Ince Boulevard or Lindblade
Street shall be provided.
"Knox" boxes shall be provided at all Fire Department access
locations that are not permanently staffed by security guards.
4. Combination sprinkler/standpipe systems with 2W Fire Department
standpipe outlets shall be provided as determined by the Fire
Marshal in certain stairwell, roof, and garage locations.
A second Fire Department sprinkler/standpipe connection shall be
provided to the looped water system within 40 feet of the fire
hydrant located at Biguera Street and the alley.
6. The subterranean parking structure shall have a smoke removal
system capable of providing a minimum of six (6) air exchanges per
hoUr.|109| A fire flow of 4,000 to 6,000 gallons per minute from four (4)
adjacent fire hydrants flowing simultaneously shall be provided.
No parking shall be permitted at the Washington Boulevard main entrance
within fifteen (15) feet• of the fire hydrant and Fire Department
sprinkler/standpipe connections located onsite.
N. The landscape/hardseape plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire
Marshal to assure sufficient medical• gurney access from the Fire
Department access gates on Washington Boulevard to the three bungalow
buildings in Phase C, Alternative 2 and walkway surface materials
throughout the complex_
94-R055
9?
Pag-e'4
O. Prior to any prohibition of through access from Higuera Street to Ince
Boulevard along the alley, The Culver Studios shall execute an easement
agreement in favor of the owner of 9000 Washington Boulevard to either:
1.
Permit service and delivery vehicles for 9000 Washington
Boulevard reasonable use of the driveway off Higuera Street for the
Television Building Complex service yard, and the service yard
itsel as a turn-around area for exiting if the entire length of the
alley is vacated;
OR
2. Permit service or delivery vehicles for 9000 Washington Boulevard
reasonable use of the Television Building Complex service yard as a
turn-around area for exiting if the alley directly behind
9000 Washington Boulevard is not vacated.
P. The studio, at its sole expense and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer,
Provide plans and restripe the lanes on Washington Boulevard,
between lEguera Street and Ince Boulevard, for a painted two-way
left-turn lane to serve the office complex driveway, the automobile
dealer driveways across Washington Boulevard, and. Hoke Avenue.
The plan shall include elimination of the curbside parking on the
south side of Washington Boulevard adjacent to the office complex
frontage and retention of the existing two eastbound and two
westbound lanes.
2. At the Lindblade Street/Ince Boulevard intersection, construct a
diverter at the southeast corner to direct all Lindblade Street traffic
to turn right onto northbound Ince Boulevard. Depending on the
final design, landscaping in the diverter may be required and shall be
provided to the satisfaction of the City.
3. On Ince Boulevard between Lindblade Street and Washington
Boulevard, widen the roadway by. 10 feet to a total of 44 feet curb
to curb, provide an 8-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the site, and
stripe Ince Boulevard for two lanes in each direction.
94-R055Page 5
The sewer lateral serving the property at the southwest corner of
Washington Boulevard and I-Dguera Street (9000 Washing:ton
Boulevard) shall be relocated and reconnected to the existing sewer
in Higuera Street at the time the 8-inch sanitary sewer line in the
alley running between Ince Boulevard and Higuera Street is
abandoned.
5.
The onsite truck maneuvering area shall be designed and
constructed so that entry and exit can be made by forward
movements without any need for backing from or onto Higuera
Street, and so that a 50-foot long semi-trailer truck (WB-40 design
vehicle) or a 30-foot long single unit truck (SU design vehicle) can
be turned around within the yard with no more than two backing
movements while another vehicle is within the dock area.
6.
If the portion of the alley behind the property on the southwest
corner of Washington Boulevard and Higuera Street is not vacated,
it shall be widened to a minimum of 20 feet in width of pavement
for two-way traffic flow. The added 2 feet could either be
dedicated to the City or retained by The Culver Studios with an
easement for all traffic, at the discretion of the City Engineer. If
this portion of the alley is vacated to The Culver Studios, then the
new driveway shall be a minimum of 20 feet in paved width. The
entrance to the alley or driveway shall be improved as required by
the City Engineer.
7 Design and construct an extension of the existing 36-inch storm
drain in Ince Boulevard that terminates approximately at Poinsettia
Court an additional 400+ feet to the northern most studio gate on
Ince Boulevard, including all catch basins.
The studio shall upgrade and install new street lights along the north side of
Lindblade street between Ince Boulevard and Higuera Street to the
satisfaction of the Maintenance Manager of the Public Works Department.
All visitor ingress and egress shall be via the Washington Boulevard
driveway, which driveway shall also be available to certain employees. The
Lindblade Street driveway shall be for employees and Westwood One
vehicles only. Signs shall be posted at the driveways on Washington
Boulevard and Lindblade Street directing visitors to the Washington
Boulevard driveway.
94-R055
/01S.
Following issuance of the certificate of occupancy, no trucks with six or
more wheels shall be permitted to leave the alley/driveway at
Higuera Street between 7:00 A.M. and 9:00 A_M. or between 4:00 P.M.
and 6:00 RM., Mondays through Fridays, except holidays.
T.
Signs shall be posted directing all traffic leaving the alley/driveway to turn
left onto Higu era Street. The sign text and locations shall be approved by
the City Engineer.
The truck dock manager shall instruct all delivery/service companies to use
Washington Boulevard and avoid Thguera Street southeast of Lindblade
Street as a travel route for servicing the site.
V. The 64 blocked access parking spaces in the subterranean parking structure
may only be counted towards fulfilling the Television Bading Complex's
parking requirements as long as Conditional Use Permit, CUP No. 93-077
for tandem parking remains valid. If Conditional Use Permit, CUP No.
93-07, becomes null and void, then the studio shall provide 64 prime access
parking spaces in a manner and location approved by the City, or reduce
the square footage and/or use of the Television Building Complex or main
studio lot improvements by an amount equivalent to the parking
requirement for 64 parking spaces, as determined by the City.
The following measures shall be implemented during each construction
phase of the complex to minimize the potential for short-term traffic
imp acts:
The contractor shall apply to the City Engineer for designation of
haul routes at least 15 days before the commencement of
construction. Those routes shall be toward the north and east,
avoiding travel on Higu era Street south ofLindblade Street.
2. At least 72 hours before the commencement of construction, the
contractor shall meet with the City Engineer and representatives of
the Police . Department, Fire .Department, and Transportation
Department to present for review and approval the plans for
construction phasing, the haul routes, the times of operation, and
the potential uses of public rights-of-way for construction purposes.
94-R055Page 7
3. Where a public roadway is to be used for construction purposes,
including construction vehicle parking or passage of pedestrians,
the contractor shall submit signing, barricading, and striping plans
to the City Engineer for approval at least 72 hours before the use.
The traffic control shall be designed to the standards published in
the then current edition of Work Area Traffic Control Handbook
(WATCH), published by Building News, Inc. As much as feasible,
work that results in interference with traffic in the street shall be
confined to between 8:30 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. A minimum of one
lane in each direction shall be kept open to traffic on each street at
all times.
4. Whenever construction work requires use of a part or all of a
sidewalk, a temporary walkway shall be provided or the existing
sidewalk shall be closed •at the nearest legal crosswalk, and
pedestrians shall be directed to a convenient parallel route, as
required by the City Engineer.
5 Construction related truck traffic (six-wheel or more vehicles) shall
not be permitted to or from the site except during the hours of
8:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M.
6.
Haul routes shall be kept clean of construction-related dirt and
debris by implementation of the following measures:
a. . The cleaning of the tires of all earth-moving vehicles before
leaving the site;
b. The covering of the hauled dirt with tarpaulins;
c. The patrolling of the haul routes at the end of each
construction workday to pick up any debris; and
d. The sweeping of the dirt hauling routes daily.
7 No construction-related work shall be permitted on Saturdays or
Sundays, unless approved by the City Engineer at least 72 hours in
advance.
8. Construction materials and equipment shall only be stored on the
site or at another nearby nonstreet location which has been
approved in advance by the City Engineer.
94—R055
/03Page 8
9.
Construction vehicles, particularly earth moving vehicles, shall not
• be allowed to wait on the streets in queues longer than two vehicles
at a time.
10.
All construction workers parking shall be provided on the site, or at
another location as approved by the City Engineer. If a remote
parking facility is used, the City Engineer may require that the
contractor provide a shuttle to transport construction workers
between the parking and the site.
11.
The contractor and all subcontractors shall instruct their employees
and delivery services to confine their travel to the arterial routes,
avoiding travel along Higuera Street and Ince Boulevard south of
Lindblade Street.
12.
No work shall be permitted within the public roadway between
Thanksgiving Day and New Years Day.
X. Following approval of Amendment No. 3 to Comprehensive Plan, CP No.
87-01, and at least 60 days after the completion of the Higuera Street
Reconstruction project, the City Engineer, at the expense of The Culver
Studios, shall prepare a Baseline Study to establish the predevelopment
conditions of traffic volumes on the following local neighborhood streets:
I-Eguera Street, south of Lindblade Street.
Lucerne Avenue, west of Higuera Street.
Lucerne Avenue, west of Ince Boulevard.
Ince Boulevard, north of Lucerne Avenue.
Krueger Street, west of Higuera Street.
Hubbard Street, west of Higuera Street
Carson Street, west of Higuera Street.
Wesley Street; east of Higu era Street
Helms Avenue, east ofI-Eguera Street
Schaeffer Street, east of Higuera Street.
The Baseline Study shall be based on counts of 24-hour traffic on each of
three consecutive weekdays during a period of representative activity at
The Culver Studios as agreed upon by the studio and City Engineer.
10 `i
94-R055Page 9
The City Engineer, at the sole expense of The Culver Studios, shall
conduct three Traffic Volume Studies of the neighborhood streets listed in
Condition X, at the indicated times listed below:
1.
Within nine months after the issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy, or 75 percent occupancy of the building(s) covered by
the Certificate of Occupancy, whichever occurs first.
2.
At least twelve months after completion of the first Traffic Volume
Study, listed above, during the next period that is representative of
studio activities, as determined by the City Engineer.
At 95 percent occupancy of the completed project, including
Alternate 2 of Phase C if completed.
If the findings of any of the Traffic Volume Studies in Condition Y are that
there has been a significant increase in local street traffic, defined as a one
tenth (0.1) increase in the Traffic Intrusion On Residential Environment
(TIRE) Index compared with the initial Baseline Study conditions, The
Culver Studios shall assess alternative measures to mitigate the identified
traffic increases, and shall present potential measures to the City Engineer
for evaluation as to feasibility and appropriateness. Measures deemed
feasible and appropriate by the City Engineer shall then be presented by the
City Engineer to the residents of the impacted streets and to residents of
other streets that may be affected by the secondary impacts of the proposed
measures. All measures upon which neighborhood consensus is reached
shall be presented to the City Council for approval, and if approved, shall
be implemented at the sole expense of The Culver Studios, as provided for
in Condition AA.
AA. Before the issuance of the first building permit for the Television Building
Complex,
The Culver Studios shall deposit with the City the sum of
$75,000 to establish a Neighborhood Protection Fund. This $75,000 shall
be the total amount The Culver Studios must deposit into the
Neighborhood Protection Fund and shall be the total amount available to
be used for the implementation of appioved traffic mitigation measures
which result from Condition Z. This fund shall be used for the
implementation of approved traffic mitigation measures and not for studies
or costs associated with reviews or presentations of the measures.
94-R055
°,•5-Page 10
The Culver Studios shall be responsible for the installation, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, of all approved measures, and may draw
upon the Neighborhood Traffic Protection Fund to pay for the construction
of these measures, including necessary traffic striping, signing, and other
approved traffic control devices. Design costs shall be paid by The Culver
Studios, and shall not be covered by the Nei g _hborhood Protection Fund.
BB. All sidewalks surrounding the site shall be modified ifias necessary to
comply with Americans With Disabilities Act standards.
CC. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy for the Television
Building Complex project, the southerly gate on Lice Boulevard (Gate 4)
for the Main Lot shall be widened to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
and City Planner. Following this widening, all studio trucks parked
southbound on Ince Boulevard past the studios Gate 3 on ince Boulevard
shall be required to turn into Gate 4 then travel northWard through the
studio lot,and exit northbound from the northern most gate (Gate 2) on
Ince Boulevard. All studio trucks parked northerly of Gate 3 shall be
required to turn into Gate 3 to exit northbound from Gate 2.
DD. The Studio shall retain the existing and/or plant new street trees on the
south side of Washington Boulevard as required by the City in coordination
with the Downtown Streetscape and East Washington Boulevard
Streetscape Design Plans. Subject to the approval of the property owner
of 9000 Washington Boulevard, street trees shall be planted along the
entire block between Ince Boulevard and Thguera Street.
EE. Within 90 days after City. Council approval of Amendment No. 3 to
Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01, revised building elevation plans that
meet the City Planner's approval as to three-dimensional detailing and
ornamentation of all roof penthouse structures and for the Lindblade Street
building elevation (e.g., balconies, tile features, etc.) shall be required.
94-R055Page'll
The following conditions shall apply only to The Culver Studios Main Lot
property.
A. All applicable development standards and improvements in Planning
Commission Resolution No. 86-P039 (Comprehensive Site Plan Review
Development Standards) shall be met, except as otherwise specified herein.
No parking stall or parked vehicle shall encroach into the emergency access
aisle located between Buildings H and I and Stages 2, 3, and 4 as such aisle
is established by the Fire Marshal.
C. No parking of any vehicle shall be permitted adjacent to sound stages,
except as approved by the Fire Marshal.
Except for emergency vehicles, there shall be no pedestrian or vehicular
ingress or egress permitted along Van Buren Place.
Turning movement restriction signs shall be posted and maintained at all
driveways along Washington Boulevard as required by the City Planner and
the City Engineer. Left turn exit only signs shall be posted and maintained
at the northern most exit driveway on Ince Boulevard.
F.
No required parking space shall be used for parking vehicles or - trailers kept
or used for studio activities. Vehicles kept or used for studio activities
shall only be parked in nonrequired parking areas as may be approved by
the Fire Marshal. Any Vehicle so used as to create an additional parking
demand as determined by the City Planner shall not be permitted to park
anywhere on the site without prior City Planner approval.
G. At such time as the fence between Stages 11 through 14 and adjoining Van
Buren Place residences requires replacement, such replacement shall be a
wall matching then existing interior property line walls elsewhere on the
site.
94-R055
/ 07Page,12
H. Under the Design For Development For The Culver Studios Area,
485 parking spaces are required for the stage use component on the Main
Lot. Notwithstanding this requirement, the City defers the Studio's
obligation to provide 100 of these parking spaces onsite unless and until
there are parking deficiencies found by the City to be causing significant
adverse impacts on traffic flow and safety in the neighborhoods
immediately adjacent to the site. Pursuant to the same procedure used for
the adoption of this comprehensive plan, and based on a finding of parking
deficiencies, the City may require all or any portion of the 100 deferred
parking spaces to be provided within a reasonable time.
As approved by the City Engineer:
1.
The westerly driveway on Washington Boulevard shall be available
for all components of studio traffic. Entry and exit shall be right
turn only with one lane in each direction.
2. The easterly driveway on Washington Boulevard shall be for right
turn exit only and shall be one lane wide.
The northerly driveway on Ince Boulevard shall be for right turn or
left turn entry (two lanes) and left turn only exit (one lane).
4. The driveway on Ince Boulevard immediately south of Krueger
• Street shall be for right turn and left turn entry and exit (all
movements) and shall have two lanes in each direction.
I.
If buses are used to transport worker or live audience members, those
buses shall only be parked on the studio lot.
K. Light standards shall not exceed the height of the closest studio perimeter
wall, but in no case 8 feet.
L.
No use of Stages ;5 and 6 for live audience tapings shall be permitted unless
The Culver Studios keeps in Bull force Conditional Use Permit, CUP No.
8741, for shared parking.
M.
Live audiences shall • only be permitted to exit from the Washington
Boulevard westerly gate, except for people being transported by buses.
N.
As feasible, additional landscaping shall be provided along the Ince
Boulevard side of the studio lot.
olf
94-R055Exhibit B
Page 13
The 84 blocked access parking spaces in the subterranean parking structure
may only be counted towards fulfilling the studio's parking requirements as
long as Conditional Use Permit, CUP No. 92-02, for tandem parking
remains valid.
P.
If Conditional Use Permit, CUP No. 92-02 for tandem parking become null
and void, then the studio shall provide 84 prime access parking spaces in a
manner and location approved by the City, or reduce the square footage
and/or use of the studio lot improvements by an amount equivalent to the
parking requirement for 84 parking spaces as determined by the City.
Q.
An exterior elevator may encroach approximately 9 feet into the required
setback along the rear of the Stage 2, 3, and 4 building, provided that it is
designed to not permit views from the elevator car, to minimize noise, and
to be compatible with the exterior of the building, all as meet the City
Planner's approval.
Ilt. The following conditions shall apply to the entire Comprehensive Plan site.
A. Compliance with the requirements of these conditions will require a close
degree of cooperation between the City and The Culver Studios and the
continuing development of the Site in accordance with these conditions .
may demonstrate that clarifications are appropriate. TherefOre, i1 from
time to time, the City and The Culver Studios determine that clarifications
or interpretations are necessary or appropriate, they may effect such
clarifications through operating memoranda approved by the City and The
Culver Studios. Following execution, each memorandum shall become a
part of these conditions. The execution of an operating memorandum in
accordance with this Subsection A shall not constitute an amendment to
these conditions and shall not require public notice or hearing. The Chief
Administrative Officer, in consultation with the City Attorney, shall be
authorized to determine, on behalf of the City, whether a requested
clarification or interpretation is appropriate and the Chief Administrative
Officer shall be authorized to execute any operating memorandum on
behalf of the City.
'
94-R055
10Page 14
B. The master sign program for The Culver Studios shall consist of the
following:
1. No new signs or graphics visible from adjoining streets or
properties shall be permitted on the Main Studio Lot, except as may
be approved by the City Planner, or upon referral by the City
Planner to the Planning Commission, approved by the Planning
Commission. Under this provision, the City Planner and the
Planning Commission shall only approve additional signs deemed
essential to studio operations and compatible with their
surroundings.
2.
A detailed sign plan for the Television Building Complex shall be
submitted for review and approval by the City Planner. The
detailed sign plan shall comply with the conceptual sign plan file
dated December 9, 1993, If the detailed sign plan proposes any
additional major signs, excluding traffic directional signs, then
Planning Commission review and approval shall be required.
C. Within 90 days after City • Council approval of Amendment No. 3 to
Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01:
A permanent waste reduction coordinator shall be designated to
work with the City Sanitation Division in reducing waste generated
within the comprehensive plan area.
The studio shall develop a comprehensive waste management plan
to the satisfaction of the Resource and Sanitation Manager which
addresses source reduction, recycling, .reuse, composting, and
hazardous waste management. The plan shall also include
provisions for collection, storage, and removal of materials, and
detailed information as to how the studio will achieve the state
mandated goal of reducing the amount of Waste that goes to
landfills.
110
94-R055Page'15
D.
Within 90 days after City Council approval of Amendment No. 3 to
Comprehensive Plan, CP No. 87-01:
The Culver Studios shall expand their current Transportation
Demand Management Program to include all people who will be
employed within the studio's office building complex located on
Lots A, B, and C of Tract 4419. The expanded Transportation
Demand Management Program shall conform to the provisions of
Chapter 39 of the Municipal Code, and in addition, shall provide
for
a.
A Transportation Coordinator for The Culver Studios
located within the comprehensive plan area or in offices
within immediate walking distance of the comprehensive
plan area.
b.
Locker rooms for cyclists and walkers.
c.
Shuttle services to Sony Pictures Studios, nearby shopping,
restaurant and service establishments, and to transit transfer
stations established in the future. The Culver Studios may
coordinate with Sony Picture Studios in providing the
shuttle service, but shall remain responsible to . 'ensure that
the service is maintained no matter the status of the Sony
Picture Studios' service.
d.
An annual report to be submitted to the City Planner and the
Transportation Director regarding all trip reduction
measures and programs, including the AQMD Regulation
15 Program, Culver City Municipal Code Chapter 39
compliance, and any other trip reduction measures required
under this comprehensive plan approval.
E. Onsite parking shall be provided free of charge, and all employees and
visitors shall be instructed and reminded as necessary to park onsite.
An 81/2 by 14-inCh reproducible "as built" site plan for both the Main Lot
and the Television Building Complex site shall be'furnished to the Planning
Division prior to issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy for each
phase of the Television Building Complex.EXEUBIT B TO RESOLUTION No. 94-R055
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
FOR THE CULVER sTumos COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CF NO. 87-01, AMENDMENT NO 3
Condition Number of
Responsible Division Time/Completion
Resolution No. 94-R055
Section I, A Planning Certificate of Occupancy
Section 1 B Plannin and En ineerina Certificate of Occupancy
Fire. During_ Constniction
• Building Certificate of Occupancy
Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Fire Certificate of Occupancy
Building Certificate of Occupancy
Fire Certificate of Occ 'any
Section I, 0
P anning During- Construction
Section 1, P Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Section 1, Q Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Section 1, R Planning and Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Section I, S Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Section I, T Public Works Certificate of Occupang
Section 1, U Planning Ongoino-
Section I, V Planning Certificate of Occupancy
Section I, W Public Works During Construction
Section I, X Public Works Within 120 days of City Council
Approval
Section I, Y Public Works As Specified
Section I, Z Public Works As Specified
Section I, AA Public Works and Planning Before First Building Permit is
Issued -
Section I, BB Public Works Certificate of Occupancy
Section I, CC Public Works and Planning During Construction
Section I DI) Planning As Specified
Section I, EE Planning Within 90 days of City Council
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to
CP No. 87-01
C1A-1:anRCondition Number of
ResolutiOn No, 94-R05
.esponsible Division Completion
Section II, A
Plarmin: Certificate of Occu Dane
On • °incr.
. •
- -
Section II, D
Public Works On:oin:
Public Works Ongoing
Ongoing
As S.ecifled
Section II, H
Plannin: As Stecified
- a Public Works Ongoing
•
.
. •
_ .
Section IF, K
.
Building On • oin:
LIIIi
Planning Ongoing
•
• •
-
Section II, N
Plannin • On croin :
Section II, 0
Plannin: Onaoin:
Section II, P
Plannin: 011: Ohl !
Section II, Q
Building As Specified
Section III, A
CAO As Specified
Section III, B g
Certificate of Occupancy
Section HI, C
Public Works
Within 90 days after City Council
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to
Section III, D
Planning Within 90 days after City Council
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to
CP 87-01.
Planning Ongoing
Planning Certificate of Occu sane
June 30, 1994: CULVR.STU NIMPI .DOC
/13|1010| 94-R055INLILaCttitiuti
CULVER CITY MUNICIPAL CODE - TITLE 17, ZONING CODE
Comprehensive Plans
17.560
CHAPTER 17360 - COMPREHENSIVE PLANS
Sections:
17.560.005 - Purpose
17.560.010 - Applicability
17.560.015 - Application Filing, Processing, and Review
17.560.020 - Findings and Decision
17.560.025 - Comprehensive Plan Modifications, Major and Minor
17.560„030 - Conditions of Approval
17.560.035 - Post Approval Procedures
17.560.005 - Purpose
This Chapter provides procedures for reviewing Comprehensive Plans that allow for flexibility in the
application of zoning code standards to proposed development. The purpose is to allow consideration of
innovation in site planning and other aspects of project design, and more effective design responses to
site features, uses on adjoining properties, and other impacts than the zoning code standards would
produce without adjustment.
17.560.010 - Applicability
An application for a Comprehensive Plan shall be filed with the Division when required for
development in the PD Zone in compliance with Chapter 17.240 (Planned Development Zoning
Districts). Comprehensive Plans proposed for development within the OS Zone shall comply with
Section 17.250.030 (Open Space District Requirements) in addition to the requirements of this Chapter.
17.560.015 - Application Filing, Processing, and Review
A. Filing. An application for a Comprehensive Plan shall be completed, filed, and processed in
compliance with Chapter 17.500 (Applications, Processing, and Fees). The application package
shall include all infoimation specified in the application, any applicable Division handout, and
any additional information required by this Title or the Director in order to conduct a thorough
review of the proposed project. It is the responsibility of the applicant to establish evidence in
support of the findings required by Section 17.560.020 (Findings and Decision), below; or, the
findings required by Subsection 17.250.030.E. (Comprehensive Plan Findings) for the OS Zone,
B. Comprehensive Plan Requirements. All Comprehensive Plans shall be prepared and endorsed
by a professional team which shall include a licensed landscape architect, a registered civil
engineer and a licensed architect, as applicable, and shall include, but not be limited to the
following:
1. Site plan showing building(s), various functional use areas, parking and circulation.
Article 5 — Land Use and Development Permit Procedures October 2005
5-27CULVER CITY MUNICIPAL CODE - TITLE 17, ZONING CODE
Comprehensive Plans 17.560
2. Description of development standards, which may include, but not be limited to, building
heights, setbacks and parking requirements.
3. Preliminary building plans, including floor plans and exterior elevations.
4. Landscaping plans, including a plant palette.
5. Lighting and signage plans.
6. Civil Engineering plans, including site grading, public rights-of-way improvements,
drainage, trash/recycling areas, and public utility extensions, as necessary.
7. Proposed use and occupancy, construction type, building height and area of each building
or structure, and proposed distances between buildings or structures, and setbacks to
property lines.
8. Other information or applicable materials as may be deemed necessary by the Director.
C. Notice and Hearings. Notice and hearings regarding an application for a Comprehensive Plan
or a modification to an approved Comprehensive Plan shall be provided in compliance with
Chapter 17.630 (Public Hearings and Administrative Review).
D. Review Authority. A Comprehensive Plan shall be approved by the adoption of an ordinance or
disapproved by a resolution of the Council after consideration of the Commission's
recommendation.
17.560.020 - Findings and Decision
The Commission, in conjunction with a public hearing, shall review and make recommendations to the
Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan. The Council, after a public hearing, may approve,
conditionally approve or disapprove a Comprehensive Plan. A Comprehensive Plan may be approved
provided the facts submitted and evaluated during the review process support the following findings or
the findings required by Subsection 17.250.030.E. (Comprehensive Plan Findings) for the OS Zone.
A. The proposed Comprehensive Plan can be substantially completed within 4 years.
B. The proposed development is capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and
stability or adequate assurance will be provided such objective will be attained.
C. The proposed uses will not be substantially detrimental to present and potential surrounding uses
but will have a beneficial effect.
D. The streets and thoroughfares serving the development are suitable and adequate to carry
anticipated traffic and the development will not generate traffic that will overload the adjacent
street network.
E. The proposed development is compatible with the surrounding area.
Article 5 Land Use and Development Permit Procedures October 2005
5-28CULVER CITY MUNICIPAL CODE- TITLE 17, ZONING CODE
Comprehensive Plans 17.560
F. The types and locations of any proposed commercial development can be economically justified.
G. The Comprehensive Plan is in conformance with the General Plan, or a concurrent General Plan
amendment is in process.
H. Any exception from the standards and requirements of this Title is warranted by the design and
amenities incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan and is desired by the Council.
I. Existing and proposed utility services are adequate for the proposed uses.
J. The Comprehensive Plan has complied with all applicable City requirements.
17.560.025 - Comprehensive Plan Modifications, Major and Minor
A. Major changes or alterations to an approved Comprehensive Plan shall be considered by the
Commission at a public hearing which shall make recommendations to the Council. The Council
may then approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the proposed changes or alterations, after
a public hearing.
B. The Director may administratively approve minor changes or alterations to an approved
Comprehensive Plan, subject to appeal pursuant to Chapter 17.640 (Appeals); provided, that the
Director makes the following findings:
1. The proposed changes are consistent with the intent of the approved Comprehensive Plan;
2. The proposed changes will not adversely impact the environment;
3. The proposed changes will not be detrimental to the surrounding uses;
4. The proposed changes will not significantly increase traffic levels on existing streets and
thoroughfares within and surrounding the development; and
5. Any proposed change, which requires exception from standard ordinance requirements, is
warranted by the design and amenities incorporated into the approved Comprehensive Plan.
C. If the Director determines the above findings cannot be made, then the request shall be considered
a major change and referred to the Commission for review at a public hearing and for Council
review at a public hearing.
D. Maintenance, rehabilitation, renovation, and reconstruction of existing structures, that will not
alter the site plan, shall not require a Comprehensive Plan or any Comprehensive Plan
modification, minor or major.
E.
All determinations required by this subsection are subject to appeal pursuant to Chapter 17.640
(Appeals).
Article 5 — Land Use and Development Permit Procedures October 2005
5-29CULVER CITY MUNICIPAL CODE - TITLE 17, ZONING CODE
Comprehensive Plans 17.560
17.560.030 - Conditions of Approval
The Council may approve a Comprehensive Plan in compliance with Section 17.540.020 (Findings and
Decision), and may impose conditions upon the project including, but not limited to, the City's
"Comprehensive Standard Conditions of Approval for Site Plan Review and Other Discretionary
Planning and Zoning Applications," as adopted by the Commission to ensure that the project will meet
all of the required findings. Conditions may relate to both on- and off-site improvements that are
reasonable and necessary to mitigate project-related impacts, and to carry out the purpose and
requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable development standards and design
guidelines.
Nothing in this Chapter shall preclude the Commission from recommending, and the Council from
approving a Comprehensive Plan in concept only and requiring subsequent discretionary review of that
Comprehensive Plan.
17360.035 - Post Approval Procedures
Procedures relating to appeals, notices, revocations and modifications as identified in Article 6 (Zoning
Code Administration), in addition to those identified in Chapter 17.595 (Permit Implementation, Time
Limits, and Extensions), shall apply following the approval of a Comprehensive Plan application.
The Council may modify any provisions of this Section after consideration of the Commission
recommendations.
Article 5— Land Use and Development Permit Procedures
October 2005
5-30
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
????????? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
?????????? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ???????? ??????
?????????? ??????????
? ???????? ?
??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
?
????? ?
?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ??????
? ????????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
??? ????? ? ?
? ?????? ???? ??
? ??????? ?????? ? ?
The Culver Studios
Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Number 5
Revised June 15, 2006June 15, 2006 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 2
Contents
Master Plan
Table of Contents
Project Description
Project Summary - p.3
Site
Aerial Map of Area Affected - p.4
Existing Conditions Site Plan - p.5
Proposed Master Plan Site Plan - p.6
Existing Domestic Water Plan - p.7
Existing Electrical/Communication Plan - p.8
Existing Natural Gas Plan - p.9
Existing Stormwater/Sewer Plan - p.10
Proposed Fire Access Plan - p.11
Buildings
Design Concept - p.12
Photo Simulations (5 views) - pp.13-17
Elevation along Ince - p.18
Building J - Drawings
North Elevation - p.19
West Elevation - p.20
South Elevation - p.21
Ground Floor Plan - p.22
Typical Floor Plan - p.23
Roof Plan - p.24
Elevation along Van Buren (parking structure) - p.25-26
Elevation perpendicular to Van Buren - p.27
Parking
Parking Requirements Chart - p.28
Parking Supply - p.29
Parking Drawings
Parking Site Plan - p.30
Proposed Surface Parking Bldg. J - p.31
Proposed Structure Layout - pp. 33-34
Parking Structure Lighting - pp.35-36
Trash Yard Detail - p.37
Landscaping & Planting - p.38
Parking Structure Landscaping - p.39
Public Art - p.40
Building Signage (view of Studio Lot interior) - p.41
Shade and Shadow Study - pp.42-50
Documents under separate cover
Traf?c Study: Prepared by Kaku Associates
Historic Survey: Prepared by Historic Resources Group
Site Survey
Gate #4 Policies Documentation
City of Culver City Forms
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application
The Culver Studios Title Report
Art in Public Places Form
Stormwater Planning Program Form
First Noti?cation Af?davitJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 3
Conceptual Project Description
As a continuously working movie and television production studio, The Culver Studios has long been an eco-
nomic and community icon in Culver City. In order to build on this history and maintain its economic viability in
light of an evolving production industry, The Culver Studios intends to amend the S-1 zone Comprehensive Plan
to allow for additional production of?ce space and upgraded facilities on the main Culver Studios lot.
The enclosed drawings and exhibits illustrate a Master Plan that necessitates an amendment to the existing
Comprehensive Plan for the Culver Studios lot.
The Master Plan will include:
- Demolition and rebuilding of existing Building J to provide approximately 49,500 SF of production of?ce space
in a four-story building on the existing Building J footprint
- Demolition of Building R
- Recon?guration and re-striping of parking layouts in front of Building J and in the bungalow area
- Construction of a new 200 car parking structure in the bungalow area
- Landscaping around the new parking structure
- Relocation of the emergency entrance to the Studio Lot on Van Buren Ave.
In addition, The Culver Studios will upgrade the Comprehensive Plan to update parking requirements to re?ect
the Citywide parking requirements adopted by the City Council in Fall 2005.
It should be noted that this Comprehensive Plan Ammendment #5 affects only the property currently owned and
operated as a part of The Culver Studios main lot as identi?ed on the following aerial photograph.
Area Summary of Proposed Master Plan
BUILDINGS
Existing
Of?ce 70,618 sf
Support 86,049 sf
Stage 155,480 sf
TOTAL 312,147 sf
Proposed
Of?ce 117,872 sf
Support 74,197 sf
Stage 155,480 sf
TOTAL 347,549 sf
LANDSCAPE
Existing
- Mansion Area 31,000 sf
- Bulgalow Area 9,400 sf
- Stages 1,400 sf
TOTAL 41,800 sf
Proposed
- Mansion Area 31,000 sf
- Bulgalow Area 9,200 sf
- Stages 1,500 sf
TOTAL 41,700 sf
Project SummaryJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 4
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
???????????????????????????
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ????? ?? ? ???? ???????? ???? ??????? ??? ????? ???????? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ???????????????
? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?? ??????????????? ?????????????? ?????????????? ?????????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
?????????? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ???????? ??????
?????????? ??????????
? ???????? ?
??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ? ? ?? ?? ? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?
????? ?
?
? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ??????
? ????????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ?? ?? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??? ????? ? ?
? ?????? ???? ??
? ??????? ?????? ? ?
????? ????? ?????? ?
? ??????? ???? ?????? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ? ???? ???????? ??? ???? ???
Aerial Photo of Site and Vicinity
Residential
Residential
Light Industrial
Light Industrial
School
Commercial
Residential
Residential
Studio -Office
CommercialJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 5
????? ?????
??????
?????? ??????
??????
??????
??????? ?????
????? ?????
?????
?????
????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
?????
?????? ??????
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ? ???
???????? ???
???????? ???
? ? ? ???
??? ???
? ??????
???? ???
??????
??? ???
?
??? ???
? ???? ??
???? ???
?????
???? ???
?????
???? ???
??? ????
??? ???
?? ?
??? ???
???
??? ???
???
???? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
?
??? ???
?? ???
? ???
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
??????????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
????????????????? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
???????????
?????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ?????????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
?????
?????
????????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ?????????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
??????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ????????? ????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
?? ?????? ????? ? ?????????? ??? ??
? ?????????????????????? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ??
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
??? ? ? ?? ????? ??????? ? ??? ????? ??
???? ????????? ??????? ?? ???? ??
? ?? ????????? ???? ? ?? ??? ?
??????????
? ?????????
? ???? ???
???? ?? ?
????
???????????????? ??
?????????????? ?? ??
??? ??????? ????? ????
?? ? ??? ? ? ? ???????????????????? ???? ?
????? ? ? ?????????? ???? ?? ? ???? ??
? ?????????
???? ?? ? ??????
?????????? ??
???????
????? ??? ? ??
?????????????????????
??????????? ???????? ??
??? ???? ?? ???????? ????
??? ?????????? ?????
???? ????? ? ?????????????? ????? ??
?????? ?? ?
?????????? ??? ? ??
? ??????????????? ???????? ?
???? ?? ?
????
???? ?? ??? ? ?
? ???????? ?
? ?? ???
????? ? ? ??
? ??????? ??????
? ????
????
?????????
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
? ???????
? ???? ????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????
?????????? ??
???????
?????? ?? ????????? ???????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
?? ??????? ????? ?? ???????????????
? ?? ? ??? ? ????? ???????????
? ????????????
? ????
????
?????????
?????????? ??
???? ????? ??????? ???
????????? ?????
? ???????? ????????
? ????
????
?????????
??? ??????? ? ? ????? ??
??? ??????? ???
????????? ??????????????????? ??
? ????? ??????????? ? ??????
? ?????????
???? ?? ? ??????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
? ????????????
? ??????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????????????
?????????????? ?? ??
???????????? ?? ??
???????????? ?? ??
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
?? ??? ??????????? ??????? ????? ????
? ?????????
? ? ?? ??? ??????
?????????? ??
?????????????????? ?
? ?????????
???? ????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
?????? ?? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
?????? ?? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
??????
?????????? ??
????????
?????? ?? ?
????? ??? ? ??
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
?????????? ??
????????
?????? ?? ?
????? ??? ? ??
? ????????
? ?????
????
?????????????????
????????????????? ???
??????????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????
????????????????? ???
?????? ?? ?
??????????
? ???????????? ? ? ?? ??????
? ??????? ??
????
????????
???????? ?????????
??????????? ?? ?
?????????? ????? ??? ? ? ? ??
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
?? ?????? ????? ? ?????????? ??? ??
? ?????????????????????? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ??
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
?? ????????? ????????????????? ??? ???
??? ?????????????
??? ? ????????????????? ?
??????????????? ?????
?????????
??? ?? ??????? ??
??? ?? ? ????? ? ? ???????
??? ???? ??
???????
??????????????? ?????
????????
???? ?????? ???? ??
??? ?????? ????? ????????????????????
? ????? ? ?
??????????????? ?????
????????
??? ?????? ????? ??????????
??? ?? ?????????? ?????????????????
?? ? ???
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
?????????? ????????
? ???? ?? ???
?????????? ???? ?? ? ???
? ? ???? ??? ? ????? ?? ???
? ?? ????? ??? ? ????? ?? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
??????????????? ?????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
Existing Conditions
Note:
Gate #4 to be operated accoding to
Gate #4 policy as speci? ed in Appen-
dix documentation. The gate will not
be open for pedestrian use.June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 6
? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ?
? ???? ? ???? ?????????? ? ?? ?
????????
???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ? ?
??????????? ? ??? ??? ??????????? ?
? ????????? ??? ???????? ? ???? ??
?? ? ???? ????????? ???? ?
?
??? ???
? ???? ??
???? ???
T T
?????
???? ???
????? ?????
??????
?????? ??????
??????
??????
??????? ?????
????? ?????
?????
?????
????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
?????
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
? ?????????
? ???? ?
???????????
?????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ?????????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
?????
?????
????????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ?????????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
??????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
??? ??? ????????? ????????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
?? ?????? ????? ? ?????????? ??? ??
? ?????????????????????? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ??
? ?????????
? ???? ???
???? ?? ?
????
???????????????? ??
?????????????? ?? ??
??? ??????? ????? ????
?? ? ??? ? ? ? ???????????????????? ???? ?
????? ? ? ?????????? ???? ?? ? ???? ??
? ?????????
???? ?? ? ??????
?????????? ??
???????
????? ??? ? ??
?????????????????????
??????????? ???????? ??
??? ???? ?? ???????? ????
??? ?????????? ?????
???? ????? ? ?????????????? ????? ??
?????? ?? ?
?????????? ??? ? ??
? ??????????????? ???????? ?
???? ?? ?
????
???? ?? ??? ? ?
? ???????? ?
? ?? ???
????? ? ? ??
? ??????? ??????
? ????
????
?????????
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
? ???????
? ???? ????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????
?????????? ??
???????
?????? ?? ????????? ???????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
?? ??????? ????? ?? ???????????????
? ?? ? ??? ? ????? ???????????
? ????????????
? ????
????
?????????
?????????? ??
???? ????? ??????? ???
????????? ?????
? ???????? ????????
? ????
????
?????????
??? ??????? ? ? ????? ??
??? ??????? ???
????????? ??????????????????? ??
? ????? ??????????? ? ??????
? ?????????
???? ?? ? ??????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
? ????????????
? ??????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????????????
?????????????? ?? ??
???????????? ?? ??
???????????? ?? ??
??? ??????? ???
????????? ????
?? ??? ??????????? ??????? ????? ????
? ?????????
? ? ?? ??? ??????
?????????? ??
?????????????????? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
???????????
??? ? ? ???? ?????
?????? ?? ?
?? ?????? ????? ? ?????????? ??? ??
? ?????????????????????? ? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ??
?? ????????????
??????????????? ?????
?????????
??? ?? ??????? ??
??? ?? ? ????? ? ? ???????
??? ???? ??
???????
?? ???????? ?????
??????????????????? ????????? ????? ?? ??
??? ?????? ???? ??
??? ?????? ????? ????????????????????
? ????? ? ?
? ????? ????????? ?????
???????????????????? ?????? ???? ? ?? ?
??? ??????????? ?? ? ???
??? ?? ???? ????? ?????????????????
?? ? ???
?? ??? ??????
???? ?? ? ????
? ???????
???? ?? ? ????
? ??????
???? ?? ? ????
?? ??? ??????
???? ???
?? ????????
???? ???
?? ?
? ? ? ???
?????
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
? ?? ????
??????
? ????? ? ?? ???
?????????
? ???????????? ? ? ?? ??????
? ??????? ??
????
????????
???????? ?????????
??????????? ?? ?
??????????? ????? ??? ? ? ? ??
? ???? ?? ? ????? ?? ?? ??? ?
? ?? ? ???
????
????? ???
??? ? ? ???? ???
?? ??? ?????????? ??? ???? ?? ?
??? ?? ????? ? ? ?? ???
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ? ???
???????? ???
???????? ???
??? ????
??? ???
?? ?
??? ???
???
??? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
??????????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
????????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
?????
???? ???
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
? ?????????
???? ????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
?????? ?? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
??? ??????? ????? ????
????????
?????? ?? ?
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
??????
?????????? ??
????????
?????? ?? ?
????? ??? ? ??
? ?????????
? ???? ?
????
????????
?????????? ??
????????
?????? ?? ?
????? ??? ? ??
? ????????
? ?????
????
?????????????????
????????????????? ???
??????????
? ?????????
???? ?? ?
????
?????????
????????????????? ???
?????? ?? ?
??????????
?
??? ???
? ??
? ? ????? ?? ?
???????
??????
??????
????????
??????
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ???? ????????
?????????? ????????
? ???? ?? ???
?????????? ???? ?? ? ???
? ???? ???? ?? ? ???
? ???? ?? ? ????? ?? ? ???
? ? ???? ??? ? ????? ?? ???
? ?? ????? ??? ? ????? ?? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
??????????????? ?????
? ????? ?????? ????????? ?????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
??????
?????
?????
Proposed Master PlanJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 7
Existing Utilities - Domestic Water
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
E
G
E
E
S
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ??? ? ? ??
? ?????? ??? ?? ??
? ????????? ? ? ??
? ? ??? ???? ??
? ??? ?? ?? ??
? ??????? ? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
EXISTING WATER MAIN
IN STREET
2" WATER METER
2-1/2" CW
(376 F.U.)
2-1/2" DOUBLE CHECK
B.F.D. +36" A.F.G.
2-1/2" CW RISER INTO
BUILDING TO SERVE
2"CW S.P. +42"
A.F.G. W/ 3/4"
H.B.
1" CW TO BLDG.
3" CW
(652 F.U.)
2" CW TO SERVE
BUILDINGS H & I
SEE PARKING STRUC-
TURE PLANS FOR
CONTINUATION
2" CW W/S.O.V. TO
1-1/2" DOUBLE
CHECK B.F.D. FOR
2" CW W/S.O.V.
2" CW W/S.O.V.
3" CW
2" CW
3" CW
IRRIGATION
IN YARD BOX
PLANTER W/S.O.V.
1-1/2" CW TO
SERVE RESTROOMS/
PANTRIES
FED FROM UNDER
STAGE 2
TO SERVE STAGES
W/3/4" HOSE BIBB
1" CW W/S.O.V.
+18" AFG
ELECTRIC SHOP REST-
ROOM, BREAK ROOM,
PLANT ENGINEERING
PAINT SINKS
BUILDINGS C,D AND E
2" CW SUPPLY FOR
EQUIP. MAKE-UP. VALVE
2" CW TO EQUIP.
AREA
2" CW S.P. +42" A.F.G.
W/ 1" H.B.
1-1/2" CW W/S.O.V.
1-1/2" CW
(1) 2" WATER METER W/2"
SERVICE TO SITE
EXISTING WATER MAIN IN STREET
(3) 2" WATER METERS W/
(1) 4" HEADER TO SITE
2" CW TO TRASH ENCLOSURE
2" SINGLE CHECK B.F.D.
4" DOUBLE CHECK B.F.D.
2" S.O.V. ABV. GRD.
4" CW (2329 F.U.)
-36"
1" CW TO BLDG.
W/S.O.V.
3/4" SERVICE TO BLDG.
1-1/2" CW RISER CAPPED
1" CW W/S.O.V.
IN YARD BOX
3/4" CW TO
BLDG.
4" CW
(2263 F.U.)
4" CW
(780 F.U.)
4" S.O.V. C.I.
SLEEVED
4" CW
(1202 F.U.)
4" CW
(960 F.U.)
3"CW BEL. GRD.
3"CW S.P. +48" A.F.G.
W/ 3/4" H.B. AND
(1202 F.U.)
4"CW
3" CW W/S.O.V.
IN YARD BOX
-36"
3" CW (652 F.U.)
ELECTRICAL VAULT
BELOW GRADE
10'-4" 6'
C.I. SLEEVE
EXISTING WATER MAIN IN STREET
1-1/2" WATER METER W/
1-1/2" SERVICE TO SITE
2" SINGLE CHECK B.F.D.
SERVING BLDG. L AND BLDG. J
(652 F.U.)
3" CW
B.F.D.
2" LANDSCAPE
LOCATED IN YARD BOX
FOR LANDSCAPING
FOR DOMESTIC
1 2 3 4
(SECURITY & PLANT ENG.
RESTROOMS.)
4"CW S.O.V. IN
YARD BOX
1-1/2"CW +42"A.F.G.
W/ 3/4" HOSE BIBB
2"CW
1"CW W/S.O.V.
FROM CNTL. PLANT
+66" A.F.G.
3/4"CW HB
AT +12"
3/4"CW HB
AT +12"
W/ 3/4"CW HB
2"CW RISER
AT +36"
1-1/2" STANDPIPE
-34"
4"CW
2"CW
3/4" CW TO HOSE
BIBBS
3/4" CW ROUTED
20' A.F.G. ON EXTERIOR
OF BLDG.
3/4" CW RISER
1-1/2" STANDPIPE
2"CW
1-1/2" CW RISER +14"
A.F.G. W/S.O.V.
4"CW
FUTURE 2" CW TEE
AND PLUG
25'-6"
17'-0"
4" CW
(680 F.U.)
2" CW SUPPLIED TO
STAGES 11,12,14,15 & 16
S.O.V. BELOW FLOOR OF
STAGE 14
2" CW RISER W/
S.O.V.
4" CW
(680 F.U.) (780 F.U.)
4" CW
STUBBED BEL. GRD.
FOR FUTURE
FROM STAGE #16 TO
STAGE #10; 4 FT. DEEP
1" CW
3/4"CW
BEL. GRD.
2"CW
2"CW W/S.O.V.
IN YARD BOX
C.I. SLEEVE
4"CW S.O.V.
3"CWJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 8
Existing Utilities - Electrical/Communications
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
E
G
E
E
S
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ??? ? ? ??
? ?????? ??? ?? ??
? ????????? ? ? ??
? ? ??? ???? ??
? ??? ?? ?? ??
? ??????? ? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
EDISON
TRANSF. BANK
SWITCH BOARDJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 9
Existing Utilities - Natural Gas
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
E
G
E
E
S
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ??? ? ? ??
? ?????? ??? ?? ??
? ????????? ? ? ??
? ? ??? ???? ??
? ??? ?? ?? ??
? ??????? ? ????
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 10
Existing Utilities - Stormwater & Sewers
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
E
G
E
E
S
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ? ?? ??? ? ? ??
? ?????? ??? ?? ??
? ????????? ? ? ??
? ? ??? ???? ??
? ??? ?? ?? ??
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
4"SD
4" OUTLET
THROUGH CURB
FACE
CB
8"SD
8"SD
4"SD
OUTLET THROUGH
CURB FACE 4"SD
4"SD 4"SD
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB
CB 4"SD 4"SD
4"
4"SD 6"SD
6"SD
6"SD
6"SD
4"SD CB
3"SD
3"SD
CB
15"SD 15"SD
15"SD 15"SD
12"R.D.
CB
CB 12"SD 12"SD
12"SD
12"SD
CB
6" ABS SD
CB
8"SD
WOOD FLUME
3" x 33" AT CURB
4"SDJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 11
? ? ???? ??? ?? ??? ???
? ?? ???
? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???
? ?? ???
? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???
? ?? ???
? ?? ????? ??? ?? ??? ???
? ?? ???
? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ??
?????? ?? ??? ? ???????? ?? ???? ?
??????????
???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ?
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
??????
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
?? ????????????
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
? ???
? ???
? ???
? ???
? ???
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
? ???? ????????
?????????? ????????
? ?? ??????
?????????? ?? ??? ? ? ?????????
? ??? ???????? ?????????? ?? ??? ? ? ????????
? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ????????
? ??? ???????? ? ? ? ????????? ???? ?? ??? ? ?? ?? ??
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
? ??? ???? ????????????? ?? ???????????? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ? ???????
?? ? ?? ???? ?????????? ????????????? ?? ?????? ????????? ???? ? ? ?? ????????? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ??
??????? ?? ????????????? ??????????? ??? ? ?? ?? ??? ? ? ??????????????????? ??? ?????? ?? ????
?? ? ???????? ???????? ?????????? ? ?? ??? ?? ??? ? ? ? ?? ?????? ? ??? ? ??????? ?? ??????? ??????
? ??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???????????? ???? ???????????????? ?? ????????????? ?? ?
?? ??????? ??? ????
?????????? ???? ? ??
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
?????????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
??
????????
? ?? ??
?????
?????????????????????????? ????
??? ? ?
??
???
????? ? ???? ? ????? ??
?? ???
? ???? ?
??
???
???
???
??
??
? ???? ?
??
???????? ???
?????????
??
?????
??? ????? ? ?????????????? ?
? ???? ???? ???? ? ????
??????? ?? ?
??????????? ?? ???????
???? ????? ?????? ?? ?
???????? ??? ?? ?? ???
???? ????? ?????? ?? ?
? ???? ???? ???? ????????
?? ? ????? ??????
?????????? ? ??????
?? ?? ????? ?
?? ???????????????
??? ? ???? ???
?? ??????
?? ??????
???????????
?????
???????
??????????
??????
?????????????
???????? ???
??? ?????? ? ??
?????? ?
??
?? ? ????? ??????
? ???? ???? ???? ????????
???? ????? ?????? ?? ?
???????? ??? ?? ?? ???
???? ????? ?????? ?? ?
??????????? ?? ???????
?? ?? ????? ?
?????????? ? ??????
??????
??????
?? ??
?? ??
??
???????????
??????? ?
? ?? ??
???? ? ????????
??
??
???
????????
? ?? ??
???
?????? ???
?????????
???????? ?? ? ????
? ?????????
??
????????
? ?????
?? ???? ????????? ?
? ???? ? ????
???? ???????
? ??? ???? ?
???? ???? ?
???????? ???? ?
???? ??????? ???? ???? ?
?????? ??????
??????
??
???????? ???? ?
??
??????? ????? ?
??
???? ? ????????
???????
?????
?? ??
???????
?????
???? ?? ?
?????????
? ???
? ?? ??
??????? ?
????????
? ?? ??
??
?????
???????
?????
???????
?? ????
???????????
?????????????
??
??
?????
???????
?????
???????
?? ??
??
???????
?????
??
??
? ?? ?????????
?????????? ???? ??
??
???????
?????
? ???
?????
???????
??
??? ???
???
????
????
???? ???
???? ???
????? ?????????? ???????????? ? ????? ??? ???
? ??????????????????? ? ?? ?????????? ????? ????
?? ????????? ???????? ??????? ? ????????????????? ?
?? ???? ? ?
???????????? ????? ????? ?
? ? ?????? ?????????????
??????
??
???? ???? ?
???? ???? ?
??????
???? ???? ?
???? ???? ?
???? ???? ?
??
????????????? ???
? ?? ??????? ? ?? ?
????????? ???
?????????
??
???? ???? ?
???? ???? ?
??????
??
??
????? ??
????? ?? ??????
??
???? ???? ?
??
?? ???????? ???? ?
??????
???? ???? ? ??????
???? ????????? ?
? ???? ? ????
??
???? ??? ???? ?
? ??? ?? ???? ??
??
??
????? ??
????????? ??? ???? ?
????????? ??? ???? ?
???????? ???? ?
????? ??
???????? ??? ????
?? ???????? ?????
???
???
?????? ? ?
???????? ???? ?
?????
?? ???????
???? ? ???????? ???? ? ???????? ???? ? ????????
????? ??? ???? ? ???
? ? ?? ???? ????
???? ? ?? ?
??
?????
??????? ???????
?????
???????
?????
??????
??
???????? ??? ???? ? ?? ???
? ?? ??????? ? ?? ?
?? ?????????? ????? ?
?????????????
??
?????? ????? ?
??????? ? ?? ?
?????????? ????? ?
?????????????
?????????????
? ?? ??
??????? ?
? ?? ??
??????? ?
? ?? ??
? ???
?????????? ???
? ? ?? ????????
?????????? ???
? ? ?? ????????
? ?????
?????
???????
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
Proposed Fire Access Plan
Fire System Assessment and Upgrade Plan
As a part of this Comprehensive Plan, The Culver Studios will implement a plan to assess and
upgrade the ?re safety system on the Studio Lot. The plan will be implemented in coordination
with the City of Culver City Fire Department.June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 12
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
E E ??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
? ???????? ? ?? ????????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
???????????
??????????
?? ????????????
A
B
E
D
C
F
G
Design Concept
NEW BUILDINGS WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT
The design of the Master Plan and new construction has been developed within the guidelines
identi?ed by the Secretary of the Interior related to new construction within a historic district.
Speci?cally, this includes:
- Building within the footprint of the existing Building J
- Maintaining massing and scale that is proportionate to the existing working buildings on
the Studio Lot
- Utilizing concrete construction, which is a common material for construction on the
Studio Lot
- Utilizing color tones that are compatible with the existing colors of the adjacent working
buildings on the Studio Lot
- Maintaining the majority of the buildings that contribute to the historic district,
speci?cally those desinated by the City of Culver City as landmark or signi?cant
In addition, as clearly identi?ed by the Secretary of the Interior, new buildings within a historic
district should be easily differentiated from historically signi?cant buildings. New construction
should also be developed such that it is able be removed from the site in the future without
impairing the essential features of the district. Bulding J and the parking structure have been
designed to adhere to those concepts.
BUILDING DESIGN
The new Building J and parking structure are designed to ?t within the character of the exisitng
Studio Lot as well as the surrounding neighborhood. Understanding the studio’s historic char-
acter, the new structures utilize a design vocabulary that integrates existing elements from both
the Studio Lot and the neighboring buildings in an engaging, contemporary architectural design.
Building J develops the historically based design vocabulary. This includes: simple block mass-
ing consistent with the historic working (stage and support) buildings; no building setbacks along
Ince; concrete construction; painted concrete ?nishes; and exterior circulation paths on the
interior facing facade (breezeways).
In order to use this vocabulary while also ?tting in with the existing neighborhood and creating
effective work space, Building J has two distinct facades: a public, Ince-facing facade and an
internal lot-facing facade. Building J’s Ince-facing facade relates to the existing neighborhood
buildings, speci?cally in relation to the façade segmentation, materials, pattern, and color. The
three facade elements –Base, Midsection and Roof- divide the building mass into a human
scale, create visual interest and relate to surrounding buildings. The Base responds to the pe-
destrian scale of the street, and also responds to the smaller windows of the colonnade on the
opposite side of Ince (Eric Moss-designed building). The Midsection relates to the height of the
neighboring two and three story buildings including the studio stages and working buildings. The
darker toned Roof section gives the appearance of a hovering attic ?oor, and visually serves as
a top that minimizes the appearance of height and mass. The Ince façade’s materials and colors
also draw from the neighborhood precedent. Three muted sand-yellow tones of painted con-
crete, pick-up the facade colors already being used on the Studio Lot and surrounding buildings.
Building J’s interior lot-facing façade builds on the design vocabulary of adjacent Stage 2,3,4 incorporating exte-
rior circulation and covered breezeways. These exterior circulation corridors that are also balconies for the of?ces
allow the of?ces to visually connect with the studio as a whole. The differentiated pattern of the perforated metal
guard-rail acts as a veil to the glass of?ce fronts, creating an active interplay of shade, shadow and movement
throughout the day.
The Culver Studios parking structure is a simple, utilitarian precast concrete structure designed in the character of
the lot’s utilitarian working buildings. Special attention has been paid to the design of the top deck and lighting plan
in order to minimize light spills into the surrounding neighborhood. All ?oors of the parking deck have a 6-foot high
parapet designed to prevent any light spills either from deck lighting or auto head-lights. Special deck lighting has
been selected and sited in order to avoid any light spill over this parapet height, while still providing the security
necessary in a parking facility.
The south- and west-facing facades of the structure are equipped with a green-screen type trellis system on which
fast-growing plants will grow, creating a backdrop of greenery where the view had once been of a bare stage
facade. Bushes will be planted between the property line on VanBuren and the parking structure and lanscaping
along the Van Buren exterior wall will be replaced, enhancing the view from the residential neighborhood. June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 13
Photo Simulation A- View South Along InceJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 14
Photo Simulation B - Building JJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 15
Photo Simulation C - Parking StructureJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 16
Photo Simulation D - Parking Structure
June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 17
Photo Simulation E - View North Along Van BurenJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 18
Elevation Along Ince
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
? ???????? ?
??????????
? ??????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????
???????
G
?? ????????????
?? ???????????? ?????????? ?????????? ? ???????? ?
? ? ? ???????
? ?? ???????? ?????? ???????
? ?? ???????????
???????? ?????????
??????? ?
???? ? ??????
????????? ???
? ? ? ???? ? ? ? ???? ?????????? ? ??????? ??????
??????? ?
??????? ?
? ??????????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 19
Building J - North Elevation
1/4” PPG SOLARCOOL (2) CARIBIA Float Glass
1/4” PPG SOLARGREEN Float Glass PPG Duranar XL Silver Gray Frazee 7763M LRV 57 Highland Buff
Frazee 7752M LRV 62 Oakbuff
Frazee 7764M LRV 45 Coffee ‘N Cream
Gensler
Culver Studios - Building J
Building J Materials - Ince Blvd Elevation
April 24, 2006
05.5101.000
Culver City, CAJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 20
Building J Elevation
Frazee 8174W LRV 41 Fenland
Perforated Galvanized Metal Panel
Galvanized Metal Panel Frazee 7763M LRV 57 Highland Buff
Frazee 7752M LRV 62 Oakbuff
Frazee 7764M LRV 45 Coffee ‘N Cream
1/4” PPG SOLARCOOL (2) CARIBIA Float Glass
1/4” PPG SOLARGREEN Float Glass
Gensler
Culver Studios - Building J
Building J Materials - Studio Entry Elevation
April 24, 2006
05.5101.000
Culver City, CAJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 21
Building J - South Elevation
1/4” PPG SOLARGREEN Float Glass with Perforated Glass Film Frazee 8174W LRV 41 F e n l a n d
Perforated Galvanized Metal Panel
Galvanized Metal Panel PPG Duranar Charcoal Gray
1/4” PPG SOLARGREEN Float Glass
PPG Duranar XL Silver Gray
Gensler
Culver Studios - Building J
Building J Materials - Studio Lot Elevation
April 24, 2006
05.5101.000
Culver City, CAJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 22
Building J Ground Floor Plan
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ???June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 23
Building J Typical Floor Plan
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ???June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 24
Building J Roof Plan
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ???June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 25
Elevation Along Van Buren
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
???????????????????????????
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
E
CONC.
P
T
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
CATWALK
E
E E
P
CONC.
P
T
? ??????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ????????
??????? ????????????? ? ? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????
?? ??? ?????????? ??????????
???? ????? ?????????????????????????
? ?? ???????????
? ??????????
? ?? ???????????
? ??????????
?????????? ???
??? ?
??? ?
??? ?
??? ?
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 26
Elevation Along Van Buren
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
???????????????????????????
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
E
CONC.
P
T
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
CATWALK
E
E E
P
CONC.
P
T
? ??????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ????????
??????? ????????????? ? ?
???? ???? ???? ???? ????
???? ????? ????
?? ??? ?????????? ??????????
???? ????? ?????????????????????????
? ?? ???????????
? ??????????
? ?? ???????????
? ??????????
?????????? ???
??? ?
??? ?
??? ?
??? ?
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 27
???????????????????????????
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
E
CONC.
P
T
G
E E E E E G
E
P P
E E
P
CATWALK
E
E E
P
CONC.
P
T
? ??????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ???????? ????????
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
? ??????
??????? ????????????? ? ? ????
?? ??? ?????????? ???????? ? ? ????
??????? ????? ???????
?????????????????
? ?? ???????????
? ??????????
?????????? ???
??? ?
??? ?
Elevation Perpendicular to Van BurenJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 28
Parking Summary -Requirements
???????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????? ???????????????????? ?????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????
???????? ??? ??? ??? ???
?????? ??????? ????? ?????????? ???? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????????? ???? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????????? ???? ???????? ?????? ??????? ????? ?????????? ???? ????????
?????????????? ? ? ? ?
? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ???????
? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???? ????????? ???? ????????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ????????? ???? ???????
?????????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????
? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
???????? ????????? ???? ??????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???? ????????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ??????
? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ??????
? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????? ????????? ???????? ???? ???????
? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????
????????????
???? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
??????????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????
?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ??????
????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
???? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????? ???? ?????? ????????? ???????? ???? ??????
??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
?? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ?????? ???????? ????????? ???? ??????
?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ???????? ???? ??????
?????????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????? ????????? ????????? ???? ????????
?????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ??????? ????????? ????????? ???? ???????
???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ?????? ???????? ???????? ???? ??????
?????????????
???????? ????????? ?????????? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ?????????? ????????? ????????? ?????????? ?????????? ????????? ??????????
??????????????????
?????????????????
?????????????
????????????????
??????????????
?????????
????????????????
??????????
???????????????
?????????
??????????????????
?????????????????
?????????????
????????????????
??????????????
?????????
????????????????
??????????
???????????????
?????????
?????????????????
?????????
?????????
???????????????
?????
????????????????
?????????
?????????????????
?????????
?????????
???????????????
?????
????????????????
?????????
??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ??????
????????????????????? ??? ??? ??? ??????
???????????????
????????????? ????
???????? ???????? ???????? ????????
????????? ????
???????? ???????? ???????? ????????
?????????????? ???????? ???????? ???????? ??????????
??????????????????
???????????????
????
??????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????
???????? ????????
??????????????????????? ???????????????????????
????????????????
??????????
???????
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????? ???????????????????????
? ? ? ? ?
? ? ? ? ?
???????
?????????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 29
Parking Summary
The proposed Master Plan includes the addition of a parking structure in
order to accommodate the parking requirements on the Studio Lot.
As a part of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the Master Plan will
update the parking requirements on the studio lot to re?ect the City-wide
parking requirements adopted by the City Council in late 2005.
The following calculations are based on the new parking requirement ratios
(see chart on previous page for details).
Previous Comprehensive Plan Entitled
Total parking requirement: 920 cars
Parking required on-site: 620 cars
Parking provided: 615 cars
New Master Plan
Total parking requirement: 1052 cars
Parking required on-site: 752 cars
Parking provided: 754 cars
Parking Area Drawings
The following pages (pp.30-36) include drawings of the changes to surface
parking in front of Building J/Stage 2-3 as well as the new parking structure.
The drawings do not include the existing underground parking structure,
since there will be no changes made to that structure.
Proposed Parking Supply
Parking Summary -Supply
????????????? ????????
?????????
???????????
??? ??????? ??????
????? ??????? ???????
??????? ?????? ??????
? ??????? ???????
????? ?????? ???????
???? ??????? ???????
??? ??????? ???????
? ?????? ??????
??? ???????? ????????
??? ???????? ????????
??? ?????? ??????
??? ?????? ??????
??????? ?????? ??????
??????????? ?????? ??????
????????????
????????? ?????? ????????
????? ???????? ????????
???????? ?????????
??????????
?????????June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 30
? ??????? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ?
? ???? ? ???? ?????????? ? ?? ?
????????
???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ? ? ? ?
??????????? ? ??? ??? ??????????? ?
? ????????? ??? ???????? ? ???? ??
?? ? ???? ????????? ???? ?
? ???? ? ??
??? ???
? ???? ??
???? ???
T T
? ???????
? ???? ? ????
???? ???
????? ?????
??????
?????? ??????
??????
??????
??????? ?????
????? ?????
?????
?????
????? ?????? ????? ????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
????? ????? ????? ?????
?????
?????
SP
T P
S
MDP
G
?? ????????????
?? ??? ??????
???? ???
?? ????????
???? ???
?? ?
? ? ? ???
?????
?? ??? ?????????? ??????
????? ??????????
?? ??? ??????
???? ?? ? ????
? ???????
???? ?? ? ????
? ??????
???? ?? ? ????
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ? ???
???????? ???
???????? ???
??? ????
??? ???
?? ?
??? ???
???
??? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????
? ??????
? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
???????????????????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
???????????????????????????
???????????????? ?
???????????????? ?
??????????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
??????????????????? ?
????????????????? ?
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
E
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
T
T
BFD
W
P
E
E
E E
P P P
P
G
E
W
G
P
T
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E E
E
G
E E E E E E E E G
P P E
E
P P
E E
S
S
G
G E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
P
E
E
P
CATWALK
E
E E P
G
E
W
CONC.
G
W
T
T
P
E
P
T
T
G
E P
E
E E
T
T
T
T
G
E E E
E
E E E E E E E E
? ??????????
???? ???
??????????
??????????
????? ?
?
??????????
? ??????
??? ???
? ??
? ? ????? ?? ?
???????
??????
??????
????????
??????
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??????????????????????
Gensler ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
?????????????????????? ?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
?????????? ????????
? ?? ? ????? ?? ? ???
?????????? ???? ?? ? ???
? ???? ???? ?? ? ???
? ? ? ??? ?????? ???????? ?? ? ???
? ? ?? ?? ? ??????? ? ? ? ???? ??
??????? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ? ??
? ??? ???? ?? ? ? ?? ?
? ???? ???????? ??? ? ??? ??????? ? ??? ???? ? ???????? ?? ???????? ?? ?? ? ????????
???????
? ?????? ???? ??????
? ? ?? ???????? ?? ????????????????????
????? ?????????????????????????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ? ? ????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
??????????
? ???????? ? ??????????
? ??????
? ?????? ??????????
??????????
??????????
??????????
? ??????? ??????
? ???????? ????????
? ????????????
????? ? ??
??????????
? ???????
??????????
? ? ? ????
? ? ? ????
??????
?????
?????
Parking PlanJune 15, 2006 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 31
Building J - Parking
Parking Layouts
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????June 15, 2006 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 32
Parking Structure
Parking Layouts
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
Level 1
46 Cars
+ 7 HC
? ?????????? ???????? ? ? ???
?????????????????
????????????????? ??? ????????????????? ???
?? ???? ??????
June 15, 2006 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 33
Parking Structure
Parking Layouts
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
Level 2
79 Cars
Level 3 68 Cars
Level 2 79 Cars
Level 1 46 Cars + 7 HCJune 15, 2006 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 34
Parking Structure
Parking Layouts
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
Level 3
68 CarsJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 35
Parking Structure Lighting
Lighting in the parking structure has been de-
signed to minimize impacts on the surrounding
neighborhood.
The ?oors of the parking deck have a high
parapet (6-foot high on the top deck facing Van
Buren Pl.) designed to prevent any light spills
either from deck lighting or auto head-lights
into the residential neighborhood. Special deck
lighting has been selected and sited in order
to avoid any light spill over this parapet height,
while still providing the security necessary in a
parking facility. These light ?xtures were select-
ed to maintain a controlled, downward angle
of light that will illuminate the parking structure
ground surface without allowing direct light to
be emmitted into the neighboring parcels.
Parking Structure Landscaping
See pages 34-36 for images. See page 38 for
more description.
Parking Structure - LightingJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 36
EH and H26
BLA Black Anodized
BRA Bronze Anodized
NA Natural Aluminum Anodized
OC Optional Color Paint
SC Special Color Paint
H/HT Style
BRP Bronze Paint
BLP Black Paint
OC Optional Color Paint
SC Special Color Paint
CD Clear Drop Diffuser EH Style only
MF Mast Arm Fitter
MU 10° Uptilt Bracket
UB Quick Disconnect for Ballast Tray
AP Adjustable Knuckle - Pole Mount
AT Adjustable Knuckle - Tenon Mount
PTF2 Pole Top Fitter - 2 3/8" Dia. Tenon
PTF3 Pole Top Fitter - 3-3 1/2" Dia. Tenon
PTF4 Pole Top Fitter - 3 1/2-4" Dia. Tenon
F Fusing In Head
LF In-Line/In-Pole Fusing
PC Photocontrol and Receptacle
PCR Photocontrol Receptacle only
POLY Polycarbonate Sag Lens
HS Internal Houseside Shield
QS Quartz Standby
SG Sag Glass Lens In lieu of flat glass
F O R M 1 0 S Q U A R E
GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The Gardco arm mounted Square Form 10 products are sharp cutoff luminaires for high intensity discharge lamps up to 1000
watts. The EH units are manufactured from mitered extruded aluminum and finished in an Architectural Class 1 anodizing. The H and HT style luminaires
are dieformed aluminum with a thermoset polyester finish. Both products can accept one of eight (8) interchangeable and rotatable precision segmented
optical systems.
EH/H/HT ARM MOUNT
EH14 14" Square Extruded Luminaire
EH19 19" Square Extruded Luminaire
H14 14" Square Fabricated Luminaire
H19 19" Square Fabricated Luminaire
HT19 19" Tall Square Fabricated Luminaire
H2 6 26" Square Fabricated Luminaire
1 Single Assembly
2 Twin Assembly
2@90 Twin Assembly at 90º
3 Triple at 90º
3@120 Triple at 120º
4 Quad Assembly
Gardco Lighting reserves the right to change materials or modify the design of its product without
notification as part of the company's continuing product improvement program. The 4X optical system
is protected by U.S. patent number 5690422.
© Copyright Gardco Lighting 2001-2005. All Rights Reserved. International Copyright Secured.
A Genlyte Company
Gardco Lighting
2661 Alvarado Street
San Leandro, CA 94577
800/227-0758
510/357-6900 in California
Fax: 510/357-3088
www.sitelighting.com
79115-43/0705
Job:
T ype:
Notes:
O R D E R I N G
P R E F I X
D I S T R I B U T I O N
120
208
240
277
347
480
QUAD
V O LTA G E
WAT TA G E
F I N I S H O P T I O N S
C O N F I G U R AT I O N
PREFIX CONFIGURATION WATTAGE DISTRIBUTION VOLTAGE FINISH OPTIONS
Enter the order code into the appropriate box above. Note: Gardco reserves the right to refuse a configuration. Not all combinations and configurations are valid.
Refer to notes below for exclusions and limitations. For questions or concerns, please consult the factory.
MH Metal Halide
PSMH Pulse Start Metal Halide
HPS High Pressure Sodium
Specify RAL designation ex: OC-RAL7024
Specify RAL designation ex: OC-RAL7024
Specify. Must supply color chip.
Specify. Must supply color chip.
N/A with 480V.
1 Type I
3 Type III
4X Type IV (19"/T19" only)
FM Type IV
Q Type V
VS Type V
FC3V* Full Cutoff Type III
FCVS* Full Cutoff Type V
Horizontal Lamp Vertical Lamp
*19" 320PSMH only. Supplied
w/MS320/BU/ED28/LLC/PS lamp
In lieu of flat glass. N/A with 4X optics.
450w maximum.
Supplied standard with FM optics.
Supplied standard with 4X optics and 26" VS
Only available with 1 way and 2 @ 180° mounting
Fits 2 3/8" tenon. N/A with 14" units
14" and 19" supplied with acrylic
sag lens. 26" supplied with sag glass
lens. Medium base, 200w max on 14"
units.
Type 4X optics supplied with sag glass
lens standard.
120/208/240/277, Factory tied to 277V.
14"
100MH|1010|150MH|1010|175MH
200MH
250MH|1010|175PSMH
2,7
100HPS
150HPS|1010|19"
250MH
400MH
250PSMH|1010|320PSMH|1010|350PSMH
400PSMH|1010|450PSMH|1010|250HPS
400HPS
T19"
750PSMH|10 10|875PSMH
10
750HPS
26"
1000MH
750PSMH|10 10|1000PSMH|1010|750HPS
1000HPS
1. Medium base lamp
2. Available with vertical lamp optics only.
3. Operates 55V lamp.
4. M138 or M153.
5. M132 or M154
6. M135 or M155
7. M137 or M152
8. Available with Horizontal optics only.
9. M149 only. Horizontal optics require
MS750/PS/BU/HOR/BT37 lamp
10. Requires Sag Glass Lens.
Flat glass lens luminaires meet IESNA Full Cutoff criteria. Sag lens luminaires meet IESNA Cutoff criteria.
Example of light ?xture for use in
parking structure.
Parking Structure - LightingJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 37
Trash Yard Detail
?
?? ???? ????????????
??? ??? ????
BUILDING
E
BUILDING
V
BUILDING
T
BUILD.
UJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 38
Landscaping & Plantings
Studio Lot Landscaping
As noted on the site plans, the Master Plan calls for only a slight (100 SF) decrease in the square-
footage of landscaped area on the Studio Lot. The majority of existing landscape (including the areas
adjacent to the Mansion building and the historic landscaping in the bungalow courtyard) will remain
as is.
The biggest change in on-site landscsaping will occur around the new parking structure. Special at-
tention will be paid to using climbing vines, and other plants to shield the parking structure from the
residential neighborhood on VanBuren Pl. The south- and west-facing facades will be designed to
create a “green screen” of climbing plants that will cover the structure’s concrete exterior. In addition
this Master Plan calls for the planting of bushes in the setback between the perimeter wall along Van-
Buren Pl. and the parking structure, as well as the replacement of landscaping along the Van Buren
Pl. wall.
Existing landscaping in front of Mansion
Existing landscaping at Gate 2
GATE 3
Iceberg Roses
Boxwood
Sycamore trees
Bronze Flax
Lantana
Day Lilies
Morea
Star Jasmine
Rapheolepsis
Natal Plum
Agapanthus
Xylosma
Axaleas
Breath of Heaven
FRONT OF MANSION
Privets
Sycamore tree
Sword fern
Rapheolepsis
Agapanthus
Day Lilies
Pigmy Palms
Peach Tree
Hybiscus
Roses
Junipers
Eugenias
Tree Roses
Azaleas
Boxwood
Gladiolas
Breath of heaven
Hydrangea
Camellias
Euonymous
Society Garlic
Brich Trees
Star Jasmine
Spider Plants
Margarita Daisy
Capanella
Plant Selection
Plants will be selected to ?t with thte existing landscaping on the Studio Lot. Following is a par-
tial listing of plants currently being used by the Culver studios. The Culver Studios intends to use
these or similar plants as part of the landscaping around the parking structure and the bungalow
courtyard.
GATE 1
Iceberg Roses
Bird of Paradise
Santa Barbara Daisys
Hybiscus
Rapheolepsis
Juniper
Day Lilies
Iris
Camphor
Xylosma
Purple Princes
Boxwood
Ficus
AzaleasJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 39
Landscaping & Plantings
Parking Structure Green Screen Type Planting
The images on this page illustrate the effective use of green screen type planting to create a lush,
green cover for a utilitarian parking strucuture. While the scale of the structures in many of these im-
ages is larger than the new Culver Studios parking structure, the technique used to create the green
screen will be similar.
Green Screen type planting utilizes a wire mesh armature attached to the surface of the parking
structure as an armature for planted vines to grow on.
The parking structure green screen will be planted with either Star Jasmine (the same material that is
used on the De Mille theater) or Creeping Fig, which provides a lush green look year-round. Both of
these are fast growing vines, and can be anticipated to fully cover the wire mesh with greeery within a
year of planiting.
Universal City, CA
Universal City, CA
Parking Structure - Palo Alto, CA
Parking Structure - Tustin, CA
Parking Structure - Mountain View, CA Parking Structure - Aptos, CA
Creeping Fig
Star JasmineJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 40
Photo Simulation F - Public Art Location
Public Art
As a part of the City of Culver City’s Art in Public Plac-
es program, the Culver Studios design team proposes
to work with the City of Culver City to develop publical-
ly visible art located adjacent to the North-west facade
of Building J facing the Gate #2 entrance. The art will
be visible to the public from the street and will add to
the character of the Studio Lot.
Proposed Public Art
LocationJune 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 41
Photo Simulation G - Building J Interiot Lot View
Building J Signage
Signage will be incorporated onto the lot
facing (interior) facade of Building J. The
signage will be used to idetify Building J
and will be of a consistent look and feel as
the exsiting singage on the Studio Lot.
The location of this signage on the Building
J facade is identi?ed by the red square on
this building image.June 15, 2006 Master Plan 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler Page 42
Shade And Shadow Study
Shade & Shadow Study
In the shade and shadow study the effects of the new construction were studied at three times of day during Winter
Solstice, Summer Solstice and the Spring/Fall Equinox. The study looks at the shade and shadow effects at the
completion of the Master Plan.
The results are illustrated by the drawings on the following pages and summarized as follows:
1. Existing Building J
2. Winter Solstice
9:00 AM – Additional shadow from J cast onto Culver Studios Lot (entry Gate #2)
12 Noon – Some additional shadow cast onto Ince Ave and the street side of the commercial buildings on Ince.
4:00 PM – Some additional shadow on the commercial properties along Ince and minimally on the the back portion
of some residential properties. These properties are already largely in the shade from the existing
sound stages and evening twilight.
3. Summer Solstice
9:00 AM – Some shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
12 Noon – MInor shadow on Ince
4:00 PM – Some shadow cast onto Ince Blvd, but not onto the Commercial properties
4. Spring/Fall Equinox
9:00 AM – Some shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
12 Noon – Some shadow cast onto Ince. Blvd.
4:00 PM – Some additional shadow on the commercial properties along Ince (not on the residential areas.)
5. Existing Parking Structure Location
6. Winter Solstice
9:00 AM – Minimal shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
12 Noon – Minimal shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
4:00 PM – Minimal additional shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot. Studio and residential properties are already
largely in the shade from existing trees and the evening twilight.
7. Summer Solstice
9:00 AM – Minor shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
12 Noon – No Shadow
4:00 PM – Some Shadow cast partially onto Culver Studios Lot
8. Spring/Fall Equinox
9:00 AM – Minor shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot and partly onto edge of residential area
12 Noon – Minor shadow cast onto Culver Studios Lot
4:00 PM – Shadow cast onto Culver Studios LotJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 43
Buildings J & O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. OJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 44
Building J
WINTER SOLSTICE
9:00am 12:00 noon
4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon 9:00am
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Existing
ProposedJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Proposed
Existing
Page 45
Building J
SUMMER SOLSTICE
9:00am 12:00 noon 4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon
9:00am
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.June 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Proposed
Existing
Page 46
Building J
SPRING/FALL EQUINOX
9:00am 12:00 noon 4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon
9:00am
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.
Krueger St.
Bldg. J
Bldg. O
Ince Blvd.June 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Page 47
Location of Proposed Parking Structure
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
RJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Proposed
Existing
Page 48
9:00am 12:00 noon 4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon 9:00am
Parking Structure
WINTER SOLSTICE
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
S
T U
V
Parking
StructureJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Proposed
Existing
Page 49
9:00am
12:00 noon 4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon 9:00am
Parking Structure
SUMMER SOLSTICE
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
S
T U
V
Parking
StructureJune 15, 2006 Shadow Studies 05.5049.000
Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan #5
Gensler
Proposed
Existing
Page 50
9:00am 12:00 noon
4:00 pm
4:00 pm 12:00 noon 9:00am
Parking Structure
SPRING/FALL EQUINOX
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
Van Buren Pl.
S
T
U
V
R
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
Van Buren Pl.
S
T U
V
Parking
Structure
S
T U
V
Parking
StructureTRAFFIC AND PARKING STUDY
FOR
CULVER STUDIOS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT #5
JUNE 2006
PREPARED FOR
GENSLER & ASSOCIATES
PREPARED BY
TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR
CULVER STUDIOS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #5
June 2006
Prepared for:
GENSLER & ASSOCIATES
Prepared by:
KAKU ASSOCIATES, INC.
201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 500
Santa Monica, California 90401
(310) 458-9916
Ref: 1954 TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1
Project Description.......................................................................................... 1
Study Scope.................................................................................................... 4
Organization of Report.................................................................................... 5
II. Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 6
Study Area......................................................................................................... 6
Existing Street System .................................................................................... 6
Existing Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service................................................. 7
Existing Transit Service ..................................................................................... 14
III. Future Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................... 18
Cumulative Base Traffic Projections................................................................ 19
Project Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................... 23
Cumulative plus Project Traffic Projections ....................................................... 28
IV. Traffic Impact Analysis ................................................................................................ 31
Significant Traffic Impact Criteria....................................................................... 31
Cumulative Base Traffic Conditions ................................................................ 32
Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions...................................................... 34
Neighborhood Street Segment Analysis.......................................................... 34
Project Impacts................................................................................................ 35
Traffic Improvement Measures........................................................................ 35
V. Regional Transportation System Impact Analysis......................................................... 38
Selection of Regional Analysis Locations........................................................ 38
CMP Transit Impact Analysis............................................................................. 39
VI. Project Access, Internal Circulation, and Parking........................................................ 41
Project Access and Internal Circulation............................................................. 41
Parking............................................................................................................ 44
VII. Summary and Conclusions.......................................................................................... 45
References
Appendix A: Intersection Lane Configurations
Appendix B: Traffic Counts
Appendix C: Intersection Level of Service Worksheets
LIST OF FIGURES
NO.
1 Study Area and Analyzed Intersections ....................................................................... 2
2 Project Site Plan ......................................................................................................... 3
3 Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes............................................................................. 10
4 Existing Transit Lines.................................................................................................. 16
5 Locations of Related Projects ....................................................................................... 22
6 Cumulative Base Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................... 24
7 Trip Distribution............................................................................................................. 27
8 Project Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ..................................................................... 31
9 Cumulative plus Project Peak Hour Traffic Volumes..................................................... 32
LIST OF TABLES
NO.
1 Existing Surface Street Characteristics ......................................................................... 8
2 Level of Service Definitions for Signalized Intersections............................................. 11
3 Level of Service Definitions for All-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections ..................... 12
4 Intersection Level of Service Analysis –
Existing Conditions (Year 2005)....................................................................... 15
5 Trip Generation Estimates for Related Projects........................................................ 20
6 Proposed Project Trip Generation................................................................................. 26
7 Intersection Level of Service Analysis –
Future Conditions (Year 2007) ........................................................................ 33
8 Gates Entry Lane Queuing Analysis............................................................................ 43
1
I. INTRODUCTION
This report documents the assumptions, methodologies and findings of a study conducted by
Kaku Associates, Inc. to evaluate the potential traffic and parking impacts of proposed
development that is part of the Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is located at 9336 and 9412 West Washington Boulevard in Culver City,
California. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the proposed project in relation to the surrounding
street system. The site plan for the project is shown in Figure 2.
The project includes the demolition of existing Building J (11,852 sf) and Building R (2,248 sf) and
replacement with a new building with 49,500 sf of office production space. The project also
includes the construction of a new parking structure with 200 parking spaces thus providing a total
of 751 future spaces on site. The project would continue to use the three existing active entry
gates (Gates 1, 2 and 3) and modify the internal circulation system on the site. The project will
also continue the limited truck use of Gate #4 as described in the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment #5 appendix documentation. It is assumed that the gate on Van Buren Place would
be used for emergency fire access only, as it is today.
The project would be developed on the current site of Culver Studios, bordered by Washington
Boulevard to the west, Ince Boulevard to the north, Van Buren Place and single-family residential
properties to the south and west in the downtown area of the City of Culver City. In the future Ince
Boulevard would provide vehicular access to Gate 1 and vehicular and pedestrian access to
Gates 2 and 3. FIGURE 2
PROJECT SITE PLAN
Source: Gensler
4
Future Washington Boulevard Realignment
It should be noted that the City Council recently approved the realignment of Washington
Boulevard in the downtown area of Culver City. The goal is to create a pedestrian friendly
downtown without obstructing vehicular movement. The realignment would alter Washington
Boulevard from Ince Boulevard to Culver Boulevard directly in front of the Culver Studios Mansion.
With the proposed expansion of the town plaza, this part of Washington Boulevard would only
limited access to Gate 1. The existing traffic would be rerouted along an improved Ince Boulevard
that would become a two-way facility.
STUDY SCOPE
The scope of work for this study was developed in conjunction with the City of Culver City. The
base assumptions and technical methodologies were all discussed as part of the study approach.
The study, which is directed at the analysis of potential project-generated traffic impacts on the
adjacent street system, expects that the project would be completed by year 2007. Because of
the imminent closure of Washington Boulevard adjacent to the project site, the future base
conditions will be evaluated with the contemplated closure. The analysis of future year traffic
forecasts is based on projected conditions in year 2007 both with and without the addition of the
project traffic. The following traffic scenarios have been developed and analyzed as part of this
study:
•
Existing 2005 Conditions - The analysis of existing traffic conditions is intended to provide
a basis for the remainder of the study. The existing conditions analysis includes a
description of the street system serving the site, current traffic volumes, and an
assessment of the operating conditions at these locations.
•
Cumulative Base (2007) Conditions - Future traffic conditions without the proposed project
will be developed for the year 2007 with the contemplated closure of Washington
Boulevard adjacent to the project site. The objective of this analysis is to project future
traffic growth and operating conditions that could be expected to result from regional
growth and related projects in the vicinity of the project site by the year 2007.
•
Cumulative (2007) plus Project Conditions – This traffic scenario provides projected traffic
volumes and an assessment of operating conditions under future conditions with the
addition of project-generated traffic with the contemplated closure of Washington
5
Boulevard adjacent to the project site. The impacts of the proposed project on future
traffic operating conditions can then be identified.
The City of Culver City has identified the following 18 intersections to be analyzed as part of the
scope of work for this project:
1. Jefferson Boulevard and Rodeo Road and Higuera Street
2. Jefferson Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
3. Duquesne Avenue and Lucerne Avenue
4. Culver Boulevard and Madison Avenue
5. Washington Boulevard and Clarington Avenue
6. Culver Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
7. Venice Boulevard and Hughes Avenue
8. Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard
9. Culver Boulevard and Main Street and Washington Boulevard
10. Washington Boulevard and Ince Boulevard
11. Culver Boulevard and Ince Boulevard
12. Venice Boulevard and Culver Boulevard
13. Venice Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard
14. Washington Boulevard and National Boulevard
15. Washington Boulevard and Higuera Street
16. Higuera Street and Lucerne Avenue
17. Ince Boulevard and Lucerne Avenue
18. Hayden Avenue and National Boulevard
ORGANIZATION OF REPORT
This report is divided into seven chapters. Chapter I provides an introduction to the study and
presents details of the various elements of the study. Chapter II describes the existing conditions
in the study area including an inventory of the streets and highways in the study area, a summary
of traffic volumes, and an assessment of the operating conditions of these streets. The
methodologies used to develop traffic forecasts for the cumulative base and cumulative plus
project scenarios and the forecasts themselves are included in Chapter III. Chapter IV presents
an assessment of potential traffic impacts for the project and any proposed mitigation measures
that may be needed. Chapter V presents the regional transportation system impact analysis.
Chapter VI presents an assessment of project site access, circulation, and parking. Chapter VII
provides a summary of the results. Appendices to this report include details of the technical
analysis.
6
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
A comprehensive data collection effort was undertaken to develop a detailed description of
existing conditions in the study area. The assessment of conditions relevant to this study includes
a description of the study area, an inventory of the local street system in the vicinity of the project
site, a review of traffic volumes on these facilities, an assessment of the resultant operating
conditions, and the current transit service in the study area. A detailed description of these
elements is presented in this chapter.
STUDY AREA
The proposed project is located at 9336 and 9412 West Washington Boulevard in Culver City,
California. Washington Boulevard and Ince Boulevard provide access to the site via Gates 1, 2
and 3. Based on discussions with City Staff, and for the purpose of the analysis in this report, it
has been assumed that access to the site would be restricted via Gates 2 and 3 as that would
represent the worse case traffic scenario. It is anticipated that Gate 1 will not be closed in the
future and studio traffic will continue to be use this entry/exit point. The study area for this
analysis is bounded by National Boulevard on the north, Madison Avenue on the south, Jefferson
Boulevard on the east, and Venice Boulevard on the west.
EXISTING STREET SYSTEM
As indicated, Washington Boulevard, Culver Boulevard and Ince Boulevard provide direct access
to the site via Gates 1, 2 and 3. Primary regional access to the site is provided by I-10 and
National Boulevard and Venice Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard. The following is a brief
description of the streets that serve the site:
7
•
Santa Monica Freeway (I-10) - The Santa Monica Freeway runs east-west approximately
one-half mile north of the project site. Access to the Santa Monica Freeway can be
obtained via full interchanges at Robertson Boulevard, Venice Boulevard, La Cienega
Boulevard and Washington Boulevard.
•
Venice Boulevard – Venice Boulevard is State Route 187 within the study area and
provides six travel lanes, three per direction, with a raised median. Restricted and
unrestricted parking is available on both sides of the street in the study area. The posted
speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph).
•
Washington Boulevard – Washington Boulevard is a major east-west arterial that provides
four travel lanes, two per direction, with a raised median near the project site. Restricted
and metered parking is available on both sides of the street within the study area. The
posted speed limit is 35 mph.
•
Culver Boulevard – Culver Boulevard is a major east-west arterial that provides four travel
lanes, two per direction, with a raised median. Restricted and metered parking is available
on both sides of the street within the study area. The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
•
National Boulevard – National Boulevard is a major east-west arterial. It has on-ramps for
I-10 East in the study area. It provides four travel lanes, two per direction. Parking is not
allowed on either side of the street within the study area. The posted speed limit is 35
mph.
•
Robertson Boulevard – Robertson Boulevard is a north-south road that has on and off
ramps to the I-10 freeway within the study area. It provides four travel lanes, two per
direction. Restricted parking is allowed on one side of the street within the study area.
The posted speed limit is 35 mph.
Table 1 provides a description of each of these facilities and summarizes the physical
characteristics of all key streets within the study area. Diagrams of the existing lane
configurations at each of the 18 analyzed intersections are provided in Appendix A.
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE
This section presents the existing peak hour turning movement traffic volumes for each of the
intersections analyzed in the study, describes the methodology used to assess the traffic
conditions at each intersection, and analyzes the resulting operating conditions at each, indicating
volume/capacity ratios and levels of service. Traffic counts are provided in Appendix B. MEDIAN SPEED
NB/EB SB/WB TYPE NB/EB SB/WB LIMIT
National Bl Robertson Bl I-10 EB On Ramp 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
I-10 EB On Ramp Venice Bl 2 2 2LT NSAT NSAT 35
Venice Bl Washington Bl 2 2 2LT PA/NSAT PA/RZ 35
Washington Bl Wesley St 2 2 2LT NSAT NSAT 40
Wesley St Hayden Av 2 2 RM/2LT PA NSAT 40
Hayden Av Jefferson Bl 2 2 RM PA/NSAT NSAT 40
Jefferson Bl La Cienega Bl National Bl 2 2 RM/2LT PA/NSAT PA/NSAT 40/35
National Bl Higuera St/Rodeo Rd 2 2 2LT PA NSAT 35
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd Holdrege Av 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Holdrege Av Duquesne Av 2 2 2LT PA PA/ 30min 35/40
Duquesne Av Leahy St 2 2 2LT PA MP 35/40
Robertson Bl National Bl I-10 WB On Ramp 1/2 2 RM/2LT NSAT NSAT 35
I-10 WB On Ramp Exposition Bl 2 2 N/A NSAT/PA, 30 min NSAT 35
Venice Washington Bl 2 2 2LT NSAT NSAT/MP, 2hrs(8-6) 35
Robertson Bl/Higuera St Washington Bl Lucerne Av 1 1 SDY PA/NSAT PA/NSAT 35
Lucerne Av Helms 1 1 RM PA, 1hr(8-6) NSAT 35
Helms Hayden Av 1 1 SDY NSAT/PA, 1hr(8-6), PE NSAT 35
Hayden Av Eastham Dr 2 2 2LT PA NSAT 25
Eastham Dr Jefferson Bl 1 2 DY NSAT NSAT 25
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd Jefferson Bl Kalsman Dr 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Kalsman Dr La Cienega Bl 2 3 2LT NSAT NSAT 35
Washington Bl Helms Av National Bl 2 2 2LT MP MP 40
National Bl Higuera St 2 2 DY NSAT/MP MP 35
Higuera St Ince Bl 2 2 2LT RZ NSAT/MP 35
Ince Bl Culver Bl 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Culver Bl/Washington Bl Culver Bl/Washington Bl 3 3 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Culver Bl/Washington Bl Hughes Av/Duquesne Av 2 2 RM NSAT/MP, 2hrs(10-4) NSAT/MP, 2hrs(10-4) 35
Hughes Av/Duquesne Av Clarington Av/Madison Av 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT/MP, 2hrs(10-4) 35
Clarington Av/Madison Av Jasmine Av 2 2 2LT NSAT NSAT/MP, 2hrs(10-4) 35
Culver Bl Venice Bl Ince Bl 2 2 RM NSAT RZ 35
Ince Bl Culver Bl/Washington Bl 2 2 RM MP, 2hrs(8-6) MP, 2hrs(8-6) 35
Culver Bl/Washington Bl Culver Bl/Washington Bl 3 2 RM NSAT/MP, 2hrs(10-4) NSAT 35
Culver Bl/Washington Bl Hughes Av/Duquesne Av 2 2 RM MP, 2hrs MP, 2hrs(8-6) 35
Hughes Av/Duquesne Av Clarington Av/Madison Av 2 2 RM NSAT/MP, 2hrs PA/GZ 35
Clarington Av/Madison Av Jasmine Av 2 2 RM/2LT NSAT/MP NSAT/MP, 2hrs(8-6) 35
Ince Bl Washington Bl Lindblade St 1 1 DY NSAT NSAT 25
Lindblade St Lucerne Av 1 1 SDY NSAT PA/MP 25
Irving PL Lucerne Av Farragut Dr 1 1 UD 1hr(6a-12a), PE 1hr(6a-12a), PE 25
Farragut Dr Braddock Dr 1 N/A UD 1hr(6a-12a), PE, SZ N/A 25
Braddock Dr Culver Bl 1 1 UD 1hr(6a-12a) 1hr(6a-12a) 25
Watseka Av Washington Bl Venice Bl 1 1 UD MP, 1hr MP, 1hr 25
Venice Bl Regent St 1 1 UD PA, 2hrs(8-6) PA, 2hrs(8-6) 25
Hughes Av Regent St Venice Bl 1 1 SDY NSAT PA/SZ 25
Venice Bl Washington Bl 1 1 SDY NSAT NSAT 25
Hughes Av/Duquesne Av Washington Bl Culver Bl 1 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Culver Bl Braddock Dr 1 1 SDY PA, (30min) PA 35
Braddock Dr Lucerne Av 1 1 SDY PA PA 35
Lucerne Av Jefferson Bl 1 1 DY NSAT/PA, 2hrs NSAT/PA, 2hrs 35
Bagley Av Regent St Venice Bl 1 1 UD PA NSAT 35
Bagley Av/Main Av Venice Bl Culver Bl/Washington Bl 1 1 DY MP, 2hrs(8-6) MP, 1hr 35
Clarington Av Regent St Venice Bl 1 1 SDY PA PA 35/25
Venice Bl Washington Bl 1 1 SDY PA, 1hrs(8-6) RZ/NSAT (8-6) 35/25
Clarington Av/Madison Av Washington Bl Culver Bl 2 2 RM NSAT NSAT 35
Culver Bl Braddock Dr 1 1 SDY PA, 2hrs(8-6) PA, 2hrs(8-6) 35
Braddock Dr Farragut Dr 1 1 SDY PA PA 35
Notes:
MEDIAN TYPE: DY = Double Yellow
SDY = Single Dashed Yellow
2LT = Dual Left Turn
RM = Raised Median
UD = Undivided Lane
LANES: # = Number of lanes
SZ = School Zone
PE = Permit Exempt
NSAT = No Stopping Any Time
RZ = Red zone - No parking allowed
MP = Metered Parking
N/A = Not Applicable
GZ = Green zone - Passenger loading and unloading
TABLE 1
EXISTING SURFACE STREET CHARACTERISTICS
SEGMENT FROM TO
PARKING: PA = Parking Allowed
PARKING RESTRICTIONS LANE
9
Existing Traffic Volumes
Weekday morning and evening peak hour traffic counts were conducted at the 18 analyzed
intersections in May, July and October 2005. These weekday traffic volumes, which are illustrated
in Figure 3, represent for the purposes of this analysis the existing 2005 conditions.
Level of Service Methodology
Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure used to describe the condition of traffic flow on the
street system, ranging from excellent conditions at LOS A to overloaded conditions at LOS F.
LOS D is typically recognized as the minimum acceptable level of service in urban areas. Level of
service definitions for signalized intersections are provided in Table 2. Three of the analyzed
intersections are four-way stop-controlled intersections. These include the following:
•
Duquesne Avenue and Lucerne Avenue
•
Higuera Street and Lucerne Avenue
•
Ince Boulevard and Lucerne Avenue
Level of service definitions for unsignalized intersections are provided in Table 3.
Of the 18 study intersections, 14 are in the City of Culver City and four are in the City of Los
Angeles. The following four intersections have been analyzed per City of Los Angeles
requirements:
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Rodeo Road and Higuera Street
•
Venice Boulevard and Hughes Avenue
•
Venice Boulevard and Culver Boulevard
•
Venice Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard
The intersection capacity utilization (ICU) method of intersection analysis, per the City of Culver
City’s requirements for analyzing intersection conditions, was used to determine the intersection
volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio and corresponding LOS for the 14 signalized study intersections 31(95)
67(38)
96(64)
2,015(1,844)
50(26)
211(199)
111(66)
1,950(1,560)
44(71)
55(71)
210(204)
79(143)
78(54)
526(525)
506(357)
251(147) 90(73)
147(201)
262(392)
6(12)
9(31)
336(407)
1,040(1,281)
425(332)
12(15)
2(15)
383(229)
1,158(794)
8(20)
31(83)
12(21)
20(23)
24(65)
85(174)
774(735)
184(97)
69(45)
31(20)
50(80)
730(839)
11(28)
45(52)
79(23)
17(41)
639(939)
68(107)
164(136)
68(64)
829(688)
38(48)
39(40)
59(165)
24(32)
14(47)
450(1,049)
937(464)
102(574)
33(115)
644(753)
146(60)
679(328)
71(42)
101(46)
766(531)
133(216)
8(33)
50(119)
566(829)
5(21)
18(70)
297(472)
3(25)
10(27)
3(22)
65(86)
98(77)
747(691)
53(58)
356(262)
89(119)
20(33)
628(771)
79(103)
22(88)
267(291)
60(107)
12(19)
595(635)
277(497)
1,879(1,841)
9(21) 30(57)
16(51)
1,579(1,803)
127(162)
31(40)
25(83)
375(483)
95(93)
181(217)
39(60)
76(63)
155(70)
259(147)
21(30)
4(3)
2(*)
1(2)
91(154)
174(142)
138(59)
2(1)
*(1)
28(15)
171(131)
*(2)
1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
11.
12.
16. 17.
98(100)
9(7) 20(58)
626(703)
708(975)
113(80)
1,088(947)
272(519)
18(24)
73(141)
125(218)
12(20)
4(22)
99(81)
77(116)
790(1,137)
59(75)
32(33)
43(44)
1,159(989)
45(81)
9. 10.
34(57)
75(78)
82(76)
817(941)
203(276)
902(619)
484(233)
1,270(704)
156(123)
49(64)
732(977)
154(143)
93(184)
95(64)
61(57) 229(259)
129(147) 853(978)
57(108)
167(150)
85(41)
332(183)
1,351(840)
60(51)
572(475)
77(54)
73(89)
2,617(2,431)
82(56)
380(306)
147(122)
1,999(1,818)
482(117)
524(541)
396(355)
287(259)
13. 14. 15.
8.
718(644)
717(911)
35(67)
16(12)
1(4)
3(9)
33(14)
69(81)
18(22)
806(856)
549(804)
26(12)
27(89)
25(23)
WASHINGTON BL
WATSEKA AV
IRVING PL
CULVER BL
Hughes Av
Venice Bl &
Culver Bl
Venice Bl &
Main St/Washington Bl
Culver Bl &
Ince Bl
Washington Bl &
Ince Bl
Culver Bl &
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Lucerne Av &
Madison Av
Culver Bl &
Clarington Av
Washington Bl &
Duquesne
Culver Bl &
Venice Bl &
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl Robertson Bl/Higuera St
Washington Bl & Washington Bl &
National Bl
Higuera St
Lucerne Av &
Ince Bl
Lucerne Av &
69(102)
166(32)
782(1,211)
166(200)
647(582)
766(315)
18.
National Bl
Hayden Av &
FIGURE 3
EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMESTABLE 2
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
Volume/Capacity
Level of Service Ratio Definition
A 0.000 - 0.600 EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer than one red
light and no approach phase is fully used.
B >0.600 - 0.700 VERY GOOD. An occasional approach phase is
fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat
what restricted within groups of vehicles.
C >0.700 - 0.800 GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to wait
through more than one red light; backups may
develop behind turning vehicles.
D >0.800 - 0.900 FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions
of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods
occur to permit clearing of developing lines,
preventing excessive backups.
E >0.900 - 1.000 POOR. Represents the most vehicles intersection
approaches can accommodate; may be long lines
of waiting vehicles through several signal cycles.
F > 1.000 FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on
cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of
vehicles out of the intersection approaches.
Tremendous delays with continuously increasing
queue lengths
Source: Transportation Research Circular No. 212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity,
Transportation Research Board, 1980.TABLE 3
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS FOR
ALL-WAY STOP-CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS
Average Vehicle Delay
Level of Service (seconds)
A 0 to 10
B >10 to 15
C >15 to 25
D >25 to 35
E >35 to 50
F> 50
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation
Research Board, 2000.
13
in the City of Culver City. For the four four-way stop-controlled intersections, Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 2000) methodology was used to evaluate the
capacity and the performance of the intersection.
The City of Los Angeles requires the use of Critical Movement Analysis (CMA) methodology
(Transportation Research Circular No. 212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity,
Transportation Research Board, 1980) to evaluate the operations of intersections and this
methodology was used to analyze the study locations in the City of Los Angeles. The CMA
method of intersection capacity analysis determines the intersection V/C ratio and
corresponding LOS for the turning movements and intersection characteristics at signalized
intersections. The CALCADB software package developed by LADOT was used to implement
the CMA methodology at the four study intersections in Los Angeles.
Additionally, 13 of the 18 study intersections are currently controlled by the City of Los Angeles’
Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system. In accordance with Los Angeles
Department of Transportation (LADOT) procedures, a capacity increase of 7% (0.07 V/C
adjustment) was applied to reflect the benefits of ATSAC control at these intersections. The
intersections operating under ATSAC include the following:
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Rodeo Road and Higuera Street
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
•
Culver Boulevard and Madison Avenue
•
Washington Boulevard and Clarington Avenue and Madison Avenue
•
Culver Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
•
Venice Boulevard and Hughes Avenue
•
Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard
•
Culver Boulevard and Washington Boulevard and Main Street
•
Washington Boulevard and Ince Boulevard
•
Venice Boulevard and Culver Boulevard
•
Washington Boulevard and National Boulevard
•
Washington Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Higuera Street
•
Hayden Avenue and National Boulevard
14
Existing Levels of Service
The traffic volumes presented in Figure 3 were analyzed using the ICU/CMA analysis and HCM
methodology described above to determine the current operating conditions at the 18
intersections.
Table 4 summarizes the results of this analysis, indicating the existing morning and evening peak
hour V/C ratio (or delay) and corresponding LOS at each of the analyzed intersections. Appendix
C contains LOS worksheets. As indicated in the table, one of the 18 intersections, Venice
Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard, is currently operating at poor
levels of service, i.e., LOS E or F, during both of the analyzed peak hours.
EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE
Twelve bus lines currently serve the study area. These transit lines, which are described below,
are illustrated in Figure 4:
•
Metro Line 33 & Line 333 – Line 33/Line 333 is an east-west line that travels from
downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica. This line provides service to Union Station. This
line travels along Venice Boulevard in the study area.
•
Metro Line 220 – Line 220 is a north-south line that travels from Los Angeles International
Airport (LAX) to West Hollywood. This line serves Playa del Rey, Marina del Rey, Culver
City, Palms and Beverly Hills. This line travels along Robertson Boulevard and Culver
Boulevard within the study area.
•
Metro Line 434 – Line 434 is an express bus line that travels from Malibu to downtown Los
Angeles. This line provides service to Santa Monica, West Los Angeles Transit Center
and Union Station. This line travels on I-10 within the study area.
•
Culver City Bus Line 1 – Line 1 is a local east-west line that runs along Washington
Boulevard from Venice Beach in the west to Washington and Fairfax in the east. This
line travels along Washington Boulevard in the study area.
•
Culver City Bus Line 3 – Line 3 is a local north-south line that runs from Century City in
the north to Fox Hills Mall in the south on a route that includes Pico Boulevard,
Westwood Boulevard, Motor Avenue, Overland Avenue and the Fox Hills/Corporate
Pointe business area along Slauson Avenue, Buckingham Parkway, Bristol Parkway,V/C or Delay LOS
1. Jefferson Boulevard & Higuera Street & Rodeo Road
(a)
A.M. 0.788 C
P.M. 0.726 C
2. Jefferson Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.875 D
P.M. 0.763 C
3. Duquesne Avenue & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 32.1 D
P.M. 24.6 C
4. Culver Boulevard & Madison Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.467 A
P.M. 0.460 A
5. Washington Boulevard & Clarington Avenue & Madison Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.435 A
P.M. 0.551 A
6. Culver Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.570 A
P.M. 0.556 A
7. Venice Boulevard & Hughes Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.754 C
P.M. 0.705 C
8. Culver Boulevard & Washington Boulevard & Watseka Avenue & Irving Place
(a)
A.M. 0.546 A
P.M. 0.721 C
9. Culver Boulevard & Washington Boulevard & Main Street
(a)
A.M. 0.750 C
P.M. 0.805 D
10. Washington Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.442 A
P.M. 0.530 A
11. Culver Boulevard & Ince Boulevard A.M. 0.316 A
P.M. 0.464 A
12. Venice Boulevard & Culver Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.668 B
P.M. 0.743 C
13. Venice Boulevard & Robertson Boulevard & Exposition Boulevard A.M. 1.070 F
P.M. 0.993 E
14. Washington Boulevard & National Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.881 D
P.M. 0.788 C
15. Washington Boulevard & Robertson Boulevard & Higuera Street
(a)
A.M. 0.773 C
P.M. 0.616 B
16. Higuera Street & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 11.3 B
P.M. 9.3 A
17. Ince Boulevard & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 9.7 A
P.M. 8.8 A
18. Hayden Avenue & National Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.710 C
P.M. 0.758 C
Notes:
(a)
Intersection is currently operating under the LADOT ATSAC system.
(b)
Intersection is all-way stop controlled. Indicates vehicle delay in seconds.
TABLE 4
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
EXISTING CONDITIONS (YEAR 2005)
2005 Existing Conditions Peak
Hour
No. IntersectionHIGUERA ST
HUGHES AV
CATTARAUGUS AV
WASHINGTON BL
CULVER BL
VENICE BL
DUQUESNE AV
JEFFERSON BL
NATIONAL BL
DURANGO AV
CANFIELD AV
BAGLEY AV
INCE BL
LANDMARK ST
WESLEY ST
HUBBARD ST
KRUEGER ST
LUCERNE AV
LAFAYETTE PL
HAYDEN PL
HAYDEN AV
MADISON AV
CLARINGTON AV
MAIN ST
WASHINGTON BL
HELMS AV
SCHAEFER ST
IRVING PL
WATSEKA AV
NATIONAL BL
REGENT ST
MTA 333,33
MTA 220
MTA 434
C1, C4
C1, C4, C5
C5
C1
C4
C4, C5
C5
C3
C1, C3
SM 12
SM 12,
SM S12
SM 12
CE 437
187
MTA 220
SM 10
CE 430, 431
BRADDOCK DR
SM S12
10
ROBERTSON BL
JEFFERSON BL
CARSON ST
LINBLADE ST
FIGURE 4
EXISTING TRANSIT LINES
- Project Site
LEGEND
- MTA
- Culver City Bus
- LADOT Commuter Express
- Santa Monica Big Blue Bus
17
Hannum Avenue and Green Valley Circle. This line travels along Washington Boulevard
and Overland Avenue in the study area.
•
Culver City Bus Line 4 – Line 4 is a local east-west line that runs between Washington
Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue to West Los Angeles College and Fox Hills Mall on a
route that includes Washington Boulevard, Duquesne Avenue, Jefferson Boulevard,
Sepulveda Boulevard, Bristol Parkway and Hannum Avenue. This line travels along
Washington Boulevard, Culver Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue in the study area. Line
4 is operated on an hourly basis on weekdays only.
•
Culver City Bus Line 5 – Line 5 is a local east-west line that runs from Blair Hills in the
east to Washington and Inglewood Boulevards in the west. This line travels along
Washington Boulevard, Culver Boulevard and Higuera Street within the study area.
•
LADOT Commuter Express Line 430 – Line 430 is a commuter express line that travels
from downtown Los Angeles to Pacific Palisades. This line also serves Brentwood and
Westwood. This line travels on the I-10 in the study area. Line 430 is operated on
weekdays only.
•
LADOT Commuter Express Line 431 – Line 431 is a north-south commuter express line
that travels from downtown Los Angeles to Westwood. This line also serves Rancho Park
and Palms. This line travels on the I-10 in the study area. Line 431 is operated on
weekdays only.
•
LADOT Commuter Express Line 437 – Line 437 is a north-south commuter express line
that travels from downtown Los Angeles to Venice. This line also serves Culver City and
Marina del Rey. This line travels along Robertson Boulevard and Culver Boulevard in the
study area. Line 437 is operated on weekdays only.
•
Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Express Line 10 – Line 10 is a freeway express line that
travels from Santa Monica to Los Angeles. This line serves Santa Monica Pier, Third
Street Promenade, Financial District, Los Angeles Civic Center, Union Station and
Patsaouras Transit Plaza. This line travels on the I-10 in the study area.
•
Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 12 – Line 12 travels from the Pico Rimpau Transit
Center to UCLA - Westside Pavilion. This line serves Culver City, Rancho Park and
Westwood. This line travels along National Boulevard, Robertson Boulevard and Venice
Boulevard in the study area.
•
Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line Super 12 – The Super 12 line travels from the Pico
Rimpau Transit Center to UCLA – Ackerman Union. This line serves Palms, Rancho
Park and Westwood. This line travels along National Boulevard in the study area.
18
III. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
In order to evaluate properly the potential impact of the proposed project on the local street
system, it was necessary to develop estimates of future traffic conditions both with and without the
project. Future traffic volumes without the project are first estimated, representing the cumulative
base conditions. The traffic generated by the proposed project is then estimated and separately
assigned to the surrounding street system. The sum of the cumulative base and project-
generated traffic represents cumulative plus project conditions.
The City Council recently approved the realignment of Washington Boulevard in the downtown
area of Culver City. The goal is to create a pedestrian-friendly downtown without obstructing
vehicular movement. The realignment would alter Washington Boulevard from Ince Boulevard
to Culver Boulevard directly in front of the Culver Studios Mansion. With the proposed
expansion of the town plaza, this part of Washington Boulevard would allow only limited access
to Gate 1. The existing traffic would be removed along an improved Ince Boulevard that would
become a two-way facility. The existing section of Ince Boulevard that serves as a one-way
street from Culver Boulevard to Washington Boulevard would serve a two-way traffic flow. The
realignment would essentially affect future traffic conditions by diverting the traffic on Washington
Boulevard along Ince Boulevard and then onto Culver Boulevard. The diverted traffic would then
travel in both directions on Culver Boulevard from its existing intersection with Ince Boulevard to
the intersection with Main Street. Traffic volumes would essentially remain unchanged beyond
these segments. As a result, all future conditions were evaluated with the contemplated closure.
The proposed new lane configurations at the three intersections: Culver Boulevard and Ince
Boulevard, Washington Boulevard and Ince Boulevard, and Culver Boulevard and Main Street,
are illustrated in Appendix A.
19
CUMULATIVE BASE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The cumulative base traffic projections reflect growth in traffic from two primary sources:
background or ambient growth in the existing traffic volumes to reflect the effects of overall
regional growth both in and outside of the study area, and traffic generated by specific projects
located within, or in the vicinity of, the study area. These factors are described below.
Areawide Traffic Growth
Culver City Engineering Division staff indicates that traffic volumes in the vicinity of the study area
have increased at a rate of about 1% per year. Future increases in the background traffic
volumes due to regional growth and development are expected to continue at this rate, at least
through the year 2007. Due to the realignment of Washington Boulevard, the existing traffic
volumes were reassigned to the street network based on the proposed realignment and then
adjusted for areawide regional growth. With the assumed completion date of 2007, the existing
2005 traffic volumes were adjusted upward by a factor of 2% to reflect areawide regional growth.
Cumulative Project Traffic Generation and Assignment
As indicated, the second major source of traffic growth in the study area is from other future
developments in the area. These cumulative projects are those planned developments that are
expected to be completed in the same timeframe as the proposed project. Data describing
cumulative projects in the area was obtained from Culver City Engineering Division. A total of 39
cumulative projects were identified within the study area and are summarized in Table 5. Their
locations are illustrated in Figure 5. TABLE 5
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES FOR RELATED PROJECTS
In Out Total In Out Total
1. New office and retail building 9,000 sf office building 4447 Sepulveda Bl 99 12 2 14 2 11 13
2.
Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook
Project
10,300 sf visitor center with a nourishment area, passive recreation,
and parking
Hetzler Rd 265 2 1 3 5 7 12
3. Office Building Construction of 151,000 sf office building 3505 Hayden Ave 1,663 208 28 236 38 187 225
4. Chevron Gas Station 3,314 sf service station with convenience store and carwash 5975 Centinela Av N/A 131 126 257 160 160 319
5. School building expansion
Building expansion (net increase of 8,352 sf) and an increase of 40
students
3430 Mc Manus Av N/A 19 11 30 0 0 0
6. Chevron Gas Station
Relocate the car wash facility and construction of a new 2,000+ sf
convenience store
10649 Jefferson Bl N/A 79 76 155 96 96 192
7. Culver City Commerce Center 242,950 sf office/industrial facility with tandem parking 10100 Jefferson Bl 2,620 333 45 378 60 292 352
8. Culver City Dog Park 1-acre dog park 9910 Jefferson Bl 225 20 15 35 30 10 40
9. Mixed Use Development
25,969 sf two-story office building with 8 live-work units, a small studio
and coffee house
8601-8637 Washington Bl 471 56 8 64 18 90 108
10. Mixed Use Retail/Condos
Mixed-use development w/5,300 sf ground floor commercial (retail)
space and eight 2-bedroom condominium units
11281 Washington Pl 197 3 5 8 9 8 17
11. Skateboard Park 12,000 sf 9910 Jefferson Bl N/A N/A N/A N/A 13 15 28
12. Residential Development
Demolish two existing single family houses, adjust the lot line to
create a larger lot, and develop 8-unit apartment building
4210 Duquesne Av 28 1 6 7 15 8 23
13. Grand View Palms 62,737 sf multi-unit care facility 4061 Grand View Bl 151 2 2 4 7 5 12
14. Culver City Muffler Shop 2,500 sf car repair facility 11333 Washington Bl N/A 5 3 8 4 4 8
15.
Baldwin Hills Regional Park Master
Plan project
Development of a 38-acre park Stocker Street 174 1 1 2 4 4 8
16. Theater Complex
101,551 sf office; 30,110 sf retail; 18,076 sf. restaurant and three
theaters w/ a 3,100 seat capacity
8511 Warner Drive 4,940 111 16 127 127 162 289
17. Westfield Mall Expansion 293,786 sf and 427 parking spaces 200 Fox Hills Mall 12,615 185 118 303 529 573 1,102
18. Culver City Transfer Station Increased throughput from 500 tpd to 1056 tpd 9255 Jefferson Bl N/A 12 5 17 3 14 17
19. Mixed Use Development
6,411 sf mixed-use project consisting of three retail spaces and three
(two bedroom, two bath) apartment units on the second floor
11511 Washington Bl 150 0 1 1 5 6 11
20. 700-701 Corporate Point 240,612 sf of office building and 4,242 sf of ancillary retail space 700-701 Corporate Point 2,649 330 44 374 61 298 359
21. Veterinary Clinic 7,000 sf 11182 Culver Bl 220 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 36
22. Condo 4-unit condo 3915 Bentley Av 27 0 2 2 2 1 3
23.
Max Leather AUP (Clothing
Manufacturer)
Adding 3,763 sf spaces to existing 4,237 sf building as retail,
showroom and office uses.
8533 Washington Bl 70 7 3 10 4 5 9
24. Apartment Building New 3-unit Apartment Building 3863 Bentley Av 20 0 1 1 1 1 2
Daily Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips
Map
ID
Project Description LocationTABLE 5
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES FOR RELATED PROJECTS
In Out Total In Out Total
Daily Trips
A.M. Peak Hour Trips P.M. Peak Hour Trips
Map
ID
Project Description Location
25. Symantec Office Development 550,000 sf of office development 800-900 Corporate Pointe 4,910 639 87 726 118 578 696
26. Hayden Tower Hayden Tower 3585 Hayden Av 400 38 9 47 12 36 48
27. Sony 49,516 sf addition to stage 6: converting to office 10202 Washington Bl 545 68 9 77 13 61 74
28. Washington/National TOD
181 residential town homes, 59 Live-Work units, 48,000 sf retail
space
Washington Bl/National Bl 3,580 176 261 437 143 115 258
29. Park Century School 6,950 sf 3939 Landmark St. 365 80 82 162 -8 -17 -25
30. Hampton Inn 77-unit hotel 3954 Sepulveda Bl 629 26 17 43 24 21 45
31. Surfas Restaurant Supplies 14,856 sf 8777 Washington Bl 1,030 21 26 47 26 33 59
32. Parcel B 115,108 sf of office, restaurant, retail space 9300 Culver Bl 4,672 224 84 308 129 194 323
33. Warehouse 10,500 sf of office and warehouse Jefferson Bl 52 4 1 5 1 4 5
34.
West Los Angeles Community
College
Proposed Master Plan for the College to increase the student
enrollment from current 10,312 to 15,124 students by year 2015;
anticipated enrollment growth through 2008 used for trip generation for
purposes of this study
Overland Av/ Freshman Dr 17,367 1,117 115 1,232 767 341 1,108
35. Metro Division 6
Proposed construction of a transportation center for operations and
maintenance facility for up to 175 MTA buses and associated
administrative staff
Jefferson Bl 1,666 67 40 107 77 26 103
36. Villa Marina Mixed-Use Project 350 condominiums , 4,000 sf retail space Lincoln Bl 547 -9 101 92 74 37 111
37. Turning Point School School Expansion National Bl & Wesley St 91 83 174 0 0 0
38.
Washington/Landmark Mixed-use
project
145 condominium dwelling units & 6,000 sf retail
8810, 8840, 8850 Washington
Blvd & 3920 Landmark Street
1,108 15 55 70 61 37 98
39. Expo Light Rail Transit 346 38 384 31 277 308
63,455 4,420 1,528 5,948 2,660 3,701 6,361
Source:
Planning Department, City of Culver City
Traffic Study for the West Los Angeles College Facilities Master Plan , Kaku Associates, September 2004.
Traffic Study for Symantec Office Development Project , Kaku Associates, July 2004.
Traffic Study for Expo Light Rail Transit , Kaku Associates, July 2005. Mid-City/Exposition LRT Project. http://www.metro.net/projects_plans/exposition/default.htm
TotalFIGURE 5
LOCATIONS OF RELATED PROJECTS
23
Trip Generation
Trip generation estimates for each of the cumulative projects were obtained from Culver City. As
shown in Table 5, the cumulative projects are expected to generate approximately 5,948 vehicles
per hour (vph) during the morning peak hour and 6,361 vph during the evening peak hour.
Trip Distribution
The geographic distribution of the traffic generated by the cumulative projects is dependent on
several factors. These factors include the type and density of the proposed land uses, the
geographic distribution of population from which the employees and potential patrons of the
proposed developments are drawn, and the location of the projects in relation to the surrounding
street system. The traffic distribution patterns took the proposed realignment of Washington
Boulevard into consideration.
Traffic Assignment
The trip generation estimates were assigned to the local street system using the trip distribution
pattern described above. These volumes, which were then added to the existing traffic volumes
after the adjustment for areawide growth, are illustrated in Figure 6. They represent cumulative
base conditions, i.e., future conditions without the proposed project.
PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The development of traffic generation estimates for the proposed project involves the use of a
three-step process similar to that discussed above for the cumulative projects. 1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
11.
12.
16. 17.
9. 10.
13. 14. 15.
8.
WASHINGTON BL
WATSEKA AV
IRVING PL
CULVER BL
32(97)
68(39)
98(65)
2,131(1,969)
51(27)
223(247)
113(67)
2,072(1,665)
49(82)
56(72)
285(260)
81(146)
82(65)
568(560)
538(392)
267(154) 93(91)
154(216)
269(405)
6(12)
9(32)
376(445)
1,128(1,484)
462(368)
12(15)
2(15)
396(238)
1,463(1,035)
8(20)
32(85)
12(21)
20(23)
24(66)
87(177)
878(858)
188(99)
70(46)
32(20)
51(82)
932(1,027)
11(29)
46(53)
81(23)
17(42)
688(987)
69(109)
167(139)
69(65)
870(731)
39(49)
40(41)
60(168)
24(33)
14(48)
461(1,080)
967(477)
108(612)
37(148)
698(914)
172(85)
710(347)
74(43)
111(49)
1,052(733)
137(220)
53(129)
51(52)
1,249(1,087)
10(28)
67(91)
102(81)
846(797)
59(73)
369(298)
105(132)
20(34)
782(924)
92(120)
33(96)
288(315)
106(140)
12(19)
622(701)
526(714)
1,955(1,953)
9(21) 31(58)
16(52)
1,700(1,928)
130(165)
33(41)
37(85)
383(493)
107(120)
223(244)
40(61)
78(64)
160(95)
270(193)
21(31)
4(3)
2(*)
1(2)
93(157)
187(170)
141(60)
2(1)
*(1)
29(15)
176(158)
*(2)
101(103)
1,597(1,868)
1,577(1,736)
95(93)
75(145)
182(261)
101(83)
79(118)
84(194)
81(100)
1,276(1,151)
64(73)
128(107)
122(120)
937(1,016)
246(309)
956(673)
514(255)
1,371(785)
223(333)
111(64)
830(1,014)
396(180)
161(210)
120(76)
66(82) 248(278)
132(150)
995(1,132)
103(207)
172(172)
92(42)
440(220)
1,422(926)
61(58)
595(527)
83(65)
83(94)
2,709(2,565)
104(62)
485(383)
184(186)
2,155(1,979)
498(162)
716(665)
484(397)
399(271)
752(687)
885(1,084)
43(84)
16(12)
1(4)
3(9)
34(14)
88(93)
18(22)
935(990)
594(845)
27(12)
28(91)
26(23)
224(129)
98(85)
881(1,207)
143(124)
423(623)
3(26)
25(34)
590(891)
1,048(1,336)
Hughes Av
Venice Bl &
Culver Bl
Venice Bl &
Main St/Washington Bl
Culver Bl &
Ince Bl
Washington Bl &
Ince Bl
Culver Bl &
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Lucerne Av &
Madison Av
Culver Bl &
Clarington Av
Washington Bl &
Duquesne
Culver Bl &
Venice Bl &
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl Robertson Bl/Higuera St
Washington Bl & Washington Bl &
National Bl
Higuera St
Lucerne Av &
Ince Bl
Lucerne Av &
18.
70(104)
169(33)
846(1,260)
169(204)
660(594)
815(342)
National Bl
Hayden Av &
FIGURE 6
CUMULATIVE BASE PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
25
Project Traffic Generation
As indicated, the proposed project consists of 49,500 sf of active production support development.
Per discussions with Culver City staff, it has been assumed that the proposed land use has a trip
generation equal to 75% of a general office building (Transportation/Circulation and Parking
Technical Report, Grand Central Creative Campus, Kaku Associates Inc., June 2000). Trip
generation rates from Trip Generation, 7
th
Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003)
were used to estimate the number of trips associated with general office building. The estimates
of future trips expected to be generated by the proposed project are summarized in Table 6.
Under current conditions, the trips generated by Building J park off the site. When project buildout
is completed, these trips would be routed back to the project site and hence the trip generation
represents a conservative analysis, as no trip credits were taken. As shown, it is estimated that
the project would generate a total of 409 daily trips, of which 58 would occur during the morning
peak hour and 55 during the evening peak hour.
Project Traffic Distribution
The geographic distribution of the traffic generated by the proposed project depends on several
factors. These factors include the type and density of the proposed land uses, the geographic
distribution of population from which the employees and potential patrons of the proposed
development are drawn, and the location of the project in relation to the surrounding street
system. The distribution pattern for this project is illustrated in Figure 7. The project traffic
distribution took the proposed realignment of Washington Boulevard into consideration. No
project trips were assigned to Gate 1 as this gate was assumed closed to represent a worst-case
scenario. It is anticipated that Gate 1 will not be closed in the future and studio traffic will continue
to use this entry/exit point. PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
Trip Gen In Out Trip Gen In Out
Trips Rates [a]
Active Production
Support
75% per 1,000 square feet 8.26 1.163 88% 12% 1.118 17% 83%
A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
In Out Total In Out Total
Existing Land Uses:
Active Production
Support (Building J)
11.9 ksf 98 12 2 14 2 11 13
Proposed Land Uses:
Active Production
Support (Building J)
49.5 ksf 409 51 7 58 9 46 55
New Trips 409 51758946 55
[a] Source: Trip Generation, 7th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003 (rates for General Office).
[b] Trip generation equivalency defined as the percent of general office trips which would be generated by the indicated use for a given floor
area. Source: Transportation/Circulation and Parking Technical Report, Grand Central Creative Campus , Kaku Associates Inc., June 2000.
TABLE 6
Trip Generation
Equivalency [b]
Land Use
Land Use Size
Rate Daily
DailyHIGUERA ST
HUGHES AV
CATTARAUGUS AV
WASHINGTON BL
CULVER BL
VENICE BL
DUQUESNE AV
JEFFERSON BL
NATIONAL BL
DURANGO AV
CANFIELD AV
BAGLEY AV
INCE BL
LANDMARK ST
WESLEY ST
HUBBARD ST
KRUEGER ST
LUCERNE AV
LAFAYETTE PL
HAYDEN PL
HAYDEN AV
MADISON AV
CLARINGTON AV
MAIN ST
WASHINGTON BL
HELMS AV
SCHAEFER ST
IRVING PL
WATSEKA AV
NATIONAL BL
7%
5%
8%
3%
7%
10%
15%
9%
33%
7%
8%
10%
2%
3%
15%
10%
10%
5%
10%
15%
24%
15%
5%
17%
RODEO RD
REGENT ST
187
BRADDOCK DR
10
ROBERTSON BL
JEFFERSON BL
15%
16%
2%
8%
6%
6%
8%
4%
12%
8%
25%
60%
40%
3%
CARSON ST
LINBLADE ST
8%
26%
12%
38%
50%
50%
25%
GATE 3
GATE 2
GATE 1
- Project Site
LEGEND
FIGURE 7
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
- Trip Distribution XX%
- Future Two-Way Street
28
Project Traffic Assignment
The traffic expected to be generated by the proposed project was assigned to the street network
using the distribution pattern described in Figure 7. Figure 8 illustrates the assignment of this
traffic at each of the 18 intersections analyzed in this study.
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The project-generated traffic volumes from Figure 8 were added to the cumulative base traffic
volumes in Figure 6 to develop cumulative plus project peak hour traffic volumes illustrated in
Figure 9.
1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
11.
12.
16. 17.
9. 10.
13. 14. 15.
8.
WASHINGTON BL
WATSEKA AV
IRVING PL
CULVER BL
5(1)
*(1)
1(5)
2(*)
1(4)
4(1)
*(1)
*(2)
3(*)
2(*)
4(1)
1(4)
4(1)
*(3)
*(1)
2(*)
1(6)
3(17)
4(1) 4(1)
1(4)
1(4)
1(6)
6(1)
13(2)
2(12)
1(6)
6(1)
4(23)
26(5)
4(23)
1(4)
1(5)
*(3)
4(1)
5(1)
17(3)
2(12)
2(12)
9(2)
*(2)
1(4)
5(1)
1(4)
1(7)
3(1)
3(1)
12(2)
1(5)
1(7)
8(1)
5(1)
26(5)
6(1)
19(3)
Hughes Av
Venice Bl &
Culver Bl
Venice Bl &
Main St/Washington Bl
Culver Bl &
Ince Bl
Washington Bl &
Ince Bl
Culver Bl &
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Lucerne Av &
Madison Av
Culver Bl &
Clarington Av
Washington Bl &
Duquesne
Culver Bl &
Venice Bl &
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl Robertson Bl/Higuera St
Washington Bl & Washington Bl &
National Bl
Higuera St
Lucerne Av &
Ince Bl
Lucerne Av &
18.
National Bl
Hayden Av &
*(3)
4(1)
FIGURE 8
PROJECT ONLY PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES1. 2. 3. 4.
5. 6. 7.
11.
12.
16. 17.
9. 10.
13. 14. 15.
8.
WASHINGTON BL
WATSEKA AV
IRVING PL
CULVER BL
32(97)
68(39)
98(65)
2,136(1,970)
51(27)
223(248)
113(67)
2,073(1,670)
49(82)
56(72)
287(260)
81(146)
82(65)
569(564)
542(393)
267(154) 93(91)
154(216)
269(406)
6(12)
9(32)
376(447)
1,128(1,484)
465(368)
12(15)
2(15)
398(238)
1,463(1,035)
8(20)
32(85)
12(21)
20(23)
24(66)
87(177)
882(859)
188(99)
70(46)
32(20)
51(82)
933(1,031)
11(29)
46(53)
81(23)
17(42)
692(988)
69(109)
167(139)
69(65)
870(734)
39(49)
40(41)
60(168)
24(33)
14(48)
461(1,081)
969(477)
108(612)
37(148)
698(914)
172(85)
710(347)
74(43)
111(49)
1,052(733)
137(220)
54(135)
51(52)
1,252(1,104)
10(28)
67(91)
102(81)
850(798)
59(73)
369(298)
109(133)
20(34)
783(928)
93(124)
33(96)
288(315)
106(140)
12(19)
623(707)
532(715)
1,955(1,953)
9(21) 31(58)
16(52)
1,700(1,928)
130(165)
33(41)
37(85)
383(493)
107(120)
223(244)
40(61)
78(64)
160(95)
270(193)
21(31)
4(3)
2(*)
1(2)
93(157)
187(170)
141(60)
2(1)
*(1)
29(15)
176(158)
*(2)
101(103)
1,610(1,870)
1,579(1,748)
96(99)
75(145)
188(262)
105(106)
105(123)
84(194)
85(123)
1,276(1,151)
65(77)
128(107)
122(120)
938(1,021)
246(312)
956(673)
518(256)
1,376(786)
223(333)
111(64)
830(1,014)
396(180)
161(210)
120(76)
66(82) 248(278)
149(153)
997(1,144)
105(219)
172(172)
92(42)
440(220)
1,431(928)
61(58)
595(529)
84(69)
88(95)
2,710(2,569)
104(62)
486(390)
184(186)
2,158(1,980)
498(162)
719(666)
496(399)
399(271)
753(692)
886(1,091)
43(84)
16(12)
1(4)
3(9)
34(14)
88(93)
18(22)
943(991)
599(846)
27(12)
28(91)
26(23)
224(129)
124(90)
881(1,207)
149(125)
423(623)
3(26)
25(34)
590(891)
1,067(1,339)
Hughes Av
Venice Bl &
Culver Bl
Venice Bl &
Main St/Washington Bl
Culver Bl &
Ince Bl
Washington Bl &
Ince Bl
Culver Bl &
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Jefferson Bl &
Duquesne Av
Lucerne Av &
Madison Av
Culver Bl &
Clarington Av
Washington Bl &
Duquesne
Culver Bl &
Venice Bl &
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl Robertson Bl/Higuera St
Washington Bl & Washington Bl &
National Bl
Higuera St
Lucerne Av &
Ince Bl
Lucerne Av &
18.
70(104)
169(33)
846(1,263)
169(204)
660(594)
819(343)
National Bl
Hayden Av &
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES
FIGURE 9
31
IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The traffic impact analysis compares the projected levels of service at each study intersection
under the cumulative base and cumulative plus project conditions to estimate the incremental
increase in the V/C ratio caused by the proposed project. This provides the information needed to
assess the potential impact of the project using significance criteria established by Culver City.
SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC IMPACT CRITERIA
The significant impact criteria for the City of Culver City and the City of Los Angeles are
described below.
City of Culver City
The City of Culver City has established threshold criteria used to determine if a project has a
significant traffic impact at an intersection. According to the city’s criteria, a project impact would
be considered significant if the following conditions are met:
Intersection Conditions
with Project Traffic
Project-related Increase
in V/C Ratio
LOS V/C Ratio
D 0.801 to 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.040
E, F 0.901 or more Equal to or greater than 0.020
Using these criteria, for example, a project would not have a significant impact at an intersection if
it is operating at LOS D after the addition of project traffic and the incremental change in the V/C
ratio is less than 0.040. If the intersection is operating at LOS E or F after the addition of project
32
traffic and the incremental change in the V/C ratio is 0.020 or greater, however, the project would
be considered to have a significant impact at this location.
City of Los Angeles
LADOT has established threshold criteria to determine whether a project has a significant traffic
impact at a specific location. This study analyzes Los Angeles intersections pursuant to these
criteria. Under the LADOT standard, a project impact would be considered significant if the
following conditions are met:
Intersection Conditions
with Project Traffic
Project-related Increase
in V/C Ratio
LOS V/C Ratio
C 0.701 - 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.040
D 0.801 - 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.020
E, F > 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.010
CUMULATIVE BASE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The year 2007 cumulative base peak hour traffic volumes were analyzed to determine the
projected V/C ratio and LOS for each of the analyzed intersections. Table 7 summarizes the
future levels of service. As indicated in Table 7, poor operating conditions (LOS E or F) are
projected at six of the 18 study intersections during at least one of the analyzed peak hours.
The intersections projected to operate at poor levels of service under future year 2007
cumulative base conditions during one or both of the analyzed peak periods include the
following:
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Rodeo Road and Higuera Street
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
•
Duquesne Avenue and Lucerne Avenue
•
Culver Boulevard and Ince Boulevard
•
Venice Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard
•
Washington Boulevard and National Boulevard INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
FUTURE CONDITIONS (YEAR 2007)
Cumulative Project Significant
plus Project Increase Project
V/C or Delay LOS V/C or Delay LOS in V/C Impact?
1. Jefferson Boulevard & Higuera Street & Rodeo Road
(a)
A.M. 0.928 E 0.928 E 0.000 No
P.M. 0.804 D 0.804 D 0.000 No
2. Jefferson Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
(a)
A.M. 1.018 F 1.020 F 0.002 No
P.M. 0.884 D 0.885 D 0.001 No
3. Duquesne Avenue & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 44.1 E 44.8 E
P.M. 36.0 E 36.9 E
A.M. 1.037 1.040 0.003 No
P.M. 1.003 1.010 0.007 No
4. Culver Boulevard & Madison Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.535 A 0.536 A 0.001 No
P.M. 0.522 A 0.523 A 0.001 No
5. Washington Boulevard & Clarington Avenue & Madison Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.450 A 0.450 A 0.000 No
P.M. 0.571 A 0.571 A 0.000 No
6. Culver Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.625 B 0.627 B 0.002 No
P.M. 0.629 B 0.632 B 0.003 No
7. Venice Boulevard & Hughes Avenue
(a)
A.M. 0.825 D 0.828 D 0.003 No
P.M. 0.774 C 0.775 C 0.001 No
8. Culver Boulevard & Washington Boulevard & Watseka Avenue & Irving Place
(a)
A.M. 0.636 B 0.638 B 0.002 No
P.M. 0.817 D 0.819 D 0.002 No
9. Culver Boulevard & Washington Boulevard & Main Street
(a)
A.M. 0.555 A 0.560 A 0.005 No
P.M. 0.638 B 0.643 B 0.005 No
10. Washington Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.709 C 0.718 C 0.009 No
P.M. 0.756 C 0.771 C 0.015 No
11. Culver Boulevard & Ince Boulevard A.M. 1.038 F 1.047 F 0.009 No
P.M. 1.087 F 1.095 F 0.008 No
12. Venice Boulevard & Culver Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.701 C 0.702 C 0.001 No
P.M. 0.843 D 0.843 D 0.000 No
13. Venice Boulevard & Robertson Boulevard & Exposition Boulevard A.M. 1.268 F 1.271 F 0.003 No
P.M. 1.139 F 1.142 F 0.003 No
14. Washington Boulevard & National Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.993 E 0.997 E 0.004 No
P.M. 0.860 D 0.861 D 0.001 No
15. Washington Boulevard & Robertson Boulevard & Higuera Street
(a)
A.M. 0.872 D 0.877 D 0.005 No
P.M. 0.742 C 0.751 C 0.009 No
16. Higuera Street & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 12.0 B 12.0 B
P.M. 10.3 B 10.3 B
A.M. 0.581 0.581 0.000 No
P.M. 0.400 0.400 0.000 No
17. Ince Boulevard & Lucerne Avenue
(b)
A.M. 9.9 A 9.9 A
P.M. 9.2 A 9.2 A
A.M. 0.431 0.431 0.000 No
P.M. 0.313 0.313 0.000 No
18. Hayden Avenue & National Boulevard
(a)
A.M. 0.738 C 0.738 C 0.000 No
P.M. 0.782 C 0.782 C 0.000 No
Notes:
(a)
Intersection is currently operating under the LADOT ATSAC system.
(b)
Intersection is controlled by stop sign(s). The top rows show analysis using Highway Capacity Manual stop-controlled methodology, for the purpose of
evaluating the operating condition of the intersection, average vehicular delay in seconds is reported rather than V/C ratio. The bottom rows show
analysis using the ICU methodology, for the purpose of application of County of Los Angeles significance criteria, V/C ratio is reported.
Cumulative Base
TABLE 7
Intersection No.
Peak
Hour
34
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The resulting cumulative plus project peak hour traffic volumes illustrated in Figure 9 were
analyzed to determine the projected future operating conditions with the addition of the proposed
project traffic. Under current conditions, the trips generated by Building J park offsite. When
the project buildout is completed, these trips would be routed back to the project site and hence
the trip generation and assignment represents a more conservative analysis.
The results of the cumulative plus project analysis, which are presented in Table 7, indicate that
poor operating conditions (LOS E or F) are projected at six of the 18 study intersections during
at least one of the analyzed peak hours. The intersections projected to operate at poor levels
of service (LOS E or F) under future year 2007 cumulative plus project conditions during one or
both of the analyzed peak periods include the following:
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Rodeo Road and Higuera Street
•
Jefferson Boulevard and Duquesne Avenue
•
Duquesne Avenue and Lucerne Avenue
•
Culver Boulevard and Ince Boulevard
•
Venice Boulevard and Robertson Boulevard and Exposition Boulevard
•
Washington Boulevard and National Boulevard
NEIGHBORHOOD STREET SEGMENT ANALYSIS
When the project trip distribution was determined for the project, it was agreed in consultation
with City of Culver City staff that the impact of project trips on residential neighborhoods would
be minimized. The Studios, in coordination with the City of Culver City, have agreed to
implement measures in order to accomplish the aforementioned objective. These measures
are described in greater detail in the project mitigation section of this report
As a result of these measures, no new trips associated with the proposed project were routed
through the adjacent residential neighborhood. Thus the project would not create a significant
traffic impact in any of the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the project site. In addition, the
35
Studios have agreed to implement a traffic-monitoring program that is described later in this
chapter.
PROJECT IMPACTS
Using the City of Culver City's criteria for determining the significance of the project traffic impacts,
it was determined that the proposed project would not have a significant traffic impact at any of
the analyzed intersections and street segments in Culver City. Based on the City of Los
Angeles’ significance criteria, no significant impacts were identified at the analyzed
intersections in the City of Los Angeles.
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
The traffic impact analysis determined that the proposed development would not generate
significant traffic impacts at any of the analyzed intersections in the study under cumulative plus
project conditions. Therefore no project-related traffic mitigation measures at the analyzed
intersections would be necessary. The project will, however, implement some improvements that
will help traffic operation in the future.
Ince Boulevard Restriping
In order to improve operating conditions at the entry point to Gate 2, Culver City staff has
requested that the southbound departure leg of Ince Boulevard directly outside of Gate 2 be
restriped. The current lane configuration consists of one through lane, which is 21 feet wide. The
width of this lane is sufficient to accommodate the proposed striping detailed below:
•
One southbound departure through/right lane (11 feet wide)
•
One southbound departure right-turn lane pocket into Gate 2 (10 feet wide)
36
The restriped departure lanes would help facilitate smoother operation of Gate 2. The two lanes
would allow Ince Boulevard to continue to operate normally, while minimizing the potential for any
through lane blockages.
Additional Traffic Signs
In discussions with Culver City Staff, it was agreed that all vehicles entering the Studio via Gates 2
and 3 would be via right-turn-in only. Also, vehicles leaving through Gates 2 and 3 would be via
left-turn-out movements only. Culver Studios will work with the City to place “right in/left out only”
street signage to help enforce the turn prohibitions. It is anticipated that these signs will be on the
Studio property and/or on the City right-of-way.
In addition, the Studio will implement a public relations program that will inform all employees,
vendors, tenants and visitors of the designated routes to and from the studios to help prevent
vehicles using residential neighborhoods to access the site.
Traffic Monitoring Program
Culver Studios will implement a traffic monitoring program in order to ensure that employees,
vendors, tenants and visitors to the studios are complying with the revised turn prohibitions. This
program (implemented following each phase of construction) will consist of the following:
•
Daily (24-hour) machine counts at two locations (1) Krueger Street east of Ince
Boulevard and (2) Ince Boulevard north of Lucerne Avenue.
•
12-hour turning movement counts at the intersection of Krueger Street and Ince
Boulevard.
•
Driveway counts at the studio gates to determine how patrons of the studios are accessing
and leaving the studios.
The aforementioned traffic monitoring will occur at the following intervals:
•
Two weeks following completion of the construction phase
37
•
One month from completion of the construction phase
•
Quarterly for the next three years
It has been agreed with the City that if the traffic levels on the residential street segments included
in this program increase by 15% or more (in traffic that can be attributable to Culver Studios), then
access to Gate 3 will be restricted to trucks only.
38
V. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section presents an analysis of potential project impacts on the regional transportation
system. This analysis was conducted in accordance with the transportation impact analysis
(TIA) procedures outlined in 2004 Congestion Management Program for Los Angeles County
(Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, June 2004). The Congestion
Management Program (CMP) requires that, when an environmental impact report is prepared
for a project, traffic and transit impact analyses be conducted for select regional facilities based
on the quantity of project traffic expected to use these facilities.
SELECTION OF REGIONAL ANALYSIS LOCATIONS
The CMP guidelines require that the first issue addressed be the determination of the
geographic scope of the study area. The criteria for determining the study area for CMP arterial
monitoring intersections and for freeway monitoring locations are:
•
All CMP arterial monitoring intersections where the proposed project will add 50 or
more trips during either the a.m. or p.m. weekday peak hours of adjacent street
traffic.
•
All CMP mainline freeway monitoring locations where the proposed project will add
150 or more trips, in either direction, during either the a.m. or p.m. weekday peak
hours.
Selection of Arterial Monitoring Intersections for Analysis
The nearest CMP arterial monitoring intersections to the project site are the following:
•
La Cienega Boulevard and Venice Boulevard (City of Los Angeles)
•
La Cienega Boulevard and Jefferson Boulevard (City of Los Angeles)
39
•
Overland Avenue and Venice Boulevard (City of Culver City)
•
La Cienega Boulevard and Centinela Avenue (City of Los Angeles)
•
La Cienega Boulevard and Stocker Street (County of Los Angeles)
Based on the project trip generation estimates and a review of the net project traffic volumes
shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8, the proposed project is not expected to add more than 50
vehicles per hour (vph) to any of these intersections. Therefore, a detailed analysis of the
aforementioned intersections was not required and there are no project impacts on these
intersections.
Freeway Segment Analysis
Since the proposed project is not expected to generate 150 trips or more in either of the analyzed
peak hours, no further analysis is required for the CMP mainline freeway monitoring locations.
CMP TRANSIT IMPACT ANALYSIS
Section B.8.4 of the CMP provides a methodology for estimating the number of transit trips
expected to result from a proposed project based on the number of vehicle trips. This
methodology assumes an average vehicle ridership (AVR) factor of 1.4 in order to estimate the
number of person trips to and from the project and then provides guidelines regarding the
percentage of person trips assigned to public transit depending on the type of use (commercial
versus residential) and the proximity to transit services. Since the project site is located within
one-quarter mile of a designated CMP transit corridor, the CMP guidelines provide that
approximately 7.0% of total person trips generated might use public transit to travel to and from
the site.
As summarized previously in Table 6, the proposed project is estimated to generate
approximately 409 daily net trips, 58 net a.m. peak hour trips, and 55 net p.m. peak hour trips. By
applying the CMP guidelines described above (i.e., converting the vehicle trips to person trips by
multiplying by a 1.4 AVR and assuming 7.0% transit use), the results indicate that the project
40
could add approximately six new transit person trips in the weekday a.m. peak hour and 6 new
transit person trips in the weekday p.m. peak hour.
As discussed in Chapter II, the project site is served by a number of established public transit
routes. These routes connect with other routes at the Fox Hills Transit Center, providing
connectivity to public transit services throughout Los Angeles and potentially distributing project
transit trips across numerous routes. Therefore, no significant project-related impacts on the
regional transit system are anticipated.
41
VI. PROJECT ACCESS, INTERNAL CIRCULATION AND PARKING
This section presents a review of the project access, internal circulation, and parking availability.
PROJECT ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION
The proposed project includes replacement of existing facilities with 49,500 sf of office production
space and a new parking structure. The project site is bounded by Washington Boulevard to the
west, Ince Boulevard to the north, Van Buren Place and single-family residential properties to the
south and west in the downtown area of the City of Culver City. Culver Boulevard and Ince
Boulevard would provide vehicular and pedestrian access for the proposed project. Parking would
be provided in a new parking structure containing 200 parking spaces.
The project would continue to use the three existing active entry gates (Gates 1, 2 and 3) and
modify the internal circulation system on the site. Gates 2 and 3 would provide primary access to
the project site. Limited access to Gate 1 will be provided off Ince Boulevard. No project trips
were assigned to Gate 1 as this gate was assumed closed to represent a worst-case scenario. It
is anticipated that Gate 1 will not be closed in the future and studio traffic will continue to be use
this entry/exit point. It is also assumed that Gate 4 on Van Buren Place would remain unchanged
and would be used for emergency access only, as it is today. Entry and exit to the project site is
anticipated to work well with no traffic conflicts or safety issues.
Entry/exit control would be as follows:
•
Two entry lanes at Gate 2 and one entry lane at Gate 3.
•
One exit lane at both gates.
42
Entry/Exit Gate Queuing Analysis
Gate queuing analysis was conducted for the proposed project taking into consideration
estimated service capacities for the entry and exit controls. Table 8 presents the results of this
analysis.
As shown in Table 8, Gate 2 has two entry lanes (one lane with no access control and one
access-controlled lane) and Gate 3 has one controlled entry lane. The uncontrolled entry lane
at Gate 2 is estimated to have a capacity of up to 1,000 vph (Entrance-Exit Design and Control
for Major Parking Facilities, Crommelin, 1972) and the controlled lanes have an estimated
capacity of approximately 75 to 100 vph (according to discussions with City staff).
Morning weekday peak hour year 2007 entry volumes are projected to be approximately 31
vehicles at Gate 2 and 20 vehicles at Gate 3. The entry queues that develop are not expected
to exceed two vehicles per lane at Gate 2 and three vehicles per lane at Gate 3. According to
the analysis, these queues are forecast to occur no more than 5% of the time.
Afternoon weekday peak hour year 2007 entry volumes are projected to be approximately five
vehicles at Gate 2 and four vehicles at Gate 3. The entry queues that develop are not expected
to exceed one vehicle per lane at Gates 2 and 3. According to the analysis, these queues are
forecast to occur no more than 5% of the time.
The control booth entrance at Gate 2 is approximately 114 feet from Ince Boulevard and this
location contains a controlled lane (employee access) of 12 feet in width and an uncontrolled
lane (visitor access) of 11.5 feet in width.
As discussed in Chapter IV, the southbound departure on Ince Boulevard (at Gate 2) will be
restriped to accommodate a dedicated right-turn lane into the studio and a through/right lane.
This will facilitate improved access and operation at Gate 2.
The control booth entrance at Gate 3 is approximately 86 feet from Ince Boulevard and this
location contains a controlled lane (employee/visitor access) of 12.5 feet in width. Employees Visitors Employees Visitors
PROJECT-GENERATED TRAFFIC
Project Inbound Trips 21 10 20 3 2 4
Existing Inbound Trips (including trips rerouted from Gate 1) 86 23 43 22 11 19
Total Inbound Trips 107 33 63 25 13 23
GATE CONTROLS
Control Lane Service Capacity
75 100 75 100
Lane 2: Clear aisle, no control [c] 1,000 n/a 1,000 n/a
Traffic Intensity factor 0.107 0.440 0.630 0.025 0.173 0.230
Entry Queue per Lane (behind service position) * 1 vehicle 2 vehicles 3 vehicles 1 vehicle 1 vehicle 1 vehicle
Notes:
* Not exceeded more than 5 times in 100.
[a] From Trip Distribution
[b] Service capacities based on discussion with Culver City staff.
[c] Sources: Entrance-Exit Design and Control for Major Parking Facilities (Crommelin, 1972); Traffic Engineering
Handbook, 4th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1992).
Lane 1: Ticket Dispenser with gate (easy Direct
Approach) / Direction-info needed (Gate 2 Visitors) [b]
Gate 3
Gate 2 Gate 2
Gate 3
A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR
GATES ENTRY LANE QUEUING ANALYSIS
TABLE 8
44
Therefore, the anticipated entry queues at the Gates (as listed in Table 8) could be
accommodated on the internal driveways at the Studios without backing up onto Ince Boulevard
or Culver Boulevard. It should also be noted that Culver Studios intends to implement an
automated gate pass system that will allow guards to process visitors more efficiently.
PARKING
Under the update to Comprehensive Plan #5, the total number of required vehicle spaces is 1051.
The number of spaces that will be provided on site will be 751 (because of the shared parking
agreement for live audiences and the 100 deferred parking spaces).
The existing land uses on site under the current comprehensive plan would require 976 spaces,
with 676 to be provided on the site. Under the new Comprehensive Plan #5 parking ratios, the
parking requirements based on the existing structures would be 921, with 621 provided on the
site.
With the new Comprehensive Plan #5 buildout (new Building J), the total parking requirement will
be 1051 spaces with 751 to be provided on the site. A more detailed breakdown of the parking
requirements is provided in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5 documentation. In order to
meet the new parking requirements, there will be a new 200-space parking structure built.
45
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This study was undertaken to analyze the potential traffic impacts of the proposed office
production space development as part of the Culver Studios Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5
on the local street system. The following summarizes the results of this analysis:
•
The project includes the demolition of existing Building J and its replacement with a new
building with a total of 49,500 sf of office production space. The project also includes
the construction of a new parking structure. The project would make improvements to
the three existing active entry gates (Gates 1, 2 and 3) and modify the internal
circulation system on the site. The project will also continue the limited truck use of
Gate #4 as described in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #5 appendix
documentation. It is assumed that the gate on Van Buren Place and would be used for
emergency access only, as it is today.
•
A total of 18 intersections were analyzed within the study area for this project. Seventeen
of the intersections currently operate at LOS D or better during both peak hours. The
intersection of Venice Boulevard & Robertson Boulevard/Exposition Boulevard currently
operates at LOS F during the morning peak hour and at LOS E during the afternoon peak
hour.
•
Because of the potential closure of Washington Boulevard adjacent to the project site, the
future conditions were evaluated with the contemplated closure.
•
Twelve of the 18 study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable level of
service (LOS D or better) during morning and evening peak hours in cumulative base
conditions (year 2007). The other six intersections are projected to operate at LOS E or F
during at least one of the analyzed peak hours.
•
Twelve of the 18 study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable level of
service (LOS D or better) during morning and evening peak hours in cumulative plus
project conditions (year 2007). The other six intersections are projected to operate at LOS
E or F during at least one of the analyzed peak hours.
•
Analysis of projected cumulative plus project conditions indicates that the proposed project
would not create any significant traffic impacts at any of the analyzed intersections.
•
The project is also not expected to have a significant impact on any of the streets in the
residential neighborhood adjacent to the site. The Studio will implement a public relations
program that will inform all employees, vendors, tenants and visitors of the designated
routes to and from the studios to help prevent vehicles using residential street to access
the site.
46
•
In order to prevent the project traffic from using the neighborhood streets, new traffic signs
would be posted on Ince Boulevard and/or the Studio at Gates 2 and 3 to prevent right
turns out of the site onto southbound Ince Boulevard. Access to both of these Gates
would be via right-turn-in/left-turn-out only.
•
Culver Studios would be required to implement a traffic monitoring program over a three-
year period commencing after the first phase of construction. If there were more than a
15% increase in traffic at the monitoring locations, then the City would propose restricting
access at Gate 3 to trucks only.
•
Southbound Ince Boulevard would be restriped at Gate 2 to provide a through/right and a
dedicated right-turn lane to provide better access to the site.
•
Analyses of potential impacts on the regional transportation system conducted in
accordance with CMP requirements determined that the project would not have a
significant impact on CMP monitoring intersections or the mainline freeway system.
•
The project location is well served by numerous established transit routes and project-
related impacts on the regional transit system are not expected to be significant.
•
Culver Boulevard and Ince Boulevard would provide vehicular and pedestrian access for
the proposed project. With the inclusion of the proposed project the studios will provide
a total of 751 parking spaces, which meets the City’s code requirement.
REFERENCES
Congestion Management Program For Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority, July 2004.
Culver City Municipal Code, City of Culver City, August 2005.
Downtown Parcel B, Culver City Redevelopment Agency, http://www.ci.culver-
city.ca.us/citygov/redevelop/proj_parcelb.html
Entrance-Exit Design and Control for Major Parking Facilities, Crommelin, 1972.
Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000.
Traffic Study for Expo Light Rail Transit, Kaku Associates, Inc., July 2005.
Traffic Study for Symantec Office Development Project, Kaku Associates, Inc., July 2004.
Traffic Study for the West Los Angeles College Facilities Master Plan, Kaku Associates, Inc.,
September 2004.
Transportation/Circulation and Parking Technical Report, Grand Central Creative Campus, Kaku
Associates, Inc., June 2000.
Transportation Research Circular No. 212, Interim Materials on Highway Capacity, Transportation
Research Board, 1980.
Trip Generation, 7
th
Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2003.
Washington Boulevard Realignment Study, Katz, Okitsu & Associates, September 2005.
APPENDIX A
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Rodeo Rd
Higuera St/Rodeo Rd
Jefferson Bl & 1.
Jefferson Bl
Higuera St
FUTURE
CONDITIONS
Same As Existing
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
Duquesne Av
Duquesne Av
Jefferson Bl & 2.
Jefferson Bl
Same As Existing
Lucerne Av
Lucerne Av
Duquesne Av & 3.
Duquesne Av
Same As Existing
Culver Bl
Culver Bl
Madison Av & 4.
Madison Av
Same As Existing
Washington Bl
Washington Bl
Clarington Av & 5.
Clarington Av
Same As Existing
Culver Bl
Culver Bl
Duquesne Av & 6.
Duquesne Av
Same As Existing
LEGEND
Stop ControlledVenice Bl
Hughes Av &
8.
Hughes Av
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
Venice Bl
Venice Bl
Culver Bl
12.
Venice Bl
Culver Bl &
FUTURE
CONDITIONS
Same As Existing
Same As Existing
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
7.
Same As Existing
Culver Bl
Main St/Washington Bl & 9.
Culver Bl
Washington Bl
Washington Bl
Ince Bl & 10.
Ince Bl
Culver Bl
Culver Bl
11.
Washington Bl
Culver Bl
Washington Bl/Irving Pl &
Main St
Culver Bl
Washington Bl
Main St
Ince Bl &
Ince Bl
Washington Bl
Ince Bl
Washington Bl
Watseka Av
Culver Bl
Irving Pl
Culver Bl
Ince BlEXISTING
CONDITIONS
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl
Higuera St
13.
15.
Robertson Bl/Exposition Bl &
Venice Bl
Washington Bl
Robertson Bl/Higuera St &
Washington Bl
National Bl
14. National Bl &
Washington Bl
FUTURE
CONDITIONS
Venice Bl
Washington Bl Same As Existing
Same As Existing
Same As Existing
INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS
Higuera St
Higuera St
Lucerne Av & 16.
Lucerne Av
Same As Existing
Ince Bl
Ince Bl
Lucerne Av & 17.
Lucerne Av
Same As Existing
LEGEND
Stop Controlled
Robertson Bl
Private Dwy
National Bl
National Bl
Hayden Av & 18.
Hayden Av
Same As Existing
APPENDIX B
TRAFFIC COUNTS
APPENDIX C
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE WORKSHEETS
EXISTING CONDITIONS EXISTING AM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
515
A:
B:
679
133
A:
B:
383
322 A:
B: 146
0.788 =
+
+
+ + + 679 383 14 146
*1425
51 A:
B: 14
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
B(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
146
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
146
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
644 450 133 766 101 937 679 71 14 102 33
937 71 679 101 766 133 450 644 33 102 14
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:53:34 AM
CalcaDB
EX_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETEXISTING PM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
328 A:
B: 255
266 A:
B: 216
60
A:
B:
377
0.726 =
+
+
+ + + 287 377 255 216
*1425
47
A:
B:
287
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
60
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
60
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
753 1049 216 531 46 464 328 42 47 574 115
464 42 328 46 531 216 1049 753 115 574 47
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:54:12 AM
CalcaDB
EX_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 2. Jefferson Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 383 1,600 0.076 N-S(1): 0.332
TH 2.00 1,158 3,200 0.362 * N-S(2): 0.628 *
LT 1.00 8 1,600 0.005 E-W(1): 0.217 *
Westbound RT 1.00 2 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.172
TH 1.00 12 1,600 0.008
LT 1.00 1 1,600 0.001 * V/C: 0.845
Northbound RT 0.00 6 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,040 3,200 0.327
LT 1.00 425 1,600 0.266 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 336 0 0.000 ICU: 0.875
TH 1.00 9 1,600 0.216 *
LT 1.00 262 1,600 0.164 LOS: D
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:45-5:45)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 229 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.417
TH 2.00 794 3,200 0.248 * N-S(2): 0.456 *
LT 1.00 20 1,600 0.013 E-W(1): 0.277 *
Westbound RT 1.00 15 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.254
TH 1.00 15 1,600 0.009
LT 1.00 4 1,600 0.003 * V/C: 0.733
Northbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,281 3,200 0.404
LT 1.00 332 1,600 0.208 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 407 0 0.000 ICU: 0.763
TH 1.00 31 1,600 0.274 *
LT 1.00 392 1,600 0.245 LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISExisting AM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:04 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.951
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 32.1
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: D
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 147 0 90 78 526 0 0 506 251
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 147 0 90 78 526 0 0 506 251
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 147 0 90 78 526 0 0 506 251
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 147 0 90 78 526 0 0 506 251
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 147 0 90 78 526 0 0 506 251
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.38 0.13 0.87 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 336 0 205 82 553 0 0 597 675
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.44 xxxx 0.44 0.95 0.95 xxxx xxxx 0.85 0.37
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 14.2 47.3 47.3 0.0 0.0 32.8 11.1
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 14.2 47.3 47.3 0.0 0.0 32.8 11.1
LOS by Move: * * * B * B E E * * D B
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 14.2 47.3 25.6
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 14.2 47.3 25.6
LOS by Appr: * B E D
********************************************************************************Existing PM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:09 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.899
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 24.6
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: C
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 201 0 73 54 525 0 0 357 147
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 201 0 73 54 525 0 0 357 147
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 201 0 73 54 525 0 0 357 147
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 201 0 73 54 525 0 0 357 147
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 201 0 73 54 525 0 0 357 147
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.73 0.00 0.27 0.09 0.91 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 404 0 147 60 584 0 0 581 655
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.50 xxxx 0.50 0.90 0.90 xxxx xxxx 0.61 0.22
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 14.9 37.4 37.4 0.0 0.0 17.6 9.6
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 14.9 37.4 37.4 0.0 0.0 17.6 9.6
LOS by Move: * * * B * B E E * * C A
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 14.9 37.4 15.2
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 14.9 37.4 15.2
LOS by Appr: * B E C
********************************************************************************Printed: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 4. Culver Boulevard & Madison Avenue
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:30-8:30)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 85 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.094 *
TH 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 N-S(2): 0.028
LT 1.00 31 1,600 0.019 * E-W(1): 0.253
Westbound RT 1.00 50 1,600 0.012 E-W(2): 0.343 *
TH 2.00 730 3,200 0.228 *
LT 1.00 11 1,600 0.007 V/C: 0.437
Northbound RT 0.00 31 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 69 1,600 0.075 *
LT 0.00 20 1,600 0.013 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 ICU: 0.467
TH 2.00 774 3,200 0.246
LT 1.00 184 1,600 0.115 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:45-5:45)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 174 1,600 0.048 N-S(1): 0.107 *
TH 1.00 65 1,600 0.041 N-S(2): 0.062
LT 1.00 83 1,600 0.052 * E-W(1): 0.254
Westbound RT 1.00 80 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.323 *
TH 2.00 839 3,200 0.262 *
LT 1.00 28 1,600 0.018 V/C: 0.430
Northbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 45 1,600 0.055 *
LT 0.00 23 1,600 0.014 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 21 0 0.000 ICU: 0.460
TH 2.00 735 3,200 0.236
LT 1.00 97 1,600 0.061 * LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 5. Washington Boulevard & Clarington Avenue
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 39 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.118 *
TH 1.00 59 1,600 0.061 N-S(2): 0.104
LT 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 * E-W(1): 0.232
Westbound RT 1.00 38 1,600 0.009 E-W(2): 0.287 *
TH 2.00 829 3,200 0.259 *
LT 1.00 17 1,600 0.011 V/C: 0.405
Northbound RT 1.00 79 1,600 0.039 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 164 1,600 0.103 *
LT 1.00 68 1,600 0.043 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 68 0 0.000 ICU: 0.435
TH 2.00 639 3,200 0.221
LT 1.00 45 1,600 0.028 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:30-5:30)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 40 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.105
TH 1.00 165 1,600 0.128 * N-S(2): 0.168 *
LT 1.00 32 1,600 0.020 E-W(1): 0.353 *
Westbound RT 1.00 48 1,600 0.010 E-W(2): 0.248
TH 2.00 688 3,200 0.215
LT 1.00 41 1,600 0.026 * V/C: 0.521
Northbound RT 1.00 23 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 136 1,600 0.085
LT 1.00 64 1,600 0.040 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 107 0 0.000 ICU: 0.551
TH 2.00 939 3,200 0.327 *
LT 1.00 52 1,600 0.033 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 6. Culver Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:30-8:30)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 60 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.237 *
TH 2.00 267 3,200 0.102 N-S(2): 0.163
LT 1.00 22 1,600 0.014 * E-W(1): 0.303 *
Westbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.236
TH 2.00 628 3,200 0.203
LT 1.00 79 1,600 0.049 * V/C: 0.540
Northbound RT 1.00 89 1,600 0.006 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 356 1,600 0.223 *
LT 1.00 98 1,600 0.061 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 65 0 0.000 ICU: 0.570
TH 2.00 747 3,200 0.254 *
LT 1.00 53 1,600 0.033 LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:45-5:45)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 107 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.219 *
TH 2.00 291 3,200 0.124 N-S(2): 0.172
LT 1.00 88 1,600 0.055 * E-W(1): 0.307 *
Westbound RT 0.00 33 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.287
TH 2.00 771 3,200 0.251
LT 1.00 103 1,600 0.064 * V/C: 0.526
Northbound RT 1.00 119 1,600 0.010 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 262 1,600 0.164 *
LT 1.00 77 1,600 0.048 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 86 0 0.000 ICU: 0.556
TH 2.00 691 3,200 0.243 *
LT 1.00 58 1,600 0.036 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISEXISTING AM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
111
A:
B:
389
650 A:
B: 96
31
A:
B:
672
0.754 =
+
+
+ + + 389 672 79 96
*1500
344 A:
B: 79
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
B(E/B)
B(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
31
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
31
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
LT
2015 50 96 1950 44 111 211 67 79 210 55
111 67 211 44 1950 96 50 2015 55 210 79
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:53:34 AM
CalcaDB
EX_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETEXISTING PM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
303 A:
B: 66
520 A:
B: 64
95
A:
B:
615
0.705 =
+
+
+ + + 418 615 66 64
*1500
143
A:
B:
418
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
95
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
95
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
LT
1844 26 64 1560 71 66 199 38 143 204 71
66 38 199 71 1560 64 26 1844 71 204 143
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:54:12 AM
CalcaDB
EX_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEET16 718 717 35 69
33|1010|Irving
Place
18
Watseka
Avenue
27
549
26
806
Existing Conditions A.M. Peak Hour
Washington Boulevard
Culver Boulevard
N
Culver Boulevard
25Phase 1) 549|1010|= 275
Phase 2) 806 + 18|1010|= 480
Phase 3) 35|1010|= 35
Phase 4) 33 + 3|1010|= 36
Critical Volumes = 275 + 480 + 35 + 36
= 826
826
1600
LOS A
0.546 =
or
25+27|1010|&
718 + 33 +16|1010|V/C = - 0.07
or
717 + 3
1.5
&
+ 0.10
767 - 275
1.512 644 911 67 81
14|10 10|Irving
Place
22
Watseka
Avenue
89
804
12
856
N
Culver Boulevard
23
Existing Conditions P.M. Peak Hour
Washington Boulevard
Culver BoulevardPhase 1) 804|1010|= 402
Phase 2) 856 + 22|1010|= 613
Phase 3) 67|1010|= 67
Phase 4) 14 + 9|1010|= 23
Critical Volumes = 402 + 613 + 67 + 23
= 1105
1105
1600
LOS C
644 + 14 +12|1010|or
89 + 23|1010|&
V/C = - 0.07
or
911 + 9
1.5
&
670 - 402
1.5
+ 0.10 0.721 =Printed: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 9. Culver Boulevard & Main Street & Washington Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 73 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.511 *
TH 1.00 125 1,600 0.086 * N-S(2): 0.000
LT 0.00 12 1,600 0.008 E-W(1): 0.209 *
Westbound RT 0.00 18 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.152
TH 2.00 272 3,200 0.091
LT 1.00 20 1,600 0.013 * V/C: 0.720
Northbound RT 0.00 9 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 113 1,600 0.076
LT 2.00 1,088 2,560 0.425 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 2.00 708 3,200 0.051 ICU: 0.750
TH 2.00 626 3,200 0.196 *
LT 1.00 98 1,600 0.061 LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:30-5:30)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 141 1,600 0.026 N-S(1): 0.519 *
TH 1.00 218 1,600 0.149 * N-S(2): 0.000
LT 0.00 20 1,600 0.013 E-W(1): 0.256 *
Westbound RT 0.00 24 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.233
TH 2.00 519 3,200 0.170
LT 1.00 58 1,600 0.036 * V/C: 0.775
Northbound RT 0.00 7 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 80 1,600 0.054
LT 2.00 947 2,560 0.370 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 2.00 975 3,200 0.157 ICU: 0.805
TH 2.00 703 3,200 0.220 *
LT 1.00 100 1,600 0.063 LOS: D
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 10. Washington Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.047 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * E-W(1): 0.313
Westbound RT 1.00 45 1,600 0.028 E-W(2): 0.365 *
TH 2.00 1,159 3,200 0.362 *
LT 1.00 77 1,600 0.048 V/C: 0.412
Northbound RT 1.00 99 1,600 0.014 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 32 1,600 0.047 *
LT 0.00 43 1,600 0.027 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 59 0 0.000 ICU: 0.442
TH 2.00 790 3,200 0.265
LT 1.00 4 1,600 0.003 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:45-5:45)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.048 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * E-W(1): 0.452 *
Westbound RT 1.00 81 1,600 0.051 E-W(2): 0.323
TH 2.00 989 3,200 0.309
LT 1.00 116 1,600 0.073 * V/C: 0.500
Northbound RT 1.00 81 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 33 1,600 0.048 *
LT 0.00 44 1,600 0.028 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 75 0 0.000 ICU: 0.530
TH 2.00 1,137 3,200 0.379 *
LT 1.00 22 1,600 0.014 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 11. Culver Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.77 10 1,231 0.002 N-S(1): 0.039 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.011
LT 0.23 3 369 0.008 * E-W(1): 0.177 *
Westbound RT 0.00 3 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.099
TH 2.00 297 3,200 0.094
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * V/C: 0.216
Northbound RT 1.00 50 1,600 0.031 * Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.43 5 696 0.007
LT 1.57 18 2,003 0.009
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.316
TH 2.00 566 3,200 0.177 *
LT 1.00 8 1,600 0.005 LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (4:45-5:45)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.55 27 882 0.000 N-S(1): 0.105 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.036
LT 0.45 22 718 0.031 * E-W(1): 0.259 *
Westbound RT 0.00 25 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.176
TH 2.00 472 3,200 0.155
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * V/C: 0.364
Northbound RT 1.00 119 1,600 0.074 * Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.46 21 738 0.028
LT 1.54 70 1,969 0.036
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.464
TH 2.00 829 3,200 0.259 *
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISEXISTING AM
Venice Boulevard Culver Boulevard
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
16
A:
B:
175
526 A:
B: 152
12
A:
B:
472
0.668 =
+
+
+ + + 175 216 472 152
*1375
216
A:
B:
216
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
B LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
12
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
12
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Prot-Fix Split Split Auto Auto OLA Auto
3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1
LT
1879 9 277 1579 127 16 30 595 375 25 31
16 595 30 127 1579 277 9 1879 31 25 375
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:53:34 AM
CalcaDB
EX_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETEXISTING PM
Venice Boulevard Culver Boulevard
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
51
A:
B:
76
601 A:
B: 273
19
A:
B:
466
0.743 =
+
+
+ + + 76 303 466 273
*1375
303
A:
B:
303
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
19
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
19
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Prot-Fix Split Split Auto Auto OLA Auto
3 1 2 3 1 1 2 1 1
LT
1841 21 497 1803 162 51 57 635 483 83 40
51 635 57 162 1803 497 21 1841 40 83 483
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:54:12 AM
CalcaDB
EX_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETEXISTING AM
Venice Bl Robertson Bl/Exposition
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
147
A:
B:
190
73
A:
B:
666
872 A:
B: 315
1.070 =
+
+
+ + + 190 396 666 315
*1375
287
A:
B:
396
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
B(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
F LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
572
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
572
LANE
SIGNAL Prot-Var|1010|Prot-Var Split Split Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1
LT
2617 82 73 1999 482 147 380 77 287 396 524
147 77 380 482 1999 73 82 2617 524 396 287
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:53:34 AM
CalcaDB
EX_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETEXISTING PM
Venice Bl Robertson Bl/Exposition
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
122
A:
B:
153
606 A:
B: 89
261
A:
B:
810
0.993 =
+
+
+ + + 153 410 810 89
*1375
259
A:
B:
410
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
E LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
475
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
475
LANE
SIGNAL Prot-Var|1010|Prot-Var Split Split Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 3 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 1
LT
2431 56 89 1818 117 122 306 54 259 355 541
122 54 306 117 1818 89 56 2431 541 355 259
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
December 30, 2005 ,Friday 11:54:12 AM
CalcaDB
EX_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 14. Washington Boulevard & National Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 49 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.365
TH 2.00 732 3,200 0.244 * N-S(2): 0.433 *
LT 2.00 154 2,560 0.060 E-W(1): 0.306
Westbound RT 1.00 156 1,600 0.049 E-W(2): 0.418 *
TH 2.00 1,270 3,200 0.397 *
LT 1.00 82 1,600 0.051 V/C: 0.851
Northbound RT 0.00 75 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 902 3,200 0.305
LT 2.00 484 2,560 0.189 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 203 1,600 0.000 ICU: 0.881
TH 2.00 817 3,200 0.255
LT 1.00 34 1,600 0.021 * LOS: D
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 64 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.274
TH 2.00 977 3,200 0.325 * N-S(2): 0.416 *
LT 2.00 143 2,560 0.056 E-W(1): 0.342 *
Westbound RT 1.00 123 1,600 0.032 E-W(2): 0.256
TH 2.00 704 3,200 0.220
LT 1.00 76 1,600 0.048 * V/C: 0.758
Northbound RT 0.00 78 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 619 3,200 0.218
LT 2.00 233 2,560 0.091 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 276 1,600 0.100 ICU: 0.788
TH 2.00 941 3,200 0.294 *
LT 1.00 57 1,600 0.036 LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 12/30/2005
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 15. Washington Boulevard & Higuera Street & Robertson Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (8:00-9:00)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 129 1,600 0.045 N-S(1): 0.137
TH 1.00 229 1,600 0.143 * N-S(2): 0.181 *
LT 1.00 93 1,600 0.058 E-W(1): 0.334
Westbound RT 0.00 332 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.562 *
TH 2.00 1,351 3,200 0.526 *
LT 1.00 60 1,600 0.038 V/C: 0.743
Northbound RT 0.00 85 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 167 3,200 0.079
LT 1.00 61 1,600 0.038 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 95 0 0.000 ICU: 0.773
TH 2.00 853 3,200 0.296
LT 1.00 57 1,600 0.036 * LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 147 1,600 0.024 N-S(1): 0.175
TH 1.00 259 1,600 0.162 * N-S(2): 0.198 *
LT 1.00 184 1,600 0.115 E-W(1): 0.358
Westbound RT 0.00 183 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.388 *
TH 2.00 840 3,200 0.320 *
LT 1.00 51 1,600 0.032 V/C: 0.586
Northbound RT 0.00 41 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 150 3,200 0.060
LT 1.00 57 1,600 0.036 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 64 0 0.000 ICU: 0.616
TH 2.00 978 3,200 0.326
LT 1.00 108 1,600 0.068 * LOS: B
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISExisting AM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:04 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.547
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 11.3
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 76 0 95 0 0 0 0 181 39 155 259 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 76 0 95 0 0 0 0 181 39 155 259 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 76 0 95 0 0 0 0 181 39 155 259 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 76 0 95 0 0 0 0 181 39 155 259 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 76 0 95 0 0 0 0 181 39 155 259 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.44 0.00 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.18 0.37 0.63 0.00
Final Sat.: 294 0 367 0 0 0 0 607 131 283 473 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.26 xxxx 0.26 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 0.30 0.55 0.55 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.6 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 9.6 12.9 12.9 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.6 0.0 9.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 9.6 12.9 12.9 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * A A B B *
ApproachDel: 9.6 xxxxxx 9.6 12.9
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.6 xxxxxx 9.6 12.9
LOS by Appr: A * A B
********************************************************************************Existing PM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:09 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.347
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.3
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 63 0 93 0 0 0 0 217 60 70 147 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 63 0 93 0 0 0 0 217 60 70 147 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 63 0 93 0 0 0 0 217 60 70 147 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 63 0 93 0 0 0 0 217 60 70 147 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 63 0 93 0 0 0 0 217 60 70 147 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.40 0.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.22 0.32 0.68 0.00
Final Sat.: 290 0 428 0 0 0 0 625 173 243 511 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.22 xxxx 0.22 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.35 0.35 0.29 0.29 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 8.8 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 9.6 9.4 9.4 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 8.8 0.0 8.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 9.6 9.4 9.4 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * A A A A *
ApproachDel: 8.8 xxxxxx 9.6 9.4
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 8.8 xxxxxx 9.6 9.4
LOS by Appr: A * A A
********************************************************************************Existing AM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:04 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.410
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.7
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 138 174 4 0 171 28 21 1 91 2 2 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 138 174 4 0 171 28 21 1 91 2 2 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 138 174 4 0 171 28 21 1 91 2 2 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 138 174 4 0 171 28 21 1 91 2 2 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 138 174 4 0 171 28 21 1 91 2 2 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.44 0.55 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.19 0.01 0.80 0.50 0.50 0.00
Final Sat.: 337 425 10 0 701 813 133 6 578 307 307 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.41 0.41 0.41 xxxx 0.24 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.01 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 10.6 10.6 10.6 0.0 9.3 7.2 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.3 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 10.6 10.6 10.6 0.0 9.3 7.2 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.3 8.3 0.0
LOS by Move: B B B * A A A A A A A *
ApproachDel: 10.6 9.0 8.4 8.3
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 10.6 9.0 8.4 8.3
LOS by Appr: B A A A
********************************************************************************Existing PM Tue Dec 20, 2005 12:27:09 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.271
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 8.8
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 59 142 3 2 131 15 30 2 154 0 1 1
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 59 142 3 2 131 15 30 2 154 0 1 1
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 59 142 3 2 131 15 30 2 154 0 1 1
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 59 142 3 2 131 15 30 2 154 0 1 1
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 59 142 3 2 131 15 30 2 154 0 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.29 0.70 0.01 0.02 0.98 1.00 0.16 0.01 0.83 0.00 0.50 0.50
Final Sat.: 218 524 11 10 674 791 129 9 660 0 356 356
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.19 0.19 0.02 0.23 0.23 0.23 xxxx 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.0 9.0 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 0.0 7.6 7.6
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.0 9.0 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 0.0 7.6 7.6
LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A * A A
ApproachDel: 9.3 8.8 8.5 7.6
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.3 8.8 8.5 7.6
LOS by Appr: A A A A
********************************************************************************Printed: 3/21/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Existing.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 18. Hayden Avenue & National Boulevard
Description: EXISTING CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.224
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.280 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.400 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.239
TH 2.00 766 3,200 0.239
LT 1.00 166 1,600 0.104 * V/C: 0.680
Northbound RT 0.00 69 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.19 0 308 0.224
LT 1.81 647 2,313 0.280 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 166 0 0.000 ICU: 0.710
TH 2.00 782 3,200 0.296 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.214
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.267 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.461 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.098
TH 2.00 315 3,200 0.098
LT 1.00 32 1,600 0.020 * V/C: 0.728
Northbound RT 0.00 102 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.30 0 477 0.214
LT 1.70 582 2,178 0.267 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 200 0 0.000 ICU: 0.758
TH 2.00 1,211 3,200 0.441 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSIS
CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS CUMULATIVE BASE AM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
532
A:
B:
710
137
A:
B:
526
349 A:
B: 172
0.928 =
+
+
+ + + 710 526 14 172
*1425
54 A:
B: 14
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
B(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
E LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
172
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
172
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
698 461 137 1052 111 967 710 74 14 108 37
967 74 710 111 1052 137 461 698 37 108 14
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:20:46 AM
CalcaDB
CB_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE BASE PM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
347 A:
B: 262
367 A:
B: 220
85
A:
B:
457
0.804 =
+
+
+ + + 306 457 262 220
*1425
48
A:
B:
306
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
85
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
85
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
914 1080 220 733 49 477 347 43 48 612 148
477 43 347 49 733 220 1080 914 148 612 48
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:21:19 AM
CalcaDB
CB_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 2. Jefferson Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 396 1,600 0.079 N-S(1): 0.359
TH 2.00 1,463 3,200 0.457 * N-S(2): 0.746 *
LT 1.00 8 1,600 0.005 E-W(1): 0.242 *
Westbound RT 1.00 2 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.176
TH 1.00 12 1,600 0.008
LT 1.00 1 1,600 0.001 * V/C: 0.988
Northbound RT 0.00 6 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,128 3,200 0.354
LT 1.00 462 1,600 0.289 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 376 0 0.000 ICU: 1.018
TH 1.00 9 1,600 0.241 *
LT 1.00 269 1,600 0.168 LOS: F
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 238 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.481
TH 2.00 1,035 3,200 0.323 * N-S(2): 0.553 *
LT 1.00 20 1,600 0.013 E-W(1): 0.301 *
Westbound RT 1.00 15 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.262
TH 1.00 15 1,600 0.009
LT 1.00 4 1,600 0.003 * V/C: 0.854
Northbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,484 3,200 0.468
LT 1.00 368 1,600 0.230 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 445 0 0.000 ICU: 0.884
TH 1.00 32 1,600 0.298 *
LT 1.00 405 1,600 0.253 LOS: D
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCumBase AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:12 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1954 Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.037
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 44.1
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: E
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 568 0 0 538 267
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 568 0 0 538 267
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 568 0 0 538 267
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 568 0 0 538 267
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 568 0 0 538 267
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.38 0.13 0.87 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 337 0 204 79 548 0 0 589 665
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.46 xxxx 0.46 1.04 1.04 xxxx xxxx 0.91 0.40
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 14.9 69.5 69.5 0.0 0.0 42.8 11.7
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 14.9 69.5 69.5 0.0 0.0 42.8 11.7
LOS by Move: * * * B * B F F * * E B
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 14.9 69.5 32.5
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 14.9 69.5 32.5
LOS by Appr: * B F D
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumBase PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:23 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.003
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 36.0
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: E
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 560 0 0 392 154
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 560 0 0 392 154
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 560 0 0 392 154
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 560 0 0 392 154
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 560 0 0 392 154
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.30 0.10 0.90 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 385 0 162 65 558 0 0 563 632
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.56 xxxx 0.56 1.00 1.00 xxxx xxxx 0.70 0.24
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 17.1 60.5 60.5 0.0 0.0 22.0 10.1
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.1 0.0 17.1 60.5 60.5 0.0 0.0 22.0 10.1
LOS by Move: * * * C * C F F * * C B
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 17.1 60.5 18.7
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 17.1 60.5 18.7
LOS by Appr: * C F C
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CAPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 4. Culver Boulevard & Madison Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 87 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.096 *
TH 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 N-S(2): 0.028
LT 1.00 32 1,600 0.020 * E-W(1): 0.285
Westbound RT 1.00 51 1,600 0.012 E-W(2): 0.409 *
TH 2.00 932 3,200 0.291 *
LT 1.00 11 1,600 0.007 V/C: 0.505
Northbound RT 0.00 32 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 70 1,600 0.076 *
LT 0.00 20 1,600 0.013 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 ICU: 0.535
TH 2.00 878 3,200 0.278
LT 1.00 188 1,600 0.118 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 177 1,600 0.049 N-S(1): 0.109 *
TH 1.00 66 1,600 0.041 N-S(2): 0.063
LT 1.00 85 1,600 0.053 * E-W(1): 0.293
Westbound RT 1.00 82 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.383 *
TH 2.00 1,027 3,200 0.321 *
LT 1.00 29 1,600 0.018 V/C: 0.492
Northbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 46 1,600 0.056 *
LT 0.00 23 1,600 0.014 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 21 0 0.000 ICU: 0.522
TH 2.00 858 3,200 0.275
LT 1.00 99 1,600 0.062 * LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 5. Washington Boulevard & Clarington Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 40 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.119 *
TH 1.00 60 1,600 0.063 N-S(2): 0.106
LT 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 * E-W(1): 0.248
Westbound RT 1.00 39 1,600 0.009 E-W(2): 0.301 *
TH 2.00 870 3,200 0.272 *
LT 1.00 17 1,600 0.011 V/C: 0.420
Northbound RT 1.00 81 1,600 0.040 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 167 1,600 0.104 *
LT 1.00 69 1,600 0.043 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 69 0 0.000 ICU: 0.450
TH 2.00 688 3,200 0.237
LT 1.00 46 1,600 0.029 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 41 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.108
TH 1.00 168 1,600 0.131 * N-S(2): 0.172 *
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 E-W(1): 0.369 *
Westbound RT 1.00 49 1,600 0.010 E-W(2): 0.261
TH 2.00 731 3,200 0.228
LT 1.00 42 1,600 0.026 * V/C: 0.541
Northbound RT 1.00 23 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 139 1,600 0.087
LT 1.00 65 1,600 0.041 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 109 0 0.000 ICU: 0.571
TH 2.00 987 3,200 0.343 *
LT 1.00 53 1,600 0.033 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 6. Culver Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 106 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.252 *
TH 2.00 288 3,200 0.123 N-S(2): 0.187
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 * E-W(1): 0.343 *
Westbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.288
TH 2.00 782 3,200 0.251
LT 1.00 92 1,600 0.058 * V/C: 0.595
Northbound RT 1.00 105 1,600 0.008 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 369 1,600 0.231 *
LT 1.00 102 1,600 0.064 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 67 0 0.000 ICU: 0.625
TH 2.00 846 3,200 0.285 *
LT 1.00 59 1,600 0.037 LOS: B
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 140 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.246 *
TH 2.00 315 3,200 0.142 N-S(2): 0.193
LT 1.00 96 1,600 0.060 * E-W(1): 0.353 *
Westbound RT 0.00 34 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.345
TH 2.00 924 3,200 0.299
LT 1.00 120 1,600 0.075 * V/C: 0.599
Northbound RT 1.00 132 1,600 0.008 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 298 1,600 0.186 *
LT 1.00 81 1,600 0.051 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 91 0 0.000 ICU: 0.629
TH 2.00 797 3,200 0.278 *
LT 1.00 73 1,600 0.046 LOS: B
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCUMULATIVE BASE AM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
691 A:
B: 98
81
A:
B:
422
404 A:
B: 113
0.825 =
+
+
+ + + 710 422 98 113
*1500
32
A:
B:
710
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
B(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
113
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
113
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|10 10|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0
LT
223 68 81 285 56 98 2072 49 32 2131 51
98 49 2072 56 285 81 68 223 51 2131 32
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:20:46 AM
CalcaDB
CB_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE BASE PM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
555 A:
B: 65
146
A:
B:
478
353 A:
B: 67
0.774 =
+
+
+ + + 656 478 65 67
*1500
97
A:
B:
656
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
B(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
67
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
67
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|10 10|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0
LT
247 39 146 260 72 65 1665 82 97 1969 27
65 82 1665 72 260 146 39 247 27 1969 97
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:21:19 AM
CalcaDB
CB_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEET16 752 885 43 88
34|1010|Irving
Place
18
Watseka
Avenue
28
594
27
935
N
Culver Boulevard
26
Culver Boulevard
Cumulative Base Conditions A.M. Peak Hour
Washington BoulevardPhase 1) 594|1010|= 297
Phase 2) 935 + 18|1010|= 592
Phase 3) 43|1010|= 43
Phase 4) 34 + 3|1010|= 37
Critical Volumes = 297 + 592 + 43 + 37
= 969
969
1600
LOS B
802 - 297
1.5
V/C = - 0.07
or
885 + 3
1.5
&
+ 0.10 0.636 =
or
26+28|1010|&
752 + 34 +16|1013|
12 687 1084 84 93
14|10 10|Irving
Place
22
Watseka
Avenue
91
845
12
990
Washington Boulevard
Culver Boulevard
N
Culver Boulevard
23
Cumulative Base Conditions P.M. Peak HourPhase 1) 845|1010|= 423
Phase 2) 990 + 22|1010|= 729
Phase 3) 84|1010|= 84
Phase 4) 14 + 9|1010|= 23
Critical Volumes = 423 + 729 + 84 + 23
= 1259
1259
1600
LOS D
+ 0.10 0.817 = V/C = - 0.07
or
1084 + 9
1.5
&
713 - 423
1.5
687 + 14 +12|1010|or
91 + 23|1010|&Printed: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 9. Culver Boulevard & Main Street & Washington Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 75 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.114 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.00 182 1,600 0.114 * E-W(1): 0.333
Westbound RT 0.00 95 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.411 *
TH 3.00 1,577 4,800 0.348 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 V/C: 0.525
Northbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.555
TH 3.00 1,597 4,800 0.333
LT 1.00 101 1,600 0.063 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 145 1,600 0.026 N-S(1): 0.163 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.00 261 1,600 0.163 * E-W(1): 0.389
Westbound RT 0.00 93 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.445 *
TH 3.00 1,736 4,800 0.381 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 V/C: 0.608
Northbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.638
TH 3.00 1,868 4,800 0.389
LT 1.00 103 1,600 0.064 * LOS: B
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 10. Washington Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 224 1,600 0.140 N-S(1): 0.433 *
TH 0.20 98 320 0.306 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.80 881 2,304 0.382 * E-W(1): 0.075
Westbound RT 2.00 1,276 3,200 0.246 * E-W(2): 0.246 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 1.00 79 1,600 0.049 V/C: 0.679
Northbound RT 1.00 101 1,600 0.014 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 81 1,600 0.051 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.709
TH 2.00 84 3,200 0.026
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 129 1,600 0.081 N-S(1): 0.568 *
TH 0.13 85 211 0.404 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.87 1,207 2,392 0.505 * E-W(1): 0.135
Westbound RT 2.00 1,151 3,200 0.158 * E-W(2): 0.158 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 1.00 118 1,600 0.074 V/C: 0.726
Northbound RT 1.00 83 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 100 1,600 0.063 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.756
TH 2.00 194 3,200 0.061
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 11. Culver Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 10 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.406
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.508 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.430 *
Westbound RT 0.00 3 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.149
TH 2.00 423 3,200 0.133
LT 1.00 143 1,600 0.089 * V/C: 0.938
Northbound RT 1.00 53 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.08 51 126 0.406
LT 1.92 1,249 2,460 0.508 *
Eastbound RT 1.92 1,048 3,071 0.130 ICU: 1.038
TH 1.08 590 1,729 0.341 *
LT 1.00 25 1,600 0.016 LOS: F
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 28 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.356
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.445 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.542 *
Westbound RT 0.00 26 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.224
TH 2.00 623 3,200 0.203
LT 1.00 124 1,600 0.078 * V/C: 0.987
Northbound RT 1.00 129 1,600 0.003 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.09 52 146 0.356
LT 1.91 1,087 2,443 0.445 *
Eastbound RT 1.80 1,336 2,880 0.266 ICU: 1.087
TH 1.20 891 1,920 0.464 *
LT 1.00 34 1,600 0.021 LOS: F
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCUMULATIVE BASE AM
Culver Blvd Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
567 A:
B: 289
227
A:
B:
227
16
A:
B:
53
0.701 =
+
+
+ + + 491 227 53 289
*1375
12
A:
B:
491
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
16
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
16
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Perm OLA Auto Auto Auto
1 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 1
LT
31 622 383 37 33 526 1700 130 12 1955 9
526 130 1700 33 37 383 622 31 9 1955 12
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:20:46 AM
CalcaDB
CB_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE BASE PM
Culver Boulevard Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
643 A:
B: 393
310
A:
B:
310
52
A:
B:
58
0.843 =
+
+
+ + + 494 310 58 393
*1375
19
A:
B:
494
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
52
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
52
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Perm OLA Auto Auto Auto
1 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 1
LT
58 701 493 85 41 714 1928 165 19 1953 21
714 165 1928 41 85 493 701 58 21 1953 19
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:21:19 AM
CalcaDB
CB_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE BASE AM
Robertson Bl/Exposition Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
83
A:
B:
718
399
A:
B:
552
184
A:
B:
243
1.268 =
+
+
+ + + 718 552 243 327
*1375
903 A:
B: 327
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
F LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
184
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
184
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Prot-Fix Auto Auto Auto Auto
2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 0 3 1
LT
485 83 399 484 716 83 2155 498 595 2709 104
83 498 2155 716 484 399 83 485 104 2709 595
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:20:46 AM
CalcaDB
CB_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE BASE PM
Robertson Bl/Exposition Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
94
A:
B:
660
271
A:
B:
520
186
A:
B:
192
1.139 =
+
+
+ + + 660 520 192 290
*1375
855 A:
B: 290
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
F LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
186
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
186
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Prot-Fix Auto Auto Auto Auto
2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 0 3 1
LT
383 65 271 397 665 94 1979 162 527 2565 62
94 162 1979 665 397 271 65 383 62 2565 527
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:21:19 AM
CalcaDB
CB_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 14. Washington Boulevard & National Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 111 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.494
TH 2.00 830 3,200 0.294 * N-S(2): 0.495 *
LT 2.00 396 2,560 0.155 E-W(1): 0.369
Westbound RT 1.00 223 1,600 0.016 E-W(2): 0.468 *
TH 2.00 1,371 3,200 0.428 *
LT 1.00 122 1,600 0.076 V/C: 0.963
Northbound RT 0.00 128 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 956 3,200 0.339
LT 2.00 514 2,560 0.201 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 246 1,600 0.000 ICU: 0.993
TH 2.00 937 3,200 0.293
LT 1.00 64 1,600 0.040 * LOS: E
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 64 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.314
TH 2.00 1,014 3,200 0.337 * N-S(2): 0.437 *
LT 2.00 180 2,560 0.070 E-W(1): 0.393 *
Westbound RT 1.00 333 1,600 0.152 E-W(2): 0.291
TH 2.00 785 3,200 0.245
LT 1.00 120 1,600 0.075 * V/C: 0.830
Northbound RT 0.00 107 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 673 3,200 0.244
LT 2.00 255 2,560 0.100 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 309 1,600 0.113 ICU: 0.860
TH 2.00 1,016 3,200 0.318 *
LT 1.00 73 1,600 0.046 LOS: D
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 15. Washington Boulevard & Higuera Street & Robertson Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 132 1,600 0.018 N-S(1): 0.184
TH 1.00 248 1,600 0.155 * N-S(2): 0.196 *
LT 1.00 161 1,600 0.101 E-W(1): 0.386
Westbound RT 0.00 440 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.646 *
TH 2.00 1,422 3,200 0.582 *
LT 1.00 61 1,600 0.038 V/C: 0.842
Northbound RT 0.00 92 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 172 3,200 0.083
LT 1.00 66 1,600 0.041 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 120 0 0.000 ICU: 0.872
TH 2.00 995 3,200 0.348
LT 1.00 103 1,600 0.064 * LOS: D
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 150 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.198
TH 1.00 278 1,600 0.174 * N-S(2): 0.225 *
LT 1.00 210 1,600 0.131 E-W(1): 0.414
Westbound RT 0.00 220 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.487 *
TH 2.00 926 3,200 0.358 *
LT 1.00 58 1,600 0.036 V/C: 0.712
Northbound RT 0.00 42 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 172 3,200 0.067
LT 1.00 82 1,600 0.051 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 76 0 0.000 ICU: 0.742
TH 2.00 1,132 3,200 0.378
LT 1.00 207 1,600 0.129 * LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCumBase AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:12 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1954 Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.581
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.0
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.42 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.15 0.37 0.63 0.00
Final Sat.: 272 0 372 0 0 0 0 614 110 275 464 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.29 xxxx 0.29 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.36 0.36 0.58 0.58 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 13.9 13.9 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 13.9 13.9 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B B B B *
ApproachDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 10.4 13.9
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 10.4 13.9
LOS by Appr: A * B B
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumBase PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:23 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.400
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.3
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.35 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.20 0.33 0.67 0.00
Final Sat.: 239 0 447 0 0 0 0 611 153 242 491 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.27 xxxx 0.27 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.39 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.4 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 10.7 10.7 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.4 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 10.7 10.7 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B B B B *
ApproachDel: 9.4 xxxxxx 10.4 10.7
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.4 xxxxxx 10.4 10.7
LOS by Appr: A * B B
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumBase AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:12 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1954 Culver Studios
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.431
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.9
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.42 0.57 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 0.01 0.81 0.50 0.50 0.00
Final Sat.: 327 434 9 0 698 807 130 6 574 302 302 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.43 0.43 0.43 xxxx 0.25 0.04 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.01 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 10.9 10.9 10.9 0.0 9.4 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.4 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 10.9 10.9 10.9 0.0 9.4 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.4 0.0
LOS by Move: B B B * A A A A A A A *
ApproachDel: 10.9 9.1 8.5 8.4
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 10.9 9.1 8.5 8.4
LOS by Appr: B A A A
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumBase PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:23 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.313
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.2
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.26 0.73 0.01 0.01 0.99 1.00 0.16 0.01 0.83 0.00 0.50 0.50
Final Sat.: 192 544 10 8 670 782 125 8 635 0 341 341
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.25 xxxx 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.3 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 7.8 7.8
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.3 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 7.8 7.8
LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A * A A
ApproachDel: 9.7 9.2 8.7 7.8
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.7 9.2 8.7 7.8
LOS by Appr: A A A A
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CAPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU Cumbase Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 18. Hayden Avenue & National Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE BASE CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.228
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.285 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.423 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.255
TH 2.00 815 3,200 0.255
LT 1.00 169 1,600 0.106 * V/C: 0.708
Northbound RT 0.00 70 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.19 0 307 0.228
LT 1.81 660 2,315 0.285 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 169 0 0.000 ICU: 0.738
TH 2.00 846 3,200 0.317 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.218
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.273 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.479 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.107
TH 2.00 342 3,200 0.107
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 * V/C: 0.752
Northbound RT 0.00 104 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.30 0 477 0.218
LT 1.70 594 2,179 0.273 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 204 0 0.000 ICU: 0.782
TH 2.00 1,260 3,200 0.458 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSIS
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT AM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
533
A:
B:
710
137
A:
B:
526
349 A:
B: 172
0.928 =
+
+
+ + + 710 526 14 172
*1425
54 A:
B: 14
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
B(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
E LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
172
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
172
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
698 461 137 1052 111 969 710 74 14 108 37
969 74 710 111 1052 137 461 698 37 108 14
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:29:37 AM
CalcaDB
CP_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PM
Jefferson Blvd Higuera St & Rodeo Road
N/S: W/E: 1
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
347 A:
B: 262
367 A:
B: 220
85
A:
B:
457
0.804 =
+
+
+ + + 306 457 262 220
*1425
48
A:
B:
306
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
B(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
85
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
85
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|1010|Perm Prot-Fix Perm Free Auto Auto Auto
0 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0
LT
914 1081 220 733 49 477 347 43 48 612 148
477 43 347 49 733 220 1081 914 148 612 48
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:30:03 AM
CalcaDB
CP_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 2. Jefferson Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 398 1,600 0.081 N-S(1): 0.359
TH 2.00 1,463 3,200 0.457 * N-S(2): 0.748 *
LT 1.00 8 1,600 0.005 E-W(1): 0.242 *
Westbound RT 1.00 2 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.176
TH 1.00 12 1,600 0.008
LT 1.00 1 1,600 0.001 * V/C: 0.990
Northbound RT 0.00 6 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,128 3,200 0.354
LT 1.00 465 1,600 0.291 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 376 0 0.000 ICU: 1.020
TH 1.00 9 1,600 0.241 *
LT 1.00 269 1,600 0.168 LOS: F
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 238 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.481
TH 2.00 1,035 3,200 0.323 * N-S(2): 0.553 *
LT 1.00 20 1,600 0.013 E-W(1): 0.302 *
Westbound RT 1.00 15 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.263
TH 1.00 15 1,600 0.009
LT 1.00 4 1,600 0.003 * V/C: 0.855
Northbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 1,484 3,200 0.468
LT 1.00 368 1,600 0.230 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 447 0 0.000 ICU: 0.885
TH 1.00 32 1,600 0.299 *
LT 1.00 406 1,600 0.254 LOS: D
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCumProj AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:29 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.040
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 44.8
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: E
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 569 0 0 542 267
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 569 0 0 542 267
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 569 0 0 542 267
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 569 0 0 542 267
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 154 0 93 82 569 0 0 542 267
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.38 0.13 0.87 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 337 0 203 79 547 0 0 589 665
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.46 xxxx 0.46 1.04 1.04 xxxx xxxx 0.92 0.40
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 15.0 70.3 70.3 0.0 0.0 44.0 11.7
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 15.0 70.3 70.3 0.0 0.0 44.0 11.7
LOS by Move: * * * B * B F F * * E B
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 15.0 70.3 33.3
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 15.0 70.3 33.3
LOS by Appr: * B F D
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumProj PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:35 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CULVER STUDIOS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Lucerne & Duquesne
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 1.010
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 36.9
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: E
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Duquesne Avenue
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 564 0 0 393 154
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 564 0 0 393 154
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 564 0 0 393 154
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 564 0 0 393 154
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 0 0 0 216 0 91 65 564 0 0 393 154
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.30 0.10 0.90 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 0 0 0 385 0 162 64 559 0 0 563 632
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.56 xxxx 0.56 1.01 1.01 xxxx xxxx 0.70 0.24
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 0.0 17.2 62.3 62.3 0.0 0.0 22.1 10.1
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 0.0 17.2 62.3 62.3 0.0 0.0 22.1 10.1
LOS by Move: * * * C * C F F * * C B
ApproachDel: xxxxxx 17.2 62.3 18.7
Delay Adj: xxxxx 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: xxxxxx 17.2 62.3 18.7
LOS by Appr: * C F C
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CAPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 4. Culver Boulevard & Madison Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 87 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.096 *
TH 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 N-S(2): 0.028
LT 1.00 32 1,600 0.020 * E-W(1): 0.286
Westbound RT 1.00 51 1,600 0.012 E-W(2): 0.410 *
TH 2.00 933 3,200 0.292 *
LT 1.00 11 1,600 0.007 V/C: 0.506
Northbound RT 0.00 32 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 70 1,600 0.076 *
LT 0.00 20 1,600 0.013 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 12 0 0.000 ICU: 0.536
TH 2.00 882 3,200 0.279
LT 1.00 188 1,600 0.118 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 177 1,600 0.049 N-S(1): 0.109 *
TH 1.00 66 1,600 0.041 N-S(2): 0.063
LT 1.00 85 1,600 0.053 * E-W(1): 0.293
Westbound RT 1.00 82 1,600 0.000 E-W(2): 0.384 *
TH 2.00 1,031 3,200 0.322 *
LT 1.00 29 1,600 0.018 V/C: 0.493
Northbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 46 1,600 0.056 *
LT 0.00 23 1,600 0.014 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 21 0 0.000 ICU: 0.523
TH 2.00 859 3,200 0.275
LT 1.00 99 1,600 0.062 * LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 5. Washington Boulevard & Clarington Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 40 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.119 *
TH 1.00 60 1,600 0.063 N-S(2): 0.106
LT 1.00 24 1,600 0.015 * E-W(1): 0.249
Westbound RT 1.00 39 1,600 0.009 E-W(2): 0.301 *
TH 2.00 870 3,200 0.272 *
LT 1.00 17 1,600 0.011 V/C: 0.420
Northbound RT 1.00 81 1,600 0.040 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 167 1,600 0.104 *
LT 1.00 69 1,600 0.043 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 69 0 0.000 ICU: 0.450
TH 2.00 692 3,200 0.238
LT 1.00 46 1,600 0.029 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 41 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.108
TH 1.00 168 1,600 0.131 * N-S(2): 0.172 *
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 E-W(1): 0.369 *
Westbound RT 1.00 49 1,600 0.010 E-W(2): 0.262
TH 2.00 734 3,200 0.229
LT 1.00 42 1,600 0.026 * V/C: 0.541
Northbound RT 1.00 23 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 139 1,600 0.087
LT 1.00 65 1,600 0.041 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 109 0 0.000 ICU: 0.571
TH 2.00 988 3,200 0.343 *
LT 1.00 53 1,600 0.033 LOS: A
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 6. Culver Boulevard & Duquesne Avenue
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 106 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.252 *
TH 2.00 288 3,200 0.123 N-S(2): 0.187
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 * E-W(1): 0.345 *
Westbound RT 0.00 20 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.288
TH 2.00 783 3,200 0.251
LT 1.00 93 1,600 0.058 * V/C: 0.597
Northbound RT 1.00 109 1,600 0.010 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 369 1,600 0.231 *
LT 1.00 102 1,600 0.064 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 67 0 0.000 ICU: 0.627
TH 2.00 850 3,200 0.287 *
LT 1.00 59 1,600 0.037 LOS: B
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 140 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.246 *
TH 2.00 315 3,200 0.142 N-S(2): 0.193
LT 1.00 96 1,600 0.060 * E-W(1): 0.356 *
Westbound RT 0.00 34 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.347
TH 2.00 928 3,200 0.301
LT 1.00 124 1,600 0.078 * V/C: 0.602
Northbound RT 1.00 133 1,600 0.006 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 298 1,600 0.186 *
LT 1.00 81 1,600 0.051 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 91 0 0.000 ICU: 0.632
TH 2.00 798 3,200 0.278 *
LT 1.00 73 1,600 0.046 LOS: B
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT AM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
691 A:
B: 98
81
A:
B:
424
404 A:
B: 113
0.828 =
+
+
+ + + 712 424 98 113
*1500
32
A:
B:
712
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
B(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
113
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
113
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|10 10|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0
LT
223 68 81 287 56 98 2073 49 32 2136 51
98 49 2073 56 287 81 68 223 51 2136 32
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:29:37 AM
CalcaDB
CP_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PM
Hughes Ave Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 7
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
557 A:
B: 65
146
A:
B:
478
354 A:
B: 67
0.775 =
+
+
+ + + 657 478 65 67
*1500
97
A:
B:
657
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
B(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
67
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
67
LANE
SIGNAL Perm|10 10|Perm Perm Perm Auto Auto Auto Auto
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0
LT
248 39 146 260 72 65 1670 82 97 1970 27
65 82 1670 72 260 146 39 248 27 1970 97
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:30:03 AM
CalcaDB
CP_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEET16 753 886 43 88
34|1010|Irving
Place
18
Watseka
Avenue
28
599
27
943
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions A.M. Peak Hour
Washington Boulevard
Culver Boulevard
N
Culver Boulevard
26Phase 1) 599|1010|= 300
Phase 2) 943 + 18|1010|= 593
Phase 3) 43|1010|= 43
Phase 4) 34 + 3|1010|= 37
Critical Volumes = 300 + 593 + 43 + 37
= 973
973
1600
LOS B
0.638 =
or
26+28|1010|&
753 + 34 +16|1010|V/C = - 0.07
or
886 + 3
1.5
&
+ 0.10
803 - 300
1.512 692 1091 84 93
14|10 10|Irving
Place
22
Watseka
Avenue
91
846
12
991
N
Culver Boulevard
23
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions P.M. Peak Hour
Washington Boulevard
Culver BoulevardPhase 1) 846|1010|= 423
Phase 2) 991 + 22|1010|= 733
Phase 3) 84|1010|= 84
Phase 4) 14 + 9|1010|= 23
Critical Volumes = 423 + 733 + 84 + 23
= 1263
1263
1600
LOS D
692 + 14 +12|1010|or
91 + 23|1010|&
V/C = - 0.07
or
1091 + 9
1.5
&
718 - 423
1.5
+ 0.10 0.819 =Printed: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 9. Culver Boulevard & Main Street & Washington Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 75 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.118 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.00 188 1,600 0.118 * E-W(1): 0.335
Westbound RT 0.00 96 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.412 *
TH 3.00 1,579 4,800 0.349 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 V/C: 0.530
Northbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.560
TH 3.00 1,610 4,800 0.335
LT 1.00 101 1,600 0.063 * LOS: A
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 145 1,600 0.026 N-S(1): 0.164 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.00 262 1,600 0.164 * E-W(1): 0.390
Westbound RT 0.00 99 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.449 *
TH 3.00 1,748 4,800 0.385 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 V/C: 0.613
Northbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.643
TH 3.00 1,870 4,800 0.390
LT 1.00 103 1,600 0.064 * LOS: B
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 10. Washington Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : Y
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 224 1,600 0.140 N-S(1): 0.446 *
TH 0.25 124 395 0.314 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.75 881 2,244 0.393 * E-W(1): 0.092
Westbound RT 2.00 1,276 3,200 0.242 * E-W(2): 0.242 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 1.00 105 1,600 0.066 V/C: 0.688
Northbound RT 1.00 105 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 85 1,600 0.053 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.718
TH 2.00 84 3,200 0.026
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 129 1,600 0.081 N-S(1): 0.584 *
TH 0.14 90 222 0.405 N-S(2): 0.000
LT 1.86 1,207 2,382 0.507 * E-W(1): 0.138
Westbound RT 2.00 1,151 3,200 0.157 * E-W(2): 0.157 *
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000
LT 1.00 123 1,600 0.077 V/C: 0.741
Northbound RT 1.00 106 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 1.00 123 1,600 0.077 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 ICU: 0.771
TH 2.00 194 3,200 0.061
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 * LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 11. Culver Boulevard & Ince Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 10 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.407
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.509 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.438 *
Westbound RT 0.00 3 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.149
TH 2.00 423 3,200 0.133
LT 1.00 149 1,600 0.093 * V/C: 0.947
Northbound RT 1.00 54 1,600 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.08 51 125 0.407
LT 1.92 1,252 2,460 0.509 *
Eastbound RT 1.93 1,067 3,091 0.134 ICU: 1.047
TH 1.07 590 1,709 0.345 *
LT 1.00 25 1,600 0.016 LOS: F
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 28 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.361
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.452 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.543 *
Westbound RT 0.00 26 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.224
TH 2.00 623 3,200 0.203
LT 1.00 125 1,600 0.078 * V/C: 0.995
Northbound RT 1.00 135 1,600 0.006 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.09 52 144 0.361
LT 1.91 1,104 2,445 0.452 *
Eastbound RT 1.80 1,339 2,882 0.264 ICU: 1.095
TH 1.20 891 1,918 0.465 *
LT 1.00 34 1,600 0.021 LOS: F
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT AM
Culver Boulevard Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
567 A:
B: 293
227
A:
B:
227
16
A:
B:
50
0.702 =
+
+
+ + + 491 227 50 293
*1375
12
A:
B:
491
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
C LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
16
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
16
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Perm OLA Auto Auto Auto
1 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 1
LT
31 623 383 37 33 532 1700 130 12 1955 9
532 130 1700 33 37 383 623 31 9 1955 12
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:29:37 AM
CalcaDB
CP_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PM
Culver Blvd Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 12
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
643 A:
B: 393
310
A:
B:
310
52
A:
B:
58
0.843 =
+
+
+ + + 494 310 58 393
*1375
19
A:
B:
494
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
D LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
52
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
52
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Perm OLA Auto Auto Auto
1 2 1 1 2 3 1 3 1
LT
58 707 493 85 41 715 1928 165 19 1953 21
715 165 1928 41 85 493 707 58 21 1953 19
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:30:03 AM
CalcaDB
CP_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT AM
Robertson Bl/Exposition Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
88
A:
B:
719
399
A:
B:
555
184
A:
B:
243
1.271 =
+
+
+ + + 719 555 243 327
*1375
903 A:
B: 327
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
A(W/B)
A(N/B)
B(E/B)
A(S/B)
F LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
184
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
184
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Prot-Fix Auto Auto Auto Auto
2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 0 3 1
LT
486 84 399 496 719 88 2158 498 595 2710 104
88 498 2158 719 496 399 84 486 104 2710 595
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:29:37 AM
CalcaDB
CP_AM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETCUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT PM
Robertson Bl/Exposition Venice Blvd
N/S: W/E: 13
I/S No:
AM/PM: Comments:
COUNT DATE: GROWTH FACTOR:
STUDY DATE:
660 A:
B: 95
271
A:
B:
521
186
A:
B:
195
1.142 =
+
+
+ + + 856 521 195 95
*1375
291
A:
B:
856
V/C =
West/East Critical Movements =
North/South Critical Movements =
SouthBound
WestBound EastBound
NorthBound
A = Adjusted Through/Right Volume
B = Adjusted Left Volume
* = ATSAC Benefit
Results
V/C RATIO LOS
0.00 - 0.60 A
0.61 - 0.70 B
0.71 - 0.80 C
0.81 - 0.90 D
0.91 - 1.00 E
B(W/B)
A(N/B)
A(E/B)
A(S/B)
F LOS =
Critical Movements Diagram
TH RT LT TH LT TH RT LT TH RT
Phasing RTOR Phasing Phasing Phasing RTOR RTOR
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND EASTBOUND
EXISTING
RTOR
RT
186
AMBIENT
RELATED
PROJECT
TOTAL
186
LANE
SIGNAL Split|1010|Split Prot-Fix Prot-Fix Auto Auto Auto Auto
2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 0 3 1
LT
390 69 271 399 666 95 1980 162 529 2569 62
95 162 1980 666 399 271 69 390 62 2569 529
Volume/Lane/Signal Configurations
Developed by Chun Wong, 12/94
April 18, 2006 ,Tuesday 11:30:03 AM
CalcaDB
CP_PM
INTERSECTION DATA SUMMARY SHEETPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 14. Washington Boulevard & National Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 111 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.494
TH 2.00 830 3,200 0.294 * N-S(2): 0.496 *
LT 2.00 396 2,560 0.155 E-W(1): 0.369
Westbound RT 1.00 223 1,600 0.016 E-W(2): 0.471 *
TH 2.00 1,376 3,200 0.430 *
LT 1.00 122 1,600 0.076 V/C: 0.967
Northbound RT 0.00 128 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 956 3,200 0.339
LT 2.00 518 2,560 0.202 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 246 1,600 0.000 ICU: 0.997
TH 2.00 938 3,200 0.293
LT 1.00 65 1,600 0.041 * LOS: E
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 64 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.314
TH 2.00 1,014 3,200 0.337 * N-S(2): 0.437 *
LT 2.00 180 2,560 0.070 E-W(1): 0.394 *
Westbound RT 1.00 333 1,600 0.152 E-W(2): 0.294
TH 2.00 786 3,200 0.246
LT 1.00 120 1,600 0.075 * V/C: 0.831
Northbound RT 0.00 107 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 673 3,200 0.244
LT 2.00 256 2,560 0.100 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 1.00 312 1,600 0.115 ICU: 0.861
TH 2.00 1,021 3,200 0.319 *
LT 1.00 77 1,600 0.048 LOS: D
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 15. Washington Boulevard & Higuera Street & Robertson Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 149 1,600 0.028 N-S(1): 0.184
TH 1.00 248 1,600 0.155 * N-S(2): 0.196 *
LT 1.00 161 1,600 0.101 E-W(1): 0.387
Westbound RT 0.00 440 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.651 *
TH 2.00 1,431 3,200 0.585 *
LT 1.00 61 1,600 0.038 V/C: 0.847
Northbound RT 0.00 92 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 172 3,200 0.083
LT 1.00 66 1,600 0.041 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 120 0 0.000 ICU: 0.877
TH 2.00 997 3,200 0.349
LT 1.00 105 1,600 0.066 * LOS: D
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 1.00 153 1,600 0.000 N-S(1): 0.198
TH 1.00 278 1,600 0.174 * N-S(2): 0.225 *
LT 1.00 210 1,600 0.131 E-W(1): 0.417
Westbound RT 0.00 220 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.496 *
TH 2.00 928 3,200 0.359 *
LT 1.00 58 1,600 0.036 V/C: 0.721
Northbound RT 0.00 42 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 2.00 172 3,200 0.067
LT 1.00 82 1,600 0.051 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 76 0 0.000 ICU: 0.751
TH 2.00 1,144 3,200 0.381
LT 1.00 219 1,600 0.137 * LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSISCumProj AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:29 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.581
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 12.0
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 78 0 107 0 0 0 0 223 40 160 270 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.42 0.00 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.15 0.37 0.63 0.00
Final Sat.: 272 0 372 0 0 0 0 614 110 275 464 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.29 xxxx 0.29 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.36 0.36 0.58 0.58 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 13.9 13.9 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 13.9 13.9 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B B B B *
ApproachDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 10.4 13.9
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 10.4 13.9
LOS by Appr: A * B B
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumProj PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:35 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CULVER STUDIOS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #16 Lucerne & Higuera
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.400
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 10.3
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Higuera Street
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 64 0 120 0 0 0 0 244 61 95 193 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.35 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.80 0.20 0.33 0.67 0.00
Final Sat.: 239 0 447 0 0 0 0 611 153 242 491 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.27 xxxx 0.27 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.40 0.40 0.39 0.39 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.4 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 10.7 10.7 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.4 0.0 9.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 10.4 10.7 10.7 0.0
LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B B B B *
ApproachDel: 9.4 xxxxxx 10.4 10.7
Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.4 xxxxxx 10.4 10.7
LOS by Appr: A * B B
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumProj AM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:29 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.431
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.9
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 141 187 4 0 176 29 21 1 93 2 2 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.42 0.57 0.01 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 0.01 0.81 0.50 0.50 0.00
Final Sat.: 327 434 9 0 698 807 130 6 574 302 302 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.43 0.43 0.43 xxxx 0.25 0.04 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.01 0.01 xxxx
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 10.9 10.9 10.9 0.0 9.4 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.4 0.0
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 10.9 10.9 10.9 0.0 9.4 7.2 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.4 8.4 0.0
LOS by Move: B B B * A A A A A A A *
ApproachDel: 10.9 9.1 8.5 8.4
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 10.9 9.1 8.5 8.4
LOS by Appr: B A A A
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CACumProj PM Tue Apr 18, 2006 11:37:35 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CULVER STUDIOS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
2000 HCM 4-Way Stop Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #17 Lucerne & Ince
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap. (X): 0.313
Loss Time (sec): 0 (Y+R = 4 sec) Average Delay (sec/veh): 9.2
Optimal Cycle: 0 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Lucerne Avenue Ince Boulevard
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign Stop Sign
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lanes: 0 0 1! 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1! 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Final Vol.: 60 170 3 2 158 15 31 2 157 0 1 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 0.26 0.73 0.01 0.01 0.99 1.00 0.16 0.01 0.83 0.00 0.50 0.50
Final Sat.: 192 544 10 8 670 782 125 8 635 0 341 341
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.25 0.25 0.25 xxxx 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
Delay/Veh: 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.3 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 7.8 7.8
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
AdjDel/Veh: 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.3 9.3 7.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 0.0 7.8 7.8
LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A * A A
ApproachDel: 9.7 9.2 8.7 7.8
Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
ApprAdjDel: 9.7 9.2 8.7 7.8
LOS by Appr: A A A A
********************************************************************************
Traffix 7.7.0515 (c) 2005 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to KAKU, SANTA MONICA, CAPrinted: 4/18/2006
Revised: 2/4/00
K-ICU CumProj Street Closure.xls
Project Title: CULVER STUDIOS
Intersection: 18. Hayden Avenue & National Boulevard
Description: CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Date/Time: AM PEAK HOUR (7:45-8:45)
Thru Lane: 1600 vph N-S Split Phase : N
Left Lane: 1600 vph E-W Split Phase : N
Double Lt Penalty: 20 % Lost Time (% of cycle) : 10
ITS: 0 % V/C Round Off (decs.) : 3
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.228
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.285 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.423 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.256
TH 2.00 819 3,200 0.256
LT 1.00 169 1,600 0.106 * V/C: 0.708
Northbound RT 0.00 70 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.19 0 307 0.228
LT 1.81 660 2,315 0.285 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 169 0 0.000 ICU: 0.738
TH 2.00 846 3,200 0.317 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
Date/Time: PM PEAK HOUR (5:00-6:00)
APPROACH MVMT LANES VOLUME CAPACITY V/C
Southbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 N-S(1): 0.218
TH 0.00 0 0 0.000 * N-S(2): 0.273 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(1): 0.479 *
Westbound RT 0.00 0 0 0.000 E-W(2): 0.107
TH 2.00 343 3,200 0.107
LT 1.00 33 1,600 0.021 * V/C: 0.752
Northbound RT 0.00 104 0 0.000 Lost Time: 0.100
TH 0.30 0 477 0.218
LT 1.70 594 2,179 0.273 * ATSAC -0.070
Eastbound RT 0.00 204 0 0.000 ICU: 0.782
TH 2.00 1,263 3,200 0.458 *
LT 0.00 0 0 0.000 LOS: C
* - Denotes critical movement
ICU ANALYSIS
ICU ANALYSIS