PC 2017/10/16
City of Anaheim
Planning Commission
Agenda
Monday, October 16, 2017
Council Chamber, City Hall
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, California
Chairperson: Bill Dalati
Chairperson Pro-Tempore: Michelle Lieberman
Commissioners: John Armstrong, Jess Carbajal, John Gillespie,
Kimberly Keys, Steve White
Call To Order - 5:00 p.m.
Pledge Of Allegiance
Public Comments
Consent Calendar
Public Hearing Items
Commission Updates
Discussion
Adjournment
For record keeping purposes, if you wish to make a statement regarding any item on the
agenda, please complete a speaker card in advance and submit it to the secretary.
A copy of the staff report may be obtained at the City of Anaheim Planning and Building
Department, 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92805. A copy of the staff
report is also available on the City of Anaheim website www.anaheim.net/planning on
Thursday, October 12, 2017, after 5:00 p.m. Any writings or documents provided to a
majority of the Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings
legally exempt from public disclosure) will be made available for public inspection in the
Planning and Building Department located at City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard,
Anaheim, California, during regular business hours.
You may leave a message for the Planning Commission using the following
e-mail address: planningcommission@anaheim.net
10-16-2017
Page 2 of 7
APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS
Any action taken by the Planning Commission this date regarding Reclassifications,
Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Public Convenience or Necessity Determinations,
Tentative Tract and Parcel Maps will be final 10 calendar days after Planning
Commission action unless a timely appeal is filed during that time. This appeal shall be
made in written form to the City Clerk, accompanied by an appeal fee in an amount
determined by the City Clerk.
The City Clerk, upon filing of said appeal in the Clerk's Office, shall set said petition for
public hearing before the City Council at the earliest possible date. You will be notified
by the City Clerk of said hearing.
If you challenge any one of these City of Anaheim decisions in court, you may be limited
to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission or
City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Anaheim Planning Commission Agenda - 5:00 P.M.
Public Comments
This is an opportunity for members of the public to speak on any item under the
jurisdiction of the Anaheim City Planning Commission or provide public comments on
agenda items with the exception of public hearing items.
10-16-2017
Page 3 of 7
Consent Calendar
The items on the Consent Calendar will be acted on by one roll call vote. There will be
no separate discussion of these items prior to the time of the voting on the motion unless
members of the Planning Commission, staff, or the public request the item to be
discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
Reports and Recommendations
ITEM NO. 1A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879
VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
(DEV2016-00058)
Location: 1330 West Pearl Street
Request: The applicant requests a one-year compliance
review of a conditional use permit and variance to permit a
group care facility within an existing apartment complex
with less parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code
(Anaheim Lighthouse).
Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission
will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically
Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15301, Class 1
(Existing Facilities).
Motion
Project Planner:
Lindsay Ortega
lortega@anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 1B
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
(DEV2016-00015)
Location: 2200 – 2210 East Orangewood Avenue
Request: The applicant requests to revise previously-
approved exhibits for a brew pub to allow the project to be
developed in two phases (Golden Road Brewery).
Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission
will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically
Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15332, Class 32
(In-Fill Development Projects).
Motion
Project Planner:
Scott Koehm
skoehm@anaheim.net
10-16-2017
Page 4 of 7
Public Hearing Items
ITEM NO. 2
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-00141
(DEV2017-00097)
Location: Citywide
Request: A City-initiated amendment to Title 18 (Zoning)
of the Anaheim Municipal Code modifying Chapters 18.04
(Single-Family Residential Zones); 18.06 (Multiple-Family
Residential Zones); 18.08 (Commercial Zones); 18.10
(Industrial Zones); 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose
Zones); 18.16 (Regulatory Permits); 18.20 (Platinum
Triangle Mixed Use (PTMU) Overlay Zone); 18.24 (South
Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone); 18.36
(Types of Uses); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations);
18.42 (Parking and Loading); 18.44 (Signs); 18.46
(Landscaping and Screening); 18.52 (Density Bonuses);
18.62 (Administrative Reviews); 18.92 (Definitions); 18.114
(Disneyland Resort Specific Plan No. 92-1 (SP 92-1)); and
18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP
2015-1)) to provide clarity, create consistency of terms and
definitions, streamline approval processes and amend
development standards to reflect current market trends.
Environmental Determination: The Planning Commission
will consider whether to find the project to be Categorically
Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15060(c)(2).
Request for
continuance to
October 30, 2017
Project Planner:
Gustavo Gonzalez
ggonzalez@anaheim.net
10-16-2017
Page 5 of 7
ITEM NO. 3
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
(DEV2017-00048)
Location: 645 South Magnolia Avenue
Request: The following land use entitlements are
being requested: (1) reclassification of the subject
property from the T (Transition) zone to the RS-3
(Single Family Residential) zone; and, (2) a tentative
parcel map to subdivide the property into three parcels
for conveyance purposes.
Environmental Determination: The Planning
Commission will consider whether to find the project to
be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, Section 15315, Class 15 (Minor Land
Divisions).
Resolution No. ______
Resolution No. ______
Project Planner:
Wayne Carvalho
wcarvalho@anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096
(DEV2017-00012)
Location: 4421 East La Palma Avenue
Request: The following land use entitlements are
being requested: (i) a conditional use permit to permit
and retain an existing live auction facility for arcade
games, a community meeting facility within an existing
industrial building, and off-site parking on an adjacent
property; and (ii) a variance to permit less parking
spaces than required by the Zoning Code (Captain’s
Auction Warehouse).
Environmental Determination: The Planning
Commission will consider whether to find the project to
be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities).
Resolution No. ______
Project Planner:
Lindsay Ortega
lortega@anaheim.net
10-16-2017
Page 6 of 7
ITEM NO. 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
(DEV2017-00026)
Location: 549-555 South Anaheim Boulevard
Request: The following land use entitlements are being
requested: (i) a conditional use permit to permit a
brewery and tasting room, full and quick service-
restaurants and a coffee shop with the sale and on-site
consumption of alcoholic beverages, repurposed
shipping containers to accommodate retail and dining
space, a garden area with outdoor dining, a pool, and
off-site parking; and, (ii) a variance to allow reduced
street and interior setbacks, less parking spaces than
required by the Zoning Code, a wall or fence height less
than permitted by Code, and fence or wall materials not
allowed by the Code (Modern Times Brewery).
Environmental Determination: The Planning
Commission will consider whether to find the project to
be Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
Section 15332, Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects).
Resolution No. ______
Project Planner:
Nick Taylor
njtaylor@anaheim.net
Adjourn to Monday, October 30, 2017 at 5:00 p.m.
10-16-2017
Page 7 of 7
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I hereby certify that a complete copy of this agenda was posted at:
1:45 p.m. October 11, 2017
(TIME) (DATE)
LOCATION: COUNCIL CHAMBER DISPLAY CASE AND COUNCIL DISPLAY KIOSK
SIGNED:
ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
The City of Anaheim wishes to make all of its public meetings and hearings accessible to all
members of the public. The City prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin
in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative
formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation
thereof.
Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids
or services, in order to participate in the public meeting may request such modification,
accommodation, aid or service by contacting the Planning and Building Department either in person
at 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, or by telephone at (714) 765-5139, no later
than 10:00 a.m. one business day preceding the scheduled meeting.
La ciudad de Anaheim desea hacer todas sus reuniones y audiencias públicas accesibles a todos
los miembros del público. La Ciudad prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de raza , color u origen
nacional en cualquier programa o actividad que reciba asistencia financiera federal.
Si se solicita, la agenda y los materiales de copia estarán disponible en formatos alternativos
apropiados a las personas con una discapacidad, según lo requiere la Sección 202 del Acta de
Americanos con Discapacidades de 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), las normas federales y
reglamentos adoptados en aplicación del mismo.
Cualquier persona que requiera una modificación relativa a la discapacidad, incluyendo medios
auxiliares o servicios, con el fin de participar en la reunión pública podrá solicitar dicha modificación,
ayuda o servicio poniéndose en contacto con la Oficina de Secretaria de la Ciudad ya sea en
persona en el 200 S Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, California, o por teléfono al (714) 765-5139,
antes de las 10:00 de la mañana un día habil antes de la reunión programada.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 1A
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
LOCATION: 1330 West Pearl Street (Anaheim Lighthouse)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Paul Chiavatti on behalf of
the Anaheim Lighthouse. The property owners are Avedis Jalakian and Shabnam
Jalakian.
REQUEST: The applicant requests a one-year compliance review of a conditional
use permit and variance to permit a group care facility within an existing apartment
complex with less parking spaces than required by Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by
motion, receive and file the one-year review of Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-
05879 and Variance No. 2016-05073, and require an additional six-month review to
ensure that the facility does not contribute to existing on-street parking problems in the
neighborhood.
BACKGROUND: The 0.2-acre property is developed with a 2-story, 4-unit apartment
building and is located in the “RM-4” Multiple Family Residential zone. The General
Plan designates this property for Medium Density Residential land uses. The property
is surrounded by apartment complexes on all four sides. There are four existing group
care facilities located adjacent to the project site. These facilities are located at 1300,
1310, 1320, and 1340 West Pearl Street.
On September 7, 2016, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit
No. 2016-05879 and Variance No. 2016-05073, permitting a group care facility for up
to 20 persons and a variance to permit fewer parking spaces than required by the
Zoning Code. Condition No. 1 requires six and twelve month reviews by the Planning
Commission as a “Reports and Recommendations” (R&R) item to determine if the
group care facility is operating without negatively impacting the adjacent properties.
The condition requires that surrounding properties be noticed in advance of these
scheduled reviews. On March 20, 2017, the Planning Commission approved the six-
month compliance review with a vote of 7-0. The six and twelve month compliance
reviews were required primarily due to parking concerns in the neighborhood. It was
determined that the review would allow City staff the opportunity to monitor parking
impacts related to the group care facility.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
October 16, 2017
Page 2 of 3
PROPOSAL: Pursuant to the conditions of approval for this conditional use permit, the group
care facility is subject to a one-year review to ensure on-going compliance with all conditions
of approval and to ensure that the drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility is being operated in a
manner that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
In response to concerns expressed by neighboring residents at the original hearing, the
applicant implemented a parking management plan to ensure that employees only utilize on-
site parking and refrain from using on-street parking spaces. As part of this management plan,
the applicant has registered all staff vehicles, requiring each vehicle to display a parking
sticker, and implemented a policy that any employee found parking on the street would be
subject to disciplinary action. Additionally, the applicant has implemented a financial incentive
program to encourage all employees to carpool to work. Residents are not permitted to keep
vehicles on site.
The operator submitted copies of the daily monitoring records in which an employee of the
facility checks license plate numbers of the employees to those vehicles parked on the street.
The log is available for review as an attachment to this report (Attachment 7). The log indicates
that over the last six months, the facility operator observed 14 vehicles associated with the
subject property utilizing street parking, resulting in an average of about 2-3 vehicles a month.
According to the applicant, those vehicles were identified and cited by the facility operator for
breaking policy and the owners were asked to move their vehicles. The logs were taken at 9:00
a.m., 3:00 p.m., and 6:00 p.m. daily. City staff requested that the applicant select those times
for monitoring as 3:00 p.m. is when the most facility staff members are on-site and 6:00 p.m. is
the time when residents in the neighborhood would be utilizing street parking. The applicant
began logging this timeframe on March 7th and has continued to do so in preparation for this
compliance review.
Staff conducted two site visits prior to the hearing; the site visits occurred on Wednesday,
October 4th. Staff visited the site at 12:15 p.m. and observed vehicles parked along the street;
however, numerous street parking spaces were observed to be available in the neighborhood at
that time. During the observation period, staff observed two individuals that appeared to be
associated with the subject property park their vehicles along the street. Additionally, staff
observed vehicles parked within open garages on site. The second site visit occurred at 6:00
p.m. Staff observed available parking spaces along the street; however, staff observed one
vehicle associated with the subject property that occupied a street parking space.
A review of Code Enforcement cases and discussion with Code Enforcement staff indicated
that no complaints have been received since the approval of the conditional use permit in
September 2016. Public Notices were mailed to property owners and tenants within 300 feet
of the subject property to inform them of this one year compliance review. As of the writing of
this report, staff has received one email in opposition to the project citing parking concerns.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
October 16, 2017
Page 3 of 3
Additionally, staff consulted with the Police Department regarding the operation of the subject
facility. The Police Department indicated that there was a high number of calls for services;
however, the calls primarily originated from the subject property and were not received from
adjacent neighbors. The Police Department expressed that the majority of calls or complaints
received from the residents of that neighborhood pertained to transients living in vehicles or
RV’s parked along the streets, which are not believed to be associated with the subject
property. The lack of on-street parking continues to be an issue in the neighborhood.
CONCLUSION: The applicant has provided documentation demonstrating an effort to
comply with all conditions of approval. However, staff observed vehicles associated with the
property utilizing street parking; therefore, staff believes the applicant is making reasonable
attempts to restrict vehicles from parking on the street. Based on the complaints received from
residents and the observations made by staff, staff recommends a third publicly noticed six-
month compliance review to ensure that the parking management plan continues to be enforced
by the facility operator. The applicant will continue to monitor their staff to ensure that street
parking is not utilized in order to minimize the impact on the parking-impacted neighborhood.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Lindsay Ortega David See
Contract Planner Interim Planning Services Manager
RRM Design Group
Attachments:
1. Original PC Staff Report
2. Original Resolution
3. 6-month Compliance Review Staff Report
4. Plans
5. Interior Site Photographs
6. Exterior Site Photographs
7. Lighthouse Parking Policy Log
8. Public Correspondence
RM-4FOURPLEX
RM-4APTS14 DU
RM-4APTS8DU
RM-3DUPLEX
RM-3S.F.R.
RM-4S.F.R.
RM-4APTS13 DU
RM-4APTS10 DU
C-GRESTAURANT
RM-3S.F.R.
C-GOFFICES
RM-3S.F.R.
RM-4DUPLEX
RM-4PARK WILSHIRE APTS77 DU
RM-4CONDOS163 DU
RM-3DUPLEX
RM-4APTS10 DU
RM-3S.F.R.
C-GVACANT
RM-3DUPLEX
RM-3TRIPLEX
RS-3SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RM-3TRIPLEX
RM-4APARTMENTS
RM-4FOURPLEX
RM-4FOURPLEX
RM-3DUPLEX
RM-3DUPLEX RM-3DUPLEX
RM-3DUPLEX
RM-3S.F.R.
RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCERS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-1SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
5 FREEWAY
5 FREEWAY W L I N C O L N A V E
W PEAR L S T
N W I L S H I R E A V E
W D W Y E R D R
N P E A R
L S T
N C A R L E
T O
N A V E
W B E V E R L Y D R
W BIRCHMONT DR
N
D W Y
E
R
P L
N
D
W
Y
E
R
D
R
N
W
E
D
G
E
W
O
O
D
D
R
W. LINCOLN AVE
W. LA PALMA AVE
W. BROADWAY
N . E U C L I D
S T
S . E U C L I D S T
N
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
N
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S .
W A L N U T
S T
N . L O A R A S T
S
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
1 3 30 West Pea rl Street
D E V No. 2016-00058
Subject Property APN: 255-022-42
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Ph oto :Jun e 2 01 5
5 FREEWAY
5 FREEWAY W LI NCOL N AVE
W L I N C O L N A V E
W PEAR L ST
N W I L S H I R E A V E
W D W Y E R D R
N P
E A R L S T
N C
A R L
E T O N A V E
W D IA M O ND ST
W B E V E R L Y D R
W BIRCHMONT DR
N D W
Y E R P L
N
D
W
Y
E
R
D
R
N
W
E
D
G
E
W
O
O
D
D
R
W. BRO ADWAY
W.
S . E U C L I D S T
N
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
N . E U C L I D S T
W. LINCOLN AVE
N
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
N . L O A R A S T
S
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
1 3 3 0 Wes t Pearl Street
D E V N o. 2016-00058
Subject Property APN: 255-022-42
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
LOCATION: 1330 West Pearl Street
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Paul Chiavatti on behalf of
the Anaheim Lighthouse. The property owners are Avedis Jalakian and Shabnam
Jalakian.
REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to establish a
group care facility for up to 20 persons and a variance to permit fewer parking spaces
than required by the Zoning Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the
attached resolution, determining that this request is Categorically Exempt from further
environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Class 1,
Existing Facilities) and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05879 and
Variance No. 2016-05073.
BACKGROUND: The 0.2-acre property is developed with a 2-story, 4-unit
apartment building and is located in the “RM-4” Multiple Family Residential zone.
The General Plan designates this property for Medium Density Residential land uses.
The property is surrounded by apartment complexes on all four sides. There are four
existing group care facilities located adjacent to the project site. These facilities are
located at 1300, 1310, 1320, and 1340 West Pearl Street.
This item was heard by the Planning Commission on August 8, 2016. At the hearing,
neighbors in the area expressed concerns regarding parking deficiencies in the
neighborhood, delivery truck activity and trash containers left on the street on non-
trash pick-up days. In response, the Commission continued the item for four weeks to
allow the applicant time to address those concerns.
The project applicant currently operates the property as a sober living residential
facility, which is permitted by-right in the RM-4 Zone. The existing facility is
considered a by-right residential use because no counseling or treatment services are
being provided to the residents. In addition to operating the existing sober living
facility, Anaheim Lighthouse operates seven other residential facilities located in the
neighborhood; however, not all require a conditional use permit to operate.
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 2 of 9
PROPOSAL: The applicant requests approval of a conditional use permit to establish a group
care facility for up to 20 persons to be used as an “alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or
treatment facility.” Three of the four apartment units have two bedrooms and one unit has three
bedrooms. The facility would provide 24 hour non-medical care with 2 to 4 staff members on
site at all times. The facility would also provide on-site group and individual counseling and
each client would be assigned a credentialed therapist and a certified treatment counselor.
Clients would receive a treatment plan prepared by their counselor upon admission into the
program which they would be required to follow. The treatment component could range
between 7 to 90 days, and includes courses such as relapse prevention and socialization skills.
Counseling services would be provided only to tenants residing at the subject facility. Upon
completion of the program, the clients would be transitioned into a sober living care residence.
Clients are referred to the program by private insurance companies or certified/licensed treatment
professionals. The Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) has sole authority to
license facilities providing 24-hour residential nonmedical services to eligible adults who are
recovering from problems related to alcohol or other drug misuse or abuse. Licensure is required
when at least one of the following services is provided: detoxification, group sessions, individual
sessions, educational sessions, or alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment planning.
Licensed facilities are reviewed every two years and subject to one announced site visit per year.
Supervision of the property would be provided 24 hours a day by a manager and assistant
manager. There are a total of 58 surveillance cameras on all five buildings owned by the
operator on this street, and these cameras are monitored off-site. The facility would also provide
full time cooking, maintenance, and housekeeping staff. Additionally, counselors and therapists
would visit the site daily to provide on-site group and individual counseling/therapy as a
component of a client’s treatment plan. As mentioned above, Anaheim Lighthouse operates four
other similar group homes at 1300-1340 West Pearl Street, as well as two facilities with fewer
than 6 people in each, and one sober living facility, resulting in a total of 8 facilities in the
neighborhood. The compatibility of the existing group homes on the surrounding neighborhood
is described later in this report.
There are eight on-site parking spaces proposed at the facility: a one-car and two-car garage
accessed off of Pearl Street, a three-car garage toward the center of the property, and two
uncovered spaces at the rear of the property. Residents would not be permitted to keep vehicles
on site. The on-site parking spaces would be used by management staff and counselors.
Maintenance, cooking, and cleaning staff would utilize the on-site parking; however, the full
time staff currently maintaining the operator’s other facilities would also maintain this location
and therefore would not generate additional demand for parking. Family members may visit
residents on Saturday’s after an initial seven day detoxification period. Residents are not
permitted to leave the site without being accompanied by staff or completing a request form
which can be denied if the counselor believes it could be detrimental to the resident’s treatment.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use
permit, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following
conditions exist:
1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is authorized
by this code;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 3 of 9
2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the growth
and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the full
development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either the particular
area or health and safety;
4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden upon
the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area; and
5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed, if any,
will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
A conditional use permit is required for a group care facility in the RM-4 zone. The purpose of
the conditional use permit is to ensure that the facility would be compatible with surrounding
uses and not negatively impact the adjacent community. The Anaheim Lighthouse operates the
four other group care facilities located on this street. During the Planning Commission hearings
for these other facilities, concerns were raised by neighbors regarding insufficient parking in the
neighborhood, tenants congregating outside, and the proximity of the facilities to children. In
one case, a condition was added to require enhancements to the south portion of the property to
provide a location for the tenants to congregate onsite. A similar condition would not be
necessary for this application as the property contains a patio area within the property that is not
adjacent to the street.
The Anaheim Police Department has provided a police report with a summary of the calls for
service over the last 24 months (two years) at the 1300, 1310, 1320, 1330, and 1340 West Pearl
Street properties (Attachment No. 7). There have been a total of 83 calls for service at these five
locations over the two year period, with 58 calls coming from the 1320 West Pearl Street
property. The applicant has explained that the main manager’s office is located at the 1320 West
Pearl Street address, which is the reason why the majority of calls are attributed to that location.
The calls varied from suicide attempts, battery and assault, trespassing, tenant disturbance, 911
hang up, medical aid, and check the welfare. After further discussion with Police Department
staff, it was determined that most of the calls originated from the facilities, rather than a call
from a neighbor or person not associated with the facilities. Twenty-seven of the calls were
categorized as “advised incident” or “assist other department.” Police Department staff has
explained that such calls meant that the visit was initiated by the officer or that the officer was
assisting another agency, such as a probation office. With this information, staff calculated that
all five facilities together (4 group care, 1 sober living) average 28 calls for service and 13
“advised incidents” or “assist other department” calls per year. Police Department staff will be
present at the Planning Commission meeting to answer specific questions regarding these crime
statistics.
In the past five years, the five group care facilities on Pearl Street have been cited six times by
Code Enforcement. The citations include re-roofing without a building permit, using garages for
non-compliant uses (storage and common area functions), failure to obtain a business license,
bulk items left in the front yard and trash containers left outside. These violations have all been
resolved and the cases have been closed by Code Enforcement.
The police calls for service have originated from the facility operator, rather than from
surrounding neighbors, which suggests that the existing and proposed facility has not posed an
undue burden on the area. In addition, all code enforcement violations have been resolved.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 4 of 9
Therefore, staff believes the proposed facility can be compatible with the surrounding land uses
and not negatively impact the neighborhood. Conditions of approval to ensure that the business
is operated in a responsible manner have been attached to the draft resolution, such conditions
include: no more than eight vehicles may be associated with the property at one time, all
recovery and counseling services shall be for current residents only, an on-site manager must be
present at all times, and visitors are only permitted on Saturdays.
Parking Variance: Before the Planning Commission may approve a parking variance, it must
make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-street
parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of such spaces
necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under the normal and
reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use;
2) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand
and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed use;
3) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the demand
and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed use;
4) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use; and
5) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular
ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed use.
The applicant requests approval to provide fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning
Code. Code requires group care facilities to provide 0.8 spaces per bed. The applicant is
requesting to permit a facility with up to 20 beds, which would require 16 spaces, and eight
spaces are proposed. The applicant has submitted a letter of operation stating that residents
would not be permitted to possess a vehicle on site. As a result, no parking spaces would be
needed for the residents. The provided parking spaces would be used by the on-site managers,
visitation by counselors, and other staff associated with the treatment program. Parking
variances were granted for the adjacent group care facilities as follows:
Approval Address Parking Required Parking Provided
CUP2003-04789 1300 W. Pearl St. 19* (based on
current Code
requirements)
8
CUP2004-04837 1310 W. Pearl St. 19* (based on
current Code
requirements)
11
CUP2007-05210 1320 W. Pearl St. 19 8
CUP2008-05294 1340 W. Pearl St. 19 9
* No parking requirement existed for group care facilities at the time they were approved and the
number of spaces provided was determined to be adequate.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 5 of 9
Updated Parking Analysis:
Based on public testimony at the last hearing and staff’s observation, on-street parking in the
neighborhood does appear to be heavily used. Staff received four letters from neighborhood
residents opposing the parking variance due to concerns regarding insufficient parking
(Attachment No. 8). Additionally, two residents from the neighborhood spoke at the last
hearing, stating concerns regarding Anaheim Light House staff utilizing street parking,
deliveries occurring on street sweeping days, delivery trucks preventing the streets from being
cleaned, and garbage dumpsters being left out after trash has been collected.
Based on the concerns expressed at the August 8, 2016 hearing, staff requested that the
applicant provide additional information regarding how they planned to address parking
concerns in the neighborhood, as well as staffing and operations for all of the facilities operating
in the neighborhood. The applicant disclosed that currently there are eight facilities in the
neighborhood, as follows:
No. of Facilities Type CUP Required Address
Four Drug and Alcohol
Rehabilitation Facilities (7
or more residents)
Yes (all four have
CUP’s)
1300, 1310,1320,
1340 W. Pearl St.
One Sober Living Residence (4-
plex)
No 220 N. Pearl St.
One Drug and Alcohol
Rehabilitation Facilities (6
or less residents)
No 1243 W. Pearl St.
One Currently vacant, plans to
operate as 6 or less
Drug/alcohol rehabilitation
facility.
No 1253 W. Pearl St
One Subject Property/Currently
Operating as Sober Living
No permit required
while sober living.
Requires permit to
operate as
Drug/Alcohol
Rehabilitation
group care
residence.
1330 W. Pearl St
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 6 of 9
In response to concerns expressed, the applicant is proposing to implement a parking
management plan to ensure that employees only utilize onsite parking and refrain from using on
street parking spaces. As part of this management plan, the applicant proposes to register all
staff vehicles, requiring each vehicle to display a parking sticker, and any employee found
parking on the street would be subject to disciplinary action. Additionally, the applicant has
begun a financial incentive program to encourage all employees to carpool to work.
Currently, the building is operating as a sober living facility in which residents are permitted to
keep vehicles on-site with limited ability by the City to regulate parking. If the proposed
treatment facility receives approval, future residents would not be permitted to possess a vehicle
and parking would only be utilized for management and counselors, thereby reducing parking
impacts in the neighborhood. Staff visited the site twice during the day (mid-morning and mid-
afternoon) and observed that all five properties were well-maintained, there were no residents
congregating outside, and street parking appeared to be available. Staff conducted an evening
site visit in which parking was observed to be scarce; however, staff was unable to determine
whether the street parking was being utilized by the Anaheim Light House facilities or the
surrounding multi-family residences.
Staff has determined that there are currently 44 code compliant spaces available across the
properties located at 1300-1340 W. Pearl St. The Anaheim Light House provided information
regarding the estimated number of vehicles on site per hour based on hourly staffing levels,
accounting for those that carpool or use other means of transportation. Based on the
information provided, the data indicates that peak vehicle levels occurred seven days a week
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 7 of 9
between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. The highest number of vehicles generated by the five group
care facilities is estimated to be 46 to 49 and would occur at 3:00 pm daily. This would result in
an estimated deficit of 2 to 5 parking spaces for one hour during the day. The applicant
explained that a shift change occurs at this time, where there is some employee overlap. Staff
believes that the facilities would have sufficient space on-site to accommodate the deficit by
utilizing non-code compliant parking spaces on-site (stacked in the driveways) for the 1 hour
overlap and would therefore not need to utilize any off-site parking.
At 5:00 p.m., on-site vehicle are reduced nearly in half and decreased continuously to 11 to 24
vehicles between 6:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. (averaging about 2 to 5 vehicles per facility), which
would result in a surplus of 20 to 33 on-site parking spaces. Based on this information, staff
believes that there is sufficient onsite parking to accommodate the facility needs, as staff
believes that each facility has sufficient space on site to accommodate the peak parking demand
without impacting the surrounding neighborhood.
Response to Other Community Concerns:
Another concern that was voiced at the hearing was the presence of delivery trucks on street
sweeping days. The applicant has coordinated with the weekly food delivery truck and has
arranged for the truck to park on-site when possible or curbside. In addition, deliveries will
only occur on non-street sweeping days, which occur on Thursday. Lastly, staff conducted a
site visit during the mid-afternoon on Tuesday, August 9, 2016, observing garbage dumpsters
along the northwest side of North Pearl Street that appeared to belong to the Wilshire Westmont
Condominiums, which have designated track pick-up days on Tuesday and Friday, based on
information provided by the City’s Streets and Sanitation Division.
Figure 1: Garbage Dumpsters along North Pearl Street (Tuesday)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 8 of 9
The Anaheim Light House facilities are located along the east and south sides of Pearl Street.
During the recent field visit on Tuesday, staff observed one garbage dumpster along North Pearl
Street and three garbage dumpsters located on the south side of West Pearl Street, which
appeared to belong to the Anaheim Light House facilities. However, based on information
provided by the Sanitation Department, trash pick-up is to occur on Monday, Wednesday,
Friday, and Saturday for the four group care facilities, which would confirm resident concerns.
Figure 2: Garbage Dumpsters along West Pearl St (Tuesday)
After bringing this to the attention of the applicant, he expressed that he had already
communicated to the facility operator that the trash dumpsters must be stored in their designated
locations by 5:00 p.m. on trash pick-up days. Staff conducted another site visit on Friday,
August 26, 2016 at 5:20 p.m. and found the trash dumpsters to be stored in their designated
locations.
A condition of approval has been included in the draft resolution requiring that all trash
containers be stored in their designated areas on trash pick-up days by 5:00 p.m.
As a result, based on the information provided by the applicant, staff observations, and the
programs proposed by the applicant, staff believes that the group care facility can operate
without creating an undue burden on the surrounding neighborhood. Staff has included the
following conditions of approval in the draft resolution to ensure the group care facility operates
in a manner that is not detrimental to the surrounding area:
• The permit shall be subject to a minimum of two compliance reviews which are to
occur 6 months and one year from the date of this approval. The reviews will be
scheduled as a “Reports and Recommendations” item on the agenda item and
residents will be notified of these reviews in advance of their consideration. The
costs of scheduling these reviews will be borne by the facility operator. Additional
reviews could be scheduled if the applicant fails to comply with established
conditions.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
September 7, 2016
Page 9 of 9
• Employees shall display parking stickers and shall park on-site at all times.
• All trash containers shall be removed from the street and stored at a designated on-
site location the same day trash pick-up has occurred and shall only be moved to the
street the morning of trash pick-up.
• Delivery trucks must park on-site or curbside and not within travel lanes or the center
of the street. Deliveries shall not occur on Thursdays or any day when parking is
restricted due to street sweeping.
Environmental Impact Analysis: Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the
effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e.,
Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration
of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use
beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section
15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will not cause a
significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
provisions of CEQA.
CONCLUSION: The proposed project would provide a supervised environment for drug
and alcohol rehabilitation. Staff believes that the applicant has made efforts to address the
resident concerns highlighted at the previous hearing by providing information regarding the
operations of all facilities in the neighborhood, implementing an off-site parking monitoring
system, offering incentives for carpooling to reduce vehicles traveling to the facilities, as well
as scheduling regular deliveries to occur on non-street sweeping days. Conditions of approval
pertaining to the resident concerns have been included to ensure the facility continues to
operate without detriment to the surrounding area.
Based upon staff’s research of the existing use of the property, the operational history of the
adjacent group care facilities, and the applicant’s proposal and letter of operation, staff
recommends approval of this request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Lindsay Ortega Jonathan E. Borrego
Contract Planner Planning Services Manager
Lilley Planning Group
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution
2. Letter of Operation
3. Plans
4. Site Photographs (interior)
5. Site Photographs (exterior)
6. Police Report
7. Neighbor’s Correspondence
8. Letter of Support
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
NO
.
2
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 1A
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 20, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
LOCATION: 1330 West Pearl Street (Anaheim Lighthouse)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Paul Chiavatti on behalf of
the Anaheim Lighthouse. The property owners are Avedis Jalakian and Shabnam
Jalakian.
REQUEST: The applicant requests a six-month compliance review of a conditional
use permit and variance to permit a group care facility within an existing apartment
complex with less parking spaces than required by Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by
motion, receive and file the six-month review of Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-
05879 and Variance No. 2016-05073.
BACKGROUND: The 0.2-acre property is developed with a 2-story, 4-unit
apartment building and is located in the “RM-4” Multiple Family Residential zone.
The General Plan designates this property for Medium Density Residential land uses.
The property is surrounded by apartment complexes on all four sides. There are four
existing group care facilities located adjacent to the project site. These facilities are
located at 1300, 1310, 1320, and 1340 West Pearl Street.
On September 7, 2016, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit
No. 2016-05879 and Variance No. 2016-05073, permitting a group care facility for
up to 20 persons and a variance to permit fewer parking spaces than required by the
Zoning Code. Condition No. 1 requires six and twelve month reviews by the Planning
Commission as a “Reports and Recommendations” (R&R) item to determine if the
group care facility is operating without negatively impacting the adjacent properties.
The condition requires that surrounding properties be noticed in advance of these
scheduled reviews. The six month review is required primarily due to parking
concerns in the neighborhood. It was determined that the review would allow City
staff the opportunity to monitor parking impacts related to the group care facility.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
March 20, 2017
Page 2 of 3
PROPOSAL: Pursuant to the conditions of approval for this conditional use permit, the
establishment of a group care facility is subject to a six-month review to ensure on-going
compliance with all conditions of approval and to ensure that the drug and alcohol rehabilitation
facility is being operated in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
In response to concerns expressed by neighboring residents at the original hearing, the applicant
implemented a parking management plan to ensure that employees only utilize on-site parking
and refrain from using on-street parking spaces. As part of this management plan, the applicant
has registered all staff vehicles, requiring each vehicle to display a parking sticker, and
implemented a policy that any employee found parking on the street would be subject to
disciplinary action. Additionally, the applicant has implemented a financial incentive program
to encourage all employees to carpool to work.
Staff conducted three site visits during the last two months, which consisted of two day visits
and one evening visit. The first site visit occurred on January 5, 2017 at 1:00 p.m.; staff
observed vehicles parked on the street, but there appeared to be spaces available in the
neighborhood. Staff did not observe any employees of the subject property approach the any of
the vehicles. On January 12, 2017 at 5:30 p.m., staff conducted a second site visit and observed
that most of the parking on the street was utilized. Staff observed one person that appeared to be
associated with the subject property walk toward a vehicle parked on the street. Lastly, on
March 2, 2017 at 11:00 a.m., staff conducted a final site visit. Parking was available along the
street and staff did not observe any persons associated with the group facility parked along the
street.
Staff met with the operator to discuss the policies established by the facility to address parking.
The operator submitted a log of daily parking compliance in which an employee of the facility
checks license plate numbers of the employees to those vehicles parked on the street. The log is
available for review as an attachment to this report (Attachment 6). The log indicates that 1-2
days a week, no more than two vehicles associated with the property have parked on the street.
Those vehicles were identified and cited by the facility operator for breaking policy and the
owners were asked to move their vehicles. The logs were taken at 8:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. daily;
however, staff has since requested that the logs be taken at 3:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. daily, as
3:00 p.m. is when the most staff members are on-site and 6:00 p.m. is the time when residents in
the neighborhood would be utilizing street parking. The applicant began logging this timeframe
on March 7th and will continue to do so in preparation for the 12 month compliance review.
A review of Code Enforcement cases and discussion with Code Enforcement staff indicated that
no complaints have been received since the approval of the conditional use permit in September
2016. Public Notices were mailed to property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the subject
property to inform them of this 6 month compliance review. As of the writing of this report, staff
was contacted by two property owners in opposition to the project due to continued parking
issues. One of the residents noted that the garages are being utilized for meeting or recreation
uses; however, the applicant has indicated that the garages are only used as a meeting space
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05879 AND VARIANCE NO. 2016-05073
March 20, 2017
Page 3 of 3
when not needed for parking as staffing levels vary throughout the day. Additionally, staff
contacted the resident that spoke at the original Planning Commission hearing and inquired as to
whether the issues brought up at the hearing had improved. The resident indicated that the
parking issue had seemed to improve for a short while and that she has not observed as many
vehicles associated with the property utilizing street parking, but that parking is still generally an
issue in the neighborhood. She attributed the most of the parking issues with the large apartment
complex located on Pearl Street west of the subject property. Staff also received one phone call
inquiring about the project for information purposes only.
Lastly, per an existing condition of approval, a 12 month compliance review will be presented to
the Planning Commission in September, 2017. Staff believes the 12 month review will better
identify whether neighborhood parking issues can be attributed to this use. If there is evidence
that the use is negatively impacting on-street parking in the area, staff will initiate actions,
including a possible amendment to the conditional use permit, to ensure such impacts are
effectively addressed.
CONCLUSION: The applicant has provided documentation demonstrating their pursuit to
comply with all conditions of approval. The applicant will continue to monitor their staff to
ensure that street parking is not utilized in order to minimize the impact on the already parking
impacted neighborhood and continues to demonstrate that the use does not adversely impact the
surrounding neighborhood. Staff has found the operation of the group care facility to be in
compliance with the conditions of approval and recommends the Planning Commission receive
and file this six month review.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Lindsay Ortega Jonathan E. Borrego
Contract Planner Planning Services Manager
Lilley Planning Group
Attachments:
1. Original PC Staff Report
2. Original Resolution
3. Plans
4. Interior Site Photographs
5. Exterior Site Photographs
6. Lighthouse Parking Policy Log
7. 9am Street Photos
8. 3pm Street Photos
9. 6pm Street Photos
10. Public Correspondence
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
N
O
.
4
Interior Site Photographs
1330 West Pearl St
CUP2016-05879
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
Bathroom
– Typical
Unit B, C,
D
Bathroom
– Typical
Unit B, C,
D
Bathroom
– Unit A
Bedroom –
Typical of
all units
Kitchen – Unit B,C, & D
Kitchen –
Unit A
Laundry
Room
Living & Dining Room
– Typical Unit B, C, D
Living & Dining Room
– Unit A
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
N
O
.
7
1
Lindsay Ortega
From:Mike Byard <mikebyard@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, October 08, 2017 8:29 PM
To:Lindsay Ortega
Subject:Conditional Use Permit #2016-05879 and Variance #2016-05073 (DEV2016-00058)
Follow Up Flag:Follow up
Flag Status:Flagged
Good evening Lindsay,
I’m writing you to submit my comments regarding Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05879 and Variance
No. 2016-05073 (DEV2016-00058).
I’m a homeowner and I live within walking distance from this property located at 1330 West Pearl Street.
Street parking is scarcely available on a daily basis. I have parking for only my vehicle on my property. My
guests find it extremely difficult to find parking on the street when they visit.
Unfortunately, the city has approved new construction, already underway, at the corner of Wilshire Avenue and
Pearl Street. This is only adding to the parking congestion, traffic and noise in the neighborhood. I live in a
condominium complex, and there are quite a few multil-family apartments and condominiums in the
neighborhood. It is very densely populated, consequently, there is heavy traffic in the area.
This proposed project will negatively impact the neighborhood. It will create additional vehicle and pedestrian
traffic. It will further burden the parking congestion. This is not a good decision, nor does it improve my
neighborhood in any way whatsoever. I strongly oppose this project and I think this “group care facility” needs
to find a different city to call home.
With kind regards,
Michael J. Byard
278 N Wilshire Avenue D4
Anaheim, CA 92801
714-795-8248
Sent from my iPhone
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 1B
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
LOCATION: 2124-2210 East Orangewood Avenue
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The applicant is Golden Road Brewing
represented by Brandon Smith and the property owner is Custom Craft Beer, LLC
doing business as Golden Road Brewing.
REQUEST: The applicant requests to revise previously-approved exhibits for a
brew pub to allow the project to be developed in two phases.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission, by
motion, determine that the proposed action is Categorically Exempt from the
requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Class 32 (In-Fill Development
Projects) and approve the revised exhibits for CUP2016-05860A.
BACKGROUND:
2200-2210 East Orangewood Avenue- This 2.5-acre property is developed with a
29,800 square foot industrial building that is used for alcohol beverage
manufacturing (a brewery). The building includes a small tasting room and
outdoor patio. The property is located in the Platinum Triangle within the
underlying “I” Industrial Zone and the “PTMU” Platinum Triangle Mixed Use
Overlay Zone. The General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses.
Surrounding land uses include The George Apartments, currently under
construction, the Angel Stadium across Orangewood Avenue to the north, and
industrial businesses to the south across Dupont Drive to the east and west.
2124-2130 East Orangewood Avenue- This 1.3-acre property is developed with an
industrial building and is located in the Platinum Triangle within the underlying
“I” Industrial Zone and the “PTMU” Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone.
The General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses. Surrounding
land uses include parking for the Angel Stadium, The George Apartments, and
vacant land approved for mixed-use development (the LT Platinum Center Project)
across Orangewood Avenue to the north, industrial businesses across Dupont
Drive to the east, industrial businesses to the south, and the Gateway Apartment
Homes to the west.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
October 16, 2017
Page 2 of 5
The Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05811 on August 10,
2015, to permit a 720 square foot tasting room with an outdoor patio for a brewery within an
existing industrial building. The intent of this tasting room was to allow a temporary facility
for customers to preview and taste specialty beers while the applicant prepared plans for the
permanent brewing, restaurant and tasting room operations. This tasting room is currently
open.
The Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05860 on November
28, 2016, to permit a 9,000 square foot brew pub which includes a Barrel Vault event space, a
coffee roaster, a tank bar, an accessory Can Shop retail building, and outdoor dining and
recreational/entertainment areas. The Commission’s approval of the project included approval
of on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, a coordinated sign
program, fewer parking spaces than required by code and off-site parking. This project,
referred to in this staff report as the “brew pub project” or “project” is currently under
construction.
PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a phasing plan to complete construction of the brew
pub project. The applicant would complete the first phase in November 2017 and the second
phase would be completed in Spring 2018. The phasing plan is being requested to
accommodate the financing of the project. The following is the requested phasing plan:
Phase 1 Plan
Brew Pub
Fenced area
with wood chips
OOuuttddoooorr ddiinniinngg
Brewery
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
October 16, 2017
Page 3 of 5
Phase 1 (Fall 2017):
1. Improvement and provision of all of the parking spaces for the entire project, as required
in the original approval for the brew pub project. This includes the off-site parking
spaces located on the property across Dupont Drive to the west.
2. Installation of a temporary seating area and landscaping in the location where the Can
Shop retail building was previously proposed. This area will serve as a waiting area for
customers.
3. Installation of 50% of the outdoor dining and recreation/entertainment areas. The
applicant will complete the portion of the outdoor dining area adjacent to Orangewood
Avenue. The applicant will temporarily cover the remaining area to the south
(previously proposed as an outdoor dining and recreation/entertainment area) with wood
chips. The applicant will restrict access to this area with a temporary slatted chain link
fence.
4. The brew pub, kitchen, and indoor seating area will be constructed as a part of the first
phase of construction.
Phase 2 Plan
Brew Pub
Brewery
OOuuttddoooorr ddiinniinngg
OOuuttddoooorr
RReeccrreeaattiioonn
AArreeaa Barrel Vault/
Event Space
Can Shop
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
October 16, 2017
Page 4 of 5
Phase 2 (Spring 2018):
1. Construction of the Can Shop retail building and elimination of the above temporary
waiting area.
2. Installation of the remaining outdoor dining and recreation/entertainment areas and
removal of the temporary slatted chain link fence and wood chip ground cover.
3. Installation of a coffee roaster and tank bar inside the brew pub.
4. Construction of the Barrel Vault event space and prep kitchen.
5. Construction of brew pub offices.
Eliminated
The applicant proposes to remove construction of the second floor conference room
indefinitely.
ANALYSIS: The brewery project began construction in June 2017. Two months after
construction began the applicant notified staff that their parent company would be dispersing
funds for construction in two phases; the first in 2017 and the second at the beginning of 2018.
As a result, the applicant stated that they could only construct a portion of the property this
year (the proposed first phase as described above). The applicant proposed that the City issue a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy to allow the brew pub to open while construction was
paused until the beginning of 2018. Staff did not believe that this was appropriate, as it would
have left a large construction area adjacent to an operating brew pub. This construction area
could be dangerous to the public. Staff recommended a phasing plan to accommodate the
applicant’s construction schedule. The phasing plan would allow the applicant to continue
with construction and ensure that when the first phase was completed, the property would be in
a state that would not pose a danger to the public while at the same time leaving the property
ready for commencement of the second phase a few months later. Staff understood that there
is no guarantee that the applicant would construct the second phase, and that the applicant
would need to construct the first phase in a way that would substantially conform to the
originally-approved permit. In the event the second phase is not developed, the applicant
would need to return to the Planning Commission to request an amendment to the original
conditional use permit to modify the exhibits to reflect only the first phase improvements.
Staff and the applicant have agreed that the applicant will meet all of the previously-approved
conditions of approval for the project before the commencement of the business in the first
phase.
Environmental Impact Analysis: The project was previously determined to qualify for a Class
32 “Infill Development Projects” exemption allowed under California Environmental Quality
Act. Staff recommends that the Commission approve the same exemption, as the applicant is
not proposing any changes that would increase or intensify any impacts.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860A
October 16, 2017
Page 5 of 5
CONCLUSION: The proposed phasing plan would allow the applicant to continue with
construction of the approved brew pub while providing the flexibility to pause a portion of the
project until Spring of 2018. The applicant has designed the phasing plan for the project in a
manner that would substantially conform to the original permit. All conditions of approval are
required to be completed prior to operation of the brew pub in the first phase. In addition, the
applicant will provide the full supply of parking required for the project in the first phase. For
these reasons, staff recommends approval of this request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Scott Koehm David See
Senior Planner Acting Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Letter of Request
2. Phasing Plans
3. Previous Staff Report (November 28, 2016)
4. Previously-Approved Resolution and Plans (November 28, 2016)
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIALI (PTMU)Gateway Sub-Area BGATEWAY APARTMENT
I (PTMU)Gateway Sub-Area BARCHSTONEAPARTMENTS
I (PTMU)GatewaySub-Area CVACANT
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL
PR (PTMU)StadiumANGEL STADIUMOF ANAHEIM
I (PTMU)Gateway Sub-Area CVACANT
I (PTMU)Gateway Sub-Area CVACANT
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL
I (PTMU)OrangewoodINDUSTRIAL
O-L (PTMU)OrangewoodOFFICES
I (PTMU)GatewaySub-Area CVACANT
E ORANGEWOOD AVE
S D U P O N T D R
D U P O N T D R
E. KATELLA AVE
S . H A S T E R S T
E. ORANGEWOOD AVE
E. CHAPMAN AVE
E. GENE AUTRY WAY S .D O U G L A S S
R DE. HOWELL AVE
2 1 2 4 - 2210 East Orangewood Avenue
D E V N o. 2016-00015
Subject Property APN: 083-271-13083-272-01
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:Jun e 2 015
Parcel AParcel B
E ORANGEWOOD AVE
S D U P O N T D R
D U P O N T D R
E. KATELLA AVE
S . H A S T E R S T
E. ORANGEWOOD AVE
E. CHAPMAN AVE
E. GENE AUTRY WAY S .D O U G L A S S
R D
2 1 2 4 - 2210 East Orangewood Avenue
D E V N o. 2016-00015
Subject Property APN: 083-272-01083-271-13
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
Brandon Smith
2210 E Orangewood Ave
Anaheim, CA 92806
Sent via electronic mail
August 24, 2017
City of Anaheim Planning Department
Planning Services Division
200 South Anaheim Blvd., 1st Floor
Anaheim, CA 92805
Attn: Scott Koehm
Senior Planner
Subject: Phasing Plan for DEV2016-00015, 2210 E Orangewood Ave
Scott,
We are requesting a phased plan from our previous approval (PC2016-98,99,100). Our desire is to open
the restaurant and beer garden as soon as possible to commence business operations (serve food) on a
larger scale than the existing tasting room. We will not be able to complete the entire scope of the
approved project by the end of this year and therefore, in order to commence business operations and
adequately document our commitment to the City of Anaheim, we are formally requesting a phasing plan
approval. We do not desire a change in overall scope of the approval from November 2016. Instead, we
are requesting the ability to commence business operations without all features that were approved in
PC2016-98,99,100.
After meeting with city staff multiple times, we believe our current plan as submitted on August 24, 2017
will adequately meet the city’s immediate needs. Our changes go as follows:
Exterior Changes:
1. Can Shop – Instead of installing the can shop, we will be installing the sitting area with planters.
This seating area will serve as a waiting area for patrons waiting for a table. We plan to install and
open the can shop early summer 2018.
2. 50% Beer Garden – We will be installing roughly 50% of the beer garden this year. In the interim,
we are surrounding the unfinished beer garden to its future grade with wood chips, surrounded
by a chainlink slatted fence to comply with undeveloped lot standards. We plan to finish the beer
garden as approved by early summer 2018.
Interior Changes:
1. Roaster and Tank Bar – These items were originally to be installed in the main dining room. We are
currently removing these items out of our first phase of the project and hope to install both by the
end of 2018.
2. Prep Kitchen and Barrel Vault – In our approved set, we planned a private event space/concert
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
venue named the Barrel Vault. Next to the Barrel Vault, we planned a prep kitchen to help cater
large events. In this phase, we are removing the assembly rating for the barrel vault and using it for
barrel storage. We plan to finish the barrel vault in 2018.
3. Offices – We are building the offices in 2018, so they are removed from this year’s plans.
4. 2nd Floor Conference Room – We have eliminated the 2nd Floor Conference room from our plans
indefinitely.
Parking Impacts:
We are committed to installing our parking plans as approved. With the phasing and changes noted
above, this means that when we open this year (2017) we will be over-supplying our business by 90
parking spaces. This over-supply comes from not completing the Can Shop (2 spaces), Barrel Vault (57
spaces), and 50% of Beer Garden (approximately 31 spaces).
Please see the attached drawings that demonstrate this phasing request. We thank you for your support
and expedited review. We’re looking forward to opening this year!
Permit Set (approved May 2017) Revision 2 (submitted August 2017)
G2.01 – Fire/Life Safety Overall Floor Plan (Jan 27, 17) G2.01 – Fire/Life Safety Overall Floor Plan (Aug 17, 17)
LP-1.1 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17) LP-1.1 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17)
LP-1.2 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17) LP-1.2 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17)
LP-1.3 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17) LP-1.3 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17)
LP-1.4 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17) LP-1.4 – Landscape Planting Plan (Aug 17, 17)
A3.01 – Rendered Elevation (October 19, 16) A3.01 – Rendered Elevation (August 21, 17)
A3.02 – Rendered Elevation (October 19, 16) A3.02 – Rendered Elevation (August 21, 17)
Sincerely,
Brandon Smith
Project Manager, Golden Road Brewing
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
SIGHT LINE 6'-0" HIGH CHAINLINK FENCE WITH WHITE VINYL SLATS
6'-0" HIGH CHAINLINK FENCE WITH WHITE VINYL SLATSCONNECT NEW FENCE TO (E) FENCE
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW
S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CATV CATV CATV CATV CATV CATV CATV
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH PH PH PH PH PH PH PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH PH PH PH PH
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S S S S S S
DW
S
S
S
D
S
D
D
W
D
W
DW
DW
DW
DW
DW
DW
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
D
W
D
W
D
W
D
W
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
P
H
PHPH 12''12''12''12''12''
12
'
'
D
W
6'
'
6'
'
6'
'
6'
'
4'
'
4'
'
4'
'
4''
D
W
D
W
D
W
G
A
S
GA
S
GA
S
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
GAS
GAS
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S S S
D
W
6
'
'
6
'
'
6
'
'
C2
C3
C3 C3 C4 C4
C4
C4
C3 C3
C3
C3
C3
C3
C4
C4
OR
A
N
G
E
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
N
U
E
D
U
P
O
N
T
A
V
E
N
U
E
(
W
E
S
T
)
PLANTING PER OFF-SITE PERMIT RCP2016-12340 LP-1.1LANDSCAPEPLANTING PLAN
L
I
M
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET LP-1.2
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
3
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GASDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CA
T
V
CATV CATV CATV CATV CATV CATV
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH PH PH PH PH PH PH PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH
PH PH PH PH PH PH PH
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD SD SD SD SD SD SD
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S S S S S S S
S
S S S
SS
DW
DW
DW DW DW DW
S
D
DW DW DW
GA
S
GA
S
GAS GAS GAS
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH
1
8
'
'
S
D
12
'
'
12
'
'
12
'
'
12
'
'
12
'
'
12
'
'
DW
GA
S
GA
S
GA
S
GA
S
GA
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
G
A
S
GAS
SSSSS
S
S
S
S
S
S
4''4''4''4''4''4''4''4''
C2
C3
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OR
A
N
G
E
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
N
U
E
DUPONT AVENUE (EAST)
PL
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
E
R
O
F
F
-
S
I
T
E
P
E
R
M
I
T
R
C
P
2
0
1
6
-
1
2
3
4
0
LI
M
I
T
O
F
F
U
T
U
R
E
E
X
P
A
N
S
I
O
N
A
R
E
A
LP-1.2LANDSCAPEPLANTING PLANLIMIT OF WORK
M
A
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
1
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
4
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW DW
S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S
S
S
F
I
R
E
F
I
R
E
FIRE
F
I
R
E
F
I
R
E
F
I
R
E
F
I
R
E
EOH
EO
H
EO
H
EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH EOH
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
E
O
H
F
I
R
E
FI
R
E
UTILUTIL
D
U
P
O
N
T
A
V
E
N
U
E
(
W
E
S
T
)
7'
x
5
0
'
L
I
N
E
-
O
F
-
S
I
G
H
T
T
R
I
A
N
G
L
E
S
;
NO
V
I
S
U
A
L
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
2
4
"
H
G
T
.
LP-1.3LANDSCAPEPLANTING PLAN
L
I
M
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET LP-1.4
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
1
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GASDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWDWSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSDWFIREFIREFIREFIREFIRE
FI
R
E
FI
R
E
FIRE FIRE FIRE
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
EO
H
UTIL UTIL UTILUTILUTILUTIL
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4''4''4''4''4''4''4''4''4''4''4''
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
DUPONT AVENUE (EAST)
EV
E
R
G
R
E
E
N
S
H
R
U
B
S
T
O
SC
R
E
E
N
T
R
A
N
S
F
O
R
M
E
R
7'
x
5
0
'
L
I
N
E
-
O
F
-
S
I
G
H
T
T
R
I
A
N
G
L
E
S
;
NO
V
I
S
U
A
L
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
E
X
C
E
E
D
2
4
"
H
G
T
.
LP-1.4LANDSCAPEPLANTING PLANLIMIT OF WORK
M
A
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
3
MA
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
L
P
-
1
.
2
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: NOVEMBER 28, 2016
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890
VARIANCE NO. 2016-05066
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR
NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
LOCATION: PARCEL A - 2210 and 2220 East Orangewood Avenue
PARCEL B - 2130 East Orangewood Avenue
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER:
PARCEL A - The applicant is Golden Road Brewing represented by Brandon Smith
and the property owner is Custom Craft Beer, LLC.
PARCEL B - The applicant is Golden Road Brewing represented by Brandon Smith
and the property owner is Trevor Tait.
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of the following entitlements:
PARCEL A-
1) A conditional use permit to permit the construction of a brew pub to
include an event space, an outdoor dining and recreational/entertainment
area with on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic
beverages and a coordinated sign program.
2) A variance to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning
Code.
3) A determination of public convenience or necessity to permit a brew pub
with on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages.
PARCEL B-
1) A conditional use permit to allow off-site parking for a brew pub.
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 2 of 9
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached
resolutions, determining that this request is categorically exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act (Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects), and approving Conditional
Use Permit No. 2016-05860, Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-05890, Variance No. 2016-05066
and Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity No. 2016-00131.
BACKGROUND:
PARCEL A- This 2.5-acre property is developed with a 58,500 square foot industrial building that
is used for alcohol beverage manufacturing (a brewery) and includes a small tasting room. The
property is located in the Platinum Triangle within the underlying “I” Industrial Zone and the
“PTMU” Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The General Plan designates the property
for Mixed Use land uses. Surrounding land uses include The George Apartments, currently under
construction, and Angel Stadium across Orangewood Avenue to the north, and, industrial
businesses to the south and across Dupont Drive to the east and west, including Parcel B described
below.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2015-05811 was approved by the Planning Commission on August
10, 2015 to permit a tasting room with an outdoor patio within a portion of an existing industrial
building with fewer parking spaces than required by the Zoning Code. The intent of this tasting
room was to allow a temporary facility for customers to preview and taste specialty beers while the
applicant prepared plans for the permanent brewing, restaurant and tasting room operations. Staff
is recommending a condition of approval that this permit be terminated if the subject project is
approved. Alcoholic Beverage Manufacturing is permitted by right at this location by the
underlying Industrial Zone.
PARCEL B- This 1.3-acre property is developed with an industrial building and is located in the
Platinum Triangle within the underlying “I” Industrial Zone and the “PTMU” Platinum Triangle
Mixed Use Overlay Zone. The General Plan designates the property for Mixed Use land uses.
Surrounding land uses include vacant land approved for mixed use development (the LT Platinum
Project) across Orangewood Avenue to the north; industrial businesses, including Parcel A
(described above), across Dupont Drive to the east; industrial businesses to the south; and the
Gateway Apartment Homes to the west.
This project was continued from the November 14, 2016 Planning Commission meeting in order
for the project to be re-advertised to include a request for approval of a coordinated sign program
and to delete the request for a development agreement because it was no longer applicable to the
proposed project.
PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to partially demolish and construct improvements to
the existing 58,500 square foot industrial building/brewery located on Parcel A. The eastern half
of the building would undergo a phased demolition to include the removal of the roof and three
walls, leaving the existing slab as a temporary construction staging area. The foundation would
eventually be demolished for the establishment of an outdoor dining, entertainment and
recreation area. The remaining structure would largely be left intact, with areas of selective
demolition to provide new building openings and interior improvements.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 3 of 9
The first floor of the remodeled building would include a brewery with a packing and shipping
area, restaurant, bar, two kitchens, roaster area, tank bar, storage, offices and barrel room with a
stage and VIP room. The barrel room would primarily be for storing and ageing beer, but on
occasion would provide an area for private events. These private events would include
weddings, music performances, and other planned gatherings. The maximum number of guests
permitted for these events would not exceed 170 people to ensure compliance with the submitted
parking demand study. Most of the second floor would be open to the area below. The second
floor would be improved with a 1,000 square foot conference room for Golden Road Brewing
corporate meetings.
The outdoor dining, entertainment and recreation area would include food service, three outdoor
bars, bocce ball court, gaming area, hammock grove, kid-safe play area, dog run, community and
semi-private outdoor dining, swings, fire pits, projector screen and a platform stage for outdoor
events.
Rendering (Outdoor Dining and Recreation)
A 580 square foot, detached retail space would be constructed at the northwest corner of the
building. The retail building would be staffed during business hours, selling branded
merchandise and retail-packaged beer in cans and bottles. Beer sales in the retail shop would be
suspended before and during events at Angels Stadium, as recommended by the Police
Department. As shown in the image below, the retail shop would be designed to resemble a silo
with integrated signage, fencing, bike parking, hardscape features and layered landscaping. This
building and adjacent outdoor space were designed to provide an architectural element near the
corner of Dupont Drive and Orangewood Avenue and to create a connection to the public right-
of-way that would encourage biking and walking to the facility.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 4 of 9
Rendering (Northwest Building Elevation and Retail Shop)
The applicant is requesting hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., daily. A full service
menu would be available at all times. During peak operational hours, an estimated thirty-one
employees would be onsite. This would include three bartenders, one site manager, one
operations manager, one restaurant manager, ten servers, seven food preparation workers, one
general worker, one brew master, five brewers, and one security officer.
The above improvements and operations, including the sale of alcohol for on and off-site
premises sale and consumption, require approval of a conditional use permit and determination
of public convenience or necessity. In addition, as part of the conditional use permit, the
applicant is requesting approval of a coordinated sign program, which would include one
monument sign, four wall signs and three directional signs. Several of these wall signs are
illustrated in the renderings above. The sign program is summarized in the following table and a
detailed sign exhibit is provided as Attachment No. 9 to this report.
Sign # Type Height Width Square
Footage
1 Monument 4 ft. 42 ft. 168
2 Wall 7 ft. 35 ft. 245
3 Directional 2.5 ft. 13 ft. 32.5
4 Deleted N/A N/A N/A
5 Wall 2.5 ft. 10 ft. 25
6 Directional 3 ft. 12 ft. 36
7 Directional 3.6 ft. 1.6 feet 6
8 Wall 6 ft. 43 ft. 258
9 Wall 6.25
ft.
8.75 ft. 55
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 5 of 9
A total of 320 parking spaces are required for the project and 239 spaces are proposed. A total of
75 parking spaces would be provided on-site. An additional 164 parking spaces would be
provided directly across Dupont Drive, on Parcel B. The parking on Parcel B would be provided
in the existing parking lot and within an industrial building. The indoor spaces would be
available to patrons at all times, but would be reserved by security and valet services on the days
that special events would be held at the facility. No physical modifications are being made to the
off-site parking location. Because all Code required parking would not be provided on or off-site,
the applicant is requesting a parking variance for Parcel A and a conditional use permit for off-
site parking for Parcel B.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit and Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity: Before the
Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, it must make a finding of fact that
the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a conditional use permit is
authorized by this Zoning Code;
2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or
the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be
located;
3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow
the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to
either the particular area or health and safety;
4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue
burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the
traffic in the area; and
5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions
imposed, if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the
citizens of the City of Anaheim.
The Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit in this zone to authorize the brew pub, the
event space and outdoor recreation in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses.
Recent amendments to the Zoning Code permit breweries with accessory tasting rooms without
the need for a CUP in most commercial and industrial zones in the City; however; a CUP is
required in this case based on the combination of the uses proposed.
The applicant is requesting approval of on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic
beverages. A Type 1 (Beer Manufacturing) license, which authorizes a brewery with a restaurant,
would be required from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC). The
Zoning Code requires a conditional use permit in this zone to authorize the sale of alcoholic
beverages in order to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 6 of 9
The location is within Police Reporting District No. 2228, which has a crime rate that is below
the citywide average. There have been 11 calls for service to this location in the last year. The
calls include two disturbances, seven security alarm responses, one abandoned vehicle and one
drunk in public. The crime rate within ¼ mile of this property is 63 percent below the citywide
average.
Staff does not anticipate that the addition of alcoholic beverage sales at this location would
contribute to an increase in crime if the business is operated in a responsible manner and in
compliance with the recommended conditions of approval. These conditions include typical Police
Department conditions for similar uses, such as requiring a security plan; requiring ABC LEAD
(Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) training for employees; and limiting the display area
of alcoholic beverages, among others.
The proposed restaurant and brew pub is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General
Plan by contributing to vitality of the Platinum Triangle as “a thriving economic center that
provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and
entertainment opportunities.” The addition of the outdoor dining and recreation area would bring
the property into greater conformance with the Platinum Triangle Master Land Use Plan
(PTMLUP) by creating an activated street frontage that will contribute to the vibrant, walkable
urban environment envisioned for the Platinum Triangle. Outdoor noise would be limited since
amplified music would require approval of a Special Event Permit. Based on these factors, staff
believes that the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding area and recommends
approval of the conditional use permit.
Coordinated Sign Program: Before the Planning Commission may approve a conditional use
permit for a coordinated sign program, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented
shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) Signs shall complement the architecture of the buildings on the same property and
provide a unifying element along the streetscape; and
2) The size, scale and style of signs shall be internally consistent and consistent with the
scale of the buildings located on the same property and the surrounding land uses.
The Code requires a conditional use permit for any coordinated sign program in the Platinum
Triangle that does not meet the City’s sign code requirements, subject to the findings above.
The proposed signs complement the architecture of the brew pub and retail can shop buildings.
The signs are designed with high quality materials and a contemporary style and with the same
exterior colors and finishes and would provide a unifying element along the streetscape. The
size of the signs is consistent with the scale of the building. The implementation of a coordinated
sign program would provide project identification, improved visibility and cohesive design
elements. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this request.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 7 of 9
Parking Variance: A variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Planning Commission or
City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer
off-street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number
of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use
under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such
use;
2) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
3) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
4) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed
use; and
5) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede
vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets
in the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
The Zoning Code requires that parking demand be calculated by combining all of the proposed
uses for the entire project. A total of 320 parking spaces are required for the proposed project as
shown in the table below. The applicant is proposing to provide a total of 239 parking spaces, of
which 75 parking spaces would be provided on-site and an additional 164 parking spaces would
be provided off-site, directly across Dupont Drive on Parcel B.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 8 of 9
Code Required Parking
Use
Code Requirement
Proposed Floor
Area (s.f.)
Spaces
Required
Alcoholic Beverage
Manufacturing
1.55 spaces/1,000 s.f.
May include 10 percent office space 14,484 23
Alcoholic Beverage
Tasting Room 17 spaces/1,000 s.f. 770 13
Entertainment Venue 17 spaces/1,000 s.f. 3,378 57
Outdoor Recreation
Requires Parking Demand Study
8,517 20
Full Service Restaurant 15 spaces/1,000 s.f. 7,054 106
Outdoor Dining-
Restaurant 15 spaces/1,000 s.f. 1,942 29
Outdoor Seating-
Fast/Casual 15 spaces/1,000 s.f. 4,147 62
Retail 5.5 spaces/1,000 s.f. 580 3
TOTAL 320
A parking study prepared by LSA Associates, Inc., dated October, 2016, was submitted in order
to analyze the project parking demand. The study identified several factors that would contribute
to a parking demand less than required by Code. For example, Golden Road Brewing’s main
manufacturing facility is located in the City of Los Angeles and this new location would
specialize in lower batches of experimental beer, which requires a significant amount of space
for storage, aging and fermenting. The Code requires 23 spaces for the brewing area, but there
would only be eight employees on site for brewing operations. In addition, the outdoor
recreational space and seating would function differently than typical outdoor dining for a full-
service restaurant. All customers would walk up to a counter for food and beverages, therefore
requiring less staff. Due to the unique nature of the outdoor area, the density of seating is much
less than a typical outdoor dining area. The study also provides consideration for alternative
modes of travel. Since the project is located within the Platinum Triangle, it is within walking
distance to several planned and constructed residential developments. As a condition of approval,
the applicant will be required to financially participate in the Anaheim Transportation Network,
which operates the ART (Anaheim Resort Transit) busses. As a result, there may be the
opportunity for Golden Road patrons to access the brewery using ART. The project is also
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05860, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2016-05890, VARIANCE
NO. 2016-05066 AND DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE OR NECESSITY NO. 2016-00131
November 28, 2016
Page 9 of 9
designed to provide a convenient drop off and pick-up location near the main entrance which
would accommodate taxis and smartphone based ridesharing. Based on these factors, the study
concluded that the actual parking demand would be 237 spaces.
Staff believes that the number of parking spaces proposed on and off-site would be adequate to
accommodate the proposed brew pub without impact to the surrounding public streets or
properties. A safe path of travel for patrons to connect to the off-site parking would be provided
by a future signalized crosswalk on Dupont Drive. Staff is recommending conditions of
approval to ensure the successful management of the off-site parking such as the requirement for
valet service during events, security to help direct traffic, adequate lighting and directional signs.
Environmental Impact Analysis: The project’s potential environmental impacts have been
evaluated and staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the development
qualifies for a Class 32 “Infill Development Projects” exemption allowed under California
Environmental Quality Act. In order to support this determination, staff prepared an
environmental checklist and determined that the project would not result in any significant
effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. In reaching this conclusion, staff
determined that the subject property is less than five acres in size and surrounded by urban uses;
has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; and, can be adequately served
by all required utilities and public services. Based on these findings, the project does not meet
the minimum thresholds that would suggest the potential for the project to cause a significant
effect on the environment.
CONCLUSION: The proposed brew pub with events and outdoor entertainment would
complement existing nearby businesses and entertainment venues and would bring the property
into greater conformance with the PTMLUP. The recommended conditions of approval would
ensure that the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages would be compatible with
surrounding land uses. In addition, an adequate supply of parking would be provided to serve
the proposed use. Staff recommends approval of this request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Amy Vazquez Jonathan E. Borrego
Contract Planner, Lilley Planning Group Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution (Parcel A)
2. Draft Determination of Public Convenience or Necessity Resolution (Parcel A)
3. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution (Parcel B)
4. Letter of Request
5. Parking Study
6. Trip Generation Memorandum
7. Police Memorandum
8. Complete Plan Set
9. Coordinated Sign Program
10. Renderings
11. Class 32 Environmental Checklist
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
NO
.
4
AT
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
NO. 8
STAGE
MAIN KITCHEN
109
BARREL VAULT
114PREP KITCHEN
131
BREWERY
136
FEATURE
144
COLD BOX
141
BREWER'S
OFFICE
140
PACKAGING
137
STREET
106
DINING ROOM
101
MEN
103
WOMEN
102
VIP
ROOM
117
TANK BAR
105
CAN SHOP
150
RR
115
RR
116
STAIR 1
OFFICE
127
OFFICE
126
OFFICE
125
OFFICE
124
OFFICE
119
OFFICE
122
MEDIA
123
BREAK
120
DRAFT
COLD BOX
113
RR
130
RR
129
ELECTRICAL
143
EXPO
107
BUS
108
COOLER
110
DISH
111
OFFICE
112
IT
118STAFF
128
DISH
135
DRY STOR.
134
FREEZER
133
COOLER
132
STORAGE
138
MCC
139
SHIPPING
142
ROASTER
104
OUTDOOR DINING
01
BOCCE AND
FAMILY ROOM
02
HAMMOCK
GROVE
03
OUTDOOR
GAMING AREA
04
BEACH FIRE PIT
05
OUTDOOR
RECREATIONAL SPACE
06
ELEVATED
STAGE
07
KID SAFE
PLAY AREA
08
DOG RUN
09
STORMWATER
TREATMENT AREA
010
OUTDOOR
STORAGE
011
TRASH AND
RECYCLING COLLECTION
012
BOILER AND
CHILLER
014
TOOL
SHED
015
TOOL
SHED
015
TOOL
SHED
015
DROP-OFF
AND PICK UP
013
X X X
X
X
CAN SHOP
150
19'-8"
15
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
RETAIL: SLAB ON GRADE WITH EPOXY PAINT, METAL
FRAMED INSULATED WALLS/CEILINGS.
UNCONDITIONED CORRUGATED METAL SILO SPACE
AT REACH IN COOLERS
RETAIL
WARMING UNITS
POS
REACH IN
COOLERS
150A
15
0
B
R13'-
0
"
3'-2"
1/16" = 1'-0"
FIRST FLOOR PLAN - OVERALL
1/8" = 1'-0"
ENLARGED PLAN - CAN SHOP - OPTION 1
Date:
Job No:
Sheet No:
A
Drawing:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
GOLDEN ROAD
BREWING
2210 E. ORANGEWOOD AVE.
ANAHEIM, CA 92806
16034
19-OCT-2016
-
-
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
- OVERALL
A2.11
2
A2.11
2
A3.01
3
A3.01
1
A3.01
4
A3.01
1
A3.02
2
A3.02
1.(E) RESTROOM TO REMAIN.
2.FUTURE SHADE TRELLIS: PROVIDE ROUGH-INS FOR GAS,
ELECTRICAL, AND WATER.
3.NEW ALUMINUM AND GLASS OVERHEAD DOOR.
4.NEW HORIZONTAL FOLDING ALUMINUM AND GLASS DOOR.
5.NEW ALUMINUM STOREFRONT AND ENTRANCE WHERE
SHOWN.
6.LAMINATED BAR TOP WITH METAL-FRAMED DIE-WALL WITH
WOOD FINISH AND FOOT RAIL. ASSUME ROUGH-INS FOR
EQUIPMENT UNDER BAR.
7.CONCRETE BAR TOP WITH BREEZE BLOCK DIE-WALL.
8.WOOD FRAMED "TOOL SHED" WITH FOLDING, LOCKING
DOORS ON OVERHEAD TRACK. INTERIOR: PAINTED
CONCRETE WALL (EXISTING) WITH TVs, BEER TAPS, WARE
WASHING, REFRIGERATOR, GLASS RACKS AND STORAGE.
9.CHANNEL GLASS WALL.
10.COFFEE ROASTER WITH GAS CONNECTION AND FLUE.
11.WOOD FRAMED ENTRY PORTAL (SIMILAR TO "TOOL SHEDS")
WITH SIGNAGE SUPPORT. SEE ELEVATIONS.
12.INFILL EXISTING ARCHES WITH CONCRETE TO MATCH
EXISTING WALL.
13.NEW METAL STUD WALL WITH GYPSUM BOARD.
14.SERVING TANKS BY OWNER. PROVIDE THICKENED SLAB AND
TRENCH DRAIN.
15.NOT USED.
16.FEATURE BY OTHERS. PROVIDE ELECTRICAL CONNECTION.
17.BREWING/PACKAGING EQUIPMENT BY OTHERS. PROVIDE
THICKENED SLAB AND TRENCH DRAINS.
18.NOT USED.
19.NEW GALVANIZED STEEL STAIR.
20.42" HIGH PAINTED STEEL SAFETY GUARDRAIL.
21.BARRELS, SEATING, MOBILE BAR, MOBILE STAGE BY
OTHERS.
22.NEW LOUVER IN EXISTING OPENING.
23.NEW BUILT-IN-PLACE REFRIGERATED UNIT WITH REMOTE
COMP. AND OVERHEAD DOORS.
24.NEW DISPLAY WALL WITH DIRECT-DRAW BEER TAPS AND
UNDER COUNTED EQUIPMENT.
25.CASEWORK.
26.WOOD DECK OR GREEN ROOF ON MEMBRANE ROOFING ON
CANTILEVERED FRAMING ON "TOOL SHED" STRUCTURE
BELOW.
2
2
2
1
1
33
3 44
4
5
6 6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
9
10
11
11
12
13 TYP
13 TYP
13 TYP
14 TYP
16
17 19
20
20
21
23
23
3
A4.01
3
A4.01
2
A4.01
2
A4.01
1
A4.01
1
A4.01
2 10/19/2016REV. 2
CLOSED KITCHEN
CEILING SPACE
CL
O
S
E
D
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
CE
I
L
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
SLOPED ROOFING
BELOW
(EXTERIOR)
2
A2.12
CONFERENCE
201
26
26
26
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
OPEN TO BELOW
DN
13
13
13 13
13
1313
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
2
2
2
27
113'-4"
25
1
'
-
0
1
/
2
"
38
'
-
1
0
"
38
'
-
1
0
"
36
'
-
1
0
"
12
'
-
8
"
12
'
-
6
"
6'-6"
22
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
4
"
56'-8"56'-8"
13
'
-
2
"
6'
-
2
"
3'
-
2
"
10'-1"34'-10"
8'
-
0
"
35
'
-
0
"
5'-0"
8'
-
0
"
35
'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
5'-6"
56'-7"35'-9"20'-0"
29
'
-
7
"
30'-0"
9'-6"20'-6"
12
'
-
0
"
9'-10"
12'-3"46'-6"23'-7"
9'-6"
17
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
8
"
20'-0"35'-9"
10
'
-
2
"
35'-2"
18
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
6
"
73
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
5'-0"
13
'
-
4
"
CONFERENCE
201
26
26
13
20
20
3
19
201A
20
1
B
201C
201D
10'-3"
ROOF LADDER
7'-6"2'-3"CL CL
4"
6'
-
0
"
CL
EQEQ
CL
A2
A3 Date:
Job No:
Sheet No:
A
Drawing:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
GOLDEN ROAD
BREWING
2210 E. ORANGEWOOD AVE.
ANAHEIM, CA 92806
16034
19-OCT-2016
-
-
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
A2.121/16" = 1'-0"
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
ENLARGED SECOND FLOOR PLAN
KEYNOTES
1.(E) RESTROOM TO REMAIN.
2.FUTURE SHADE TRELLIS: PROVIDE ROUGH-INS FOR GAS,
ELECTRICAL, AND WATER.
3.NEW ALUMINUM AND GLASS OVERHEAD DOOR.
4.NEW HORIZONTAL FOLDING ALUMINUM AND GLASS DOOR.
5.NEW ALUMINUM STOREFRONT AND ENTRANCE WHERE
SHOWN.
6.LAMINATED BAR TOP WITH METAL-FRAMED DIE-WALL WITH
WOOD FINISH AND FOOT RAIL. ASSUME ROUGH-INS FOR
EQUIPMENT UNDER BAR.
7.CONCRETE BAR TOP WITH BREEZE BLOCK DIE-WALL.
8.WOOD FRAMED "TOOL SHED" WITH FOLDING, LOCKING
DOORS ON OVERHEAD TRACK. INTERIOR: PAINTED
CONCRETE WALL (EXISTING) WITH TVs, BEER TAPS, WARE
WASHING, REFRIGERATOR, GLASS RACKS AND STORAGE.
9.CHANNEL GLASS WALL.
10.COFFEE ROASTER WITH GAS CONNECTION AND FLUE.
11.WOOD FRAMED ENTRY PORTAL (SIMILAR TO "TOOL SHEDS")
WITH SIGNAGE SUPPORT. SEE ELEVATIONS.
12.INFILL EXISTING ARCHES WITH CONCRETE TO MATCH
EXISTING WALL.
13.NEW METAL STUD WALL WITH GYPSUM BOARD.
14.SERVING TANKS BY OWNER. PROVIDE THICKENED SLAB AND
TRENCH DRAIN.
15.WOOD BOARDWALK (MATCH LANDSCAPE). SAWCUT SLAB
AND PROVIDE DEPRESSED SLAB.
16.FEATURE BY OTHERS. PROVIDE ELECTRICAL CONNECTION.
17.BREWING/PACKAGING EQUIPMENT BY OTHERS. PROVIDE
THICKENED SLAB AND TRENCH DRAINS.
18.NOT USED.
19.NEW STEEL STAIR. GALVANIZE AT EXTERIOR.
20.42" HIGH PAINTED STEEL SAFETY GUARDRAIL.
21.BARRELS, SEATING, MOBILE BAR, MOBILE STAGE BY
OTHERS.
22.NEW LOUVER IN EXISTING OPENING.
23.NEW BUILT-IN-PLACE REFRIGERATED UNIT WITH REMOTE
COMP. AND OVERHEAD DOORS.
24.NEW DISPLAY WALL WITH DIRECT-DRAW BEER TAPS AND
UNDER COUNTED EQUIPMENT.
25.CASEWORK.
26.WOOD DECK OR GREEN ROOF ON MEMBRANE ROOFING ON
CANTILEVERED FRAMING ON "TOOL SHED" STRUCTURE
BELOW.
27.LINE OF CAP OF SPACE BELOW.
GENERAL NOTES
A.XXX
LEGEND
(E) CONCRETE WALL
NEW WALL, REFER TO ASSEMBLIES SHEET
2 10/19/2016REV. 2
X
X
X
X
DUPONT (WEST)
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
N
O
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
NO
PARKI
N
G
1
9
3
1
2
9
2
8
7
2
7
1
8
1
1
1
5
5
4
0
1
4
1
3
7
3
6
2
4
2
1
6
3
2
5
3
9
3
6
3
8
15
3
0
1
7
3
6
2
6
1
4
1
6
2
3
3
5
1
0
4
9
6
3
2
5
4
0
7
8
4
6
3
2
4
9
5
0
51
5
1
4
4
3
1
1
1
4
5
3
3
3
4
5
4
3
4
2
4
1
2
4
6
2
2
1
2
4
7
4
8
2
0
2
2
1
3
2
1
52
9
7
5
4
5
3
4
3
53 ACCENT PALM TREES WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA / CALIFORNIA FAN PALM20` B.T.H. STREET TREE - DUPONT DRIVE LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA / CRAPE MYRTLE36" BOX STREET PALM TREE - ORANGWOOD AVE WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA / CALIFORNIA FAN PALM20` B.T.H. SPECIMEN TREE CITRUS X SINENSIS `VALENCIA` / SWEET ORANGE96" BOX PARKING LOT TREE GEIJERA PARVIFLORA / AUSTRALIAN WILLOW36" BOX LOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS / BRISBANE BOX36" BOX STREET TREE - ORANGEWOOD AVE JACARANDA MIMOSIFOLIA / JACARANDA36" BOX EXISTING EXISTING TREE / PROTECT IN PLACEEXISTING ACCENT PALMS BRAHEA ARMATA / MEXICAN BLUE PALM24" BOX CHAMAEROPS HUMILIS / MEDITERRANEAN FAN PALM24" BOX LANDSCAPE AREA - SHRUBS & GROUNDCOVER ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM / COMMON YARROW1 GAL AGAVE ATTENUATA / AGAVE1 GAL ALOE SPP. / ALOE1 GAL BOUGAINVILLEA SPP. / BOUGAINVILLEA1 GAL CAREX SPP. / SEDGE1 GAL CISTUS X PURPUREUS / ORCHID ROCKROSE1 GAL DESCHAMPSIA CESPITOSA / TUFTED HAIR GRASS1 GAL DYMONDIA MARGARETAE / DYMONDIA1 GAL ECHEVERIA HYBRIDS / HYBRID ECHEVERIA1 GAL FICUS PUMILA / CREEPING FIG1 GAL HEBE SPECIOSA `VARIEGATA` / VARIEGATED HEBE1 GAL HESPERALOE PARVIFLORA / RED YUCCA1 GAL LAVANDULA SPP. / LAVENDER1 GAL LIMONIUM PEREZII / STATICE1 GAL MANDEVILLA SPLENDENS / MANDEVILLA1 GAL OSTEOSPERMUM FRUTICOSUM / FREEWAY DAISY1 GAL PENNISETUM MESSIACUM `RED BUNNY TAILS` / FOUNTAIN GRASS1 GAL PENNISETUM SPATHIOLATUM / RYE PUFFS1 GAL PITTOSPORUM TENUIFOLIUM `SILVER SHEEN` / TAWHIWHI1 GAL PODOCARPUS MACROPHYLLUS MAKI / SHRUBBY YEW1 GAL RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA `EVE CASE` / CALIFORNIA COFFEEBERRY1 GAL SALVIA LEUCANTHA `SANTA BARBARA` / MEXICAN BUSH SAGE1 GAL SANTOLINA CHAMAECYPARISSUS / LAVENDER COTTON1 GAL SEDUM SPP. / SEDUM SPECIES1 GAL SENECIO MANDRALISCAE / BLUE FINGER1 GAL SESLERIA AUTUMNALIS / AUTUMN MOOR GRASS1 GAL TECOMA CAPENSIS / CAPE HONEYSUCKLE1 GAL TECOMA STANS / YELLOW BELLS1 GAL WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA / COAST ROSEMARY1 GAL CONCEPT PLANT SCHEDULE: 50% 1 GAL. & 50% 5 GAL. EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN PROPOSED 5` WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK EXISTING BUILDING TO BE RENOVATED PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS PROPOSED CAN SHOP PER ARCHITECTURAL PLANS PROPERTY LINE, TYPICAL HARDSCAPE – TYPE 1, TYPICAL HARDSCAPE – TYPE 2, TYPICAL HARDSCAPE – TYPE 3, TYPICAL HARDSCAPE – TYPE 4, TYPICAL YARD GAME AREA SAND, TYPICAL RAISED WOOD DECK 123456789101112 LEGENDPROPOSED INDOOR GO
L
F
S
I
M
U
L
A
T
O
R
PER ARCHITECTURE PL
A
N
S
EXISTING ASPHALT PAR
K
I
N
G
L
O
T
T
O
B
E
R
E
N
O
V
A
T
E
D
HAMMOCK GROVE FIRE FEATURE, TYPICAL BENCH SWING SAND PLAY AREA WITH
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
E
L
E
M
E
N
T
DOG AREA (SYNTHETIC
T
U
R
F
)
OUTDOOR BAR PER AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
SECURITY FENCE SITE FURNISHINGS - TY
P
I
C
A
L
RAISED TREE PLANTER 1314151617181920212223
P
L
A
N
T
E
D
P
O
T
4
2
”
H
I
G
H
F
E
N
C
E
6
’
H
I
G
H
P
E
R
I
M
E
T
E
R
F
E
N
C
E
4
'
H
I
G
H
F
E
N
C
E
F
L
U
S
H
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
M
E
D
A
L
L
I
O
N
W
I
T
H
L
O
G
O
V
A
L
E
T
P
I
C
K
U
P
A
N
D
D
R
O
P
O
F
F
A
R
E
A
P
I
C
K
U
P
A
N
D
D
R
O
P
O
F
F
A
R
E
A
A
D
A
R
A
M
P
–
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
6
’
W
I
D
E
D
O
U
B
L
E
G
A
T
E
,
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
A
N
D
U
N
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
R
E
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
T
R
A
N
S
F
O
R
M
E
R
F
U
T
U
R
E
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
O
R
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
F
U
T
U
R
E
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
P
E
R
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
U
L
T
I
M
A
T
E
R
I
G
H
T
-
O
F
-
W
A
Y
B
O
C
C
E
B
A
L
L
C
O
U
R
T
L
E
A
N
B
A
R
-
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
B
R
A
N
D
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
/
S
C
U
L
P
T
U
R
E
1
2
'
W
I
D
E
D
O
U
B
L
E
G
A
T
E
3
'
W
I
D
E
S
I
N
G
L
E
G
A
T
E
S
E
A
T
W
A
L
L
B
I
K
E
R
A
C
K
S
G
R
E
E
N
R
O
O
F
O
V
E
R
B
A
R
4
'
H
I
G
H
W
O
O
D
S
L
A
T
T
E
D
F
E
N
C
E
3
6
3
7
3
8
3
9
4
0
4
1
4
2
4
3
4
4
4
5
4
6
G
A
L
V
A
N
I
Z
E
D
S
T
A
I
R
S
E
L
E
V
A
T
E
D
D
E
C
K
R
E
M
O
V
A
B
L
E
B
O
L
L
A
R
D
S
T
R
A
S
H
&
R
E
C
Y
C
L
I
N
G
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
I
O
N
B
I
O
-
B
A
S
I
N
S
T
O
R
M
W
A
T
E
R
T
R
E
A
T
M
E
N
T
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
P
E
R
C
I
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
S
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
T
A
I
R
S
S
L
O
P
E
D
W
A
L
K
W
A
Y
4
7
4
8
4
9
5
0
5
1
5
2
5
3
5
4
N
O
T
E
S
:
1
.
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
D
O
C
U
M
E
N
T
A
T
I
O
N
P
A
C
K
A
G
E
A
N
D
A
C
E
R
T
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
C
O
M
P
L
E
T
I
O
N
A
R
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
F
O
R
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
1
0
.
1
9
O
F
T
H
E
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
C
O
D
E
A
N
D
O
R
D
I
N
A
N
C
E
N
O
.
6
1
6
0
R
E
L
A
T
I
N
G
T
O
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
W
A
T
E
R
E
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
C
Y
.
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
S
E
C
O
D
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
I
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
A
T
T
H
E
T
I
M
E
O
F
I
S
S
U
A
N
C
E
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
P
E
R
M
I
T
S
.
2
.
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
I
R
R
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
M
E
T
E
R
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
I
N
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
C
H
A
P
T
E
R
1
0
.
1
9
O
F
T
H
E
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
C
O
D
E
A
N
D
O
R
D
I
N
A
N
C
E
N
O
.
6
1
6
0
R
E
L
A
T
I
N
G
T
O
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
W
A
T
E
R
E
F
F
I
C
I
E
N
C
Y
.
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
S
E
C
O
D
E
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
I
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
A
T
T
H
E
T
I
M
E
O
F
I
S
S
U
A
N
C
E
O
F
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
P
E
R
M
I
T
S
.
0
1
0
2
0
4
0
1
"
=
2
0
'
-
0
"
S
C
A
L
E
:
NORTH
O
R
A
N
G
E
W
O
O
D
A
V
E
N
U
E
SOUTH DUPONT DRIVE
SOUTH DUPONT DRIVE
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
#
2
1
0
/
1
9
/
2
0
1
6
D
a
t
e
:
J
o
b
N
o
:
S
h
e
e
t
N
o
:
S
E
|
A
S
C
O
T
T
E
D
W
A
R
D
S
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
L
L
P
|
2
5
2
5
E
.
B
u
r
n
s
i
d
e
S
t
.
,
P
o
r
t
l
a
n
d
,
O
R
9
7
2
1
4
p
h
o
n
e
:
(
5
0
3
)
2
2
6
-
3
6
1
7
w
w
w
.
s
e
a
l
l
p
.
c
o
m
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
:
D
r
a
w
n
B
y
:
C
h
e
c
k
e
d
B
y
:
G
O
L
D
E
N
R
O
A
D
B
R
E
W
I
N
G
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
,
C
A
L
I
F
.
1
6
-
5
0
3
1
9
-
O
C
T
-
2
0
1
6
L
C
,
M
M
J
B
L
-
1
.
0
2
2
1
0
EXIST ROOF SLOPE
DIRECTION
EXIST ROOF SLOPE
DIRECTION
EX
I
S
T
R
O
O
F
SL
O
P
E
EX
I
S
T
R
O
O
F
SL
O
P
E
RO
O
F
S
L
O
P
E
DI
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
444
4
ROOF
SLOPE
1 1
3
FLUE
1
2
5
1
4
12
2
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS
DS DS
6
7
7
8
7
8
7
7
7
9
9
99
9
9 9
11
11
1
RO
O
F
S
L
O
P
E
DI
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
12
2
.12
.12
7
A7.51
2
A7.51
5
A7.51
Date:
Job No:
Sheet No:
A
Drawing:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
GOLDEN ROAD
BREWING
2210 E. ORANGEWOOD AVE.
ANAHEIM, CA 92806
16034
19-OCT-2016
-
-
ROOF PLAN
A2.21
1/16" = 1'-0"
ROOF PLAN
KEYNOTES
1.MECHANICAL SCREEN: PERFORATED CORRUGATED METAL
ON GALVANIZED METAL FRAMING, BRACE TO STRUCTURE.
2.ROOF HATCH. TO BE COORDINATED WITH FINAL ROOF TOP
UNIT LOCATIONS.
3.ROOF MOUNTED ADDRESS NUMBERS.
4.STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFING.
5.EXISTING BUILT UP ROOFING. PATCH AS REQUIRED.
6.CUT EXISTING PARAPET ARCHES FOR CONTINUOUS FLAT
PARAPET. REFER TO ELEVATIONS FOR PARAPET PROFILE.
7.EXISTING SKYLIGHT. VERIFY LOCATION.
8.DEMOLISH EXISTING SKYLIGHT AND CURB. PROVIDE NEW
ROOF SHEATHING AND MEMBRANE AS REQUIRED.
9.NEW SKYLIGHT AND CURB ASSEMBLY. PROVIDE NEW
STRUCTURAL FRAMING TO SUPPORT SKYLIGHT.
10.SALVAGED GIRDER FROM DEMOLITION OF ADJACENT
BUILDING. CUT TO REQUIRED LENGTH.
11.ROOF OF TOOL SHED BAR BELOW.
12.GUTTER.
2 10/19/2016REV. 2
Date:
Job No:
Sheet No:
A
Drawing:
Drawn By:
Checked By:
GOLDEN ROAD
BREWING
2210 E. ORANGEWOOD AVE.
ANAHEIM, CA 92806
16034
19-OCT-2016
-
-
BUILDING SECTIONS
A4.01
1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION
1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION - CONTINUED
1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING SECTION
KEYNOTES
1.MECHANICAL SCREEN BEYOND. EXPANDED METAL.
2 10/19/2016REV. 2
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 2
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2017-00141
LOCATION: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Anaheim
REQUEST: This application is a City-initiated amendment to various chapters
of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to provide clarity, create
consistency of terms and definitions, streamline approval processes and amend
development standards to reflect current market trends.
DISCUSSION: Staff requests a continuance of this hearing to allow time to
include additional technical and clarifying changes to the proposed Zoning Code
Amendment.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this hearing be continued to the
October 30, 2017 Planning Commission meeting.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Gustavo N. Gonzalez David See
Senior Planner Acting Planning Services Manager
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 3
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
LOCATION: 645 South Magnolia Avenue
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The property owner is Kim Nguyen
Pham and the applicant is DCH & Associates, Inc., represented by Danh Ho.
REQUEST: The following land use entitlements are being requested:
1) A Reclassification, or rezoning, of the subject property from the
T” Transition Zone to the “RS-3” Single Family Residential Zone.
2) A Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide one parcel into three single
family residential lots.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt
the attached resolutions, determining that this request is categorically exempt
from further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) under Class 15 (Minor Land Divisions) of the State CEQA
Guidelines, and approving Reclassification No. 2017-00307 and Tentative Parcel
Map No. 2017-128.
BACKGROUND: The 0.76 acre-property is located in the “T” Transition Zone
and is designated for Low Density Residential uses by the General Plan. The site
is currently occupied with a one-story single family residence. As further
described below, the residence, which would be demolished, is listed on the
Citywide Historical Interest List. The property is surrounded by single family
homes on the north, south and west, with multi-family residential uses to the east
across Magnolia Avenue.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
October 16, 2017
Page 2 of 6
PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to rezone the existing 33,117 square foot lot from the
“T” Transition Zone to the “RS-3” Single Family Residential Zone for the purpose of creating
a three lot subdivision for conveyance purposes. The proposal includes the demolition of the
existing single family residence that currently straddles proposed lot lines. There is no
proposal for development of the individual parcels at this time. If approved, the three lot
subdivision would permit the construction of a single family residence on each lot.
EXISTING ZONING
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
October 16, 2017
Page 3 of 6
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
The applicant proposes to subdivide the existing lot into three lots for conveyance purposes.
No development of the site is proposed at this time. Chapter 18.04 of the Anaheim
Municipal Code specifies a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet and a minimum lot width
of 50 feet for properties in the RS-3 zone. The proposed lot sizes are as follows:
Lot Size Lot Width
Parcel 1 10,603 sq. ft. 53 ft.
Parcel 2 11,020 sq. ft. 54 ft.
Parcel 3 11,066 sq. ft. 53 ft.
The existing house, which would be demolished, is listed on the Citywide Historical Interest
List. The house was built in 1953 and according to the City’s Historical Preservation staff,
may be one of Anaheim’s original “Citrus Grove” houses. The Citywide Historic
Preservation Plan specifies that the demolition of any structures listed on the Citywide
Historical Interest List requires a 60-Day Notice of Intent to Demolish, only if those
structures have been surveyed using a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR)
Form 523a. The existing residence proposed for demolition has not been surveyed or
included in a survey of the property, and therefore does not require a 60-Day Notice.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
October 16, 2017
Page 4 of 6
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS: Following is staff’s analysis and recommendation for each
requested action:
Reclassification: This property is currently located in the “T” Transition Zone. A
reclassification, or rezoning, to the “RS-3” Single Family Residential Zone is being requested
in order to allow a three-lot subdivision for single-family residential development. The RS-3
zoning requires a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 50 feet.
The proposed subdivision would result in three, 53 to 54-foot wide lots with lot areas
between 10,603 and 11,066 square feet in conformance with Code requirements.
The intent of the RS-3 zone is to promote the development of attractive, safe and healthy
single family residential uses, and to promote development that integrates with and
minimizes impacts to surrounding land uses. The density of the proposed project is
consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential
allowing a maximum of 6.5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed density of 3.9 dwelling
units per acre would be compatible with the surrounding land uses and zoning. The proposed
reclassification supports several General Plan goals intended to (i) provide a variety of
quality housing opportunities to address the City’s diverse housing needs and (ii) facilitate
new residential development on underutilized infill parcels. Therefore, staff recommends
approval of the reclassification request.
Tentative Parcel Map: Before the Planning Commission may approve the tentative parcel
map, it must make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the
following conditions exist:
1) That the proposed subdivision of the Property, including its design and
improvements, is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Anaheim.
2) That the proposed subdivision of the Property, as shown on Tentative Parcel
Map No. 2017-128, including its design and improvements, is consistent with
the zoning and development standards of the proposed "RS-3" Single-Family
Residential Zone being proposed in conjunction with Reclassification No.
2017-00307.
3) That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the proposed
project.
4) That the design of the subdivision, as shown on Tentative Parcel Map No.
2017-128, is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or
substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
October 16, 2017
Page 5 of 6
5) That the design of the subdivision, as shown on Tentative Parcel Map No.
2017-128 or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public
health problems.
6) That the design of the subdivision, as shown on Tentative Parcel Map No.
2017-128, or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public, at large, for access through or use of property within
the proposed subdivision.
A tentative parcel map is required to subdivide the existing lot into three lots. The proposed
subdivision would create three new lots that would exceed the minimum lot size of 5,000
square feet in the RS-3 zone. The proposed subdivision would also meet the minimum lot
width requirement of 50 feet for the RS-3 zone. Although the tentative map is being
processed for conveyance purposes only, all future development would be required to be
developed in accordance with the development standards of the RS-3 zone.
Based on potential impacts from traffic and existing street parking on Magnolia Avenue,
Public Works Department staff recommends a condition of approval requiring that a
covenant be recorded in conjunction with the Final Parcel Map which would restrict the
number of vehicular access points to one per parcel, and that any future development be
designed to provide on-site turnaround allowing forward travel to and from Magnolia
Avenue. This condition is included in the draft resolution (Attachment 2).
The proposed lot sizes and lot widths are compatible with the lot sizes and widths of other
single family residential properties in the area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the
proposed tentative parcel map with the added condition.
Environmental Impact Analysis: Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the
effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e.,
Class 15 – Minor Land Divisions) which consist of the division of property in urbanized
areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the
division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are
required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the
parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and the
parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent and that, therefore, pursuant to
Section 15315 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will
not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from
the provisions of CEQA.
RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
October 16, 2017
Page 6 of 6
CONCLUSION: The proposed reclassification of the property from the “T” Transition
Zone to "RS-3" Single-Family Residential Zone is consistent with the Zoning Code and
General Plan. The proposed subdivision is consistent with site development standards for the
"RS-3" Single-Family Residential Zone and would be compatible with the single-family
residential uses surrounding the property. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the
reclassification and tentative parcel map requests.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Wayne Carvalho David See
Contract Planner Acting Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Reclassification Resolution
2. Draft Tentative Parcel Map Resolution
3. Tentative Parcel Map
4. Applicant’s Letter of Request
5. Site Photographs
TDEV 2017-00048SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
C-GOFFICES
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
R S -2
S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
C-GRETAIL
C-GAUTO REPAIR/SERVICE
TRELIGIOUS USE
TRELIGIOUS USE
RM-3ATRIUM GARDENAPARTMENTS51 DU
TMAGNOLIA ACRESAPARTMENTS40 DU
TRELIGIOUS USETPRESCHOOL
TRELIGIOUS USETPRESCHOOL
TRELIGIOUS USETPRESCHOOL
TSINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
TRELIGIOUS USETPRESCHOOL
RM-3MAGNOLIA POINT APARTMENTS16 DU
RM-3SFR
RM-3STANFORDAPARTMENTS14 DU
RM-3VILLA CAPRIAPARTMENTS29 DU
RM-3NORMANDY VILLASAPARTMENTS18 DU
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
TSINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
R S -2
S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
R S -2
S I N G L E F A M I L Y R E S I D E N C E
RS-2SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
S M A G N O L I A A V E
W ORANGE AVE
S
K E N M
O R E S T
W W ESTHAVEN DR
W STONYBR OOK DR
S V E R O N A S T
W ORANGE AVE
W K EYS LN
S
K E N M
O R E S T
S V E R O N A S T
W. BALL RD
W. LINCOLN AVE
S . D A L E A V E W. BRO ADWAY
W. ORANGE AVE
S . B R O O K H U R S T S T
S .
B E A C H
B L V D
S .
G I L B E R T
S T
W. LINCOLN AVE
S . B E A C H B L V D
6 4 5 Sou th Magnolia Avenue
D E V N o. 2017-00048
Subject Property APN: 126-194-17
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
S M A G N O L I A A V E
W ORANGE AVE
S
K E N M
O R E S T
W W ESTHAVEN DR
W STONYBR OOK DR
S V E R O N A S T
W ORANGE AVE
W K EYS LN
S
K E N M
O R E S T
S V E R O N A S T
W. BALL RD
W. LINCOLN AVE
S . D A L E A V E W. BRO ADWAY
W. ORANGE AVE
S . B R O O K H U R S T S T
S .
B E A C H
B L V D
S .
G I L B E R T
S T
W. LINCOLN AVE
S . B E A C H B L V D
6 4 5 Sou th Magnolia Avenue
D E V N o. 2017-00048
Subject Property APN: 126-194-17
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
- 1 - PC2017-***
RESOLUTION NO. PC2017-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE ANAHEIM PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2017-00307 AND MAKING
CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2017-00048)
(645 SOUTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning
Commission") did receive a verified petition for reclassification, designated as Reclassification
No. 2017-00307, for that certain real property located at 645 South Magnolia Avenue in the City
of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on the map attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently developed with a single-family residence
and is located in the "T" Transition Zone. The Anaheim General Plan designates this Property
for Low Density Residential land uses; and
WHEREAS, the applicant requests to rezone or reclassify the Property from the
“T” Transition Zone to the “RS-3” Single-Family Residential Zone; and
WHEREAS, Reclassification No. 2017-00307 is proposed in conjunction with
Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128 to establish a 3-lot residential subdivision for conveyance
purposes, which includes the demolition of the existing single family residence (collectively
referred to herein as the "Proposed Project"); and
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2017, the Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been
duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60
(Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"), to hear and consider evidence for
and against proposed Reclassification No. 2017-00307 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128
and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as
“CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA
Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of
environmental documents for"projects", as that term is defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed
Project is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 15 – Minor Land Divisions) which consists of
the division of property meeting the conditions described in Section 15315 of the CEQA
Guidelines; that is, (a) consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for
residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in
conformance with the General Plan and zoning, (b) no variances or exceptions are required, (c)
- 2 - PC2017-***
all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, (d) the parcel was
not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and (e) the parcel does
not have an average slope greater than 20 percent. The Planning Commission finds and
determines that the Property is located within an "urbanized area", as that term is defined in
Section 15387 of the CEQA Guidelines and meets the aforementioned conditions and will not
cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing, does find and determine the following facts:
1. Reclassification of the Property from the "T" Transition Zone to the "RS-3"
Single-Family Residential Zone is consistent with the Property’s existing Low Density
Residential land use designation in the General Plan.
2. The proposed reclassification of the Property is necessary and/or desirable
for the orderly and proper development of the community and is compatible with the adjacent
properties to the north, south, and west which are designated for Low Density Residential land
uses and are developed with single family homes.
3. The proposed reclassification of the Property does properly relate to the zone
and its permitted uses locally established in close proximity to the Property and to the zones and
their permitted uses generally established throughout the community in that surrounding
properties include single-family residential uses within the “RS-2” Single-Family Residential
Zone. The development standards of the “RS-3” Single-Family Residential Zone are compatible
with residential development within the “RS-2” Single-Family Residential Zone.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record
constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this
Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the
record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report
and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts,
that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly
declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due
consideration of all evidence presented to it.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings,
this Planning Commission does hereby approve Reclassification No. 2017-00307 to authorize an
amendment to the Zoning Map of the Anaheim Municipal Code to rezone and reclassify the
Property into the "RS-3" Single-Family Residential Zone and recommends that the City Council
adopt an ordinance reclassifying the Property in accordance with Reclassification No. 2017-
00307.
- 3 - PC2017-***
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall not constitute a
rezoning of, or a commitment by the City to rezone, the Property; any such rezoning shall require
an ordinance of the City Council, which shall be a legislative act, which may be approved or
denied by the City Council at its sole discretion.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission
meeting of October 16, 2017.
CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do
hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Anaheim held on October 16, 2017, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 16th day of October, 2017.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 4 - PC2017-***
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 2
- 1 - PC2017-***
RESOLUTION NO. PC2017-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2017-00048)
(645 SOUTH MAGNOLIA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning
Commission") did receive a verified petition to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128 to
establish a 3-lot residential subdivision for that certain real property located at 645 South Magnolia
Avenue, in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange, State of California, as generally depicted on
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Property is currently developed with a single-family residence and
is located in the "T" Transition Zone. Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128 is proposed in
conjunction with Reclassification No. 2017-00307, which is a request to rezone or reclassify the
Property from the "T" Transition Zone to the "RS-3" Single-Family Residential Zone (herein
referred to as "Reclassification No. 2017-00307"). The Anaheim General Plan designates this
Property for Low Density Residential land uses; and
WHEREAS, the applicant requests a tentative parcel map in order to establish a 3-
lot residential subdivision. Following approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128 and as a
condition of approval, the applicant will demolish the existing single family residence that
currently straddles the proposed lot lines. The applicant has no current plans to develop the parcels
established by Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128; however, each parcel will be available for
future construction of single-family dwellings; and
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2017, the Planning Commission did hold a public
hearing at the Civic Center in the City of Anaheim, notice of said public hearing having been duly
given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of
the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"), to hear and consider evidence for and against said
proposed Tentative Parcel Map 2017-128 and Reclassification No. 2017-00307 and to investigate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as
“CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (herein referred to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure
Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental
documents for "projects", as that term is defined in Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines; and
- 2 - PC2017-***
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds and determines that Tentative Parcel
Map 2017-128 is within that class of projects (i.e., Class 15 – Minor Land Divisions) which
consists of the division of property meeting the conditions described in Section 15315 of the CEQA
Guidelines; that is, (a) consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential,
commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with
the General Plan and zoning, (b) no variances or exceptions are required, (c) all services and access
to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, (d) the parcel was not involved in a division
of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and (e) the parcel does not have an average slope
greater than 20 percent. The Planning Commission finds and determines that the Property is
located within an "urbanized area", as that term is defined in Section 15387 of the CEQA
Guidelines and meets the aforementioned conditions and will not cause a significant effect on the
environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and
study made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports
offered at said hearing with respect to the request to establish a 3-lot residential subdivision, does
find and determine the following facts:
1. The proposed subdivision, including its design and improvements, and with
the conditions imposed herein is consistent with the Low Density Residential land use designation
in the Anaheim General Plan and the development standards contained in the "RS-3" Single-
Family Residential Zone in that the proposed parcel map will create three lots which exceed the
minimum 5,000 square foot lot size for the “RS-3” zone (Lot 1 – 10,603 square feet, Lot 2 – 11,020
square feet, Lot 3 – 11,066 square feet). The proposed lots are consistent with the proposed zoning
and General Plan land use designation.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and size of the proposed residential
subdivision in that this flat lot is currently developed with a single family dwelling and is of
adequate size to subdivide into three parcels that can be developed in accordance with the RS-3
zone development standards.
3. The design of the subdivision, with the conditions imposed, is not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat because no sensitive environmental habitat has been identified on the site in that no
environmental impacts are anticipated as part of the future development of single-family
residential uses on this Property.
4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to
cause serious public health problems, since any new structures and associated site improvements
will be constructed on the property in compliance with the conditions imposed and other related
Code requirements in that the future demolition, removal of structures, and future development of
a single family residence will be subject to all City code requirements for demolition and
construction.
- 3 - PC2017-***
5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the
proposed subdivision in that the parcel map is conditioned to be submitted for review and approval
to the City of Anaheim and the Orange County Surveyor and then shall be recorded in the Office
of the Orange County Recorder prior to issuance of building permits.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record
constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this
Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the
record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report
and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts,
that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly
declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due
consideration of all evidence presented to it.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does
hereby approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 2017-128, subject to and contingent upon (1) the
adoption by the City Council of an ordinance reclassifying the Property within the " RS-3" Single-
Family Residential Zone in accordance with Reclassification No. 2017-00307, (2) the conditions
of approval described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which
are hereby found to be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of the Property in order to
preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim. Extensions
for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance with Section
18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by
the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established
that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition(s), (ii) the modification complies with
the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of the
use or approved development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find
and determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance
with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part
thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent
jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and
void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes
approval of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Anaheim Municipal
Code and any other applicable City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any
action or findings as to compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable
ordinance, regulation or requirement.
- 4 - PC2017-***
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission
meeting of October 16, 2017. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in
Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and
may be replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Anaheim held on October 16, 2017, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 16th day of October, 2017.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 5 - PC2017-***
- 6 - PC2017-***
EXHIBIT “B”
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 2017-128
(DEV2017-00048)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL
1 The legal property owner shall dedicate 53 feet from the centerline on
Magnolia Avenue to the City of Anaheim for street, public utilities and other
public purposes on the Parcel Map.
Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
2 An Improvement Certificate shall be included on the Parcel Map for
construction of required public improvements prior to development of the
parcels. Public improvement plans (streets, sewer, water or storm drain)
shall be submitted for improvements along the frontage of Magnolia Avenue.
Improvements shall conform to the City Standards 160-A, 114-A, and as
approved by the City Engineer. Parkway landscaping and irrigation shall be
installed.
Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
3 A covenant shall be recorded on each newly-created parcel limiting the
number of driveways to one per lot, and requiring adequate driveway design
for forward travel to and from Magnolia Avenue (no backing onto Magnolia
Avenue). The covenant shall be reviewed and approved by the Department
of Public Works, Traffic Engineering Division prior to recordation with the
Orange County Recorder.
Public Works
Department,
Traffic Engineering
Division
4 The Subdivider shall provide non-interference letters from utility companies. Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
5 The Subdivider shall provide a Monumentation bond. Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
6 The final map shall release and relinquish to the City access rights to
Magnolia Avenue except for approved access points at each lot.
Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
- 7 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
7 The final map shall be submitted to and approval by the City of Anaheim
Department of Public Works and the Orange County Surveyor for
technical review and ensure that all applicable conditions of approval have
been complied with and then shall be filed in the Office of the Orange
County Recorder.
Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
8 The new lots shall be assigned a new street address by the Building
Division.
Planning and
Building Department,
Building Division
PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE PARCEL MAP
9 All existing structures on the property shall be demolished. The developer
shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division.
Public Works
Department,
Development
Services Division
GENERAL
10 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its
officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to
individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims,
actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review, set
aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this permit
or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or made
prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality or
validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s
indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages, fees
and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit,
claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other
costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in connection with
such proceeding.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
11 The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the processing
of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the issuance of the
final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits for this project,
whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all charges shall result in delays in
the issuance of required permits or may result in the revocation of the
approval of this application.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
12 The property shall be developed substantially in accordance with plans and
specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the applicant and
which plans are on file with the Planning Department.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
N
O
.
3
8462 Crane Cir, Huntington Beach, CA 92646
EMail:dhcivilengineering@yahoo.com Tel: 714.414.0260 Fax: 714.960-0431
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS CIVIL ENGINEERING- LAND PLANNING - SURVEYING
August 3rd, 2017
City Of Anaheim
200 S Anaheim Blvd.
Anaheim, CA 92805
Attn: Planning Department
Re: Project Description for Tentative PM 2017-128
625 S Magnolia Ave., Anaheim, CA 92804
Dear Sir,
I hereby request for approval of our proposal to subdivide a parcel of 33,200SF of land
with a +-3200 SF existing single family residence into three (3) Single Family Residence
parcels. Please note that the existing residence will be demolished prior to construction.
Per City zoning map this property is in zone T (Transition), the proposal for this
subdivision include request for zone change to zone designate as RS3.
The property owner request for approval of this proposed subdivision as soon as this
application deem complete and satisfactory by the City Staffs
Attached please find the Conceptual Site Plan per City's Planner request.
Regards,
Danh C Ho, PE
8462 Crane Cir
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
714-414-0260
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
645 South Magnolia Avenue (Looking West)
Existing Residence
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 4
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096
LOCATION: 4421 East La Palma Avenue (Captain’s Auction Warehouse)
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: The agent is Timothy Lux, representing
the applicant Chris Campbell. The property owner is Bradmore Realty Investment
Group.
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of the following entitlements:
1) A conditional use permit (CUP) to permit and retain an existing
live auction facility for arcade games, a community meeting
facility within an existing industrial building, and off-site parking
on an adjacent property;
2) A variance to permit less parking spaces than required by the
Zoning Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt
the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt from
further environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act
(Class 1, Existing Facilities) and approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2016-
05889 and Variance No. 2017-05096.
BACKGROUND: The 0.74-acre property is developed with a 1-story, 13,485
square foot industrial warehouse building. The property is located in Development
Area 4 of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (SP2015-1) and the General Plan
designates the property for Neighborhood Center land uses. The surrounding land
uses include industrial uses to the north, east, south, and west.
In May 2015, the applicant was cited by Code Enforcement as the result of a
complaint filed by the Fire Department citing life safety concerns after observing
live auctions within the industrial warehouse. The applicant submitted an
application for a CUP on January 27, 2017. The Code Enforcement case remains
active, pending a determination on this application.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096
October 16, 2017
Page 2 of 5
In 2008, the business owner began operating a wholesale arcade game business at the subject
property without the proper approvals from the City. Sales occurred primarily online through
auction websites such as E-bay; however, the business over the years began to host regular
live auction events every six weeks throughout the year. In addition, the business owner
recently began hosting Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) meetings at the subject property in the
evenings after business hours.
PROPOSAL: The applicant requests approval to permit and retain the use of a portion of the
industrial warehouse for assembly uses. These assembly uses include hosting regular live
auction events associated with the sale of arcade games and weekly AA meetings. The
existing 13,485 square foot warehouse would continue to operate primarily as a warehouse
and storage facility. The auction events and AA meetings are conducted inside of the
warehouse where approximately 2,500 square feet are cleared for the assembly use. Live
auction events occur approximately every six weeks on Saturday and Sundays when the
surrounding businesses are closed. The events are staffed with 5-6 employees to assist with
bidding and transactions. The applicant has indicated that the live auction events typically
range in size of about 30-40 attendees with 70-80% of bidders participating online. Auction
item winners may either pick up the item by will call or have the item shipped directly to
them.
The existing and proposed hours of operation for the warehouse are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday. The business would continue to stay open on weekends when auction
events are occurring and the events generally occur between 11:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. with
setup occurring at 8:00 a.m. The AA meetings host approximately 40 attendees on weeknights
from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. once all of the industrial businesses have closed.
Site Plan
Assembly
Area
Warehouse
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096
October 16, 2017
Page 3 of 5
The applicant proposes to provide 28 on-site parking spaces and is proposing an agreement
with the adjacent property to the west to utilize 38 additional spaces during off-peak business
hours that will accommodate the live auction events and AA meetings that occur during off
peak hours. A parking analysis is provided in more detail below.
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a CUP , it must make
a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a CUP is authorized by the
Zoning Code;
2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the
growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow
the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either
the particular area or health and safety;
4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue
burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the
traffic in the area; and
5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed,
if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the
City of Anaheim.
The Zoning Code requires approval of a CUP for “Community and Religious Assembly” uses
within Development Area 4 (Local Commercial) of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan zone
to ensure that the uses are appropriate for the site, compatible with surrounding land uses, and
in compliance with Zoning Code requirements. Staff believes that the proposed use is
compatible with the other industrial businesses in the surrounding area as the proposed
assembly uses would occur during off-peak hours such as evenings and weekends when the
industrial businesses are closed. The traffic generated by this use will not exceed the
anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets and adequate parking and circulation
will be provided to accommodate the use.
The attached draft resolution contains recommended conditions of approval to mitigate
potential impacts to surrounding industrial properties. These conditions include the
following:
A recorded parking agreement permitting the use of the adjacent off-site
parking spaces shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and
approval.
All outdoor storage currently occupying parking spaces shall be removed.
The proposed building occupancy shall comply with the requirements of an
“Assembly” occupancy in accordance with California Building Code, 2016
edition. A building permit shall be obtained within 90 days of the date of this
approval.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905
October 16, 2017
Page 4 of 5
Parking Variance: Before the Planning Commission may approve a parking variance, it must
make a finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions
exist:
1) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of
such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under
the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use;
2) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
3) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
4) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed
use; and
5) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede
vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
There are 28 parking spaces available on-site and the applicant proposes to utilize 38
additional off-site parking spaces during off-peak hours to accommodate the assembly uses,
for a total of 66 parking spaces being provided. The additional spaces would be located on the
adjacent property to the west (at 4411 East La Palma Avenue) where the applicant is leasing
additional warehouse space. The Zoning Code requires that the parking demand for
community and religious assembly uses be determined by a parking study or letter. The
applicant indicated that on average 40 participants attend the auction events during the
weekends with a maximum of 6 employees present. Additionally, during the week the
AA meetings are attended by approximately 40 participants. The applicant has indicated that
many that attend the AA meetings access the property by taking public transportation, carpool,
or utilize rideshare services. Similarly, the applicant stated that many of the auction attendees
carpool to the events. Staff determined the parking demand based on single occupant vehicles
attending the events, which would result in a maximum demand of 46 parking spaces, resulting
in an excess of 20 parking spaces.
Additionally, Code Enforcement has not received any complaints from the surrounding
businesses regarding overflow or spillover parking. Based on the available on and off-site
parking being proposed, staff believes that the proposed use would have a sufficient amount of
parking spaces available and would not impose an undue burden on the adjacent commercial
and industrial uses. Therefore, staff believes that the number of parking spaces proposed is
adequate to accommodate the proposed business and without impact to the surrounding public
streets or properties.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905
October 16, 2017
Page 5 of 5
Environmental Impact Analysis: Staff recommends the Planning Commission find that the
effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e.,
Class 1 – Existing Facilities) which consist of the repair, maintenance, and/or minor alteration
of existing public or private structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use
beyond that existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section
15301 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the proposed project will not cause a
significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the
provisions of CEQA.
CONCLUSION: The live auction events and AA meetings, as conditioned, would be
conducted in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding area. Based on the available on
and off-site parking, and the letter of operation provided by the applicant, staff believes that
the number of parking spaces would be adequate to accommodate the proposed business
without impact to the surrounding public streets or properties. Similarly, the live auction
events and AA meetings would occur during off peak hours and would not result in a
significant impact to the businesses in the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval of the
requested conditional use permit and variance.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Lindsay Ortega David See
Contract Planner Acting Planning Services Manager
RRM Design Group
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit Resolution
2. Applicant’s Letter of Operation
3. Photographs
4. Plans
SP 2015-1DEV2017-00012LA PALMA BUSINESSCENTER
SP 2015-1DA1BUSINESS PARK
SP 2015-1DA1LA PALMAINDUSTRIALPLAZA
SP 2015-1DA4RETAIL
SP 2015-1DA1OFFICES
SP 2015-1DA1BUSINESS PARK
SP 2015-1DA4ETCHANDYCOMMERCECENTER
SP 2015-1DA4ETCHANDYCOMMERCECENTER
SP 2015-1DA1RETAIL SP 2015-1DA4RETAIL
SP 2015-1DA1SFR
SP 2015-1DA1LA PALMAINDUSTRIALPLAZA
SP 2015-1DA1OFFICES
SP 2015-1DA1OFFICES
SP 2015-1DA1LA PALMABUSINESSCENTER
SP 2015-1DA1LA PALMABUSINESSCENTER
SP 2015-1DA1LA PALMABUSINESSCENTER SP 2015-1DA4LA PALMABUSINESSCENTER
SP 2015-1DA4OFFICES
SP 2015-1DA4RESTAURANT
SP 2015-1DA1BUSINESS PARK
SP 2015-1DA1WAREHOUSE AND DISTRIBUTION
SP 2015-1DA4OFFICES
SP 2015-1DA1SANTA ANA RIVER
SP 2015-1DA1OFFICES
E LA PALMA AVE
E MIRALOMA AVE
N L
A K
E V
I
E W A V E
N
L
A K
E V
I
E W A V E
E. LA PALMA AVE
N
.
L
A
K
E
V
I
E
W
A
V
EE. R I V E R D A L E A V E
N . J E F F E R S O N S T
S . R I C H F I E L D R D
N .
K E L L O G G D R
4 4 2 1 Ea st La Palma Avenue
D E V N o. 2017-00012
Subject Property APN: 346-351-02
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
E LA PALMA AVE
E MIRALOMA AVE
N L
A K
E V
I
E W A V E
N
L
A K
E V
I
E W A V E
E. LA PALMA AVE
N
.
L
A
K
E
V
I
E
W
A
V
EE. R I V E R D A L E A V E
N . J E F F E R S O N S T
S . R I C H F I E L D R D
N .
K E L L O G G D R
4 4 2 1 Ea st La Palma Avenue
D E V N o. 2017-00012
Subject Property APN: 346-351-02
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
- 1 - PC2017-***
RESOLUTION NO. PC2017-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2017-05905 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096 AND MAKING
CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2017-00012)
(4421 EAST LA PALMA AVENUE)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim (the "Planning
Commission") did receive a verified petition for Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05905 and
Variance No. 2017-05096 to permit and retain an existing live auction facility for arcade games,
a community meeting facility within an existing industrial building, off-site parking on an
adjacent property, and less parking than required by the zoning code within an existing industrial
warehouse located at 4421 East La Palma Avenue in the City of Anaheim, County of Orange,
State of California (the "Property"), the boundaries of which are generally depicted on the map
attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the Property is approximately 0.74 acres in size and is currently developed
with a 13,485 square foot industrial building. The Anaheim General Plan designates the Property
for Neighborhoord Center land uses. The Property is located within the Anaheim Canyon
Specific Plan Area described in Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (the "SP 2015-1")
and more particularly within the Local Commercial Development Area (Development Area 4)
thereof. As such, the Property is subject to the zoning and development standards described in
Chapter 18.120 (Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-1 (SP 2015-1) Zoning and
Development Standards) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the "Code"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in
the City of Anaheim on October 16, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been
duly given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60
(Procedures) of the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against proposed the Proposed
Project and to investigate and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as
“CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for the Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (commencing with Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15000; herein referred
to as the "CEQA Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the
"lead agency" for the preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the
Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, this Planning Commission finds and determines that the effects of the
Proposed Project are typical of those generated within that class of projects (i.e., Class 1 –
Existing Facilities) which consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing,
licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical
equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that
existing at the time of this determination, and that, therefore, pursuant to Section 15301 of the
- 2 - PC2017-***
CEQA Guidelines, the Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment
and is, therefore, categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, this Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study
made by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at
said hearing with respect to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05905, does find
and determine the following:
1. The request to permit a Community and Religious Assembly use within an
existing industrial building at the Property is properly one for which a conditional use permit is
authorized.
2. The request to permit a Community and Religious Assembly use within an
existing industrial building at the Property would not adversely affect the surrounding land uses
and the growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located because the
Project because it does not operate during the normal weekday business hours of the surrounding
industrial uses.
3. The size and shape of the site is adequate to allow the full development of the
proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular area nor to the health, safety and
general welfare of the public because the Property is already improved with an industrial
building and no expansion to the existing building is proposed.
4. The traffic generated by the use would not impose an undue burden upon the
streets and highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the
Community and Assembly use would not operate during normal weekday business hours.
5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05905 under the conditions
imposed will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
WHEREAS, based upon a parking justification letter submitted by the applicant, the
Planning Commission does further find and determine that the request for Variance No. 2017-
05096 to allow fewer parking spaces than required by the Code should be approved for the
following reasons:
SECTION NO. 18.42.040.010 Minimum number of parking spaces.
(46 spaces required; 28 spaces on-site spaces
proposed)
1. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided for such use than the number of spaces necessary to
accommodate all vehicles attributable to the proposal under the normal and reasonably
foreseeable conditions of operation of such use because the applicant will have access to off-site
parking on the adjacent property to the west; therefore, the existing on-site and off-site parking
will be sufficient to accommodate the use of the Property as a live auction facility for arcade
games and community meeting facility; and
- 3 - PC2017-***
2. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of
the Property because the applicant will have access to parking spaces on the adjacent property
when needed to accommodate overflow; and
3. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate
vicinity of the proposed use because the proposed number of parking spaces within the Property
is sufficient to accommodate the proposed use on site, as well as a shared parking agreement
permitting the business to utilize parking spaces located on the adjacent property for evening and
weekend events or meetings, if needed; and
4. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed use because the
traffic generated by this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding
streets.
5. That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede vehicular
ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed use because the project site has existing ingress or egress access points that are
designed to allow adequate on-site circulation and, therefore, will not impede vehicular ingress
to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the
Property; and
WHEREAS, this Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record
constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this
Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the
record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report
and all materials in the Proposed Project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there
other facts, that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. This Planning Commission
expressly declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due
consideration of all evidence presented to it.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, pursuant to the above findings, this
Planning Commission does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05905 and
Variance No. 2017-05096, contingent upon and subject to the conditions of approval set forth in
Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which are hereby found to
be a necessary prerequisite to the proposed use of that portion of the Property for which
Conditional Use Permit No. CUP2017-05905 and Variance No. 2017-05096, is applicable in
order to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in accordance
with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be
amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing
is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification
complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward
establishment of the use or approved development.
- 4 - PC2017-***
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that extensions for further time to complete the
conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B hereto may be granted in accordance with Section
18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of approval may be amended by
the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i) equivalent timing is established
that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii) the modification complies with
the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant progress toward establishment of
the use or approved development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this
permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit
Approval) and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance
with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part
thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent
jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and
void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval of
the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable
City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to
compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or
requirement.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting of
October 16, 2017. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60
(Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be
replaced by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 5 - PC2017-***
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim,
do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim held on October 16, 2017, by the following vote of
the members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 16th day of October,
2017.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 6 - PC2017-***
- 7 - PC2017-***
EXHIBIT “B”
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05905 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05096
(DEV2017-00012)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
WITHIN 90 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS RESOLUTION
1. The proposed occupancy shall comply with the requirements of an
“Assembly” occupancy in accordance with California Building Code,
2016 edition. A building permit shall be obtained from the Building
Division within 90 days of the date of this resolution.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
2. A shared parking agreement shall be submitted to the Planning and
Building Department for review and approval, and shall be recorded in
the Office of the County Recorder. A recorded copy shall be filed with
the Planning and Building Department. The agreement shall specify the
number and location of the parking spaces and assure that the spaces
shall be accessible and available in conjunction with the use for which
the parking spaces are required.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
OPERATIONAL
3. The business shall be operated in accordance with the Letter of Request
submitted as part of this application. Any changes to the business
operation, as described in that document, shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial
conformance with the Letter of Request and to ensure compatibility
with the surrounding uses.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
4. All outdoor storage currently occupying parking spaces shall be
removed within 60 days of the date of this resolution.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
5. All parking shall occur on-site. Should the parking demand exceed the
amount of on-site parking, the applicant shall submit a request to
modify the Conditional Use Permit, subject to the approval of the
Planning Commission.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
6. Weekday events shall be restricted to those events outlined in the letter
of operation taking place after 6:00 p.m. Any changes to the business
operation as described in that document shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Director to determine substantial
conformance to ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
- 8 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
GENERAL
7. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and
its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively referred to
individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any and all claims,
actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees to attack, review,
set aside, void, or annul the decision of the Indemnitees concerning this
permit or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done, or
made prior to the decision, or to determine the reasonableness, legality
or validity of any condition attached thereto. The Applicant’s
indemnification is intended to include, but not be limited to, damages,
fees and/or costs awarded against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs
of suit, claim or litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees
and other costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in
connection with such proceeding.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
8. The applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the
processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of the
issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building permits
for the Proposed Project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all
charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or may
result in the revocation of the approval of this application.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
9. The subject Property shall be developed, used and maintained
substantially in accordance with plans and specifications submitted to
the City of Anaheim by the petitioner and which plans are on file with
the Planning Department, and as conditioned herein.
Planning and
Building Department,
Planning Services
Division
150 PAULARINO • SUITE D195 • COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626 • (949) 581-2255 • datum@pacbell.net
August 18, 2017
City of Anaheim
Planning Services Division
200 South Anaheim Boulevard
Anaheim, CA 92805
To Whom it may Concern,
CUP2017-05905/DEV2017-00012 proposes to increase the parking availability to support the proposed
Auction Events and propose AA Meetings by utilizing parking associated with two adjacent parcels. The
first building is 4411 E. La Palma which shares the western property line of the subject property at 4421
E. La Palma Avenue. CDC 3PL, Inc. DBA Captains Auction Warehouse currently occupies 24,019
square feet of warehouse space in this building. The second property building is 1221 North Lakeview
which shares the eastern property line of the subject property. Captains Auction Warehouse proposes to
enter into a reciprocal parking agreement for 25 additional parking stalls.
4421 E. L A PALM A
On behalf of CDC 3PL, Inc. DBA Captains Auction Warehouse, DBA CDC Fulfillment, I am pleased to
present to you an overview of the existing uses at the facility located at 4421 E. La Palma Avenue. (APN
346-351-02) The project is in a freestanding building on its own parcel located in the Anaheim Canyon
Specific Plan (SP2015-1). The building has an area of 13,485 square feet of which 1,700 square feet of
improved office area (12.6 percent). The existing building as currently occupied includes general office
use, warehouse storage, and distribution. The site currently provides 28 standard parking stalls. The site
will be restriped to provide for the required accessible parking stalls reducing the available parking by one
stall. The existing exterior storage will be eliminated and that area will be restriped gaining two additional
spaces. The product will be a net gain of one parking stall. The business operation also includes
periodic auctions as detailed in the operations descriptions. Additionally, the building voluntarily hosts
meetings for Alcoholics Anonymous detailed below.
General Business Description:
Captains Auction Warehouse represents clients who provide their products on consignment. The
amusement device products in the inventory includes pinball machines and arcade games. The devices
vary in size, but could typically equate to household appliances. The inventory is received from clients,
catalogued, and then stored prior to sale and distribution. On occasion clients request that their products
be liquidated.
The inventory is marketed online, and through periodic online/live auctions. No onsite sales are
conducted during regular business hours.
Principal Business Operations:
Daily operations can be divided into a general office (1,700 Square Feet) which is used for clerical
activities associated with daily business operations. The office area, located in the forward section of the
building at the primary building entry, will be occupied during normal operating hours of the facility. Office
area will typically be occupied by 3-5 employees.
The Warehouse (11,785 Square Feet) stores bulk items and contains shipping and receiving functions.
Warehouse area will typically be occupied by 3-5 employees.
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
150 PAULARINO • SUITE D195 • COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626 • (949) 581-2255 • datum@pacbell.net
Auction Events:
The facility typically conducts nine auction events annually. The individual auction events occur on
weekends. The events are staged by staff between the hours of 8-11am. The Auction events commence
after the staging with a typical duration between the hours of 11am-6pm. The number of attendees varies
throughout the day, and many attendees carpool to these events. Auction events do not occur during the
week or during regular business hours. The auction events are conducted in the warehouse portion of
the building with a limited casual seating area and a product display area. During an Auction event these
areas are isolated from balance of the office and warehouse portions of the facility. The Auction seating
and product display area is approximately 2,500 square feet supported by 40 non-fixed seats. The
product display is provided by video screens within the Auction area. The Auction seating and display
areas are provided with direct access to an exterior exit door. On auction event days there will typically
be some exterior product display. The displays are placed in a fashion as to not encumber parking or
vehicular circulation. Access to the balance of the warehouse area is restricted during the Auction
events.
The participants in the auctions include 70-80 percent online bidders with the balance of the participants
participate in a traditional live auction format. The onsite bidders typically number between 30-40
attendees. The auction is supported by an auctioneer and by 3-4 docents during the auction. Upon
conclusion of bidding 2 employees finalize the transactions. The transaction process is conducted within
the designated auction area. Auction items are received by the successful bidders either by a will call
process, or shipped directly to the successful bidder.
AA Meetings:
The AA meetings occur on weeknights typically between the hours of 6pm-9pm. AA events do not occur
during regular business hours. The AA events are conducted in the warehouse portion of the building
with a limited casual seating area of 1,200 square feet. The seating area is provided with direct access to
an exterior exit door, and segregated from both the office and warehouse sections of the building. Many
attendees carpool to the meetings.
PARKING ANALYSIS - 4421 E. LA PALMA AVE. SUBJECT PROPERTY
OFFICE 10-PERCENT 1,349 SF INCLUDED
OFFICE +10-PERCENT 351 SF 4/1,000 1.4
WAREHOUSE 11,785 SF INCLUDED
TOTAL 13,485 SF 1.55/1,000 20.9
TOTAL 23
REQUIRED PARKING – AUCTION EVENT
TENANT AREA (SF) RATIO
REQUIRED
PARKING
AUCTION AREA 2,500 TO BE
DETERMINED TBD STALLS
REQUIRED PARKING – AUCTION EVENT
TENANT AREA (SF) RATIO
REQUIRED
PARKING
MEETING AREA 1,200 20/1,000 24 STALLS
The proposed site plan includes 28 parking spaces. The proposed exterior site project scope would
include two accessible parking stalls including a van accessible stall. There are no proposed interior
improvements proposed.
150 PAULARINO • SUITE D195 • COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626 • (949) 581-2255 • datum@pacbell.net
4411 E. L A PALM A
Captains Auction Warehouse currently leases 24,019 square feet of this building on a month to month
basis. Pending resolution of this CUP Application Captains Auction Warehouse would enter a 60-month
lease to be coterminous with a proposed lease extension at 4422 E. La Palma.
General Business Description:
Captains Auction Warehouse occupies the majority of the warehouse space in this building. There is no
additional staff exclusively associated with this building. The existing staff at 4422 E. La Palma work s in
both buildings. In addition to the storage of product some packaging for shipping will occur in the
building.
Principal Business Operations:
The Warehouse (24,019 Square Feet) stores bulk items and contains shipping and receiving functions.
Warehouse area will typically be occupied by 3-5 employees from the 4422 E. La Palma building.
Business hours are Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
PARKING ANALYSIS - 4411 E. LA PALMA AVE. LEASE PROPERTY
OFFICE 10-PERCENT 3,671 SF INCLUDED
OFFICE +10-PERCENT 5,839 SF 1/1,000 23.4
WAREHOUSE 27,251 SF INCLUDED
TOTAL 36,761 SF 1.55/1,000 57.0
TOTAL 81
1221 N. LAKEVIEW
Captains Auction Warehouse proposes to enter into a 25-stall reciprocal parking agreement with the
building owner.
General Business Description:
The building owner and tenant occupies the building which ass 2,500 square feet of office with the
balance of the building is an industrial use.
Principal Business Operations:
Business hours are Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
PARKING ANALYSIS - 1221 N. LAKEVIEW
OFFICE 2,500 INCLUDED
WAREHOUSE 22,847 INCLUDED
TOTAL 25,347 1.55/1,000 39.3
150 PAULARINO • SUITE D195 • COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA 92626 • (949) 581-2255 • datum@pacbell.net
AGGREGATE PARKING MATRIX
PARKING PROVIDED AVAILABLE PROVIDED
4421 E. LA PALMA AVE. 28 SPACES 28 SPACES
4411 E. LA PALMA AVE. 98 SPACES 38 SPACES
1221 N. LAKEVIEW 58 SPACES 25 SPACES
TOTAL 184 SPACES 91 SPACES
Thank you in advance for your consideration of this information.
Sincerely,
Timothy J Lux
C-19769
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
N
O
.
3
N
O
R
T
H
A
T
T
A
C
H
M
E
N
T
N
O
.
4
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
ITEM NO. 5
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
City of Anaheim
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
LOCATION: 549-559 South Anaheim Boulevard
APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER:
The applicant is Modern Times Beer, LLC, represented by Jacob McKean, and the
property owner is Nest & Rest, LLC, represented by Shaheen Sadeghi of The LAB
Holdings, LLC.
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of the following entitlements:
1) A conditional use permit (CUP) to permit a brewery within an existing
commercial building. The brewery will include a tasting room, an
outdoor garden with a seating area and swimming pool, a full service
restaurant with outdoor dining area, a take-out restaurant, on and off-
premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, and off-site
parking.
2) A variance to allow reduced street and interior setbacks and less
parking spaces than required by the Code. A variance to permit a wall
height less than permitted by Code and wall/fence materials not
allowed by Code were deleted subsequent to advertisement of this
item.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve
the attached resolution, determining that this request is categorically exempt under the
California Environmental Quality Act (Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects), and
approving Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910 and Variance No. 2017-05095.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 2 of 11
BACKGROUND:
This 0.79-acre property is developed with a 3,312 square foot, two-story single-family residence
(“Burns’ Building” - Building A), a 5,712 square foot barrel-vaulted retail building (“Barrel
Building” - Building B), and a 1,412 automotive repair building (Building D). The project also
includes a portion of the 20-foot wide public alley adjacent to the north side of the property. The
portion of the alley abutting the project site has been abandoned by the City and purchased by the
applicant. The property is located in the underlying “C-G” General Commercial Zone, the
Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone, and the Boulevard Residential District of the South
Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay zone. In 2013, the reclassification of the site to
“RO” Overlay implemented a key strategy of the City’s 2006-2014 General Plan Housing Element
by rezoning the properties identified as Housing Opportunities Sites in the Housing Element. The
proposed rezoning of these approximately 166 sites allowed “by-right” housing development by
applying one of two overlay zones to these properties: the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay
Zone or the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone. The General Plan designates the property for Low-
Medium Density Residential land uses, but the applicant proposes to reuse the existing commercial
structures and implement the development standards and permitted uses as allowed in the
underlying “C-G” Zoning only. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential to the west
across a public alley, condominiums to the north, commercial land uses across Anaheim Boulevard
to the east, and an auto sales lot to across Water Street to the south.
Center City Vision: The Community Development Department has been facilitating the City’s
vision for downtown, as expressed in the Anaheim General Plan. The City envisions a vibrant
downtown area that includes high quality residential development, thriving commercial activity, a
pedestrian-friendly environment, and a unique architectural identity that reflects the historic
character of the Anaheim Colony Historic District. The downtown area, which has been recently
rebranded as “Center City”, is envisioned to be a recognizable urban city center and a public place
that is dense, livable, active, and diverse, while capitalizing on existing infrastructure, new and
existing amenities, historic features, and a mix of residential/commercial and civic uses. These
land use principles are also summarized in the Anaheim General Plan Community Design Element
and the Greater Downtown Guide for Development.
PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to re-purpose and improve the existing buildings to
accommodate a full-service restaurant and coffee shop in Building A, establish a production
brewery and tasting room in Building B, construct a new freestanding restroom building (Building
C), and establish a “take-out” restaurant in Building D. Site improvements would include an
outdoor dining area adjacent to Building A, a centralized garden area with seating to the rear of
Building B, two-story shipping containers surrounding the garden area to the west and north, and
a swimming pool south of Building B. The applicant proposes to construct an 8-foot high block
wall adjacent to the condominiums to the north. The proposed hours of operation would be Sunday
to Thursday, 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and Friday and Saturday, 6:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m., with beer
service beginning at 11:00 a.m. daily. A more detailed description of the project is provided below.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 3 of 11
Illustrative Site Plan
Building A: The Burns Building is a historic Craftsman-style home that is currently undergoing
exterior renovations in order to be eligible for a Mills Act Contract with City, which is likely to be
approved before the end of the year. The Mills Act was established by the State of California and
is administered by the City. It provides a tax abatement for the property owner in exchange for an
agreement to rehabilitate and maintain a historic property. The first floor of the remodeled building
would include a kitchen and seating area for a full service restaurant and a coffee station. The
second floor would include additional seating area, as well as office and storage areas. Outdoor
dining areas are proposed on the east and south sides of the building.
Building B: The Barrel Building would house a production brewing facility and tasting room. The
tasting room would have roll-up doors to provide an open-air experience for patrons inside and
walk-up service at the bar for patrons using the garden and pool area. The building would be
finished with a combination of wood and corrugated metal siding and would maintain the original
barrel-vaulted roof.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 4 of 11
Rendering (looking northwest from Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street)
Building C: This new freestanding restroom building would serve customers using the pool,
brewery, and garden areas.
Building D: This building (currently occupied with an auto repair shop) would be renovated and
improved with a full kitchen offering food service at a walk-up window with seating available in
the garden area, as well as a small employee lounge.
Garden/Pool/Shipping Containers: The outdoor garden would be improved with informal seating
areas, including amenities such as fire pits, raised planters, and a trellis. Ambient music is proposed
to be played throughout the garden area. The garden would be surrounded on two sides with
shipping containers that would provide accessory retail and food items, storage, and additional
seating areas. There would be a second floor open on one side with an additional seating area
offering views overlooking the garden.
Shipping Containers East Elevation
A total of 97 parking spaces are required for the project and 76 spaces are proposed. A total of 31
parking spaces would be provided on-site. An additional 45 parking spaces would be provided in
CarPark 2 (located on Center Street across from the Community Center) through a license
agreement with the City. Because all Code required parking would not be provided on-site, the
applicant is requesting a parking variance. An analysis of the parking variance is described in
more detail below.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 5 of 11
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS:
Conditional Use Permit: Before the Planning Commission may approve a CUP , it must make a
finding of fact that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the proposed use is properly one for which a CUP is authorized by this
Zoning Code;
2) That the proposed use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses, or the
growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
3) That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow
the full development of the proposed use, in a manner not detrimental to either
the particular area or health and safety;
4) That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue
burden upon the streets and highways designed and improved to carry the
traffic in the area; and
5) That the granting of the conditional use permit under the conditions imposed,
if any, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the
City of Anaheim.
The Zoning Code requires a CUP in this zone to permit a brewery with a tasting room and outdoor
dining area order to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The Zoning Code permits
breweries with accessory tasting rooms without the need for a CUP in most commercial and
industrial zones in the City; however, a CUP is required in this case because the tasting room
exceeds the 750 square foot size limitation allowed by right in the C-G zone.
The applicant is requesting approval of on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic
beverages. A Type 23 (Small Beer Manufacturer) license, which authorizes a brewery with a
restaurant, would be required from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
(ABC). The Zoning Code requires a CUP to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. This
request does not require a determination of Public Convenience or Necessity.
The Census Tract allows for up to four on-sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there is
presently one within the tract. The crime rate in this Reporting District is 240 percent above the
city average and there were four calls for service at this location in the past year. In the quarter
mile surrounding the subject property the crime rate is 169 percent above the city average and calls
for service primarily consisted of petty theft, auto burglaries, and vandalism. Staff does not
anticipate that the addition of alcoholic beverage sales at this location would contribute to an
increase in crime if the business is operated in a responsible manner and in compliance with the
recommended conditions of approval. These conditions include typical Police Department
conditions for similar uses, such as requiring a security plan and ABC LEAD (Licensee Education
on Alcohol and Drugs) training for employees, security measures, limitations on the outdoor hours
of operation and entertainment as described below, and a fenced in patio, among others.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 6 of 11
The proposed restaurant, brewery, outdoor garden area, and tasting room are compatible with the
surrounding land uses, would complement existing uses within Center City, and would not have a
detrimental impact on adjacent land uses or adversely affect development within the area, subject
to compliance with the conditions of approval mentioned above. Leisuretown would add to the
collection of unique attractions that create a sense of place within Center City. This project would
further contribute to the overall downtown pedestrian experience by providing an attraction that
would generate additional positive activity within the community. Leisuretown would
complement the other food, banquet, and entertainment uses operating in the nearby Packing
House food hall and alcoholic beverage service in the MAKE Building to the north.
To ensure that this project does not cause any disturbances in the neighborhood, staff recommends
conditions of approval that would restrict outdoor noise to ambient music only. Although not being
requested at this time, any future outdoor entertainment, including live music, would require
approval of a separate Entertainment Permit. Through the permit review process, staff would have
the ability to require certain protections to ensure that the music does not disturb any nearby
residents. Any outdoor entertainment proposed in the future would be significantly limited and
only allowed up to four times a year through the issuance of a Special Event Permit. Similar to an
Entertainment Permit, a Special Event Permit could include restrictions to ensure that such
entertainment does not disturb surrounding properties. Any outdoor entertainment in excess of the
four events permitted by the Special Event Permit would require a CUP. Staff also recommends
that the outdoor hours be limited to 9:00 p.m. on weekdays and 10:00 p.m. on weekends, rather
than 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. as requested by the applicant respectively; and that an 8-foot high
block wall be constructed to separate the project from the condominiums to the north to comply
with the Zoning Code and to ensure that adequate screening and noise buffering be provided. Based
on these factors, staff believes that the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding
area and recommends approval of the CUP.
In addition, staff believes the project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the General
Plan for Center City, including:
Ensure that Downtown maintains a mix of uses attractive to broad segments of
Anaheim’s population and that stimulate activity every day of the week;
Encourage the preservation and protection of buildings of historical significance;
Intensify and revitalize strategically located commercial sites in keeping with the
Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 7 of 11
Parking Variance: A variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Planning Commission or
City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not cause fewer off-
street parking spaces to be provided for the proposed use than the number of
such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to such use under
the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such use;
2) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
3) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use;
4) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not increase traffic
congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the proposed
use; and
5) That the variance, under the conditions imposed, if any, will not impede
vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed use.
The Zoning Code requires that the parking demand be calculated by combining all of the
proposed uses for the entire project. As described in the table below, a total of 97 parking spaces
are required by the Code. In the parking study prepared by Fehr & Peers, dated August 2017, the
actual demand is estimated to be 76 spaces. Accordingly, the applicant is proposing to provide a
total of 76 parking spaces, of which 31 parking spaces would be provided on-site and an
additional 45 parking spaces would be provided off-site through a parking license agreement
with the City in CarPark 2 located at 235 East Center Street.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 8 of 11
Code Required Parking
Use
Code Requirement
Proposed Floor
Area (s.f.)
Spaces
Required
Alcoholic Beverage
Manufacturing
1.55 spaces/1,000 s.f.
May include 10 percent office space 5,521 8.6
Alcoholic Beverage
Tasting Room 17 spaces/1,000 s.f. 808 14
Tasting Room Patio
(Pool Deck)
17 spaces/1,000 s.f.
Requires Parking Demand Study 1,528 26
Outdoor Garden
(Dining for Take-Out
Restaurant)
8/1000
1,647 13.2
Full Service Restaurant
Buildings A & D 8 spaces/1,000 s.f. 4,129 33
Retail 4 spaces/1,000 s.f. 320 1.3
Office 4 spaces/1,000 s.f. 315
1.3
TOTAL 97.4
The parking study and management plan identified several factors that would contribute to a
parking demand that is less than required by Code. For example, the use of Transportation
Network Companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft, provided an estimated five percent demand
reduction. Further, the study recommended an additional five percent captive ratio credit
accounting for those patrons choosing to visit one component of the project and deciding to visit
another during the same trip (i.e. going to the restaurant and choosing to visit the tasting room
after, requiring only one parking space instead of two). In addition, the outdoor recreational space
and seating is anticipated to function differently than typical outdoor dining for a full-service
restaurant and patio for a tasting room. Due to the unique nature and design of the outdoor area
(landscape planters, fire pit, outdoor furniture and benches, etc.), the density of seating would be
less than a typical outdoor dining area or tasting room patio.
Based on these factors, the study concluded that the actual parking demand would be 76 spaces.
Staff believes that the number of parking spaces proposed on and off-site and the recommended
parking management plan would be adequate to accommodate the proposed uses without impact
to the surrounding public streets or properties. Further, the study identified that the developer has
rights to additional spaces in the Center City parking supply, and that adequate capacity exists to
accommodate the uses proposed. Recommendations from the parking management plan have been
included as recommended conditions of approval, including:
The developer shall operate a free shuttle service (Polly the Trolley) within Center City,
including CarPark 2, which provides visitors the opportunity to park at available parking
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 9 of 11
further away from their destination without increasing walking distance. The trolley shall
operate on Fridays and Saturdays from 12:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m., and Sunday through
Thursday from 12:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., with 15-minute headways according to the route
specified in the parking management plan.
Polly the Trolley Route
Employees shall be required to park in CarPark 2. The developer shall provide an employee
shuttle, or other form of transportation deemed acceptable by the Planning and Building
Director, to and from the project site when the trolley is not operating.
If a Permit Parking District petition is submitted by the adjacent neighborhood for parking-
impacted areas originating from the development of the project as determined by the
Public Works Department, a permit parking district may be established by City Council
per the City’s Permit Parking policies. The Community and Economic Development
Department has agreed to fund the cost of establishing the permit parking district subject
to inclusion of such expenditure in the annual budget approved by City Council. Once
established and only if such expenditures are included as part of the annual budget
approved by the City Council, the Community Development Department will pay the
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 10 of 11
annual permit costs of district residents (i.e. resident and guest permits) for a period of no
more than 10 years from date of establishment of the district.
Setback Variances: A variance shall be granted upon a finding by the Planning Commission or
City Council that the evidence presented shows that all of the following conditions exist:
1) That there are special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location or surroundings, which do not apply to other property
under identical zoning classification in the vicinity;
2) That, because of special circumstances shown in subsection .0201, strict
application of the Zoning Code deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by
other property under identical zoning classification in the vicinity.
Street Setbacks: The applicant requests a variance to allow a reduced setback from Anaheim
Boulevard of 9’-6” where a 15-foot setback is required; a 1’-6” setback from Water Street is
proposed where a 10-foot setback would be required. Staff believes the reduced street setbacks are
justified because the proposed site improvements are constrained due to the existing development
of three buildings that will be protected in place, including the preservation of the historic Burns
House. Accordingly, not allowing encroachment of the pool wall into the Anaheim Boulevard and
Water Street setbacks would impede the development of the site. Further, the proposed wall in the
Anaheim Boulevard setback would be located behind the existing building line and the area would
be fully landscaped to soften views of the wall from the public right-of-way. The applicant
proposes to enhance landscape screening of the views from Water Street; therefore staff supports
the present design. Staff believes the proposed restroom building location is appropriate because
it will maintain the existing building setback line of Building D, providing an aesthetically pleasing
entrance between the two buildings from Water Street.
Interior Setback: The Zoning Code requires a 10-foot landscape setback when a commercial
project is proposed adjacent to residential land uses. The applicant purchased the public alley
adjacent to the condominiums to the north and has incorporated this area into the project to provide
additional on-site parking. In order to maximize the amount of parking gained in this area, the
applicant has designed this area in an efficient manner that provides no setback from the adjacent
residential property. Staff believes that this setback reduction is justified due to the development
constraints of the as a result of the preservation of the historic Burns House. Imposition of the full
setback would greatly reduce the overall development potential of this site by limiting the amount
of on-site parking to be provided. Staff believes that there will be adequate separation from the
residential land use because the Zoning Code requires an eight foot tall solid masonry wall to be
installed in this area, and the condominiums are setback 20-25 feet from the property line and
approximately 65 feet from the existing Burns House. Further, the applicant has stated the
neighboring homeowner’s association is supportive of the proposed site plan.
Community Outreach: The applicant presented the project to the Historic Preservation Committee
on September 20, 2017. The project was generally well received by the Committee, although many
of the members raised concerns regarding sufficient parking for the project. The applicant also
presented the plan to the adjacent neighbors on Zeyn Street, as well as the condominium owners
to the north.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
October 16, 2017
Page 11 of 11
City staff met with two property owners adjacent to the project on Zeyn Street and another owner
adjacent to the project in The Boulevard condominiums. The owners were generally supportive of
the project but raised concerns regarding parking and noise. The owners on Zeyn Street were in
favor of the permit parking program on their street and the owner in The Boulevard requested that
an eight foot high block wall be installed to provide adequate screening and noise attenuation. All
owners seemed to be satisfied with the use of ambient music outdoors and the limited number of
eligible special events to be processed through the Special Event Permit process.
Environmental Impact Analysis: The project’s potential environmental impacts have been
evaluated and staff recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the development
qualifies for a Class 32 “Infill Development Projects” exemption allowed under California
Environmental Quality Act. In order to support this determination, staff prepared an
environmental checklist and determined that the project would not result in any significant effects
relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. In reaching this conclusion, staff determined
that the subject property is less than five acres in size and surrounded by urban uses; has no value
as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; and, can be adequately served by all required
utilities and public services. Based on these findings, the project does not meet the minimum
thresholds that would suggest the potential for the project to cause a significant effect on the
environment.
CONCLUSION: The proposed restaurant, brewery, tasting room, and outdoor recreation area
would provide a valuable amenity to the neighborhood and complement existing nearby
businesses, including nearby Center City and provide a valuable addition to the Packing District.
The recommended conditions of approval would ensure that the sale and consumption of alcoholic
beverages, and limitations outdoor recreation, would be compatible with surrounding land uses.
In addition, an adequate supply of parking and appropriate parking management would be
provided to serve the proposed use. Staff recommends approval of this request.
Prepared by, Submitted by,
Nick Taylor David See
Associate Planner Acting Planning Services Manager
Attachments:
1. Draft Conditional Use Permit and Variance Resolution
2. Letter of Operation
3. Variance Justification
4. Parking Study and Parking Management Plan
5. Traffic Impact Analysis
6. Parking and Traffic Project Description Change Memo
7. Police Memorandum
8. Complete Plan Set
9. Class 32 Environmental Checklist
10. Modern Times Presentation
11. Correspondence
C -G (S A B C )
D E V 2 0 1 7 -0 0 0 2 6
R E T A I L
R S -3
S I N G L E F A M I L Y
R E S I D E N C ERM-3WATER WELL
R S -3
S I N G L E F A M I L Y
R E S I D E N C E
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
3
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
3
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
3
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
RS-2DUPLEX
RS-2DUPLEX
RS-2DUPLEX
I (SABC)AUTOREPAIR
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL
I (SABC)PARKING LOT
C-G (SABC)RELIGIOUS USE
C-G (SABC)VACANT
RM-4 (SABC)PARK VIEW TERRACEAPTS24 DU
ICONDOMINIUMS/TOWNHOUSESI
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
I (SABC)SUBSTATION
R
M
-
4
(
S
A
B
C
)
C
O
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
S
/
T
O
W
N
H
O
U
S
E
S
I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
C-G (SABC)RETAILRM-3 (SABC)APTS8 DU
I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
C-G (SABC)RETAIL
RM-3 (SABC)SFRRM-3 (SABC)FOURPLEX
RM-3 (SABC)DUPLEXRM-3 (SABC)SFR
C -G (S A B C )
V A C A N T
C -G (S A B C )
D U P L E X
C -G (S A B C )
O F F I C E S
RM-3 (SABC)DUPLEX RM-3 (SABC)FOURPLEX
RM-3 (SABC)DUPLEX
RS-2SFR
R
S
-
3
(
S
A
B
C
)
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
3
(
S
A
B
C
)
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
I
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL I (SABC)INDUSTRIAL
I
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
I
A
L
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
R
S
-
2
S
I
N
G
L
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
W W A T E R S T
E W A T E R S T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
Z
E
Y
N
S
T
W S A N T A A N A S T
E E L L S W O R T H A V E
W S T U E C K L E A V E
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
L
A
N
D
M
A
R
K
L
N
S
.
E
A
S
T
S
T
W. BALL RD E. BALL RD
E . L I N C O L N A V E
W . B R O A D W A Y
S . W A L N U T S T
E . B R O A D W A Y
S.
M
A
N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R A
V
E
S
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
W.L I N C O L N A V E E . B R O A D W A Y
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
5 4 9 -5 55 South Anaheim Boulevard
D E V N o. 2017-00026
Subject Property APN: 251-071-23251-071-24
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
W W A T E R S T
E W A T E R S T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
Z
E
Y
N
S
T
W S A N T A A N A S T
E E L L S W O R T H A V E
W S T U E C K L E A V E
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
L
A
N
D
M
A
R
K
L
N
S
.
E
A
S
T
S
T
W. BALL RD E. BALL RD
E . L I N C O L N A V E
W . B R O A D W A Y
S . W A L N U T S T
E . B R O A D W A Y
S.
M
A
N
C
H
E
S
T
E
R A
V
E
S
.
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
W.L I N C O L N A V E E . B R O A D W A Y
S
.
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
5 4 9 -5 55 South Anaheim Boulevard
D E V N o. 2017-00026
Subject Property APN: 251-071-23251-071-24
°0 50 100
Feet
Aeria l Photo:May 2016
[DRAFT] ATTACHMENT NO. 1
- 1 - PC2017-***
RESOLUTION NO. PC2017-***
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 2017-05910 AND VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095 AND
MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH
(DEV2017-00026)
(549-559 SOUTH ANAHEIM BOULEVARD)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim ("Planning Commission")
did receive a verified petition to approve (i) Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910 to
conditionally permit the construction and operation of a brewery with tasting room to include an
outdoor garden with seating area and swimming pool, a full service restaurant with outdoor dining
area, a take-out restaurant, on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, and
off-site parking; and (ii) Variance No. 2017-05095 to permit fewer parking spaces than required
by the Zoning Code and reduced front and interior setbacks at 549-559 South Anaheim Boulevard
in the City of Anaheim (the Property"). The Property is generally depicted on the map attached
hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, the Property, consisting of approximately 0.79 acres, is developed with a
single-family residence, a vacant retail building, and a vacant automotive repair facility. The Land
Use Element of the Anaheim General Plan designates the Property for “R-LM” Low-Medium
Density Residential land uses. The Property is located in the “C-G” General Commercial Zone,
the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay zone, and the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor
(SABC) Overlay Zone. Generally, the development standards and regulations of Chapter 18.24
(South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone) of the Anaheim Municipal Code (the
"Code") supersede the regulations of the underlying zone, i.e., that of the “C-G” General
Commercial Zone. However, the provisions of Chapter 18.24 (South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor
(SABC) Overlay Zone) do not apply to parcels that have been, or are proposed to be, developed
entirely under the “C-G” General Commercial Zone, which is the case with the Proposed Project;
and
WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910 and Variance No. 2017-05095 to
conditionally permit the sale of alcoholic beverages for on- and off-premises
consumption in conjunction with a brewery and restaurant at the Property.
Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910 and Variance No. 2017-05095, shall be referred to herein
collectively as the “Proposed Project”; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing at the Civic Center in the
City of Anaheim on October 16, 2017 at 5:00 p.m., notice of said public hearing having been duly
given as required by law and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 (Procedures) of
the Code, to hear and consider evidence for and against the Proposed Project and to investigate
and make findings and recommendations in connection therewith; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; herein referred to as
“CEQA”), the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; herein referred to as the "CEQA
- 2 - PC2017-***
Guidelines"), and the City's Local CEQA Procedure Manual, the City is the "lead agency" for the
preparation and consideration of environmental documents for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, this Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed Project is
within that class of projects (i.e., Class 32 – In-fill Development Projects) which consists of in-fill
development meeting the conditions described in Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Specifically, the Proposed Project (a) is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation
and all applicable General Plan policies and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation
and regulations, (b) is no more than five acres in size substantially surrounded by urban uses, (c)
has no value as a habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species, (d) would not result in
significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, and (e) the Property can
be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Accordingly, pursuant to Section
15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Planning Commission finds and determines that the Proposed
Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is, therefore, categorically
exempt from the provisions of CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said
hearing pertaining to the request for Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910, does find and
determine the following facts:
1. The proposed request to permit a brewery with tasting room to include an outdoor
garden with seating area and swimming pool, a full service restaurant with outdoor dining area, a
take-out restaurant, on and off-premises sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages, and off-
site parking are allowable uses within the "C-G" General Commercial Zone under Section
18.08.030 (Uses) of Chapter 18.08 (Commercial Zones) of the Code, subject to a conditional use
permit and the zoning and development standards of the "C-G" General Commercial Zone.
2. The uses proposed under Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910, under the conditions
imposed, are compatible with the existing residential and commercial uses in the surrounding area.
3. The size and shape of the site for the uses proposed under Conditional Use Permit No.
2017-05910 are, under the conditions imposed, adequate to allow the full development of the
proposed uses in a manner not detrimental to the particular area or to the health and safety because
the Project will adhere to all required land use standards, with the exception of the parking and
setback variances as described below.
4. The traffic generated by the uses proposed under Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-
05910, under the conditions imposed, will not impose an undue burden upon the streets and
highways designed and improved to carry the traffic in the area because the traffic generated by
this use will not exceed the anticipated volumes of traffic on the surrounding streets.
5. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910, under the conditions
imposed, will not be detrimental to the health and safety of the citizens of the City of Anaheim as
the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area through conditions of approval
for the use and is not a health or safety risk to the citizens of the City of Anaheim.
- 3 - PC2017-***
WHEREAS, based upon the parking study and parking management plans submitted
by the applicant to justify the variance, the Planning Commission does further find and determine
that the request for Variance No. 2017-05095 for less parking than required by the Code should be
approved for the following reasons:
SECTION NO. 18.42.040 Minimum number of parking spaces.
(97 spaces required; 76 spaces proposed)
1. The variance for the Property, under the conditions imposed, will not cause fewer
off-street parking spaces to be provided for the Property, including the proposed restaurants and
brewery, than the number of such spaces necessary to accommodate all vehicles attributable to all
uses at the Property under the normal and reasonably foreseeable conditions of operation of such
uses. A parking study prepared by Fehr & Peers Associates, Inc., dated August, 2017, was
submitted in order to analyze the project parking demand. The study identified several factors that
would contribute to a parking demand less than required by Code. Such factors include a the use
of Transportation Network Companies such as Uber and Lyft, a captive ratio for customers
choosing to visit more than one use on the site, and the unique nature and design of the outdoor
garden area. Based on these factors, the study concluded that the actual maximum parking demand
would be 76 spaces, which would be accommodated by a combination of on an off-site parking
spaces;
2. The variance for the Property, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of
the proposed use because the on-site parking will adequately accommodate the peak parking
demands of all combined uses on the site;
3. The variance for the Property, under the conditions imposed, will not increase the
demand and competition for parking spaces upon adjacent private property in the immediate
vicinity of the Property because the on- and off-site parking will adequately accommodate peak
parking demands of all uses on the site;
4. The variance for the Property, under the conditions imposed, will not increase
traffic congestion within the off-street parking areas or lots provided for the Property because the
Property provides adequate ingress and egress points, which are designed to allow for adequate
on-site circulation; and
5. The variance for the Property, under the conditions imposed, will not impede
vehicular ingress to or egress from adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate
vicinity because the Property has existing ingress or egress access points that are designed to allow
adequate on-site circulation and, therefore, will not impede vehicular ingress to or egress from
adjacent properties upon the public streets in the immediate vicinity of the Property.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due inspection, investigation and study made
by itself and in its behalf, and after due consideration of all evidence and reports offered at said
hearing with respect to the request to permit the construction and operation of a brewery with
tasting room to include an outdoor garden with seating area and swimming pool, a full service
restaurant with outdoor dining area, a take-out restaurant, on and off-premises sales and
- 4 - PC2017-***
consumption of alcoholic beverages, with building and landscape setbacks that are less than
required by the Code, has determined that a Variance should be approved for the following reasons:
SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010.0101 Minimum front landscaped and structural
setback.
(Anaheim Boulevard; 15 feet required; 9 feet, 6
inches proposed)
(Water Street, 10 feet required; 1 foot, 6 inches
proposed)
SECTION NO. 18.08.060.010.0101 Minimum interior setback.
(10 feet landscape required; 0 feet landscape
proposed)
1. That there are special circumstances applicable to the Property, including size,
shape, location and surroundings, which do not apply to other property under the identical zoning
classification in the vicinity of the proposed Project. The reduced setbacks are justified because
the proposed site improvements are constrained due to the existing development of three buildings
that will be protected in place, including the preservation of the historic Burns House. Further, the
proposed wall in the Anaheim Boulevard setback would be located behind the existing building
line and the area would be fully landscaped to soften views of the wall from the public right-of-
way.
2. That, because of these special circumstances, strict application of the Zoning Code
deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other property under the identical zoning
classification in the vicinity due to the development constraints of the as a result of the preservation
of the historic Burns House. Imposition of the full setback would greatly reduce the overall
development potential of this site by limiting the amount of on-site parking to be provided.
Adequate separation from the residential land use would be provided with the construction of an
8-foot tall solid masonry wall along the north property line.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission determines that the evidence in the record
constitutes substantial evidence to support the actions taken and the findings made in this
Resolution, that the facts stated in this Resolution are supported by substantial evidence in the
record, including testimony received at the public hearing, the staff presentations, the staff report
and all materials in the project files. There is no substantial evidence, nor are there other facts,
that detract from the findings made in this Resolution. The Planning Commission expressly
declares that it considered all evidence presented and reached these findings after due
consideration of all evidence presented to it.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby
approve Conditional Use Permit No. 2017-05910 and Variance No. 2017-05095, subject to the
conditions of approval set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference. Extensions for further time to complete conditions of approval may be granted in
accordance with Section 18.60.170 of the Code. Timing for compliance with conditions of
approval may be amended by the Planning Director upon a showing of good cause provided (i)
equivalent timing is established that satisfies the original intent and purpose of the condition, (ii)
- 5 - PC2017-***
the modification complies with the Code, and (iii) the applicant has demonstrated significant
progress toward establishment of the use or approved development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any amendment, modification or revocation of this
permit may be processed in accordance with Chapters 18.60.190 (Amendment to Permit Approval)
and 18.60.200 (City-Initiated Revocation or Modification of Permits) of the Code.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find and
determine that adoption of this Resolution is expressly predicated upon applicant's compliance
with each and all of the conditions hereinabove set forth. Should any such condition, or any part
thereof, be declared invalid or unenforceable by the final judgment of any court of competent
jurisdiction, then this Resolution, and any approvals herein contained, shall be deemed null and
void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that approval of this application constitutes approval
of the proposed request only to the extent that it complies with the Code and any other applicable
City, State and Federal regulations. Approval does not include any action or findings as to
compliance or approval of the request regarding any other applicable ordinance, regulation or
requirement.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was adopted at the Planning Commission meeting
of October 16, 2017. Said resolution is subject to the appeal provisions set forth in Chapter 18.60
(Procedures) of the Anaheim Municipal Code pertaining to appeal procedures and may be replaced
by a City Council Resolution in the event of an appeal.
CHAIRPERSON, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
ATTEST:
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 6 - PC2017-***
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss.
CITY OF ANAHEIM )
I, Eleanor Morris, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim, do hereby
certify that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Anaheim held on October 16, 2017, by the following vote of the
members thereof:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 16th day of October, 2017.
SECRETARY, PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM
- 7 - PC2017-***
- 8 - PC2017-***
EXHIBIT “B”
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910 AND
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
(DEV2017-00026)
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS
1 The Developer/Owner shall submit a set of improvement plans for
Public Utilities Water Engineering review and approval in
determining the conditions necessary for providing water service to
the project.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
2 The owner shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and be available
for Public Works Development Services Division review upon
request.
Public Works,
Development Services
3 Prepare and submit a final grading plan showing building footprints,
pad elevations, finished grades, drainage routes, retaining walls,
erosion control, slope easements and other pertinent information in
accordance with Anaheim Municipal Code and the California Building
Code, latest edition.
Public Works,
Development Services
4 Prepare and submit a final drainage study, including supporting
hydraulic and hydrological data to the City of Anaheim for review and
approval. The study shall confirm or recommend changes to the City's
adopted Master Drainage Plan by identifying off-site and on-site storm
water runoff impacts resulting from build-out of permitted General
Plan land uses. In addition, the study shall identify the project's
contribution and shall provide locations and sizes of catchments and
system connection points and all downstream drainage-mitigating
measures including but not limited to offsite storm drains and interim
detention facilities.
Public Works,
Development Services
5 The Owner shall obtain the required coverage under California’s
General Permit for Stormwater Discharges associated with
Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent
(NOI) submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a
copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste
Discharge Identification (WDID) number.
Public Works,
Development Services
6 Submit a Final Geotechnical Report to the Public Works Development
Services Division for review and approval. The report shall address
any proposed infiltration features of the WQMP.
Public Works,
Development Services
- 9 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
7 The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department,
Development Services Division, for review and approval, a Final
Water Quality Management Plan, as described in Drainage Area
Management Plan for Orange County. Said WQMP shall:
Address Site Design Best Management Practices (BMPs)
such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing
permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious
areas, creating reduced or “zero discharge” areas, and
conserving natural areas.
Incorporate applicable Routine Source Control BMPs.
Incorporate Treatment Control BMPs.
Describe the long-term operation and maintenance, identifies
the responsible parties, and funding mechanisms for the
Treatment Control BMPs
Public Works,
Development Services
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
8 A private water system with separate water service for fire
protection, irrigation, and domestic water shall be provided and
shown on plans submitted to the Water Engineering Division of the
Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
9 All backflow equipment shall be located above ground outside of
the street setback area in a manner fully screened from all public
streets and alleys. Any other large water system equipment shall be
installed to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering Division
outside of the street setback area in a manner fully screened from
all public streets and alleys. Said information shall be specifically
shown on plans and approved by Water Engineering and Cross
Connection Control Inspector.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
10 All requests for new water services, backflow equipment, or fire
lines, as well as any modifications, relocations, or abandonments of
existing water services, backflow equipment, and fire lines, shall be
coordinated and permitted through Water Engineering Division of
the Anaheim Public Utilities Department.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
11 All existing water services, meters, meter boxes, and fire services
shall conform to current Water Services Standards Specifications.
Any water service, meter, meter box and/or fire line that does not meet
current standards shall be upgraded if continued use is necessary or
abandoned if the existing service is no longer needed. The
owner/developer shall be responsible for the costs to upgrade or to
abandon any water service or fire line.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
- 10 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
12 The Owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of Anaheim
a twenty (20) foot wide easement for all water service mains and
service laterals all to the satisfaction of the Water Engineering
Division. The easements shall be granted on the Water Engineering
Division of the Public Utilities Department’s standard water
easement deed. The easement deeds shall include language that
requires the Owner to be responsible for restoring any special
surface improvements, other than asphalt paving, including but not
limited to striping, colored concrete, bricks, pavers, stamped
concrete, decorative hardscape, walls or landscaping that becomes
damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of City
owned water facilities. Provisions for the repair, replacement and
maintenance of all surface improvements other than asphalt paving
shall be the responsibility of the Owner and included and recorded
in the Master CC&Rs for the project.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
13 The developer/owner shall submit to the Public Utilities Department
Water Engineering Division an estimate of the maximum fire flow
rate and maximum day and peak hour water demands for the project.
This information will be used to determine the adequacy of the
existing water system to provide the estimated water demands. Any
off-site water system improvements required to serve the project
shall be done in accordance with Rule No. 15A.1 of the Water Utility
Rates, Rules, and Regulations.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
14 Individual water service and/or fire line connections will be required
for each parcel or residential, commercial, industrial unit per Rule
18 of the City of Anaheim’s Water Rates, Rules and Regulations.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
15 The legal owner shall submit an application for a Subdivision Map
Act Certificate of Compliance to the Public Works Development
Services Division. The Certificate of Compliance shall be approved
by the City Surveyor and recorded in the Office of the Orange
County Recorder.
Public Works,
Development Services
16 The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Development
Services Division for review and approval a Lot Line Adjustment
document. The document shall be approved by the City Surveyor
and recorded, along with conforming deed, in the office of the
Orange County Recorder.
Public Works,
Development Services
17 Street improvement plans shall be submitted for improvements
along the frontage of Anaheim Blvd and the Water Street.
Improvements shall conform to the City Standards and as approved
by the City Engineer. The ADA access ramp at Anaheim Blvd and
Water Street shall be per City standard 111-3 Case A, type 1.
Public Works,
Development Services
- 11 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
Parkway landscaping and irrigation shall be installed and connected
to appoint a point of connection on site. Bonds shall be posted in an
amount approved by the City Engineer and in a form approved by
the City Attorney.
18 The property owner shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the City of
Anaheim a six foot easement for roadway and other public purposes
along Anaheim Boulevard and a corner cut-off at Water Street.
Public Works,
Development Services
19 A Right-of-Way Construction Permit shall be obtained from the
Development Services Division for all work performed in the public
right-of-way.
Public Works,
Development Services
20 Applicant shall demonstrate that turning radius is sufficient to
accommodate trash truck circulation on project or provide an
alternate method to service bin(s) for trash/organic collection
services.
Public Works,
Operations Division
21 Building Plans shall show stop signs, stop bars, and stop legends and
shall be in conformance with the latest versions of Engineering
Standard Details 434 and 435.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
PRIOR TO FINAL BUILDING AND ZONING INSPECTIONS
22 Owner shall install approved backflow prevention assemblies on the
water service connections serving the property, behind property line
and building setback in accordance with Public Utilities Department
Water Engineering Division requirements.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
23 The developer may be required to relocate the existing street light
where the ADA Ramp is proposed based on the approved design of
the ramp.
Public Works,
Development Services
24 The developer shall improve and repair the westerly portion of the
east-west alley that has not been vacated, to maintain the existing
drainage pattern, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director.
Public Works,
Development Services
25 All public improvements shall be constructed by the developer,
inspected and approved by the City Inspector.
Public Works,
Development Services
26 All required Water Quality management plan BMPs shall be
constructed and operational to the satisfaction of the City Inspector.
Public Works,
Development Services
27 All remaining fees/deposits required by Public Works department
must be paid in full.
Public Works,
Development Services
- 12 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
28 Do Not Enter signs per CAMUTCD shall be installed at the alley at
Water Street.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
29 A wall shall be constructed at the intersection of the western property
line and the existing east/west alley which will be closed off by the
proposed project. A wall shall be constructed to prevent both
vehicles and pedestrians from gaining access to the proposed project,
to the satisfaction of the City of Anaheim.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS
30 The Owner shall be responsible for restoring any special surface
improvements, other than asphalt paving, within any right-of-way,
public utility easement or City easement area including but not
limited to striping, colored concrete, bricks, pavers, stamped
concrete, walls, decorative hardscape or landscaping that becomes
damaged during any excavation, repair or replacement of City
owned water facilities. Provisions for maintenance of all said special
surface improvements shall be included in the recorded Master
CC&R’s for the project and the City easement deeds.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
31 Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises or on any adjacent
area under the control of the licensee shall be removed or painted
over within 24 hours of being applied.
Police Department
32 Security measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Anaheim
Police Department to deter unlawful conduct of employees and
patrons, promote the safe and orderly assembly and movement of
persons and vehicles, and to prevent disturbances to the neighborhood
by excessive noise created by patrons entering or leaving the premises.
Police Department
33 Any and all security officers provided shall comply with all State
and Local ordinances regulating their services, including, without
limitation, Chapter 11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and
Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim Municipal Code)
Police Department
34 The applicant shall not share any profits, or pay any percentage or
commission to a promoter or any other person, based upon monies
collected as a door charge, cover charge, or any other form of
admission charge, including minimum drink orders, or the sale of
drinks.
Police Department
35 The outdoor patio and pool area shall close to patrons at 9:00 p.m.,
Sunday – Thursday, and 10:00 p.m., Friday and Saturday. All
patrons remaining must move into the indoor restaurant or tasting
room. The restaurant and tasting room shall close at midnight daily.
Police Department
- 13 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
36 Managers, owners, and wait staff need to call the Department of
Alcoholic Beverage Control and obtain LEAD (Licensee Education
on Alcohol and Drugs Program) Training. The contact number is
714-558-4101.
Police Department
37 That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not be exchanged for a
public premise (bar) type license nor shall the establishment be
operated as a public premise as defined in Section 23039 of the
Business and Professions Code.
Police Department
38 The patio must be fenced and fully enclosed. If there is a pedestrian
gate it must be self-closing and have a sign posted on the interior
that reads “No alcohol beyond this point.”
Police Department
39 Parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways,
recesses and grounds contiguous to buildings, shall be provided with
enough lighting to illuminate and make clearly visible the presence
of any person on or about the premises during the hours of darkness
and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons, property, and
vehicles onsite.
Police Department
40 There shall be no entertainment allowed in any outdoor area unless
a Special Event Permit has been obtained. Police Department
41 There shall be no entertainment inside the brewery or restaurant
without obtaining an Entertainment Permit from the City of
Anaheim.
Police Department
42 The petitioner(s) shall be responsible for maintaining free of litter
the area adjacent to the premises over which they have control, as
depicted.
Police Department
43 At all times when the premise is open for business, the premise shall
be maintained as a bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu
containing an assortment of foods normally offered in such
restaurant.
Police Department
44 The permitted event or activity shall not create sound levels which
violate any ordinance of the City of Anaheim.
Police Department
45 The number of persons inside the restaurant shall not exceed the
maximum occupancy load as determined by the Anaheim Fire
Department. Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted in a
conspicuous place on an approved sign near the main exit from the
room. (Section 25.114(a) Uniform Fire Code)
Police Department
- 14 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
46 The business shall not be operated in such a way as to be detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare. Police Department
47 Any violation of the application, or any attached conditions, shall be
sufficient grounds to revoke the permit. Police Department
48 If wrought iron or similar open construction type fencing is used for
the fencing to the north, there shall be some form of decorative
screening used that will help screen headlights from shinning into
the residence.
Police Department
49 The storage containers shall be constructed to have sound
attenuating material inside to help with noise reduction.
Police Department
50 The project shall operate in accordance with the Parking
Management Plan prepared by Fehr & Peers, dated August 2017.
Any deviation shall require review and approval by the Planning &
Building Director, and may be subject to review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
51 The developer shall operate a free shuttle service (Polly the Trolley)
within Center City, including CarPark 2, which provides visitors the
opportunity to park at available parking further away from their
destination without increasing walking distance. The trolley shall
operate on Fridays and Saturdays from 12 p.m. to 12 a.m., and
Sunday through Thursday from 12 p.m. to 9 p.m., with 15-minute
headways according to the route specified in the parking
management plan.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
52 Employees shall be required to park in CarPark 2. The developer
shall provide an employee shuttle, or other form of transportation
deemed acceptable by the Planning and Building Director to and
from the project site when the trolley is not operating.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
53 The restaurant and brewery shall be operated in accordance with the
Statement of Operations submitted as part of this application. Any
changes to the business operation as described in that document shall
be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director to
determine substantial conformance with the Letter of Request and to
ensure compatibility with the surrounding uses.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
54 That ongoing during project operations, vehicle deliveries including
loading and unloading shall be performed on site. Delivery vehicles
shall load/unload or block any part of the public right of way.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
- 15 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
GENERAL CONDITIONS
55 The following minimum horizontal clearances shall be maintained
between proposed water mains/laterals/meters and other facilities:
• 10-feet minimum separation (outside wall-to-outside wall)
from sanitary sewer mains and laterals
• 5-feet minimum separation from all other utilities, including
storm drains, gas, and electric
• 6-feet minimum separation from curb face
• 10-feet minimum separation from structures, footings, street
lights, power poles, and trees.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
56 No public water main or public water facilities shall be installed in
private alleys or paseo areas.
Public Utilities,
Water Engineering
57 The Applicant is responsible for paying all charges related to the
processing of this discretionary case application within 30 days of
the issuance of the final invoice or prior to the issuance of building
permits for this project, whichever occurs first. Failure to pay all
charges shall result in delays in the issuance of required permits or
may result in the revocation of the approval of this application.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
58 If a Permit Parking District petition is submitted by the
neighborhood for parking-impacted areas originating from the
development of the Project as determined by Public Works, a permit
parking district may be established by City Council per the City’s
Permit Parking policies. The Community and Economic
Development Department agrees to fund the cost of establishing the
permit parking district subject to inclusion of such expenditure in
the annual budget approved by City Council. Once established and
only if such expenditures are included as part of the annual budget
approved by the City Council, the Community Development
Department will pay the annual permit costs of district residents (i.e.
resident and guest permits) for a period of no more than 10 years
from date of establishment of the district.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
59 Valet operations shall not be permitted without providing a valet
operations plan for review and approval by the Traffic and
Transportation Manager and Police Department.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
60 All landscaping within the line of sight clear zone per City of
Anaheim Engineering Standard 115-B shall be less than 24” in
height.
Public Works,
Traffic Engineering
- 16 - PC2017-***
NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESPONSIBLE
DEPARTMENT
61 The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
and its officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively
referred to individually and collectively as “Indemnitees”) from any
and all claims, actions or proceedings brought against Indemnitees
to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the decision of the
Indemnitees concerning this permit or any of the proceedings, acts
or determinations taken, done, or made prior to the decision, or to
determine the reasonableness, legality or validity of any condition
attached thereto. The Applicant’s indemnification is intended to
include, but not be limited to, damages, fees and/or costs awarded
against or incurred by Indemnitees and costs of suit, claim or
litigation, including without limitation attorneys’ fees and other
costs, liabilities and expenses incurred by Indemnitees in
connection with such proceeding.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
62 The property shall be developed substantially in accordance with
plans and specifications submitted to the City of Anaheim by the
applicant and which plans are on file with the Planning Department
and as conditioned herein.
Planning and Building
Department,
Planning Services
Division
05 May 2017
Leisuretown Operations Description
CUP2017-05910
(DEV2017-00026)
Leisuretown Operations Description for Anaheim CUP Application
The Burns House building will operate as the Modern Times coffee café, offices and restaurant. The
Burns House restaurant will be a seated dining concept with full wait staff. The restaurant will serve
lunch and dinner entrees where the café will support the breakfast demand with a variety of pastries
and options for our coffee bar. Upstairs will house offices, IT closet, conference room and spill over café
seating.
The brewery will house Modern Times’ much anticipated oak foeder facility. In a foeder focused
brewery, beers take months and even sometimes years to develop into a product ready to serve. As
such, this brewery will be low in production volume. Modern Times estimates that this brewery will
produce up to two thousand barrels of beer annually. This brewery will provide additional range of
styles for Modern Times which will complement our core brands brewed in San Diego. This will in no
way be a mass production location. Raw material and spent grain will be trucked back and forth from
our San Diego brewery on a twice weekly schedule. All deliveries will occur prior to 8 am.
Modern Times merchandise will also be housed within the brewery building. This component will be a
small store where customers can purchase clothing, glassware, coffee beans, at-home coffee making
equipment as well as packaged beer to-go in both cans and bottles. The tasting room bar will also be
filling growlers for offsite consumption.
Trash pickup for the entirety of the site will occur from the dumpster enclosure that is located behind
the 559 S Anaheim address.
The outdoor garden area serves as a space where patrons can convene and socialize while enjoying a
beer from the tasting room bar and food offerings from the “to-go” building located within 559 S.
Anaheim. This building houses a quick service restaurant concept where customers order from the
window and orders are called out or notified via a buzzer system. Also in the garden area are two
shipping containers which provide ancillary products to patrons. One will house a specialty beer bottle
shop where we will be selling limited release offerings from both Modern Times as well as our generous
colleagues in the industry. The second shipping container will serve a variety of dessert options such as
churros, frozen horchata slushies, etc.
If patrons would like to escape to a more secluded area, we are offering upstairs zones above the
shipping containers where you can sit and overlook the people below.
The pool area serves as unique customer experience for any restaurant or brewery setting. This is
comparable to the pool at Coppola Winery in Geyserville, CA, where customers can relax by the pool
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
with a glass of wine and cool off in the summer heat. Modern Times will have the pool area open from
11 am – 10 pm daily to paying customers. Within the pool area, customers will be served in cans or
plastic glassware.
Throughout the entirety of the site there will be ambient music played through strategically located
speakers. Modern Times does not promote a loud or ruckus environment and in no way, do we
encourage music that drowns out the ability to have a conversation with your fellow guests.
Although live music is not a component of the site plan and operation, Modern Times would like to
reserve the right to procure special event permits for up to 12 events annuall y. These events would, in
most cases, not entail amplified music. There will be no DJ parties or “Las Vegas -like” atmospheres.
These parties could range from anniversary parties, holiday parties, corporate or private events and
beer release parties.
Standard hours of operation are projected to be Sunday -Thursday 6am – 10pm and Friday - Saturday
6am-12am. Coffee café opens at 6am daily. Beer service would not begin until 11 am daily. Last call for
beer service corresponds to 30 minutes prior to closing ti me.
September 17, 2017
Nick Taylor
City of Anaheim Planning Department
200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 162
Anaheim, CA 92805
RE: Modern Times’ Leisurtown Variances,
Mr. Taylor,
The Leisuretown project is seeking a variance for three areas. These variances allow the project, which is an
adaptive reuse of 3 existing structures, to be developed and also provide benefits to the surrounding neighbors.
The attached diagram outlines the three areas and provides the justification for each request. We have reviewed
the first variance with adjacent neighbors who are affected by the request. They are in support of the request and
this has been formalized in a letter from their HOA Board.
We two additional variances are a result of site parameters set by the requirement to restore the existing struc-
tures (part of the DDA for this site). The program for the project requires these two additional variances to be
developable.
Please contact me if there are any further questions regarding this request.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Chris Bennett
Director of Development
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
LEISURETOWN
SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
1
1
2
233
4
2
29
5
3
6
7
4
8
9
5
10
6
11
7
12
8
13
9
1410
15
11
11
16
17
13
18
14
19
20
21
16
22
17
23
18
24
19
25
20
26
27
22
22
12
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
30
28
24
27
26
25
23
21
EAST ENTRANCE
OUTDOOR DINING ROOM
PATIO SEATING
FIRE PIT
GRUIT GARDEN
ADA RAMP AND STAIRS
REMNANT GARDEN FENCE
BURNS YARD
NORTH ENTRANCE
PAVILLION FLEXIBLE USE AREA
RAISED TREE PLANTER
LIFT
M.T. FAMILY ROOM WITH FIREPLACE
SOURYARD
PICNIC AREA
COVERED OUTDOOR TASTING LOUNGE
M.T. POOL
OUTDOOR SHOWER
POOL CABANAS
EMERGENCY EGRESS GATE
BICYCLE PARKING
AUTOMOBILE PARKING
VALET/UBER DROP
TRASH ENCLOSURE
WEST ENTRANCE
SOUTH ENTRANCE
BAMBOO HEDGE
6’ HT. CMU POOL WALL W/ ANTI-GRAFFITI PLANTING
ABC RAIL
WOOD DECK
6’ HT. PROPERTY LINE AND ALLEY CLOSURE WALL
LOADING/UNLOADING AREA
SHIPPING CONTAINER
OPEN STAGE CONTAINER
555 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
EXISTING
EXISTING
559 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
549 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
15
LEGEND
A
B
CD
10
’
LANDSCAPE SETBACK LINE
32
31
SE
T
B
A
C
K
L
I
N
E
15’
UL
T
.
R
.
O
.
W
.
9/11/2017
SETBACK LINE
1
0
’
33
33
33
Leisure Town 9/11/2017
CUP2017-05910/VAR2017-05059(DEV2017-00026)SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
Lot Size 34,675 S.F.
Total Gross Building Area 13,005 S.F.
F.A.R. 0.38
LevelRoom DescriptionArea (S.F.)
Building AL1Café600
L1Kitchen565
L1Office114
L1Other (Circulation and etc)510
L1 Subtotal1,789
L2Café310
L2Office385
L2Closet609
L2Other (Circulation and etc)219
L2 Subtotal1,523
Bldg A Total3,312
Building BFactory + Storage + Bar Prep5,022
Assembly Area690
Bldg B Total5,712
Building CRestroom659
Bldg C Total659
Building DKitchen1,097
Employee Lounge199
Employee Restroom116
Bldg D Total1,412
Container Building ARetail (Container 1)160
Retail (Container 2)160
Storage (Container 3)160
Upper Roof Deck1,190
Container Bldg A Total1,670
Container Building BOpen Stage (Container 4)240
Container Bldg B Total240
*All Square Footage updated to reflect the most current Floor Plans from Core & Shell and Tenant Improvements Plan Check Submissions
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
(New Building)
Leisuretown Area Calculations
Leisuretown Area Breakdown
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
EXISTING PROPOSED
PROTECT IN PLACE ALL EXISTING SITE TREES
34
1
2 3
Variance Justification
1. 10’ landscape setback on North property line
2. Building Setback line at Building C
3. Pool wall height within setback.
Variance Justification Variance Justification
1. 10’ landscape setback on North property line
The project is proposing to utilize this setback area to provide additonal onsite parking for the proj-
ect. With the requirement to save these structures set by the DDA, the remaining site dimensions
become constrained for parking. The additional parking not only benefits the project but also is the
solution preferred by neighbors to maximize the number of spaces on site for this project. We have
met with the adjacent HOA and have agreed to provide a screen fence and hedge to block this
visually from the Broadway project and keep pedestrians from walking through their project. The
HOA Board has provided a letter of support for this approach as they would prefer to maximize the
number of parking spaces on site. This area is currently a City alley with no landscape setback and
the Broadway project has a significant landscape setback and front stoop at this property line.
Variance Justification
2. Building Setback line at Building C
The Water St. setback would require Building C to be set back further. The current design proposs
that Building C be aligned with Buidling D which is an existing structure to remain on site. The set-
back of Buidling C would create an uneven staggered setback along the street which is not aesthet-
ically preferred and also restricts access between Buidling B and C which is not preferred in terms
of pedestrian circulation. Adjacent development on and across Water St. shares the same setback
as Buidling D. It is preferred to have a consistent line of structures along this streetscape.
Bldg. D
Variance Justification
Bldg. D
Variance Justification
3. Pool wall height within setback.
The pool wall is designed to be 6’ high as a safety requirement by code. Reducing the height is not
an option for safety and pulling the wall back further would preclude the development of a pool due
to the dimensions of the site left after saving Building B . Buildings B and D are existing non-con-
forming buildings that project into this setback. Both buildings are being restored and will remain.
The pool wall will be heavily planted and covered with ivy so it blends with the landscape of the site.
LEISURETOWN
SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
11223342
29
5
3
6748951061171281391410
15
11
11
16
17
13
18
14
19
20
21
16
22
17
23
18
24
19
25
20
26
27
22
22
12
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
30
28
24
27
26
25
23
21
EAST ENTRANCEOUTDOOR DINING ROOMPATIO SEATINGFIRE PITGRUIT GARDENADA RAMP AND STAIRSREMNANT GARDEN FENCEBURNS YARDNORTH ENTRANCEPAVILLION FLEXIBLE USE AREARAISED TREE PLANTERLIFTM.T. FAMILY ROOM WITH FIREPLACESOURYARD
PICNIC AREA
COVERED OUTDOOR TASTING LOUNGE
M.T. POOL
OUTDOOR SHOWER
POOL CABANAS
EMERGENCY EGRESS GATE
BICYCLE PARKING
AUTOMOBILE PARKING
VALET/UBER DROP
TRASH ENCLOSURE
WEST ENTRANCE
SOUTH ENTRANCE
BAMBOO HEDGE
6’ HT. CMU POOL WALL W/ ANTI-GRAFFITI PLANTING
ABC RAIL
WOOD DECK
6’ HT. PROPERTY LINE AND ALLEY CLOSURE WALL
LOADING/UNLOADING AREA
SHIPPING CONTAINER
OPEN STAGE CONTAINER
555 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
EXISTING
EXISTING
559 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
549 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
15
LEGENDA
B
CD
10’LANDSCAPE SETBACK LINE 3231 SETBACK LINE 15’ULT. R.O.W.
9/11/2017
SETBACK LINE
1
0
’
33
33
33
Leisure Town 9/11/2017
CUP2017-05910/VAR2017-05059(DEV2017-00026)
SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
Lot Size 34,675 S.F.Total Gross Building Area 13,005 S.F.F.A.R. 0.38 LevelRoom DescriptionArea (S.F.)Building AL1Café600 L1Kitchen565 L1Office114 L1Other (Circulation and etc)510 L1 Subtotal1,789 L2Café310 L2Office385 L2Closet609 L2Other (Circulation and etc)219 L2 Subtotal1,523 Bldg A Total3,312 Building BFactory + Storage + Bar Prep5,022 Assembly Area690 Bldg B Total5,712 Building CRestroom659 Bldg C Total659 Building DKitchen1,097 Employee Lounge199 Employee Restroom116 Bldg D Total1,412 Container Building ARetail (Container 1)160
Retail (Container 2)160
Storage (Container 3)160
Upper Roof Deck1,190
Container Bldg A Total1,670
Container Building BOpen Stage (Container 4)240
Container Bldg B Total240
*All Square Footage updated to reflect the most current Floor Plans from Core & Shell and Tenant Improvements Plan Check Submissions
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged, Occupancy change only) (New Building)Leisuretown Area CalculationsLeisuretown Area Breakdown (Existing Bldg GFA unchanged, Occupancy change only) (Existing Bldg GFA unchanged, Occupancy change only)
EXISTING PROPOSED
PROTECT IN PLACE ALL EXISTING SITE TREES34
8141 E. Kaiser Boulevard | Suite 110 | Anaheim, CA 92808 | (714) 941-8800 | Fax (949) 859-3209
www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 9, 2017
To: Chris Bennett, LAB Holdings
From: Spencer Reed, PE, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Leisuretown Parking Study (549 and 555 South Anaheim Boulevard)
OC17-0497
This memorandum documents a parking study conducted by Fehr & Peers for the proposed
Leisuretown project (Project) located at 549 and 555 South Anaheim Boulevard in Anaheim,
California. This study details the parking requirement of this Project based on the Anaheim
Municipal Code (Municipal Code) and the demand for similar projects. This study also reviews the
available supply of nearby public parking facilities and provides a series of recommended parking
management strategies for the Project. The Project requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
approval prior to operation.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the restoration of a historical craftsman home, a barrel-vaulted mid-century
retail building, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern Times Brewery. The
project will include a low-volume production brewery, tasting room, restaurant, retail, staff offices,
outdoor gardens, and a pool. The outdoor gardens will provide a combination of seating areas, an
elevated seated overlook area, restroom, recreational games, a hammock grove, and lounge
gardens. Table 1 offers a more detailed description of the elements of the project. The pool area
will serve as a unique experience for customers of the tasting room to sit on pool chairs around the
pool.
Three Project site plan parking alternatives are proposed. Project Alternative 1 (preferred Project
site plan) is shown on Figure 1a and results in 31 on-site parking spaces (12 of the parking spaces
result from abandonment of the east-west alley and a landscape set back variance). Project
Alternative 2 is shown on Figure 1b and results in 25 on-site parking spaces (5 of the parking spaces
result from abandonment of the east-west alley). Alternative 3 is shown on Figure 1c and results in
ATTACHMENT NO. 4
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 2 of 9
19 on-site parking spaces. The final determination for the number of Project on-site parking spaces
is dependent on the outcome of the alley abandonment decision by the City Council and approval
of the setback variance.
The restaurant will be open from 6:00 AM and will remain open until 10:00 PM. The tasting room,
pool deck, outdoor gardens, and retail will open at 11:00 AM and will remain open through 10:00
PM.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
MUNICIPAL CODE AND DEMAND REVIEW PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS
The required minimum parking is based on the Municipal Code Section 18.42.040, coordination
with City of Anaheim Planning staff, and reviews of parking demand for similar uses. Parking
requirements from Municipal Code Section 18.42.040 were applied to the Project uses for brewery,
brewery office, tasting room, restaurant, outdoor dining, staff office, and retail.
The Municipal Code does not provide a parking requirement for garden space or pool deck area
associated with tasting rooms or restaurants. Therefore, a proportional parking requirement was
developed based on the proportional parking demand of the outdoor space at the Anaheim
Packing House. Observations of the outdoor space at the Anaheim Packing House adjacent to
Claudina Street were conducted on a Saturday in May 2017. Saturday was chosen as the survey day
as it represents a day when parking for commercial spaces is typically at its highest. The
observations were made during the evening period from 6:00 to 8:00 PM. According to Shared
Parking, Second Edition (Urban Land Institute, 2005) parking demand for restaurants with active bar
lounges is typically higher during that time period.
The observations found that the outdoor space adjacent to Claudina Street had approximately 1/3
the person density of the inside area of the Anaheim Packing House. Therefore, a 1/3 ratio was
applied to the tasting room parking requirement resulting in 5.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet Gross
Floor Area (GFA).
Table 2 presents the parking requirements for the various components based on the Municipal
Code and demand of similar uses.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 3 of 9
PARKING REQUIREMENT REDUCTIONS
The Project is located adjacent to residential neighborhoods, within approximately 1,000 feet from
the Anaheim Packing House, and within approximately 2,000 feet from Center Street Promenade in
Center City. Center City is the urban and dense downtown core of Anaheim, and is emerging as a
vibrant and active pedestrian-oriented place with a variety of land uses such as residential, office,
and commercial uses. The Project’s proximity to residential, office, and commercial land uses can
account for a reduction in the Project parking demand by patrons walking, biking, or using transit.
Furthermore, Transportation Network Companies (TNC) like Uber and Lyft have seen an increase in
popularity and usage around Center City. TNC’s allow people the opportunity to travel by vehicle
without the need for parking at their destination. TNC’s can reduce the Project parking demand as
patrons do not to have to park a car when traveling to the Project. In coordination with the City of
Anaheim Planning Department, a 5% parking demand credit was applied to the parking
requirement of the Project to account for patrons who would not need to park a vehicle at the
Project.
The mix of Project components could result in some patrons choosing to visit one component of
the Project, but also deciding to visit another component as part of the same trip. This is described
as a captive ratio. Captive ratios represent a percentage of patrons who visit two different
components of a project but only account for one parking space. The ability of a patron to eat at
the restaurant and also have a drink at the brewery would only result in one total parking space
demand and not one space demanded by each component separately. In coordination with the
City of Anaheim Planning Department, a captive ratio of 5% was assumed to account for patrons
who only park one vehicle but visit multiple components of the Project.
PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS
As presented in Table 3, the Project requires a total of 75 parking spaces. The Project will provide
31, 25, or 19 parking spaces on-site, depending on the outcome of the alley abandonment and CUP
hearings. As such, the Project will require 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces off-site. Accessible parking
will be required per the 2016 California Building Code Section 11B-208.2 (California Building
Standards Commission, 2017). If 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided in a parking facility, then 1
accessible parking space shall be required; if 26 to 50 parking spaces are provided in a parking
facility, then 2 accessible parking spaces shall be required. Additionally, for every six or fraction of
six parking spaces required by Section 11B-208.2 at least one shall be a van parking space.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 4 of 9
PARKING UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
To determine if the Project can provide the parking spaces in off-site public parking facilities, Fehr
& Peers reviewed recent parking data collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data
collection documented the parking supply and demand of public parking structures (CarParks, see
Figure 2), lots, and street parking located in Center City. The CarParks operate 24-hours a day and
range in price rate from $3 per hour (with $7 daily maximum) to $4 per hour (with $12 daily
maximum). The data collection determined a supply of approximately 3,653 parking spaces in the
CarParks, with a peak weekday (Wednesday – Friday) utilization of approximately 2,494 parking
spaces (68.3%) at 11:00 AM on Thursday and a peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of
approximately 1,805 parking spaces (49.4%) at 1:00 PM on Sunday. The off-site parking requirement
of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces could be accommodated by the remaining supply in the CarParks.
The developer, LAB Holdings has an entitlement to 170 parking spaces in CarPark 2, and currently
does not exercise the option of using those 170 parking spaces. This entitlement will be used to
accommodate the off-site parking requirement of the Project. To determine if the off-site parking
requirement can be accommodated in CarPark 2, Fehr & Peers reviewed recent parking data
collected at CarPark 2 by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data collection determined a
supply of approximately 625 parking spaces in CarPark 2, with a peak weekday (Wednesday –
Friday) utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces (62.1%) at 11:00 AM on Wednesday and a
peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of approximately 543 parking spaces (86.9%) at 1:00
PM on Sunday. CarPark 2 is utilized by the River Church (201 East Broadway) on Sundays. Outside
of the Sunday 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM timeframe in which the church is utilizing CarPark 2, the peak
weekend utilization is approximately 278 parking spaces (44.5%) at 3:00 PM on Saturday.
Additionally, CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for temporary vehicle storage. This
rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking spaces available to other users.
The off-site parking requirement of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces could be accommodated by the
remaining supply in CarPark 2.
According to Shared Parking, Second Edition parking utilization for restaurants with active bar
lounges is typically at its highest, with approximately 90% to 100% of parking spaces being utilized,
on weekdays and weekends from 6:00 to 10:00 PM. Therefore, the Project is anticipated to have its
highest parking utilization during these time periods. The parking supply of the CarParks can
accommodate the anticipated highest utilization of the Project. The utilization of the CarParks from
6:00 to 10:00 PM ranges from approximately 28.8% to 55.1% on weekdays and from approximately
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 5 of 9
19.7% to 28.0% on weekends. While the Project will have the available parking supply in CarPark 2
to meet the off-site parking requirement of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces, parking is available in all
of the CarParks for patrons. It is anticipated that patrons will park in any available parking facility.
PARKING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
A series of parking management strategies has been recommended for the Project to efficiently
utilize the available parking supply. Below is a series of parking management strategies that could
be utilized by the Project for use in a parking management program.
POLLY THE TROLLEY SERVICE
LAB Holdings will operate a free shuttle (Polly the Trolley) within Center City that will provide visitors
the opportunity to park at available parking spaces further away from their destination without
increasing walking distance. The trolley is an open air bus that has been remodeled to resemble a
historic streetcar, and will operate on Fridays and Saturdays from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM and on
Sundays from 12:00 PM to 9:00 PM. The trolley has capacity of 24 passengers and will operate at
15-minute headways at four stops in Center City.
The trolley route will utilize Center Street Promenade, Anaheim Boulevard, Broadway, Claudina
Street, and Santa Ana Boulevard before returning to Center Street Promenade. The stops will be
located at the Packing House back patio, the Rinks Anaheim Ice, the Muzeo, and near the Lemon
Street & Center Street intersection.
In an effort to manage the parking requirement of the Project, it is recommended that the trolley
operate seven days a week and service be altered to add stops at the Project site and CarPark 2.
The inclusion of trolley stops at the Project and CarPark 2 would allow patrons to easily access the
Project from CarPark 2 and the other CarParks along Center Street Promenade. Figure 2 identifies
a potential route that includes the Project site and Carpark 2. The final route would need to be
approved through coordination with City of Anaheim staff. Stops should be located either on the
side of the street or within the parking lots at stop locations. If rerouting results in a headway
greater than 15 minutes, then additional vehicle capacity should be added to the route to maintain
15-minute headways. Ridership of the trolley service should be reviewed to determine if additional
capacity in the form of larger or additional vehicles is necessary to ensure that the trolley vehicles
are not operating at full capacity.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 6 of 9
EMPLOYEE PARKING
It is recommended that employee parking for the Project be located at CarPark 2. Employee parking
is simpler to manage and direct than patron parking. Therefore, requiring employees to park in
CarPark 2 would maximize the number of on-site parking spaces that are available to patrons. Four
signalized intersections along Anaheim Boulevard at Center Street, Center Street Promenade,
Broadway, and Santa Ana Street, along with existing sidewalk facilities can be used as pedestrian
access to the site. The Project may also consider offering an employee specific shuttle service for
employees from CarPark 2 during the hours when the trolley is not operating.
PARKING INCENTIVES
It is recommended that the Project consider providing incentives to patrons that choose to not park
a vehicle in the on-site parking lot or nearby residential streets. These incentives can range from
Project memorabilia to coupons for future visits to the Project.
COORDINATION WITH NEARBY PROPERTIES
While the study has identified the parking supply to meet code requirements, the Project developer
has approached other nearby commercial properties for parking agreements on an as needed basis.
These agreements could include, but are not limited to, additional one-time parking supply or valet
service.
COORDINATION WITH CITY OF ANAHEIM PROGRAMS
It is recommended that the Project coordinate with the City of Anaheim on parking management
initiatives that are planned for Center City. Potential initiative considerations could include, but are
not limited to those described below.
Anaheim Permitted Parking Program
The Project is not proposing to meet its off-site parking requirement with the use of on-street
parking. However, patrons may choose to park in any publicly available parking facility. The City of
Anaheim has developed permitted parking programs on residential streets when the need for the
program has been identified. This need is identified by neighborhood residents when the parking
by commercial patrons on residential streets near commercial properties adversely affects the
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 7 of 9
residential parking on those streets. The permitted parking programs are developed to limit the
number of or length of stay of patron-parked vehicles on the residential streets near commercial
properties. The Project should coordinate with the City of Anaheim Traffic and Transportation
Division to identify the extent of Project parking on nearby residential streets to determine if or
when a permitted parking program is appropriate. If a permitted parking program is to be
considered for the residential streets near the Project, then the Community & Economic
Development Department will fund the implementation of the permit parking program. The Project
should coordinate with the Community & Economic Development Department to determine which
streets are selected for the permitted parking program, enforcement hours, and education of
patrons.
Anaheim Parking Guidance System
The City of Anaheim Community & Economic Development Department is working to develop a
parking guidance system that will provide real time parking availability and wayfinding to visitors
of Center City. The system will use a combination of mobile phone application, variable message
boards, and static signs to identify the available parking supply in the publicly available parking
facilities in Center City. The message boards and signs will be located outside of the Center City
area in an effort to inform visitors of the parking availability so they can alter their parking location
choice. The mobile phone application will have navigational features that can direct visitors to
specific parking facilities. This program will allow patrons to quickly identify available parking
facilities in Center City before they arrive. The Project should coordinate with the Community &
Economic Development Department to include its on-site parking lot in the guidance system as
well as educate patrons to utilize the resource.
Anaheim Micro Transit System
The City of Anaheim Community & Economic Development Department is working to develop a
micro transit system that will provide free rides within Center City. The system will operate during
peak hours of demand on Thursday through Sunday. Electric carts with a capacity of up to six
passengers will be used to provide free rides that begin and end within the Center City service area
which is loosely defined by Lincoln Avenue to the north, South Street to the south, Olive Street to
the east, and Harbor Boulevard to the west. Riders will request a ride using either a mobile phone
application, meeting for a ride at a designated pick-up location, or by manually hailing a ride within
the service area. The system will allow visitors the opportunity to visit the unique properties of
Center City by utilizing a unique transportation mode.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 8 of 9
The micro transit system will provide free direct rides for patrons within the service area. This system
would work as a supplement to Polly the Trolley and as a separate system of transporting patrons
from other parking facilities. The Project should coordinate with the Community & Economic
Development Department to identify improvements to the system and to educate patrons to utilize
the resource.
Anaheim Resort Transportation
The Anaheim Resort Transportation (ART) is a public transportation system operating within the
City of Anaheim and surrounding cities. The system features 22 lines that serve destinations such
as Center Street Promenade, Disneyland Resort, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, ARTIC, etc. The
Downtown Packing District Line (Line 10) operates daily between the Disneyland Transportation
Center and Center Street Promenade with 30 minute headways from approximately 6:00 AM to
12:30 AM. The line uses both Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard between Broadway and
Ball Road. The Project should coordinate with the Anaheim Transportation Network to identify
improvements to the system and to educate patrons to utilize the resource.
PARKING AND ACCESS IDENTIFICATION
The Project should direct patrons to utilize the transportation modes and parking identification
programs described above for access to the Project. Furthermore, the Project should highlight other
transportation options such as TNC’s, walking, biking, and fixed route transit as modes to get the
Project without spending time looking for parking. This could be completed using the Project
website, social media platforms, advertisements, or other forms of information distribution.
CONCLUSION
The Project will require 75 parking spaces with 31, 25, or 19 parking spaces being provided on-site
and 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces being provided in CarPark 2 respectively. According to data
collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016, CarPark 2 has a supply of approximately 625
parking spaces with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces and a peak
weekend utilization of 543 parking spaces. CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for
temporary vehicle storage. This rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking
spaces available to other users. All of the CarParks have a combined supply of approximately 3,653
parking spaces, with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 2,494 parking spaces and a peak
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 9 of 9
weekend utilization of approximately 1,805 parking spaces. CarPark 2 and the other CarParks can
accommodate the Project off-site parking requirement.
A series of parking management strategies has been recommended for the Project to efficiently
utilize the available parking supply. These strategies include changes to the existing trolley service,
management of employee parking, and coordination with City of Anaheim programs. While the
available parking supply in Center City can accommodate the Project parking requirement, these
strategies should be considered for inclusion in the parking management program of the Project.
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
Project Site Plan - Alternative 1
Figure 1A
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
PPPPP
mm
mmmmmmmmmmmm
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
Project Site Plan - Alternative 2
Figure 1B
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
mm
Project Site Plan - Alternative 3
Figure 1C
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
E SOUTH S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
N
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
W CHARTR
E
S
S
T
W STUECK
L
E
A
V
E
N
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
E CENTER
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W OAK ST
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E ELLSWO
R
T
H
A
V
E
E WATER S
T
E CENTER S
T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E SANTA A
N
A
S
T
W CYPRESS
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
E BROADW
A
Y
W L I N C O L N A V E
W ELM ST
W C E N T E R S T
W BROADW
A
Y
E LINCOLN
A
V
E
W SANTA A
N
A
S
T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
W WATER S
T
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
ProjectProject
SiteSite
Car Park 2Car Park 2
Car
Park 1
Car
Park 1Car
Park 3
Car
Park 3Car
Park 4
Car
Park 4
Car Park 5Car Park 5
Car Park 6Car Park 6
Car
Park 7
Car
Park 7
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R
o
u
t
e
.
m
x
d
Figure 2
Proposed Leisuretown Trolley Route
Existing Stop Future Stop TrolleyRoute
TABLE 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use Size (sf)Description
Restaurant
Restaurant 1,963 Restaurant with breakfast, lunch, and dinner entrees.
Outdoor Dining 628 Outdoor dining space for restaurant.
Kitchen 971 Additional kitchen space for restaurant in adjacent building.
Staff Office 248 Staff office space in adjacent building.
Storage 321 Storage space for restaurant.
Restaurant Total 4,131
Brewery
Brewery 4,810 Low production brewery.
Brewery Office 425 Brewery management office space.
Brewery Total 5,235
Tasting Room
Tasting Room 808 Brewery tasting room.
Outdoor Garden 1,647
Combination of seating area, recreational game area, hammock
grove, and lounge area.
Pool Deck 1,670 Pool chair lougne area for tasting room.
Overlook Area 640 Elevated seated area overlooking outdoor garden.
Retail 320 Retail space selling Modern Times merchandise and package food.
Restroom 599 Restroom for garden area and pool deck.
Storage 160 Storage for outdoor garden.
Tasting Room Total 5,844
Note
sf: square feet
TABLE 2
ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.42.040
Parking and Loading - Non-Residential Parking Requirements
Use Class Required Spaces
Restaurant - Full
Service
Restaurants within a Commericial Retail Center - Small: 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
GFA
Brewery/Tasting Room
1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA, which may include a maximum of 10% office
space, plus, if the percentage of office space exceeds 10% of the GFA, 4 spaces per 1,000
square feet of GFA for the floor area in excess of 10% Tasting Room and outside patios: 17
spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Retail - General General: 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Office-General 3 stories or lower: 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Warehousing &
Storage–Enclosed
Buildings with 100,000 square feet or less of GFA: 1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA,
which may include a maximum of up to 10% office space
Note:
GFA - gross floor area
Land Use Size Required Spaces [a] Rate Unit Required Spaces
Restaurant [b] [c] 3.562 ksf 8 per 1 ksf GFA 29
Brewery [d] 5.235 ksf 1.55 per 1 ksf GFA 9
Tasting Room 0.808 ksf 17 per 1 ksf GFA 14
Pool Deck 1.670 ksf 5.6 per 1 ksf GFA 10
Garden Area [e] 2.886 ksf 5.6 per 1 ksf GFA 17
Retail 0.320 ksf 4 per 1 ksf GFA 2
Staff Office 0.248 ksf 4 per 1 ksf GFA 1
Storage 0.481 ksf 1.55 per 1 ksf GFA 1
Required Parking Subtotal 83
Proximity to other uses and TNC's (5%) -4
Captive Ratio (5%) -4
Required Parking Total 75
Provided on Site 31, 25, or 19
Off-Site Parking 44, 50, or 56
Notes:
ksf - thousand square feet
GFA - gross floor area
[a]: Source - Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.42.040, unless otherwise noted.
[b]: Parking requirement of 8 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area determined by City of Anaheim Planning Department staff.
[c]: Incorporates 1.963 ksf restaruant, 0.971 ksf kitchen, and 0.628 ksf patio
TABLE 3
PARKING ANALYSIS
MODERN TIMES
8141 East Kaiser Boulevard
Suite 110
Anaheim, CA 92808
714.941.8800
Prepared for
City of Anaheim
Prepared by
Leisuretown
Project
Transportation
Impact Analysis
August 2017
ATTACHMENT NO. 5
Leisuretown Transportation
Impact Analysis
Prepared for:
City of Anaheim
August 2017
OC17-0497
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
Table of Contents
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1
Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 2
Project Description .............................................................................................................................................................. 2
Project Study Area ............................................................................................................................................................... 6
Data Collection ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Analysis Scenarios ............................................................................................................................................................... 9
Analysis Methodologies .................................................................................................................................................... 9
Future Forecasting ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
Opening Year (2018) Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 11
Traffic Impact and Mitigation Criteria ...................................................................................................................... 11
Traffic Impacts ........................................................................................................................................................... 11
Mitigation Requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 12
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS .....................................................................................................................13
Existing Roadway Facilities ............................................................................................................................................ 13
Regional Roads.......................................................................................................................................................... 13
Local Access Roads .................................................................................................................................................. 13
Existing Transit Facilities................................................................................................................................................. 14
Existing Bicycle Facilities ................................................................................................................................................ 17
Existing Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................................................................... 17
Existing Operations .......................................................................................................................................................... 19
Intersection Operations ......................................................................................................................................... 19
Roadway Segment Operations ........................................................................................................................... 21
4. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS ......................................................................................................................22
Project Traffic...................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Project Trip Generation .......................................................................................................................................... 23
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
Trip Distribution ................................................................................................................................................................ 28
Trip Assignment ................................................................................................................................................................ 28
Existing Plus Project Traffic conditions..................................................................................................................... 29
Future Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................................................................... 29
Opening Year (2018) Traffic Projections .......................................................................................................... 37
Future plus Project Traffic Projections ...................................................................................................................... 37
5. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ..........................................................................................40
Intersection Operations .................................................................................................................................................. 40
Intersection Impact Assessment ......................................................................................................................... 41
Roadway Segment Operations .................................................................................................................................... 42
Roadway Segment Impact Assessment ........................................................................................................... 42
6. OPENING YEAR (2018) AND OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS ................43
Opening Year (2018) Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 43
Intersection Operations ......................................................................................................................................... 43
Roadway Segment Operations ........................................................................................................................... 44
Opening Year (2018) Plus Traffic conditions .......................................................................................................... 44
Intersection Operations ......................................................................................................................................... 44
Roadway Segment Operations ........................................................................................................................... 46
7. SIGNAL WARRANTS...........................................................................................................................48
Data Collection .................................................................................................................................................................. 48
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 49
Warrant 1 - Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume ..................................................................................................... 50
Warrant 2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume ...................................................................................................... 50
Warrant 3 – Peak-Hour Vehicular Volume ..................................................................................................... 51
Warrant 4 – Pedestrain Volume .......................................................................................................................... 52
Warrant 5 – School Crossing................................................................................................................................ 52
Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System ......................................................................................................... 52
Warrant 7 – Crash Experience.............................................................................................................................. 52
Warrant 8 – Roadway Network ........................................................................................................................... 53
Findings ................................................................................................................................................................................ 53
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
8. MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................................................................................................54
Existing Plus Project ......................................................................................................................................................... 54
Opening Year (2018) Plus Project ............................................................................................................................... 54
9. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM .........................................................................................55
CMP Traffic Impact Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 55
10. NON-AUTOMOTIVE ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................56
Goals and Policies ............................................................................................................................................................. 56
Transit Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................. 57
Bicycle Analysis .................................................................................................................................................................. 57
Pedestrian Analysis .......................................................................................................................................................... 58
11. SITE ACCESS AND ON-SITE CIRCULATION .....................................................................................59
Site Access ........................................................................................................................................................................... 59
Vehicle Access ............................................................................................................................................................ 59
Bicycle Access ............................................................................................................................................................ 59
Transit Access ............................................................................................................................................................. 59
On-Site Circulation ........................................................................................................................................................... 59
12. CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................................61
Appendices
APPENDIX A: PARKING STUDY
APPENDIX B: TRAFFIC COUNTS
APPENDIX C: LOS RESULTS
APPENDIX D: SIGNAL WARRANTS
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
List of Figures
Figure 1a Project Site Plan Alternative 1 ................................................................................................................................ 3
Figure 1b Project Site Plan Alternative 2 ................................................................................................................................ 4
Figure 1c Project Site Plan Alternative 3 ................................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2 Study Area ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 3 Existing Transit Facilities ........................................................................................................................................ 16
Figure 4 Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities ............................................................................................................. 18
Figure 5 Existing Traffic Peak Hour Volumes .................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 6 Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................................................................ 30
Figure 7a Project Only Peak Hour Volumes (Inbound).................................................................................................. 31
Figure 7b Project Only Peak Hour Volumes (Outbound) .............................................................................................. 32
Figure 7c Project Only Daily Volumes (Inbound) ............................................................................................................. 33
Figure 7d Project Only Daily Volumes (Inbound) ............................................................................................................. 34
Figure 7e Project Only Daily Volumes on Segments ...................................................................................................... 35
Figure 8 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Volumes ....................................................................................................... 36
Figure 9 Opening Year (2018) Peak Hour Volumes ...................................................................................................... 38
Figure 10 Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Peak Hour Volumes ............................................................................. 39
List of Tables
Table 1 Intersection and Roadway Segment Level of Service Criteria ......................................................................... 10
Table 2 Significance Criteria .......................................................................................................................................................... 12
Table 3 Existing Signalized Intersection Level Of Service .................................................................................................. 19
Table 4 Existing Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service ............................................................................................. 21
Table 5 Roadway Level of Service Existing conditions ....................................................................................................... 21
Table 6 Surveyed Trip Generation Rate .................................................................................................................................... 23
Table 7 Project Components Square Footages ..................................................................................................................... 24
Table 8 Trip Generation Rates ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
Table 9 Estimated Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................. 27
Table 10 Existing Plus Project Signalized Intersection Level of Service ....................................................................... 40
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
Table 11 Existing Year Plus Project Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service ....................................................... 40
Table 12 Existing Plus Project Signalized Intersection Significant Impact .................................................................. 41
Table 13 Existing Plus Project Unsignalized Intersection Delay Change ..................................................................... 41
Table 14 Roadway Level of Service Existing Plus Project ................................................................................................... 42
Table 15 Roadway Level of Service Existing Plus Project Significant Impact ............................................................. 42
Table 16 Opening Year (2018) Signalized Intersection Levels of Service .................................................................... 43
Table 17 Opening Year (2018) Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service ................................................................ 44
Table 18 Roadway Level of Service Opening Year (2018) ................................................................................................. 44
Table 19 Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Signalized Intersectin Level of Service ............................................... 45
Table 20 Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service ....................................... 45
Table 21 Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Signalized Intersection Significant Impact ....................................... 46
Table 22 Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Unsignalized Intersection Delay Change........................................... 46
Table 23 Roadway Level of Service Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions .................................................. 47
Table 24 Roadway Significant Impact Opening Year (2018) Plus Project Significant Impact ............................. 47
Table 24 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary.............................................................................................................. 50
Table 25 Traffic Signal Warrant 3 Analysis Summary .......................................................................................................... 51
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fehr & Peers has been retained by the City of Anaheim Community Development Department to assist with
the transportation impact analysis for the Leisuretown Project (Project) at the corner of Anaheim Boulevard
and Water Street in Anaheim, California. The Project involves the restoration of a historical craftsman home,
a barrel-vaulted mid-century supermarket, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern
Times Brewery.
As a part of the transportation impact analysis, and consistent with the Methodologies and Assumptions
for Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis Memorandum approved by the City of Anaheim, the
following scenarios were analyzed:
• Existing conditions
• Existing Plus Project conditions
• Opening Year (2018) conditions
• Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions
FINDINGS
The results of the transportation analysis indicated that none of the study intersections or roadway
segments were significantly impacted by Project traffic. Therefore, no mitigation measures were
recommended. Signal warrant analysis indicated that the side street stop controlled intersection of Anaheim
Boulevard and Water Street did not meet signal warrant criteria as established by the 2014 California Manual
of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Caltrans, 2014).
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
2
2. INTRODUCTION
This chapter outlines the geographic scope of the Project traffic impact analysis, including the study area,
analysis methodologies, and significance criteria employed in the study.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the restoration of a historical craftsman home, a barrel-vaulted mid-century retail
building, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern Times Brewery. The Project would
include a low volume production brewery, tasting room, restaurant, retail area, staff offices, outdoor
gardens, and a pool. The outdoor gardens will provide a combination of seating areas, an elevated seated
overlook area, restroom, recreational games, a hammock grove, and lounge gardens. The pool area will
serve as a unique experience for customers of the tasting room to sit on pool chairs around the pool. Access
to the Project will be from a right in/right out driveway along Anaheim Boulevard and a full access driveway
along Water Street.
The standard hours of operation are projected to be from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM on Sunday through Thursday
and from 6:00 AM to 12:00 AM on Friday and Saturday. The restaurant would open at 6:00 AM daily and
the tasting room would open at 11:00 AM daily.
The Project site is zoned as general commercial and was planned as residential use with an overlay for
commercial use. Up until last year the site was used for commercial purpose. Currently the site is vacant in
preparation for the Project.
In addition to this study, Fehr & Peers prepared and submitted a parking study for the Project to City of
Anaheim Planning Department on August 9, 2017. The parking study concluded that the Project would
require a total of 75 parking spaces. Three Project site plan parking alternatives have been proposed. Project
Alternative 1 (preferred Project site plan) is shown in Figure 1a and results in 31 on-site parking spaces (12
of the parking spaces result from abandonment of the east-west alley and a landscape set back waver).
Project Alternative 2 is shown in Figure 1b and results in 25 on-site parking spaces (5 of the parking spaces
result from abandonment of alley). Alternative 3 is shown in Figure 1c and results in 19 on-site parking
spaces. The final determination for the number of Project located parking spaces is dependent on the
outcome of the alley abandonment decision and CUP hearing. Either 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces will be
provided in CarPark 2 in Center City depending on the site plan alternative chosen. According to parking
utilization data collected in the Center City area by the City of Anaheim in November 2016, CarPark 2 and
the other CarParks in Center City can accommodate the Project’s off-site parking needs. The parking study
submitted to the City of Anaheim is provided in Appendix A
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
Project Site Plan - Alternative 1
Figure 1A
Restaurant
Retail/
Storage
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoor
Garden
Brewery/
Tasting Room
Pool/
Pool DeckKitchen/
Staff Offi ce Restroom
PPPPP
mm
mmmmmmmmmmmm
Left/Right
Out Only
Right Turn In/
Right Turn Out
Project Site Plan - Alternative 2
Figure 1B
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/
Storage
Right Turn In/
Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoor
Garden
Brewery/
Tasting Room
Pool/
Pool DeckKitchen/
Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
mm
Left/Right
Out Only
Project Site Plan - Alternative 3
Figure 1C
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/
Storage
Right Turn In/
Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoor
Garden
Brewery/
Tasting Room
Pool/
Pool DeckKitchen/
Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
Left/Right
Out Only
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
6
PROJECT STUDY AREA
The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies states that, at a minimum, intersections
where the Project will add 51 or more trips during either AM or PM weekday peak hours should be included
in the transportation assessment. In order to determine which intersections are forecasted to have a volume
increase greater than 50 trips with the Project, Fehr & Peers determined the assignment of Project trips
based on our trip generation and trip distribution for the Project. The following five intersections, shown on
Figure 2, were projected to have more than 51 project trips assigned during either the AM or PM weekday
peak hour and were approved by City of Anaheim staff for data collection:
1. Anaheim Boulevard & Center Street (signalized)
2. Anaheim Boulevard & Center Street Promenade (signalized)
3. Anaheim Boulevard & Broadway (signalized)
4. Anaheim Boulevard & Santa Ana Street (signalized)
5. Anaheim Boulevard & Water Street (two-way stop-controlled)
Due to the location of study intersections, the following 4 roadway segments were approved by City staff
for data collection:
1. Anaheim Boulevard between Center Street and Center Street Promenade
2. Anaheim Boulevard between Center Street Promenade and Broadway
3. Anaheim Boulevard between Broadway and Santa Ana Street
4. Anaheim Boulevard between Santa Ana Street and Water Street
DATA COLLECTION
Existing morning (7:00 to 9:00 AM) and evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period intersection counts were
conducted at the study intersections on Thursday, May 18, 2017. Existing 24-hour machine (tube) counts
were conducted at the study roadway segments on Thursday, June 8, 2017. Traffic counts are provided in
Appendix B.
Please note that roadway segment counts were collected in June when Anaheim schools were closed for
the summer. An additional intersection count was conducted at Anaheim Boulevard and Broadway during
the roadway segment data collection. Comparison between the May and June counts at this intersection
were used to increase the roadway volumes on Anaheim Boulevard by 13% to reflect traffic conditions when
school is in session.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
7
Fehr & Peers collected the following information in a field visit to the study area:
• Lane configurations
• Signal phasing
• Land uses in the study area
• Existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities
• On-street parking conditions
• Transit service
!
!
!
!
!
E S O U T H S T
N
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
W C H A R T R E S S T
W S T U E C K L E A V E
N
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W O A K S T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E E L L S W O R T H A V E
E W A T E R S T
E CEN T E R S T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E S A N T A A N A S T
W C Y P R E S S S T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
E B R O A D W A Y
W L I N C O L N A V E
W E L M S T
W C E N T E R S T
C E N T E R S T R E E T P R O M E N A D E
W B R O A D W A Y
E LIN COL N AV E
W S A N T A A N A S T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
W W A T E R S T
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
1
2
3
4
5
2
1
3
4
\\f p o c 0 3 \D a t a _O C \P R O J E C T S \O C 1 7 \0 4 9 7 L e i s u r e t o w n \G r a p h i c s \G I S \M X D \F 2 _S t u d y I n t e r s e c t i o n s .m x d
Study Intersections & Roadway Segments
!Study Intersections
Roadway Study Segments
Project Site
Car Park 2
Figure 2
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
9
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
Consistent with the City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, the following four
scenarios were analyzed:
• Existing conditions – represents Existing conditions in the study area using collect data and
information from the field visit.
• Existing plus Project conditions – represents Existing conditions plus traffic from the Project.
• Opening Year (2018) conditions– represents Year 2018 conditions in the study area that includes
ambient growth and traffic from appending and approved projects in the area.
• Opening Year (2018) plus Project conditions – represents Opening Year (2018) conditions plus
traffic from the Project.
A general plan analysis scenario was not conducted as the Project does not require a zone change or general
plan amendment. The four scenarios above were identified in the Methodologies and Assumptions for the
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis (June 6, 2017) memorandum and submitted to City of Anaheim
Public Works staff. City of Anaheim Public Works staff confirmed the analysis of the four scenarios identified.
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES
Four of the study intersections are signalized and the fifth study intersections is side-street stop controlled.
For signalized intersections, the transportation analysis was conducted in accordance with City of Anaheim
and County of Orange Congestion Management Program (CMP) requirements using the Intersection
Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. For unsignalized intersection, methodologies consistent with the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 2010) were applied.
The ICU methodology is considered a standard approach for evaluating signalized intersection operations
in Orange County and in the City of Anaheim. The ICU method of intersection capacity analysis determines
the intersection volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio and corresponding Level of Service (LOS) for the turning
movements and intersection characteristics at signalized intersections. “Capacity” represents the maximum
volume of vehicles in the critical lanes that have a reasonable expectation of passing through an intersection
in one hour under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. The ICU method calculates the V/C ratio for
each critical movement by dividing volume by capacity. The V/C ratios for each critical movement are
summed with an added allowance for yellow clearance to determine the total intersection V/C ratio.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
10
The HCM unsignalized intersection delay was used to estimate the intersection delay in seconds and
corresponding LOS for the turning movements and intersection characteristics at the unsignalized
intersections. Delay was calculated based on the worst-case approach.
After the quantitative V/C and delay estimates were completed, the methodologies assign a qualitative
letter grade that represents the operations of the intersection. These grades range from level of service
(LOS) A (minimal delay) to LOS F (excessive congestion). LOS E represents at-capacity operations.
Descriptions of the LOS letter grades for intersections are provided in Table 1.
LOS grades for the four study roadway segments were determined based on each segment’s V/C ratio
utilizing capacity documented in the City’s General Plan.
TABLE 1 INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
Level of Service Description
Signalized
Intersections and
Roadway Segments
Volume-to-
Capacity (V/C)
Ratio
Unsignalized
Intersections
Delay (seconds)
A
Signalized: Operations with very low delay
occurring with favorable progression and/or
short cycle length.
Unsignalized: Little or no delay.
0.000-0.600 ≤ 10.0
B
Signalized: Operations with low delay occurring
with good progression and/or short cycle
lengths.
Unsignalized: Short traffic delays.
0.601-0.700 > 10.0 to 15.0
C
Signalized: Operations with average delays
resulting from fair progression and/or longer
cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to
appear.
Unsignalized: Average traffic delays.
0.701-0.800 > 15.0 to 25.0
D
Signalized: Operations with longer delays due
to a combination of unfavorable progression,
long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many
vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are
noticeable.
Unsignalized: Long traffic delays.
0.801-0.900 > 25.0 to 35.0
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
11
TABLE 1 INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
Level of Service Description
Signalized
Intersections and
Roadway Segments
Volume-to-
Capacity (V/C)
Ratio
Unsignalized
Intersections
Delay (seconds)
E
Signalized: Operations with high delay values
indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths,
and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are
frequent occurrences.
Unsignalized: Very long traffic delays.
0.901-1.000 > 35.0 to 50.0
F
Signalized: Operation with delays unacceptable
to most drivers occurring due to over
saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle
lengths.
Unsignalized: Extreme traffic delays with
intersection capacity exceeded
Greater than 1.000 Greater than 50.0
FUTURE FORECASTING
OPENING YEAR (2018) CONDITIONS
Future volumes for Project Opening Year (2018) conditions were developed by applying a 1% per year
growth rate to existing volumes. Pending and approved development projects were requested from the
City. No projects were included in these calculations.
TRAFFIC IMPACT AND MITIGATION CRITERIA
TRAFFIC IMPACTS
In accordance with City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, a transportation impact
on an intersection or roadway segment shall be deemed “significant” in accordance with Table 2 below.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
12
TABLE 2 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Level of Service Final V/C Ratio Project-Related Increase in V/C
C >0.700 – 0.800 Equal or greater than 0.050
D >0.800 – 0.900 Equal or greater than 0.030
E, F >0.900 Equal or greater than 0.010
The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies does not have significance criteria for
the determination of a transportation impact at an unsignalized intersection or criteria for intersections
using delay. Per the Methodologies and Assumptions Memorandum sent the City of Anaheim, a signal
warrant analysis was conducted for the unsignalized intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street.
This signal warrant analysis included peak hour signal warrant criteria for all of the analysis scenarios.
MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with City of Anaheim Traffic Impact Study Criteria, when an impact is determined at an
intersection or roadway segment, mitigation measures must be identified in order to improve the
operations to minimum LOS D at intersections and LOS C at roadway segments.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
13
3. EXISTING CONDITIONS
This chapter discusses the existing transportation conditions in the Project study area. This discussion
addresses the roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian networks.
EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES
Regional access to the Project is provided by State Route 91 to the north, Interstate 5 to the west, and SR-
57 to the east. Roadways in the study area are classified per the City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation
Element.
REGIONAL ROADS
• Interstate 5 (I-5) – I-5 is a north-south freeway that extends from California state and Mexico border
and extends to Oregon. Within the study area, I-5 has a north-south orientation and provides four
general travel lanes and one high occupancy vehicle lane in each direction. Access to the Project
site is provided with Lincoln Avenue Ramps and Anaheim Boulevard.
• State Route 91 (SR-91) – SR-91 is an east-west freeway that extends from Interstate 110 in Gardena
to State Route 50 in San Bernardino where it turns into Interstate 215. Within the study area, SR-91
has an east-west orientation and provides four general travel lanes and one high occupancy vehicle
lane in each direction. Access to the Project site is provided with the Anaheim Boulevard and Harbor
Boulevard on-ramps.
• State Route 57 (SR-57) – SR-57 is a north-south freeway that extends from Interstate 5 and State
Route 22 in Santa Ana to State Route 2010 and Interstate 210 in Glendora. Within the study area,
SR-57 has a north-south orientation and provides five general travel lanes and one high occupancy
vehicle lane in each direction. Access to the Project site is provided with Lincoln Avenue Ramps and
Anaheim Boulevard.
LOCAL ACCESS ROADS
• Anaheim Boulevard – The City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation element classifies Anaheim
Boulevard as a Primary Arterial south of La Palma Avenue and as a Secondary Arterial north of La
Palma Avenue. Anaheim Boulevard runs in the north-south direction. There are two travel lanes in
each direction. The posted speed limit varies between 35 and 40 MPH. On-street parking is allowed.
• Lincoln Boulevard – The City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation element classifies Lincoln
Boulevard as a Primary Arterial. Lincoln Boulevard runs in the east-west direction. There three travel
lanes in each direction in the study area. The posted speed limit varies between 35 and 40 MPH.
On-street parking is not allowed is not allowed in the study area.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
14
• Broadway – The City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation element classifies Broadway as a
Secondary Arterial. Broadway Avenue runs in the east-west direction to the north of the Project site.
There are two travel lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH.
• Center Street – Center Street runs in the east-west direction to the north of the Project site. There
is one travel lane in each direction with on street parking. The speed limit is 25 MPH.
• Center Street Promenade - Center Street Promenade runs in the east-west direction to the north of
the Project site. There is one travel lane in each direction with on street parking. The speed limit is
25 MPH.
• Santa Ana Street – The City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation element classifies Santa Ana Street
as a Collector Street between I-5 and State College Boulevard. Santa Ana Street runs in the east-
west direction to the north of the Project site. There is one travel lane in each direction with on
street parking.
• Water Street – Water Street runs in the east-west direction to the south of the Project site. There is
one travel lane in each direction with street parking. The speed limit is 25 MPH.
• South Street – The City of Anaheim General Plan Circulation element classifies South Street as a
Collector Street between I-5 and State College Boulevard. South Street runs in the east-west
direction to the south of the Project site. There is one travel lane in each direction with on street
parking. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH.
EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES
The study area is serviced by multiple Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) bus routes.
Additionally, several bus stops exist adjacent to the Project site and along surrounding roadways. Bus routes
and bus stops are displayed on Figure 3. Bus routes are described below.
• Route 42 (Long Beach to Orange) – This route runs between Long Beach and Orange and provides
access to Hawaiian Gardens, Cypress, Buena Park, Anaheim. This route operates on 15 to 30 minutes
headways during the weekday and 30 to 45 minute headways on the weekend.
• Route 43 (Fullerton to Costa Mesa via Harbor Blvd.) – This route runs between Fullerton and Costa
Mesa and provides access to Santa Ana, Garden Grove, and Fountain Valley. Near the Project site,
Route 43 runs along Harbor Boulevard. This route operates on 20-minute headways during the
weekday peak periods and on weekends.
• Route 47 (Fullerton to Newport Beach via Anaheim Blvd./Fairview St.) – This route runs between
Fullerton and Newport Beach and provides access to Garden Grove, Orange, Santa Ana, and Costa
Mesa. Near the Project site, Route 47 runs along Anaheim Boulevard. This route operates on 15-
minute headways during the weekday peak periods and on 20- to 30-minute headways on
weekends.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
15
• Route 543 (Fullerton Transportation Center to Santa Ana via Harbor Blvd.) – This route runs between
Fullerton and Santa Ana and provides access to Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana. Near the
Project site, Route 543 runs on Harbor Boulevard. This route only operates on weekdays, with 10-
to 15-minute headways during the weekday peak periods.
W S T U E C K L E A V E
W CHESTN
U
T
S
T
W CHARTR
E
S
S
T
S
K
R
O
E
G
E
R
S
T
S
P
I
N
E
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
C
I
T
R
O
N
S
T
E V A L E N C I A A V E
W O A K S T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E ELLS W ORTH A VE
E W A T E R S T
E C E N TER S T
E SOUTH S
T
N
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W S O U T H S T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E S A N T A A N A S T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
R
E
S
H
S
T
S
J
A
N
S
S
S
T
W ELM ST
W C E N T E R S T
W C YPRE S S ST
E B R O A D W A Y
W LINCO
L
N
A VE
W B R O A D W A Y
W S A N T A A N A S T
W W A T E R S T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
\\
f
p
o
c
0
3
\
D
a
t
a
_
O
C
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
F
3
_
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
m
x
d
Existing Transit
Anaheim Resor t Transit
10
17
OCTA Routes
42
43
47
543
Project Site
Figure 3
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
17
Anaheim Resort Transportation (ART) bus routes also service the study area. Routes and bus stops are
displayed on Figure 3. Bus routes are described below.
• Route 10 (Canyon Line) - This route runs between Canyon Metrolink Station and Disneyland
transportation center and provides access to Anaheim, Garden Grove, and Santa Ana. Near the
Project site, Route 543 runs on Harbor Boulevard. This route only operates on weekdays, with 10-
to 15-minute headways during the weekday peak periods.
• Route 17 (Downtown Packing District Line ) – This route runs between Anaheim Packing District
and Disneyland transportation venter and provides access to City Hall, Walmart Neighborhood
Market, and Center City. This route only operates on weekdays, with 30- to 45-minute headways
corresponding to the train schedule at Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station.
EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES
The City of Anaheim is served by Class I, II, and III bicycle facilities, described below:
• Class I bicycle paths: Provide a dedicated right-of-way for bicyclists, completely separated from
roadway traffic.
• Class II bicycle lanes: Provide a dedicated striped or stenciled lane for one-way travel along a
roadway.
• Class III bicycle routes: Provide for a roadway shared between automobile traffic and bicyclists.
Currently, the only bicycle facilities near the study area are Class II bicycle lanes in each direction on
Broadway, between East Street and State College Boulevard. There are no existing bicycle facilities in the
study area. However, the City of Anaheim Bicycle Master Plan has proposed several additional Class II bicycle
lanes in the study area, along Anaheim Boulevard and Broadway. The City also proposes Class III bicycle
facilities along Santa Ana Street and South Street. Existing and future bicycle facilities in the study area are
shown on Figure 4.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Pedestrian facilities in the study area consist of sidewalks, pedestrian crosswalks, and pedestrian crossing
controls. Sidewalks are provided throughout the area. Sidewalk connectivity throughout the study are
provides access to neighborhoods as well as local shops and restaurants. Crosswalks are provided at major
signalized intersection in the study area.
W STUECK
L
E
A
V
E
W CHESTN
U
T
S
T
W CHARTR
E
S
S
T
S
K
R
O
E
G
E
R
S
T
S
P
I
N
E
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
C
I
T
R
O
N
S
T
E VALENCI
A
A
V
E
W OAK ST
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E ELLSWO
R
T
H
A
V
E
E WATER S
T
E C E N TER S T
E SOUTH S
T
N
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W SOUTH S
T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E SANTA A
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
R
E
S
H
S
T
S
J
A
N
S
S
S
T
E L I N COL N AV E
W ELM ST
W C E N T E R S T
W CYPRESS
S
T
E BROADW
A
Y
W LINCO
L
N
A
V
E
W BROADW
A
Y
W SANTA A
N
A
S
T
W WATER S
T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
\\
f
p
o
c
0
3
\
D
a
t
a
_
O
C
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
F
3
_
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
.
m
x
d
Existing & Planned Bicycle Facilities
Existing Bikeways
Class I
Class II
Class III
Proposed Bikeways
Class I
Class II
Class III
Project Site
Figure 4
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
19
EXISTING OPERATIONS
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Existing traffic volumes and lane configurations collected in the field were used to analyze operations at the
study intersections for existing AM and PM peak hour conditions using the ICU and HCM 2010
methodologies. Traffix v8.0 software was used to conduct the ICU intersection analysis methodology and
Synchro v9.0 (latest version) was used to conduct the HCM 2010 intersection analysis methodology. LOS
calculations are provided in Appendix C. As shown in Table 3, all signalized intersections operate at LOS B
or better. As shown in Table 4, the unsignalized intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street
operates at LOS A, with the worst approach operating at LOS F during the AM and PM peak hours. Figure
5 shows the existing intersection counts during the AM and PM peak hours at the study intersections. The
signal warrant analysis completed for the Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street intersection recommends
the inclusion of bicycles in the street as vehicles for the analysis. Therefore bicycles in the street were
analyzed as vehicles in the intersection analysis to limit confusion between the volumes for the intersection
analysis and signal warrant analysis. This represents a conservative approach to the analysis of the Anaheim
Boulevard and Water Street intersection. Existing conditions signal warrant analysis is presented in Chapter
7.
TABLE 3 EXISTING SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name Time
Period
ICU Methodology
[a]
Existing conditions
V/C LOS
1 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street AM 0.404 A
PM 0.398 A
2 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street Promenade AM 0.337 A
PM 0.349 A
3 Anaheim Boulevard Broadway AM 0.525 A
PM 0.621 B
4 Anaheim Boulevard Santa Ana Street AM 0.539 A
PM 0.597 A
Notes:
[a]: V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software.
V/C = Volume / Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Figure 5
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
ac
c
e
4
6
(
6
5
)
5
1
8
(
9
5
4
)
3
6
(
7
0
)
d
21
(
2
6
)
8
(
1
9
)
73
(
7
9
)
a
c
e
6
0
(
6
8
)
7
9
2
(
6
0
6
)
2
4
(
3
8
)
a
e
28
(
7
3
)
21
(
1
4
)
28
(
6
6
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
4
1
(
3
1
)
5
8
4
(
1
,
0
3
7
)
f
26
(
6
4
)
c
e
2
1
(
3
2
)
8
2
2
(
7
9
4
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 70 (175)438 (823)61 (88)accf129 (168)526 (449)139 (79)ace69 (131)678 (618)102 (109)accf51 (66)425 (478)101 (113)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
3
1
(
7
2
)
4
9
4
(
1
,
0
5
9
)
3
4
(
4
8
)
ae
56
(
4
6
)
20
4
(
1
7
1
)
87
(
4
2
)
a
c
e
3
3
(
5
4
)
8
5
4
(
7
1
5
)
4
1
(
6
5
)
a
e
39
(
5
4
)
17
8
(
2
1
1
)
65
(
4
9
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
1
6
(
3
1
)
4
9
3
(
1
,
1
3
1
)
1
8
(
2
3
)
d
12
(
1
0
)
12
(
9
)
49
(
3
0
)
a
c
e
1
8
(
2
4
)
9
8
3
(
7
4
8
)
2
4
(
4
4
)
d
44
(
2
1
)
10
(
3
)
45
(
1
7
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
21
TABLE 4 EXISTING UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name
Time
Period
Average Delay
(sec) [a] LOS
Control Delay
(sec) [b] LOS
5 Anaheim Boulevard Water Street AM 6.0 A 68.0 (WBA) F
PM 4.4 A 123.7 (WBA) F
Notes:
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control delay reported
is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections.
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Existing traffic volumes were used to analyze operations at the study roadway segments. The results are
summarized in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, all study roadway segments perform at LOS B or better.
TABLE 5 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING CONDITIONS
Roadway Segment Volume Capacity V/C
Ratio LOS
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade 23,576 37,500 0.63 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway 25,652 37,500 0.68 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana 25,208 37,500 0.67 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street 25,119 37,500 0.67 B
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
22
4. TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
PROJECT TRAFFIC
Traffic was estimated for the Project using a three-step process. First, the number of Project trips were
estimated. Next, the distribution of those trips to the broader network was estimated. Finally, the trips were
assigned to the study network based on the distribution of those trips. This process is described below.
TRIP GENERATION
The trip generation for the restaurant component was estimated using Trip Generation, 9th Edition (Institute
of Transportation Engineers [ITE], 2012). Empirical trip generation data was collected at a local brewery to
determine the trip generation rate for the brewery/tasting room component.
ITE Trip Generation
The Trip Generation, 9th Edition rates for High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (ITE Code 932) was used to
estimate trips for the restaurant component of the Project.
Empirical Trip Generation
Data Collection
Based on the components and operating characteristics of the Project, weekday peak hour trip generation
data collection was conducted at the Bruery Teurreux (1174 N Grove Street, Anaheim, CA 92868) from 4:00
PM to 6:00 PM on Thursday, May 11, 2017. This site was selected due to its similar operating hours for the
tasting room to that proposed with the Project. Daily trip generation data could not be collected at the site
due to the lack of dedicated on-site parking, and was therefore estimated based on ratios of peak hour to
daily trip generation for similar land uses from Trip Generation, 9th Edition.
Trip Generation Rate Development
The trip generation data collected at Bruery Terreux included all trips generated by the site (brewery, tasting
room, and patio). As such, employee and visitor trips were counted together during the data collection
period. All of these trips were used to develop the trip generation rate for an entire sample site based on
the size of the tasting room and patio.
As presented in Table 6, Bruery Terreux generates 21 trips (16 inbound/5 outbound) during the PM peak
hour. AM peak hour trip generation was not collected due to the proposed operational hours of the tasting
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
23
room component of the Project. According to Bruery Terreux staff, the tasting room has a floor area of
approximately 2,106 square feet and the patio has a floor area of approximately 1,335 square feet. PM peak
hour trip generation rates based on the size of the tasting room and patio components were developed by
dividing the PM peak hour trips by the estimated square footage of the Bruery Terreux tasting room and
patio. As presented in Table 6, a trip generation of 6.10 PM peak hour trips per 1,000 square feet (76%
inbound/24% outbound) was determined for the brewery, tasting room, and patio component of Bruery
Terreux. This rate accounts for all trips associated with the brewery, tasting room, and patio based on the
size of the tasting room and patio.
Daily trip generation rates were developed based on ratios of peak hour to daily trip generation for similar
land uses from Trip Generation, 9th Edition. The Drinking Place (ITE Code 925) land use does not have a daily
trip generation rate, therefore Quality Restaurant (ITE Code 931) was selected based on the operational
characteristics provided in Trip Generation, 9th Edition. The daily trip generation rate for the brewery, tasting
room, and patio was developed by multiplying the calculated PM peak hour rate by the ratio of the daily
trip generation rate to the PM peak hour rate for Quality Restaurant (ITE Code 931).
TABLE 6 SURVEYED TRIP GENERATION RATE
Type
Size
Trips/Trip Generation Rate
Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour
Trips [a]
PM Peak Hour
Trips
In Out Total In Out Total
Brewery/Tasting Room Trips [c] 3.441ksf [b] 0 0 0 16 5 21
Brewery Trip Generation Rate 73.26 0% 0% 0.00 76% 24% 6.10
Note:
[a]: AM peak hour trips for tasting room not collected as business did not open until 12:00 PM.
[b]: Daily trips not collected. ITE does not have daily trip generation rate for ITE Code 925 (Drinking Place).
Daily trip generation rate developed based on ratio of daily trips to PM peak hour trips for ITE Code 931 (Quality Restaurant).
[c]: Trip generation rate developed for tasting room and patio square footage only as it was assumed that the tasting room
and patio were the reason for the PM peak hour trips. Trips associated with employees were not excluded from the data
collection thereby accounting for employee and visitor trips to the site.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
The trip generation rates from Trip Generation, 9th Edition and the similar site were used to estimate the
number of trips associated with the Project. Trip generation rates per thousand square feet (KSF) was
developed based on the peak hour trip generation and square footage of the sample site. These rates were
applied to determine the trip generation for the Project. Table 7 presents the square footages and
descriptions of the components of the Project.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
24
Allocation of Land Use
The Project is composed of multiple sections that create three primary components, the restaurant, brewery,
and tasting room and patio. As presented in Table 6, the restaurant component is comprised of the
restaurant, outdoor dining, kitchen, staff office, and storage. These square footages were combined and
multiplied by the associated restaurant trip generation rate to develop the restaurant trip generation
estimate. The brewery component is comprised of the brewery and brewery office. These square footages
were not be used for the development of trip generation estimates as the trips associated with these uses
were already accounted for in the tasting room and patio trip generation rate. The tasting room and patio
component is comprised of the tasting room, outdoor garden, pool deck, overlook area, retail, restroom,
TABLE 7 PROJECT COMPONENTS SQUARE FOOTAGES
Use Size (sf) Description
Restaurant
Restaurant 1,963 Restaurant with breakfast, lunch, and dinner entrees.
Outdoor Dining 628 Outdoor dining space for restaurant.
Kitchen 971 Additional kitchen space for restaurant in adjacent building.
Staff Office 248 Staff office space in adjacent building.
Storage 321 Storage space for restaurant.
Restaurant Total 4,131
Brewery
Brewery 4,810 Low production brewery.
Brewery Office 425 Brewery management office space.
Brewery Total 5,235
Tasting Room
Tasting Room 808 Brewery tasting room.
Outdoor Garden 1,647 Combination of seating area, recreational game area,
hammock grove, and lounge area.
Pool Deck 1,670 Pool chair lounge area for tasting room.
Overlook Area 640 Elevated seated area overlooking outdoor garden.
Retail 320 Retail space selling Modern Time merchandise and package
food.
Restroom 599 Restroom for garden area and pool deck.
Storage 160 Storage for outdoor garden.
Tasting Room Total 5,844
Note:
sf: square feet
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
25
and storage. These square footages were combined and multiplied by the associated brewery and tasting
room trip generation rate to develop the brewery, tasting room, and patio trip generation estimate.
Trip Generation Credits
Internal trip credits are a reduction to the trip generation estimates for all individual components to account
for trips internal to the site. These are trips usually made via walking within the site. The components are
expected to draw patrons from each other. The internal trip credits for the Project were estimated based on
the NCHRP 8-51 Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments (National
Cooperative Highway Research Program); recommended factors are provided in Trip Generation, 9th Edition.
Pass-by credits were applied to the components to account for patrons making an intermediate stop on
the way to and from other locations (pass-by trips are trips attracted from traffic passing the site on adjacent
roadways and are not new trips generated by the Project). A 5% pass-by trip credit was applied the
components based on size and location of the Project along major regional thoroughfares.
Project Trip Generation Estimates
As presented in Table 8 and 9, the Project is expected to generate an estimated net external 861 daily trips,
including 46 trips (27 inbound/19 outbound) during the AM peak hour. The Project is expected to generate
an estimated net external 72 trips (48 inbound/24 outbound) during the PM peak hour. The brewery
component of the Project anticipates having three workers arrive during the AM peak hour and leave during
the PM peak hour. These brewery worker trips were added to the trips estimated by the trip generation
rate.
In addition, the Project will alter the Polly the Trolley route to add an additional stop at the Project site. The
route will be adjusted to provide shuttle service from CarPark 2 and the other CarParks to the Project site.
A potential rerouting of the Polly the Trolley service is provided in the parking study submitted to the City
of Anaheim. It was assumed that Polly the Trolley would operate with 15 minute headways, resulting in four
additional inbound and outbound trips during the AM and PM peak hours.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
26
TABLE 8 TRIP GENERATION RATES
Type
ITE
Land
Use
Code
Size
(ksf)
Daily
Rate
AM Peak Hour [a] PM Peak Hour [a]
Rate % In % Out Rate % In % Out
High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant
[b] 932 4.131 127.15 10.81 55% 45% 9.85 60% 40%
Internal capture [c] 5% 0% 5%
Pass-by credit [d] 5% 5% 5%
Net External Trips
Tasting Room [e], [f], [g], [h] - 5.844 73.26 0.00 0% 0% 6.10 76% 24%
Internal capture [c] 5% 0% 5%
Pass-by credit [d] 5% 0% 5%
Notes:
[a]: Trip generation rates from Trip Generation,9th Edition and empirical data presented in Table 1.
[b]: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant land use incorporates: 1.963 ksf restaurant, 0.971 ksf kitchen, 0.628 ksf patio, 0.248 staff office, and 0.321 ksf
storage.
[c]: Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. Credit estimated based on NCHRP 8-51 Enhancing
Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments.
[d]: A pass-by credit to be considered reasonable given the location of the site near a major thoroughfares.
[e]: Tasting room land use incorporates: 0.808 ksf tasting room, 1.647 ksf outdoor garden, 1.670 ksf pool deck, 0.640 ksf overlook area, 0.599 ksf
restroom, 0.320 ksf retail, and 0.160 ksf storage.
[f]: Tasting room hours proposed from 11:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Three employees are anticipated to be working at brewery, and three AM peak hour
inbound trips were assumed for those employees.
[g]: Brewery and brewery office not included as part of land use for trip generation purposes as the primary purpose for the peak hour trips was based
on size of tasting room and patio component. As described in Table 2 footnote [c],
trip generation rate developed for tasting room and patio square footage as it was assumed that the tasting room and patio were the reason for the
PM peak hour trips. Trips associated with employees were not excluded from the
data collection thereby accounting for employee and visitor trips to the site.
[h]: Daily trip generation rate developed based on ratio of daily trips to PM peak hour trips for ITE Code 931 (Quality Restaurant).
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
27
TABLE 9 ESTIMATED TRIP GENERATION
Type
ITE
Land
Use
Code
Size
(ksf)
Daily
Trips
AM Peak Hour Trips
[a]
PM Peak Hour Trips
[a]
In Out Total In Out Total
High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant [b] 932 4.131 525 25 20 45 25 16 41
Internal capture [c] (26) 0 0 0 (1) (1) (2)
Pass-by credit [d] (25) (1) (1) (2) (1) (1) (2)
Net External Trips 474 24 19 43 23 14 39
Tasting Room [e], [f], [g], [h] - 5.844 428 3 0 3 27 12 39
Internal capture [c] (21) 0 0 0 (1) (1) (2)
Pass-by credit [d] (20) 0 0 0 (1) (1) (2)
Net External Trips 387 3 0 3 25 10 35
Total Project Trips 953 28 20 48 52 28 80
Internal capture [c] (47) 0 0 0 (2) (2) (4)
Pass-by credit [d] (45) (1) (1) (2) (2) (2) (4)
Net External Project Trips 861 27 19 46 48 24 72
Polly the Trolley Trips 96 4 4 8 4 4 8
Total Trips 957 31 23 54 52 28 80
Notes:
[a]: Trip generation rates from Trip Generation,9th Edition and empirical data presented in Table 1.
[b]: High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant land use incorporates: 1.963 ksf restaurant, 0.971 ksf kitchen, 0.628 ksf patio, 0.248 staff office, and 0.321 ksf
storage.
[c]: Internal capture represents the percentage of trips between land uses that occur within the site. Credit estimated based on NCHRP 8-51 Enhancing
Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments.
[d]: A pass-by credit to be considered reasonable given the location of the site near a major thoroughfares.
[e]: Tasting room land use incorporates: 0.808 ksf tasting room, 1.647 ksf outdoor garden, 1.670 ksf pool deck, 0.640 ksf overlook area, 0.599 ksf
restroom, 0.320 ksf retail, and 0.160 ksf storage.
[f]: Tasting room hours proposed from 11:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Three employees are anticipated to be working at brewery, and three AM peak hour
inbound trips were assumed for those employees.
[g]: Brewery and brewery office not included as part of land use for trip generation purposes as the primary purpose for the peak hour trips was based
on size of tasting room and patio component. As described in Table 2 footnote [c],
trip generation rate developed for tasting room and patio square footage as it was assumed that the tasting room and patio were the reason for the
PM peak hour trips. Trips associated with employees were not excluded from the
data collection thereby accounting for employee and visitor trips to the site.
[h]: Daily trip generation rate developed based on ratio of daily trips to PM peak hour trips for ITE Code 931 (Quality Restaurant).
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
28
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
The geographic distribution of trips generated by the Project is dependent on characteristics of the street
system serving the Project site, the level of accessibility of routes to and from the Project site, and the
locations of employment and residential areas to which patrons of the Project would be drawn. The
distribution of Project trips was estimated using this information and illustrated on Figure 6.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
Based on the trip generation and trip distribution estimates developed and described above, Project trips
were assigned to the study area roadway network. The Project will have between 19 and 31 parking spaces
provided at the site and between 41 and 56 parking spaces provided in CarPark 2. Due to the off-site parking
characteristic of the Project, the inbound assignment of the Project trips assumes that all vehicles drive by
the Project site before parking in CarPark 2. This assignment of the Project trips reflects a conservative
condition as it accounts for the potential circulation of inbound Project trips traveling to the Project site
before parking off-site, and results in some inbound vehicles traveling on the roadway segments and
through the intersections more than once (in multiple directions) during the inbound trip. Project only
vehicle trips were rounded to the nearest whole number for all roadway volumes and intersection
movements. The assignment of the inbound peak hour Project only trips is shown on Figure 7a.
Due to the off-site parking characteristic of the Project, the outbound assignment of the Project trips
assumes that all vehicles departs from CarPark 2 and directly leave the study area. This assignment reflects
the realistic condition as the outbound trips would not need to travel by the Project site before leaving the
study area, and results in all vehicles traveling on the roadway segments and through the intersections only
once. Project only vehicle trips were rounded to the nearest whole number for all roadway volumes and
intersection movements. The assignment of the outbound trips is shown on Figure 7b.
The assignment of the inbound daily project only trips at the study intersections is shown on Figure 7c. The
assignment of the outbound daily project only trips at the study intersections is shown in Figure 7d. The
assignment of daily Project only trips on the roadway segments are shown on Figure 7e.
In addition, the Project will alter the Polly the Trolley route to add an additional stop at the Project site. The
route will be adjusted to provide shuttle service from CarPark 2 and the other CarParks to the Project site.
A potential rerouting of the Polly the Trolley service is provided in the parking study submitted to the City
of Anaheim. The parking study submitted to the City of Anaheim is provided in Appendix A. The assignment
of inbound Polly the Trolley trips for the development is shown on Figure 7a. The assignment of outbound
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
29
Polly the Trolley trips for the development is shown on Figure 7b. The assignment of the daily Polly the
Trolley trips on the roadway segments are shown on Figure 7c.
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The estimated Project traffic was added to the existing traffic volumes to estimate Existing Plus Project traffic
volumes on a non-event day. Figure 8 shows turning movement traffic volumes for the existing plus Project
scenario.
FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
To evaluate the potential impacts of the Project on Opening Year (2018) conditions, it was necessary to
develop estimates of future traffic conditions in the area both without and with Project traffic.
!
!
!
!
!
E O A K S T
W P R O V E N T I A L D R
N
P
A
U
L
I
N
E
S
T
W O A K S T
S
I
N
D
I
A
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
N
R
E
S
H
S
T
N
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
E E L L S W O R T H A V E
E W A T E R S T
E C E N T E R S T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
W WILHELM
I
N
A
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
E S Y C A M O R E S T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
S
K
R
O
E
G
E
R
S
T
S
A
T
C
H
I
S
O
N
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
R
E
S
H
S
T
S
J
A
N
S
S
S
T
N
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
W A L B E R T A S T
W ELM ST
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
W C E N T E R S T
C E N T E R S T R E E T
N
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
N
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
E V E R M O N T A V E
S
O
H
I
O
S
T
W S O U T H S T
E ADELE S
T
E SOUTH S
T
W S Y C A M O R E S T
W C Y P R E S S S T
E S A N T A A N A S T
E B R O A D W A Y
W B R O A D W A Y
W S A N T A A N A S T
LIN CO LN AVE
E C Y P R E S S S T
W W A T E R S T S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
S
C
I
T
R
O
N
S
T
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
1
2
3
4
5
2
1
3
4
\\
f
p
a
i
n
c
.
l
o
c
a
l
\
D
f
s
-
e
n
t
-
d
a
t
a
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
A
I
\
F
6
_
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
.
a
i
Project Traffic Distribution
!Study Intersections
Roadway Study Segments
Project Site Car Park 2
Traffic Distribution
Figure 6
X%
5%
5%
5%
20%15%
5%
15%
10%
15%5%
Figure 7a
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
O
n
l
y
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
(
I
n
b
o
u
n
d
)
ac
c
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
2
7
(
4
8
)
d
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
0
(
0
)
7
(
1
2
)
0
(
0
)
a
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
4
(
4
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
0
(
0
)
2
7
(
4
8
)
f
4
(
4
)
c
e
4
(
4
)
7
(
1
2
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 0 (0)22 (38)0 (0)accf5 (10)0 (0)0 (0)ace0 (0)11 (16)0 (0)accf0 (0)0 (0)1 (2)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
0
(
0
)
1
8
(
3
1
)
0
(
0
)
ae
4
(
7
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
0
(
0
)
1
2
(
1
8
)
0
(
0
)
a
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
1
(
2
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
0
(
0
)
9
(
1
6
)
0
(
0
)
d
9
(
1
6
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
9
(
1
7
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
d
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Project Site Access f4 (4)Project Site Water StAnaheim Blvd
Figure 7b
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
O
n
l
y
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
(
O
u
t
b
o
u
n
d
)
ac
c
e
0
(
0
)
4
(
4
)
0
(
0
)
d
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
e
6
(
7
)
0
(
0
)
9
(
1
1
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
0
(
0
)
4
(
4
)
f
0
(
0
)
c
e
0
(
0
)
9
(
1
1
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 0 (0)4 (4)0 (0)accf0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)ace2 (3)6 (8)0 (0)accf0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
0
(
0
)
4
(
4
)
0
(
0
)
ae
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
0
(
0
)
6
(
8
)
0
(
0
)
a
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
d
4
(
4
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
a
c
e
0
(
0
)
6
(
8
)
0
(
0
)
d
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
0
(
0
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Project Site Access Project Site a4 (4)Water StAnaheim Blvd
Figure 7c
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
O
n
l
y
D
a
i
l
y
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
(
I
n
b
o
u
n
d
)
ac
c
e
0
0
4
3
1
d
0 0 0
a
c
e
0
1
0
8
0
a
e
0 0 48
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
0
4
3
1
f
0
c
e
0
1
5
6
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 0 3450accf860 0ace01560accf00223. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
0
2
8
0
0
ae
65 0 0
a
c
e
0
1
7
7
0
a
e
0 0 22
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
0
1
4
0
0
d
14
0
0 0
a
c
e
1
5
1
0
0
d
0 0 0
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
f48 Water StAnaheim BlvdProject Site Access Project Site
Figure 7d
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
O
n
l
y
D
a
i
l
y
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
(
O
u
t
b
o
u
n
d
)
ac
c
e
0
4
8
0
d
0 0 0
a
c
e
0
0
0
a
e
12
9
0 19
4
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
0
4
8
f
0
c
e
0
1
9
4
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 0 480accf00 0ace541400accf0003. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
0
4
8
0
ae
0 0 0
a
c
e
0
1
4
0
0
a
e
0 0 0
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
0
0
0
d
48 0 0
a
c
e
0
1
4
0
0
d
0 0 0
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Water StAnaheim BlvdProject SiteProject Site Access a48
E SOUTH
S
T
N
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
W CHART
R
E
S
S
T
W STUEC
K
L
E
A
V
E
N
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W OAK S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E ELLSW
O
R
T
H
A
V
E
E WATER
S
T
E CEN T E R S T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E SANTA
A
N
A
S
T
W CYPRE
S
S
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
E BROAD
W
A
Y
W L I N C O L N A V E
W ELM S
T
W CENT
E
R
S
T
C E N T E R S T R E E T P R O M E N A D E
W BROAD
W
A
Y
E LINCOLN AVE
W SANTA
A
N
A
S
T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
W WATER
S
T
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
829
829
711
667
\\
f
p
o
c
0
3
\
D
a
t
a
_
O
C
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
F
2
_
S
t
u
d
y
I
n
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
m
x
d
Figure 7e
Project Only Daily Volumes on Segments
Daily Project Volumes Project Site
Car Park 2
XXX
Figure 8
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
l
u
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
ac
c
e
4
6
(
6
5
)
5
2
2
(
9
5
8
)
6
3
(
1
1
8
)
d
21
(
2
6
)
8
(
1
9
)
73
(
7
9
)
a
c
e
6
0
(
6
8
)
7
9
9
(
6
1
8
)
2
4
(
3
8
)
a
e
34
(
8
0
)
21
(
1
4
)
41
(
8
1
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
4
1
(
3
1
)
6
1
5
(
1
,
0
8
9
)
f
30
(
6
8
)
c
e
2
5
(
3
6
)
8
3
7
(
8
1
7
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 70 (175)464 (865)61 (88)accf134 (178)526 (449)139 (79)ace71 (134)695 (642)102 (109)accf51 (66)425 (478)102 (115)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
3
1
(
7
2
)
5
1
6
(
1
,
0
9
4
)
3
4
(
4
8
)
ae
60
(
5
3
)
20
4
(
1
7
1
)
87
(
4
2
)
a
c
e
3
3
(
5
4
)
8
7
2
(
7
4
1
)
4
1
(
6
5
)
a
e
39
(
5
4
)
17
8
(
2
1
1
)
66
(
5
1
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
1
6
(
3
1
)
5
0
2
(
1
,
1
4
7
)
1
8
(
2
3
)
d
25
(
3
0
)
12
(
9
)
49
(
3
0
)
a
c
e
2
7
(
4
1
)
9
8
9
(
7
5
6
)
2
4
(
4
4
)
d
44
(
2
1
)
10
(
3
)
45
(
1
7
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Project Site Access f4 (4)Project Site a4 (4)Water StAnaheim Blvd
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
37
OPENING YEAR (2018) TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The traffic volumes projected for the future base scenario (Year 2018) take into account the expected
changes in traffic over Existing conditions from two primary sources: ambient growth in the existing traffic
volumes due to the effects of overall regional growth and development outside the study area and traffic
generated by specific development projects in, or in the vicinity of, the Study Area as identified by the City
of Anaheim. The methods used to account for these factors are described below.
Background or Ambient Growth
An ambient growth factor of 1% per year was applied to adjust the existing year traffic volumes to reflect
the effects of regional growth and development by the year 2018. This adjustment was applied to the
Existing traffic volume data (Year 2017) to reflect the effect of ambient growth by the year 2018. Volumes
were rounded to the whole vehicle after applying the 1% per year grow factor.
Related Projects
Future traffic forecasts include the effects of specific projects, called related projects, expected to be
implemented in the vicinity of the Project site prior to the buildout date of the Project. Related project
information was requested from City of Anaheim staff, but no related projects were identified to be
completed by the year 2018.
Figure 9 shows turning movement traffic volumes for the Opening Year (2018) scenario.
FUTURE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
The Project traffic volumes were added to the Opening Year (2018) traffic projections, resulting in Opening
Year (2018) Plus Project AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes. Figure 10 displays the Opening Year (2018)
Plus Project scenario.
Figure 9
Op
e
n
i
n
g
Y
e
a
r
(
2
0
1
8
)
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
ac
c
e
4
6
(
6
6
)
5
2
3
(
9
6
4
)
3
6
(
7
1
)
d
21
(
2
6
)
8
(
1
9
)
74
(
8
0
)
a
c
e
6
1
(
6
9
)
8
0
0
(
6
1
2
)
2
4
(
3
8
)
a
e
28
(
7
4
)
21
(
1
4
)
28
(
6
7
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
4
1
(
3
1
)
5
9
0
(
1
,
0
4
7
)
f
26
(
6
5
)
c
e
2
1
(
3
2
)
8
3
0
(
8
0
2
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 71 (177)442 (831)62 (89)accf130 (170)531 (453)140 (80)ace70 (132)685 (624)103 (110)accf52 (67)429 (483)102 (114)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
3
1
(
7
3
)
4
9
9
(
1
,
0
7
0
)
3
4
(
4
8
)
ae
57
(
4
6
)
20
6
(
1
7
3
)
88
(
4
2
)
a
c
e
3
3
(
5
5
)
8
6
3
(
7
2
2
)
4
1
(
6
6
)
a
e
39
(
5
5
)
18
0
(
2
1
3
)
66
(
4
9
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
1
6
(
3
1
)
4
9
8
(
1
,
1
4
2
)
1
8
(
2
3
)
d
12
(
1
0
)
12
(
9
)
49
(
3
0
)
a
c
e
1
8
(
2
4
)
9
9
3
(
7
5
5
)
2
4
(
4
4
)
d
44
(
2
1
)
10
(
3
)
45
(
1
7
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Figure 10
Op
e
n
i
n
g
Y
e
a
r
(
2
0
1
8
)
P
l
u
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
ac
c
e
4
6
(
6
6
)
5
2
7
(
9
6
8
)
6
3
(
1
1
9
)
d
21
(
2
6
)
8
(
1
9
)
74
(
8
0
)
a
c
e
6
1
(
6
9
)
8
0
7
(
6
2
4
)
2
4
(
3
8
)
a
e
34
(
8
1
)
21
(
1
4
)
41
(
8
2
)
1.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
ac
c
c
4
1
(
3
1
)
6
2
1
(
1
,
0
9
9
)
f
30
(
6
9
)
c
e
2
5
(
3
6
)
8
4
5
(
8
2
5
)
2.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
C
e
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
ace 71 (177)468 (873)62 (89)accf135 (180)531 (453)140 (80)ace72 (135)702 (648)103 (110)accf52 (67)429 (483)103 (116)3. Anaheim Blvd/Broadway
ac
e
3
1
(
7
3
)
5
2
1
(
1
,
1
0
5
)
3
4
(
4
8
)
ae
61
(
5
3
)
20
6
(
1
7
3
)
88
(
4
2
)
a
c
e
3
3
(
5
5
)
8
8
1
(
7
4
8
)
4
1
(
6
6
)
a
e
39
(
5
5
)
18
0
(
2
1
3
)
67
(
5
1
)
4.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
S
a
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
ac
e
1
6
(
3
1
)
5
0
7
(
1
,
1
5
8
)
1
8
(
2
3
)
d
25
(
3
0
)
12
(
9
)
49
(
3
0
)
a
c
e
2
7
(
4
1
)
9
9
9
(
7
6
3
)
2
4
(
4
4
)
d
44
(
2
1
)
10
(
3
)
45
(
1
7
)
5.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
/
W
a
t
e
r
S
t
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
BroadwayAnaheim Blvd
Sa
n
t
a
A
n
a
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
Wa
t
e
r
S
t
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
STOP
S
T
O
P
Ce
n
t
e
r
S
t
P
r
o
m
e
n
a
d
e
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
N
Project Site Access f4 (4)Project Site a4 (4)Water StAnaheim Blvd
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
40
5. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
This chapter evaluates the Existing Plus Project conditions. This scenario includes the addition of traffic
generated from the Project.
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection LOS results for Existing Plus Project conditions are summarized in Table 10 and 11. LOS sheets
are provided in Appendix C. As shown in Table 10, all signalized intersections will operate at LOS B or a
better. Table 11 shows that Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street will operate at LOS A, with the worst
approach to operate at LOS F.
TABLE 10 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name Time
Period
ICU Methodology [a]
EX conditions EX+P conditions
V/C LOS V/C LOS
1 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street AM 0.404 A 0.414 A
PM 0.398 A 0.411 A
2 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street Promenade AM 0.337 A 0.345 A
PM 0.349 A 0.359 A
3 Anaheim Boulevard Broadway AM 0.525 A 0.531 A
PM 0.621 B 0.640 B
4 Anaheim Boulevard Santa Ana Street AM 0.539 A 0.544 A
PM 0.597 B 0.611 B
Notes:
[a]: V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C = Volume
/ Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
TABLE 11 EXISTING YEAR PLUS PROJECT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street
Name
Time
Period
Average Delay
(sec) [a] LOS
Control Delay
(sec) [b] LOS
5 Anaheim Boulevard Water Street AM 8.0 A 75.7 (EBA) F
PM 7.9 A 153.9 (EBA) F
Notes:
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control delay
reported is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections.
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
41
INTERSECTION IMPACT ASSESSMENT
As shown in Table 12, the addition of Project traffic will not cause a significant impact at any of the signalized
intersections. The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies does not have
significance criteria for the determination of a transportation impact at an unsignalized intersection. As
shown in Table 13, AM and PM peak hour signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersection to
determine the need for a traffic signal. As presented in Chapter 7, the intersection did not meet the peak
hour signal warrant for the AM or PM peak hour in the Existing Plus Project conditions.
TABLE 12 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ID N/S Street
Name
E/W Street
Name
Time
Period
ICU Methodology [a]
EX+P
LOS
Change in
V/C
Allowable
change in V/C
Significant
Impact
1
1
Anaheim
Boulevard Center Street AM A 0.010 N/A NO
PM A 0.013 N/A NO
2 Anaheim
Boulevard
Center Street
Promenade
AM A 0.008 N/A NO
PM A 0.010 N/A NO
3 Anaheim
Boulevard Broadway AM A 0.006 N/A NO
PM B 0.019 N/A NO
4 Anaheim
Boulevard
Santa Ana
Street
AM A 0.005 N/A NO
PM B 0.014 N/A NO
Notes:
[a] V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C
= Volume / Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
TABLE 13 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION DELAY CHANGE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name Time
Period
Change in
Average Delay
(sec) [a]
Change in
Control Delay
(sec) [b]
Peak Hour
Signal
Warrant
5 Anaheim Boulevard Water Street AM 2.0 7.7 (EBA) No
PM 3.5 30.2 (EBA) No
Notes:
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control
delay reported is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections.
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
42
ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Roadway segment LOS results for Existing Plus Project conditions are summarized in Table 14. As described
in the Trip Assignment section, all inbound Project trips are assumed to drive by the Project site before
parking in CarPark 2. This assignment of the Project trips reflects a conservative condition as it accounts for
the potential circulation of inbound Project trips traveling to the Project site before parking off-site, and
results in vehicles traveling on the roadway segments and through the intersections more than once (in
multiple directions) during the inbound trip. Due to the off-site parking characteristic of the Project, the
outbound assignment of the Project trips assumes that all vehicles departs from CarPark 2 and directly leave
the study area. This assignment reflects the realistic condition as the outbound trips would not need to
travel by the Project site before leaving the study area, and results in vehicles traveling on the roadway
segments and through the intersections only once. As shown in Table 14, study roadway segments will
continue to operate at LOS C or better.
TABLE 14 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT
Roadway Segment Volume Capacity V/C
Ratio LOS
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade 24,405 37,500 0.651 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway 26,481 37,500 0.706 C
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana 25,919 37,500 0.691 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street 25,786 37,500 0.687 B
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
ROADWAY SEGMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT
As shown in Table 15, the addition of Project traffic will not cause a significant impact at any of the roadway
segments.
TABLE 15 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING PLUS PROJECT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Roadway Segment LOS Change
in V/C
Allowable
Change in
V/C
Impact
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade B 0.022 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway C 0.022 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana B 0.019 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street B 0.018 N/A No
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
43
6. OPENING YEAR (2018) AND OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS
PROJECT CONDITIONS
This chapter evaluates the Opening Year (2018) conditions. This scenario includes the addition of ambient
growth from Existing conditions. Opening Year (2018) conditions are presented on Figure 9. This chapter
evaluates the Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions. This scenario analyzes the intersection and
roadway analysis conditions with the addition of traffic volumes generated from the Project trips to Opening
Year (2018) conditions
OPENING YEAR (2018) CONDITIONS
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection LOS results for Opening Year (2018) conditions are summarized in Table 16. LOS sheets are
provided in Appendix C. As shown in Table 18, all signalized intersections will operate at LOS B or a better.
Table 17 shows that Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street will operate at LOS A, with the worst approach
to operate at LOS F. Opening Year (2018) conditions signal warrant analysis is presented in Chapter 7.
TABLE 16 OPENING YEAR (2018) SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name Time
Period
ICU Methodology [a]
Future conditions
V/C LOS
1
1 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street AM 0.407 A
PM 0.402 A
2 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street Promenade AM 0.340 A
PM 0.352 A
33 Anaheim Boulevard Broadway AM 0.530 A
PM 0.627 B
4 Anaheim Boulevard Santa Ana Street AM 0.544 A
PM 0.602 B
Notes:
[a]: V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix
software. V/C = Volume / Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
44
ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Roadway segment LOS results for Opening Year (2018) conditions are summarized in Table 18. As shown
in Table 18, study roadway segments will continue to operate at LOS C or better.
TABLE 18 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR (2018)
Roadway Segment Volume Capacity V/C
Ratio LOS
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade 23,812 37,500 0.635 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway 25,909 37,500 0.691 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana 25,460 37,500 0.679 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street 25,370 37,500 0.677 B
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS
Intersection LOS results for Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions are summarized in Table 19 and
20. LOS sheets are provided in Appendix C. As shown in Table 19, all signalized intersections will operate at
LOS B or a better. Table 20 shows that Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street will continue operate at LOS
A, with the worst approach to operate at LOS F.
TABLE 17 OPENING YEAR (2018) UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name
Time
Period
Average Delay
(sec) [a] LOS Control Delay
(sec) [b] LOS
5 Anaheim Boulevard Water Street AM 6.2 A 71.9 (WBA) F
PM 4.6 A 134.0 (WBA) F
Notes
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control
delay reported is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
45
TABLE 19 OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIN LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name Time
Period
ICU Methodology [a]
OY Conditions OY+P Conditions
V/C LOS V/C LOS
1 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street AM 0.407 A 0.417 A
PM 0.402 A 0.414 A
2 Anaheim Boulevard Center Street Promenade AM 0.340 A 0.348 A
PM 0.352 A 0.362 A
3 Anaheim Boulevard Broadway AM 0.530 A 0.536 A
PM 0.627 B 0.646 B
4 Anaheim Boulevard Santa Ana Street AM 0.544 A 0.549 A
PM 0.602 B 0.617 B
Notes:
[a]: V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C =
Volume / Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
TABLE 20 OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street
Name
Time
Period
Average Delay
(sec) [a] LOS Control Delay
(sec) [b] LOS
5 Anaheim
Boulevard Water Street AM 8.4 A 80.6 (EBA) F
PM 8.1 A 158.0 (EBA) F
Notes:
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control
delay reported is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections.
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Intersection Impact Assessment
As shown in Table 21, the addition of Project traffic will a not cause significant impact at any of the signalized
intersections. The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies does not have
significance criteria for the determination of a transportation impact at an unsignalized intersection. As
shown in Table 22, AM and PM peak hour signal warrant analysis was conducted for the intersection to
determine the need for a traffic signal. As presented in Chapter 7, the intersection did not meet the peak
hour signal warrant for the AM or PM peak hour in the Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
46
TABLE 21 OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ID N/S Street
Name
E/W Street
Name
Time
Period
ICU Methodology
OY+P
LOS
Change in
V/C [a]
Allowable
Change in V/C
Significant
Impact
1 Anaheim
Boulevard Center Street AM A 0.010 N/A NO
PM A 0.012 N/A NO
2 Anaheim
Boulevard
Center Street
Promenade
AM A 0.008 N/A NO
PM A 0.010 N/A NO
3 Anaheim
Boulevard Broadway AM A 0.006 N/A NO
PM B 0.019 N/A NO
4 Anaheim
Boulevard
Santa Ana
Street
AM A 0.005 N/A NO
PM B 0.015 N/A NO
Notes:
[a]: V/C for signalized intersections based on application of Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology using Traffix software. V/C =
Volume / Capacity Ratio.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
TABLE 22 OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION DELAY CHANGE
ID N/S Street Name E/W Street Name
Time
Period
Change in
Average Delay
(sec) [a]
Change in
Control Delay
(sec) [b]
Peak Hour
Signal
Warrant Met
5 Anaheim Boulevard Water Street AM 2.2 8.7 (EBA) NO
PM 3.5 24.0 (EBA) NO
Notes:
[a]: Average delay requested by City of Anaheim staff.
[b]: Delay for unsignalized intersections based on application of Highway Capacity Methodology using Synchro 9 software. Control delay
reported is the worst-case approach delay which is used for the determination of LOS at two-way stop-controlled intersections.
(WBA) - West Bound Approach
(EBA) - East Bound Approach
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS
Roadway segment LOS results for Existing Plus Project conditions are summarized in Table 23. As described
in the Trip Assignment section, all inbound Project trips are assumed to drive by the Project site before
parking in CarPark 2. This assignment of the Project trips reflects a conservative condition as it accounts for
the potential circulation of inbound Project trips traveling to the Project site before parking off-site, and
results in vehicles traveling on the roadway segments and through the intersections more than once (in
multiple directions) during the inbound trip. Due to the off-site parking characteristic of the Project, the
outbound assignment of the Project trips assumes that all vehicles departs from CarPark 2 and directly leave
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
47
the study area. This assignment reflects the realistic condition as the outbound trips would not need to
travel by the Project site before leaving the study area, and results in vehicles traveling on the roadway
segments and through the intersections only once. As shown in Table 23, study roadway segments will
continue to operate at LOS C or better.
TABLE 23 ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Roadway Segment Volume Capacity V/C
Ratio LOS
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade 24,641 37,500 0.657 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway 26,738 37,500 0.713 C
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana 26,171 37,500 0.698 B
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street 26,037 37,500 0.694 B
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Roadway Segment Impact Assessment
Based on the significant criteria outline by the City of Anaheim, the addition of Project traffic will not cause
significant impacts at study roadway segments under Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions. The
results are shown in Table 24.
TABLE 24 ROADWAY SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Roadway Segment LOS Change
in V/C
Allowable
Change in
V/C
Impact
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street and Center Street Promenade B 0.022 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Center Street Promenade and Broadway C 0.022 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Broadway and Santa Ana B 0.019 N/A No
Anaheim Boulevard Between Santa Ana and Water Street B 0.018 N/A No
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
48
7. SIGNAL WARRANTS
A signal warrant analysis for the Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street intersection was completed to
determine if signalization is currently needed or needed with buildout of the Project. The existing traffic
counts, accident history, and future traffic forecasts were used to evaluate the applicable traffic signal
warrants per the 2014 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).
DATA COLLECTION
Fehr & Peers coordinated with City of Anaheim Public Works staff to identify the data collection effort for
the intersection. The data collection effort consisted of intersection turning movement counts at the
intersection and roadway segment counts for each approach. The intersection turning movement counts
were collected on Thursday, May 18th, 2017, from 7:00 to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 to 6:00 PM. The intersection
turning movement counts included a vehicle classification count and bicycle and pedestrian counts. Bicycles
were counted as motorized vehicles, as recommended in the CA MUTCD. Roadway segment counts were
conducted on Thursday, June 8th for 24-hours at the following locations:
• Anaheim Boulevard between Santa Ana and Water
• Anaheim Boulevard between Water and South
• Water Street between Zeyn and Anaheim Boulevard
• Water Street between Anaheim Boulevard and Alley
Roadway segment counts were collected in June when Anaheim Schools were closed for the summer. To
reflect traffic conditions when school is in session, the roadway segments along Anaheim Boulevard used
the same 13% adjustment that was applied to the roadway segments for the roadway segment analysis. A
comparison was conducted of the peak AM and PM Water Street approach volume between the May
intersection turning movement and June roadway segment counts. This comparison determined that the
June approach volumes ranged from 20% lower to 11% higher than the May approach volumes. Therefore,
the approach volumes on Water Street were increased depending on approach and time of day by 1% to
20% to reflect traffic conditions when school is in session.
Collision data was collected from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records
System (SWITRS) for a twelve-month period. Due to collision records processing backlogs, SWIRTS data is
typically seven months behind. As such, collision data used was from October 2015 to October 2016. This
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
49
data included collisions located within half the distance to the adjacent signalized intersections to either
side of the Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street intersection.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS1
The signal warrant evaluation was based on warrant criteria as defined in the California Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) section 4C, which provides nine warrant criteria. According to the CA
MUTCD, if one or more of the warrants is satisfied, a traffic signal could be installed at the intersection.
Eight of the nine traffic signal warrants were examined under Existing conditions. Warrant 9, Intersection
near a Grade Crossing, is not applicable at this intersection and is not discussed further. For this analysis,
Anaheim Boulevard is considered the Major Street and Water Street is considered the Minor Street. In
addition, bicycles traveling in the roadway were counted as vehicles. Table 24 presents the signal warrant
analysis summary followed by a brief description and summary of each applicable warrant that was
evaluated. None of the signal warrants included in the analysis of Existing conditions are met. Only Warrant
3 (Peak Hour) was evaluated under Existing Plus Project, Opening Year (2018), and Opening Year (2018) Plus
Project conditions. Calculations for the signal warrants is provided in Appendix D.
1 This analysis is intended to examine the general correlation between the planned level of future development and the
need to install new traffic signals. It estimates future development-generated traffic compared against a sub-set of the
standard traffic signal warrants recommended in the Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices and associated State guidelines. This analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when
to install a signal. To reach such a decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on field-measured,
rather than forecast, traffic data and a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions by an experienced engineer.
Furthermore, the decision to install a signal should not be based solely upon the warrants, since the installation of
signals can lead to certain types of collisions. The City of Anaheim should undertake regular monitoring of actual traffic
conditions and accident data, and timely re-evaluation of the full set of warrants in order to prioritize and program
intersections for signalization.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
50
TABLE 24 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Warrant Result
Warrant 1 - Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Met
Warrant 2 - Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Not Met
Warrant 3 - Peak Hour Not Met
Warrant 4 – Pedestrian Volume Not Met
Warrant 5 – School Crossing Not Met
Warrant 6 – Coordinated Signal System Not Met
Warrant 7 – Crash Experience Not Met
Warrant 8 – Roadway Network Not Met
Notes:
Signal warrant based on CA MUTCD.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
WARRANT 1 - EIGHT-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME
This warrant considers the installation of a traffic signal based on two conditions: Warrant 1A considers the
total intersection volume, and Warrant 1B considers the volumes on the major street where it causes
excessive interruption to vehicles approaching the intersection from the minor street. Warrant 1B also
considers the 85 percentile speed along the major street, which may increase minor street delay if speed
exceeds 40 miles per hour. If either condition is met, Warrant 1 is met. Additionally, Warrant 1 can be met
if Warrants 1A and 1B both meet 80 percent of their stated criteria.
The existing traffic volumes at the intersection do not meet Warrant 1A nor Warrant 1B. Additional analysis
scenarios are not typically reviewed as part of Warrant 1 due to lack of project trip generation data for the
eight hours reviewed. If peak hour project traffic was added to the appropriate minor street approach for
each of the eight hours reviewed for all analysis scenarios, the intersection would not meet Warrant 1A nor
Warrant 1B. Therefore Warrant 1 is not met.
WARRANT 2 – FOUR-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME
Warrant 2 examines volumes on the major-street and minor-street approaches to determine if a specified
minimum volume is met for any four or more hours on an average day, above which the warrant is met.
The existing traffic volumes at the intersection do not meet the four hour volume requirement. Additional
analysis scenarios are not typically reviewed as part of Warrant 1 due to lack of project trip generation data
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
51
for the eight hours reviewed. If peak hour project traffic was added to the appropriate minor street approach
for each of the four hours reviewed for all analysis scenarios, the intersection would not meet Warrant 2.
Therefore Warrant 2 is not met
WARRANT 3 – PEAK-HOUR VEHICULAR VOLUME2
This warrant determines if the minor street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major
street for a minimum of one hour of an average day. Only Warrant 3 (Peak Hour) was evaluated under
Existing Plus Project, Opening Year (2018), and Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions. This is based
on the major-street volume and the higher-volume minor-street approach volume. Warrant 3 is met if one
of two conditions are met: Warrant 3A considers minor street approach volume, stopped time delay, and
total intersection volumes, while Warrant 3B considers the interaction of the major street volumes and the
higher volume minor street approach. Both the AM and PM peak hours were reviewed for Warrant 3.
According to the data collection, the peak hour volume for traffic on the major road occurs between 5:00
PM and 6:00 PM, while the peak hour volumes for traffic along the minor roads occur between 7:00 AM and
8:00 AM.
Following recommendations in the CA MUTCD, all analysis scenarios were assessed for the peak hour
warrant. Table 25 presents the peak hour signal warrant analysis summary for all analysis scenarios.
TABLE 25 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT 3 ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Warrant Existing Existing Plus
Project
Opening Year
(2018)
Opening Year
(2018) Plus
Project
Warrant 3 - Peak Hour [a] Not Met Not Met Not Met Not Met
Notes:
[a]: Signal warrant based on CA MUTCD Warrant 3, Peak Hour Volume (Urban Area).
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2017
2 The peak hour signal warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when to install a traffic signal. To
reach such a decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions by
an experienced engineer. The decision to install a signal should not be based solely upon the warrants, since the installation of signals
can lead to certain types of collisions. The responsible state or local agency should undertake regular monitoring of actual traffic
conditions and accident data and timely re-evaluation of the full set of warrants in order to prioritize and program intersections for
signalization.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
52
The results indicate that the intersection does not satisfy the peak hour volume signal warrant under Existing
Plus Project, Opening Year (2018), and Opening Year (2018) Plus Project. Therefore Warrant 3 is not met.
WARRANT 4 – PEDESTRAIN VOLUME
The pedestrian volume warrant is satisfied when there are more than 100 pedestrian crossings per hour for
each of any four hours or more than 190 pedestrian crossings in one hour.
Data showed an average of five pedestrians crossing per hour and a maximum of 13 pedestrians crossing
in one-hour period starting at 4:45 PM therefore, Warrant 4 is not met.
WARRANT 5 – SCHOOL CROSSING
This warrant considers the installation of a traffic signal based on schoolchildren crossing a major road.
Warrant 5 is met if there are a minimum of 20 schoolchildren crossing during the highest crossing hour,
and the number of gaps in the traffic stream during the period when the schoolchildren are using the
crossing is less than the number of minutes in the same period.
The maximum number of pedestrians crossing in a one-hour period does not exceed a total of 20
pedestrians therefore, Warrant 5 is not met.
WARRANT 6 – COORDINATED SIGNAL SYSTEM
This warrant considers the installation of a traffic signal to maintain proper platooning of vehicles in a
coordinated system. Warrant 6 is met if adjacent traffic signals do not provide the necessary degree of
vehicular platooning, and if the combination of adjacent and traffic control signals will provide a progressive
operation.
Field observations did not identify issues in vehicular platooning along Anaheim Boulevard therefore,
Warrant 6 is not met.
WARRANT 7 – CRASH EXPERIENCE
Warrant 7 considers the installation of a traffic signal based on the severity and frequency of crashes under
three conditions: an adequate trial of alternative to reduce the number of accidents has failed (Warrant 7A),
five or more reported collisions (that could be mitigated through the installation of a traffic signal) over a
12-month period (Warrant 7B), and an examination of major and minor-street and pedestrian volumes
(Warrant 7C).
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
53
SWITRS data for from October 2015 – October 2016 was reviewed for Warrant 7. The report identified four
collisions around the intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street in the twelve month period. Of
those four collisions, only two of the collisions could have been influenced by the presence of a traffic signal.
As a result, Warrant 7B is not met. The low pedestrian volumes at the study intersection indicate the Warrant
7C is not met; therefore, Warrant 7 is not met.
WARRANT 8 – ROADWAY NETWORK
Warrant 8 considers the installation of a traffic signal to encourage concentration and organization traffic
flow on a roadway network. Warrant 8 is met if two or more major route meet one or both of the two
conditions are met: Warrant 8A considers total entering volume of at least 1,000 vehicles per hour during
peak hour of a typical weekday and has 5-year projected volumes that meet one or more of Warrants 1, 2,
3; while Warrant 3B considers the intersection has enter 1,000 vehicles per hour for each of any 5 hours
during the weekend.
Based on the major road criteria for signal warrant 8, Waters Street does not classify as a major road,
therefore Warrant 8 is not met.
FINDINGS
According to the CA MUTCD, if one or more of the warrants is satisfied, a traffic signal can be installed at
the intersection. However, the CA MUTCD also states that the satisfaction of a traffic signal warrant shall
not in itself require the installation of a traffic control signal. Engineering judgment should also be used to
determine if a traffic signal is appropriate.
The forecasts used to evaluate Opening Year (2018) and Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions were
conservatively estimated using a growth factor. No warrants were determined to be satisfied as part of the
signal warrant analysis with and without inclusion of the Project. Therefore, it is determined that the Project
does meet the warrants for the installation of a traffic signal and it is recommended that the traffic volumes
be monitored and that traffic signal installation only be considered when warrants are met.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
54
8. MITIGATION MEASURES
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT
As discussed in Section 4.0, the Project does not significantly impact any of the analyzed locations under
Existing (2017) Plus Project conditions, therefore no mitigation measures are required.
OPENING YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT
As discussed in Section 6.0, the Project does not significantly impact any of the analyzed locations under
Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions, therefore no mitigation measures are required.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
55
9. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
This chapter presents the regional transportation system impact analysis for the Project. This analysis was
conducted in accordance with the transportation impact analysis procedures outlined in 2015 Orange
County Congestion Management Program (Orange County Transportation Authority, 2015). The CMP
requires that when a transportation analysis is prepared for a project, traffic impact analyses must be
conducted for select regional facilities based on the quantity of Project traffic expected to use these facilities.
CMP TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The CMP guidelines require that projects with the potential to create an impact of more than 3% of LOS “E”
capacity on the CMP highway system links should require a traffic impact analysis. All projects generating
2,400 or more daily trips should require evaluation. If a project will have direct access to a CMP link, the
threshold is reduced to 1,600 or more daily trips. A traffic impact analysis is not required if one has already
been performed for the Project as part of an earlier development approval which takes the impact on the
CMP highway system into account.
The nearest OCTA CMP intersection is Harbor Boulevard and I-5 Northbound Ramps. Based on the
estimated Project trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment, the Project would not add sufficient
new traffic to exceed the 3% criteria. Since the Project will not have direct access to an OCTA CMP facility
and the Project is anticipated to generate 861 daily trips, the roadway capacities would not be significantly
affected. As stated in the OCTA CMP, for intersections, a 3% level of impact applied to the sum of critical
volume (1,700 vehicles per hour) would be 51 vehicles per hour. Applying a conservative analysis utilizing
the Project only trip assignment for the worst case peak hour at the analyzed intersections closest to the
CMP intersections, the maximum amount of trips that could reach the CMP intersection is 24 trips in the
PM peak hour.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
56
10. NON-AUTOMOTIVE ASSESSMENT
The Non-Automotive assessment evaluates the project’s consistency with existing and planned bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit facilities in the area. As such, the following significance criteria is applied:
• Non-Automotive Threshold – A significant impact occurs if the Project conflicts with adopted
policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decreases the performance or safety of such facilities.
GOALS AND POLICIES
Based on a review of the City of Anaheim General Plan, the following goals and policies were found which
apply to future bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities:
• Goal 5.1: Promote bus service and paratransit improvements.
o Policy 1: Support the efforts of regional, State and Federal agencies to provide additional
local and express bus service in the City.
o Policy 3: Support transit supportive land uses in new development.
o Policy 6: Improve pedestrian access to transit facilities.
• Goal 7.1: Protect and encourage bicycle travel.
o Policy 1: Provide safe, direct, and continuous bicycle routes for commuter and recreational
cyclists.
o Policy 3: Support bicycle routes that minimize cyclist/motorist conflicts.
o Policy 4: Support roadway design policies that promote attractive circulation corridors and
pleasant traveling experiences for bicyclists.\
o Policy 9: Require that new streets or developments contain adequate right of way for
bicycle lanes, where appropriate.
o Policy 10: Where space and appropriate roadway conditions currently exist, continue to
install bike routes.
• Goal 8.1: Protect and encourage pedestrian travel.
o Policy 1: Encourage and improve pedestrian facilities that link development to the
circulation network and that serve as a transition between other modes of travel.
o Policy 2: Improve pedestrian and bicycle connections from residential neighborhoods to
retail activity centers, employment centers, schools, parks, open space areas and
community centers.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
57
o Policy 4: Support the planning of sidewalks of appropriate width to allow the provision of
buffers to shield non-motorized traffic from vehicles.
o Policy 5: Add raised, landscaped medians and bulbouts, where appropriate, to reduce
exposure to cross traffic at street crossings.
o Policy 7: Ensure that streets and intersections are designed to provide visibility and safety
for pedestrians.
o Policy 9: Enhance and encourage pedestrian amenities and recreation, retail and
employment opportunities in mixed-use areas to enhance non-motorized transportation.
o Policy 10: Coordinate with appropriate agencies to ensure that transit stops are accessible
to pedestrians.
TRANSIT ANALYSIS
Existing transit routes ART 10, OCTA 443, and OCTA 47, along with existing bus stops, are near the Project
site. In addition, the Project will alter existing Polly the Trolley route to add an additional stop at the Project
site. Pedestrian connectivity will be provided from the Project site to the bus stop and several other bus
stops located in a walking proximity to the Project site. Existing transit service will be maintained upon
completion of the Project.
Since the Project is consistent with policies related to transit facilities and that it is not expected to degrade
transit operations, the impact to transit is considered less than significant.
BICYCLE ANALYSIS
Currently, the only bicycle facilities near the study area are Class II bicycle lanes in each direction on
Broadway, between East Street and State College Boulevard. There are no existing bicycle facilities in the
study area.
Since the Project does not conflict with any existing or planned bicycle facility in the area, the Project impact
to bicycle facilities is considered less than significant.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
58
PEDESTRIAN ANALYSIS
The Project includes internal accessibility and proposes sidewalks along all frontages. Given that the Project
provides adequate pedestrian facilities onsite and along the Projects frontage, the Project is considered
consistent with relevant pedestrian related plans and policies.
Since the Project is consistent with policies related to pedestrian facilities, the impact is considered less than
significant.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
59
11. SITE ACCESS AND ON-SITE CIRCULATION
This chapter summarizes the review of site access, and on-site circulation. Fehr & Peers’ review is based on
the site plan for the project dated January 16, 2017.
SITE ACCESS
VEHICLE ACCESS
Vehicle access to the Project site is provided from Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street. The Project access
driveway on Anaheim Boulevard is proposed to be right-in and right-out only. The Project access driveway
on Water Street is proposed to be outbound only. Signage will be installed at the Water Street driveway to
inform patrons of the outbound only access at the Water Street driveway. Given that there are multiple
access driveways motorists are provided with adequate vehicle access to the project site.
In addition to this vehicular access, Fehr & Peers recommends that the City’s fire and police departments
review the site plan to ensure adequate accessibility is provided for emergency responders.
BICYCLE ACCESS
The City of Anaheim proposes to install Cass II bike lanes on Anaheim Boulevard adjacent to the project
site. These bike paths will connect the study area to the region from a bicycle connectivity perspective.
Fehr & Peers recommends that the project sponsor ensure that direct, convenient, and safe connectivity to
the bicycle paths are provided.
TRANSIT ACCESS
Bus stops are provided near the Project site on Anaheim Boulevard at Water Street and Santa Ana Avenue.
These stops access multiple routes throughout the City and County. Given the close proximity and number
of transit facilities, the transit access is deemed adequate.
ON-SITE CIRCULATION
On-site circulation is provided by an internal system which consists of an internal driveway and alley. The
site will have an east/west facing two-way driveway along the northern edge of the Project site and a
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
60
north/south facing one-way (southbound direction_ alley along the western edge of the Project site. This
combination of a two-way driveway and one-way alley will provide entry from Anaheim Boulevard and exits
to both Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street. Parking is provided on the sides of the driveway and along
one side of the alley. Fehr & Peers recommends the project sponsor review pedestrian crossing issues from
parking spaces to Project buildings to minimize potential conflicts.
The site plan shows pedestrian sidewalks that provide pedestrian access to all buildings, patios, pool, and
parking spaces. The sidewalks also provide direct access from the Project site to the sidewalks available on
Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street.
The site has made appropriate considerations for both vehicles and pedestrians and therefore on-site
circulation is deemed adequate.
Leisuretown Transportation Impact Analysis
August 2017
61
12. CONCLUSIONS
This study was undertaken to analyze the potential traffic impacts of the Leisuretown Project (Project) at the
corner of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street in Anaheim, California. The following summarizes the results
of this analysis:
• The Project will include the restoration of a historical craftsman home, a barrel-vaulted mid-century
supermarket, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern Times Brewery. The
Project will include a low volume production brewery, tasting room, restaurant, retail, staff offices,
outdoor gardens, and a pool. The outdoor gardens will provide a combination of seating areas, an
elevated seated overlook area, restroom, recreational games, a hammock grove, and lounge
gardens. The pool area will serve as a unique experience for customers of the tasting room to sit
on pool chairs around the pool.
• Access to the Project will be from a right in/right out driveway along Anaheim Boulevard and an
outbound only driveway along Water Street. Signage will be installed at the Water Street driveway
to inform patrons of the outbound only access at the Water Street driveway.
• The LOS analyses for both the Existing Plus Project scenario and the Opening Year (2018) Plus
Project scenario (using the City of Anaheim significance criteria) determined that the Project would
not significantly impact traffic at any signalized study intersection. Therefore, no mitigation
measures would be required.
• The City of Anaheim Criteria for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies does not have significance
criteria for the determination of a transportation impact at an unsignalized intersection. CA
MUTCD peak hour signal warrant analysis was conducted for the AM and PM peak hour of each
analysis scenario for the Anaheim Boulevard and Water intersection to determine the need for a
traffic signal. The intersection did not meet the peak hour signal warrant for the AM or PM peak
hour in any analysis scenario.
• The roadway analyses for both the Existing Plus Project scenario and the (2018) Plus Project
scenario (using the City of Anaheim significance criteria) determined that the Project would not
significantly impact traffic at any roadway segment. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be
required.
• Signal warrant analysis of Anaheim Boulevard and Waters Street revealed that the intersection does
meet warrant criteria.
APPENDIX A: PARKING STUDY
8141 E. Kaiser Boulevard | Suite 110 | Anaheim, CA 92808 | (714) 941-8800 | Fax (949) 859-3209
www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 9, 2017
To: Chris Bennett, LAB Holdings
From: Spencer Reed, PE, Fehr & Peers
Subject: Leisuretown Parking Study (549 and 555 South Anaheim Boulevard)
OC17-0497
This memorandum documents a parking study conducted by Fehr & Peers for the proposed
Leisuretown project (Project) located at 549 and 555 South Anaheim Boulevard in Anaheim,
California. This study details the parking requirement of this Project based on the Anaheim
Municipal Code (Municipal Code) and the demand for similar projects. This study also reviews the
available supply of nearby public parking facilities and provides a series of recommended parking
management strategies for the Project. The Project requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
approval prior to operation.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the restoration of a historical craftsman home, a barrel-vaulted mid-century
retail building, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern Times Brewery. The
project will include a low-volume production brewery, tasting room, restaurant, retail, staff offices,
outdoor gardens, and a pool. The outdoor gardens will provide a combination of seating areas, an
elevated seated overlook area, restroom, recreational games, a hammock grove, and lounge
gardens. Table 1 offers a more detailed description of the elements of the project. The pool area
will serve as a unique experience for customers of the tasting room to sit on pool chairs around the
pool.
Three Project site plan parking alternatives are proposed. Project Alternative 1 (preferred Project
site plan) is shown on Figure 1a and results in 31 on-site parking spaces (12 of the parking spaces
result from abandonment of the east-west alley and a landscape set back variance). Project
Alternative 2 is shown on Figure 1b and results in 25 on-site parking spaces (5 of the parking spaces
result from abandonment of the east-west alley). Alternative 3 is shown on Figure 1c and results in
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 2 of 9
19 on-site parking spaces. The final determination for the number of Project on-site parking spaces
is dependent on the outcome of the alley abandonment decision by the City Council and approval
of the setback variance.
The restaurant will be open from 6:00 AM and will remain open until 10:00 PM. The tasting room,
pool deck, outdoor gardens, and retail will open at 11:00 AM and will remain open through 10:00
PM.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
MUNICIPAL CODE AND DEMAND REVIEW PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS
The required minimum parking is based on the Municipal Code Section 18.42.040, coordination
with City of Anaheim Planning staff, and reviews of parking demand for similar uses. Parking
requirements from Municipal Code Section 18.42.040 were applied to the Project uses for brewery,
brewery office, tasting room, restaurant, outdoor dining, staff office, and retail.
The Municipal Code does not provide a parking requirement for garden space or pool deck area
associated with tasting rooms or restaurants. Therefore, a proportional parking requirement was
developed based on the proportional parking demand of the outdoor space at the Anaheim
Packing House. Observations of the outdoor space at the Anaheim Packing House adjacent to
Claudina Street were conducted on a Saturday in May 2017. Saturday was chosen as the survey day
as it represents a day when parking for commercial spaces is typically at its highest. The
observations were made during the evening period from 6:00 to 8:00 PM. According to Shared
Parking, Second Edition (Urban Land Institute, 2005) parking demand for restaurants with active bar
lounges is typically higher during that time period.
The observations found that the outdoor space adjacent to Claudina Street had approximately 1/3
the person density of the inside area of the Anaheim Packing House. Therefore, a 1/3 ratio was
applied to the tasting room parking requirement resulting in 5.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet Gross
Floor Area (GFA).
Table 2 presents the parking requirements for the various components based on the Municipal
Code and demand of similar uses.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 3 of 9
PARKING REQUIREMENT REDUCTIONS
The Project is located adjacent to residential neighborhoods, within approximately 1,000 feet from
the Anaheim Packing House, and within approximately 2,000 feet from Center Street Promenade in
Center City. Center City is the urban and dense downtown core of Anaheim, and is emerging as a
vibrant and active pedestrian-oriented place with a variety of land uses such as residential, office,
and commercial uses. The Project’s proximity to residential, office, and commercial land uses can
account for a reduction in the Project parking demand by patrons walking, biking, or using transit.
Furthermore, Transportation Network Companies (TNC) like Uber and Lyft have seen an increase in
popularity and usage around Center City. TNC’s allow people the opportunity to travel by vehicle
without the need for parking at their destination. TNC’s can reduce the Project parking demand as
patrons do not to have to park a car when traveling to the Project. In coordination with the City of
Anaheim Planning Department, a 5% parking demand credit was applied to the parking
requirement of the Project to account for patrons who would not need to park a vehicle at the
Project.
The mix of Project components could result in some patrons choosing to visit one component of
the Project, but also deciding to visit another component as part of the same trip. This is described
as a captive ratio. Captive ratios represent a percentage of patrons who visit two different
components of a project but only account for one parking space. The ability of a patron to eat at
the restaurant and also have a drink at the brewery would only result in one total parking space
demand and not one space demanded by each component separately. In coordination with the
City of Anaheim Planning Department, a captive ratio of 5% was assumed to account for patrons
who only park one vehicle but visit multiple components of the Project.
PROJECT PARKING REQUIREMENTS
As presented in Table 3, the Project requires a total of 75 parking spaces. The Project will provide
31, 25, or 19 parking spaces on-site, depending on the outcome of the alley abandonment and CUP
hearings. As such, the Project will require 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces off-site. Accessible parking
will be required per the 2016 California Building Code Section 11B-208.2 (California Building
Standards Commission, 2017). If 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided in a parking facility, then 1
accessible parking space shall be required; if 26 to 50 parking spaces are provided in a parking
facility, then 2 accessible parking spaces shall be required. Additionally, for every six or fraction of
six parking spaces required by Section 11B-208.2 at least one shall be a van parking space.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 4 of 9
PARKING UTILIZATION ANALYSIS
To determine if the Project can provide the parking spaces in off-site public parking facilities, Fehr
& Peers reviewed recent parking data collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data
collection documented the parking supply and demand of public parking structures (CarParks, see
Figure 2), lots, and street parking located in Center City. The CarParks operate 24-hours a day and
range in price rate from $3 per hour (with $7 daily maximum) to $4 per hour (with $12 daily
maximum). The data collection determined a supply of approximately 3,653 parking spaces in the
CarParks, with a peak weekday (Wednesday – Friday) utilization of approximately 2,494 parking
spaces (68.3%) at 11:00 AM on Thursday and a peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of
approximately 1,805 parking spaces (49.4%) at 1:00 PM on Sunday. The off-site parking requirement
of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces could be accommodated by the remaining supply in the CarParks.
The developer, LAB Holdings has an entitlement to 170 parking spaces in CarPark 2, and currently
does not exercise the option of using those 170 parking spaces. This entitlement will be used to
accommodate the off-site parking requirement of the Project. To determine if the off-site parking
requirement can be accommodated in CarPark 2, Fehr & Peers reviewed recent parking data
collected at CarPark 2 by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data collection determined a
supply of approximately 625 parking spaces in CarPark 2, with a peak weekday (Wednesday –
Friday) utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces (62.1%) at 11:00 AM on Wednesday and a
peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of approximately 543 parking spaces (86.9%) at 1:00
PM on Sunday. CarPark 2 is utilized by the River Church (201 East Broadway) on Sundays. Outside
of the Sunday 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM timeframe in which the church is utilizing CarPark 2, the peak
weekend utilization is approximately 278 parking spaces (44.5%) at 3:00 PM on Saturday.
Additionally, CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for temporary vehicle storage. This
rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking spaces available to other users.
The off-site parking requirement of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces could be accommodated by the
remaining supply in CarPark 2.
According to Shared Parking, Second Edition parking utilization for restaurants with active bar
lounges is typically at its highest, with approximately 90% to 100% of parking spaces being utilized,
on weekdays and weekends from 6:00 to 10:00 PM. Therefore, the Project is anticipated to have its
highest parking utilization during these time periods. The parking supply of the CarParks can
accommodate the anticipated highest utilization of the Project. The utilization of the CarParks from
6:00 to 10:00 PM ranges from approximately 28.8% to 55.1% on weekdays and from approximately
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 5 of 9
19.7% to 28.0% on weekends. While the Project will have the available parking supply in CarPark 2
to meet the off-site parking requirement of 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces, parking is available in all
of the CarParks for patrons. It is anticipated that patrons will park in any available parking facility.
PARKING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
A series of parking management strategies has been recommended for the Project to efficiently
utilize the available parking supply. Below is a series of parking management strategies that could
be utilized by the Project for use in a parking management program.
POLLY THE TROLLEY SERVICE
LAB Holdings will operate a free shuttle (Polly the Trolley) within Center City that will provide visitors
the opportunity to park at available parking spaces further away from their destination without
increasing walking distance. The trolley is an open air bus that has been remodeled to resemble a
historic streetcar, and will operate on Fridays and Saturdays from 12:00 PM to 12:00 AM and on
Sundays from 12:00 PM to 9:00 PM. The trolley has capacity of 24 passengers and will operate at
15-minute headways at four stops in Center City.
The trolley route will utilize Center Street Promenade, Anaheim Boulevard, Broadway, Claudina
Street, and Santa Ana Boulevard before returning to Center Street Promenade. The stops will be
located at the Packing House back patio, the Rinks Anaheim Ice, the Muzeo, and near the Lemon
Street & Center Street intersection.
In an effort to manage the parking requirement of the Project, it is recommended that the trolley
operate seven days a week and service be altered to add stops at the Project site and CarPark 2.
The inclusion of trolley stops at the Project and CarPark 2 would allow patrons to easily access the
Project from CarPark 2 and the other CarParks along Center Street Promenade. Figure 2 identifies
a potential route that includes the Project site and Carpark 2. The final route would need to be
approved through coordination with City of Anaheim staff. Stops should be located either on the
side of the street or within the parking lots at stop locations. If rerouting results in a headway
greater than 15 minutes, then additional vehicle capacity should be added to the route to maintain
15-minute headways. Ridership of the trolley service should be reviewed to determine if additional
capacity in the form of larger or additional vehicles is necessary to ensure that the trolley vehicles
are not operating at full capacity.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 6 of 9
EMPLOYEE PARKING
It is recommended that employee parking for the Project be located at CarPark 2. Employee parking
is simpler to manage and direct than patron parking. Therefore, requiring employees to park in
CarPark 2 would maximize the number of on-site parking spaces that are available to patrons. Four
signalized intersections along Anaheim Boulevard at Center Street, Center Street Promenade,
Broadway, and Santa Ana Street, along with existing sidewalk facilities can be used as pedestrian
access to the site. The Project may also consider offering an employee specific shuttle service for
employees from CarPark 2 during the hours when the trolley is not operating.
PARKING INCENTIVES
It is recommended that the Project consider providing incentives to patrons that choose to not park
a vehicle in the on-site parking lot or nearby residential streets. These incentives can range from
Project memorabilia to coupons for future visits to the Project.
COORDINATION WITH NEARBY PROPERTIES
While the study has identified the parking supply to meet code requirements, the Project developer
has approached other nearby commercial properties for parking agreements on an as needed basis.
These agreements could include, but are not limited to, additional one-time parking supply or valet
service.
COORDINATION WITH CITY OF ANAHEIM PROGRAMS
It is recommended that the Project coordinate with the City of Anaheim on parking management
initiatives that are planned for Center City. Potential initiative considerations could include, but are
not limited to those described below.
Anaheim Permitted Parking Program
The Project is not proposing to meet its off-site parking requirement with the use of on-street
parking. However, patrons may choose to park in any publicly available parking facility. The City of
Anaheim has developed permitted parking programs on residential streets when the need for the
program has been identified. This need is identified by neighborhood residents when the parking
by commercial patrons on residential streets near commercial properties adversely affects the
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 7 of 9
residential parking on those streets. The permitted parking programs are developed to limit the
number of or length of stay of patron-parked vehicles on the residential streets near commercial
properties. The Project should coordinate with the City of Anaheim Traffic and Transportation
Division to identify the extent of Project parking on nearby residential streets to determine if or
when a permitted parking program is appropriate. If a permitted parking program is to be
considered for the residential streets near the Project, then the Community & Economic
Development Department will fund the implementation of the permit parking program. The Project
should coordinate with the Community & Economic Development Department to determine which
streets are selected for the permitted parking program, enforcement hours, and education of
patrons.
Anaheim Parking Guidance System
The City of Anaheim Community & Economic Development Department is working to develop a
parking guidance system that will provide real time parking availability and wayfinding to visitors
of Center City. The system will use a combination of mobile phone application, variable message
boards, and static signs to identify the available parking supply in the publicly available parking
facilities in Center City. The message boards and signs will be located outside of the Center City
area in an effort to inform visitors of the parking availability so they can alter their parking location
choice. The mobile phone application will have navigational features that can direct visitors to
specific parking facilities. This program will allow patrons to quickly identify available parking
facilities in Center City before they arrive. The Project should coordinate with the Community &
Economic Development Department to include its on-site parking lot in the guidance system as
well as educate patrons to utilize the resource.
Anaheim Micro Transit System
The City of Anaheim Community & Economic Development Department is working to develop a
micro transit system that will provide free rides within Center City. The system will operate during
peak hours of demand on Thursday through Sunday. Electric carts with a capacity of up to six
passengers will be used to provide free rides that begin and end within the Center City service area
which is loosely defined by Lincoln Avenue to the north, South Street to the south, Olive Street to
the east, and Harbor Boulevard to the west. Riders will request a ride using either a mobile phone
application, meeting for a ride at a designated pick-up location, or by manually hailing a ride within
the service area. The system will allow visitors the opportunity to visit the unique properties of
Center City by utilizing a unique transportation mode.
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 8 of 9
The micro transit system will provide free direct rides for patrons within the service area. This system
would work as a supplement to Polly the Trolley and as a separate system of transporting patrons
from other parking facilities. The Project should coordinate with the Community & Economic
Development Department to identify improvements to the system and to educate patrons to utilize
the resource.
Anaheim Resort Transportation
The Anaheim Resort Transportation (ART) is a public transportation system operating within the
City of Anaheim and surrounding cities. The system features 22 lines that serve destinations such
as Center Street Promenade, Disneyland Resort, Angel Stadium of Anaheim, ARTIC, etc. The
Downtown Packing District Line (Line 10) operates daily between the Disneyland Transportation
Center and Center Street Promenade with 30 minute headways from approximately 6:00 AM to
12:30 AM. The line uses both Harbor Boulevard and Anaheim Boulevard between Broadway and
Ball Road. The Project should coordinate with the Anaheim Transportation Network to identify
improvements to the system and to educate patrons to utilize the resource.
PARKING AND ACCESS IDENTIFICATION
The Project should direct patrons to utilize the transportation modes and parking identification
programs described above for access to the Project. Furthermore, the Project should highlight other
transportation options such as TNC’s, walking, biking, and fixed route transit as modes to get the
Project without spending time looking for parking. This could be completed using the Project
website, social media platforms, advertisements, or other forms of information distribution.
CONCLUSION
The Project will require 75 parking spaces with 31, 25, or 19 parking spaces being provided on-site
and 44, 50, or 56 parking spaces being provided in CarPark 2 respectively. According to data
collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016, CarPark 2 has a supply of approximately 625
parking spaces with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces and a peak
weekend utilization of 543 parking spaces. CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for
temporary vehicle storage. This rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking
spaces available to other users. All of the CarParks have a combined supply of approximately 3,653
parking spaces, with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 2,494 parking spaces and a peak
Chris Bennett
August 9, 2017
Page 9 of 9
weekend utilization of approximately 1,805 parking spaces. CarPark 2 and the other CarParks can
accommodate the Project off-site parking requirement.
A series of parking management strategies has been recommended for the Project to efficiently
utilize the available parking supply. These strategies include changes to the existing trolley service,
management of employee parking, and coordination with City of Anaheim programs. While the
available parking supply in Center City can accommodate the Project parking requirement, these
strategies should be considered for inclusion in the parking management program of the Project.
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
Project Site Plan - Alternative 1
Figure 1A
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
PPPPP
mm
mmmmmmmmmmmm
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
Project Site Plan - Alternative 2
Figure 1B
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
mm
Project Site Plan - Alternative 3
Figure 1C
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
I
D
\
F
1
_
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
i
n
d
d
X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
sn
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HCCCCCCCCCCP
bf
bf bfre
re re
bf
bf
P P
P
P
P
P
P
P sn
ct
ct
ct
L
LLLLLLL
avavavavav
LLLLLLLL
av
M
M
M
M
M
M
LJ
LJ
CP
CP
CP
CPCP
CP
ad
ad
ad
ad
d
d
d
CP
aj
aj ajaj
CPCP
LJ pw
CPCP
ASAS
M
ASM
v v
v
vv
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ASMMMMM
aj vvv v v
ASASNNNN
NN
NNN
N N N N
N NN N
SM
l
l
ll
l
l
l
ll
AAAA
AA
jj
j
j
j j j
j
ADAD
AD
ro
ro
ro
ro
rocc
cc
SMcc
cccc
cc
j j
cc cc cc
A
A A
AD
ADA
O
bf
P
j
S
S
SS
S
S S
S
S
S
ro
SS
S
v
vv v
S
S
S
S S
A
A
A
A A A
A
A
A
A
v
v
ct ct
ct
ro
ro
ro
dl
S
l l l
l
l l lS
dl
ajv
v
M
PPP
P
P
P
P
X X
X XX
X
P
P P
P P P
P P P P P
P
P P PP
X
XX
sn
hh
h
h h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A A A A A A
M
ro roro ro ro ro
sl sl sl sl sl
sl sl sl sl sl sl
d ddd
O
ct ct ct ct
ct ct ctct
ct
NN
N
L m
M M M MM
v v v
N
N N
NN NN N aj
M
M
AS
AS
Restaurant
Retail/Storage
Full Access
Right Turn In/Right Turn Out
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
ctctctctctctctctctctctctct
rororororororororororo
rororororororororo
rorororororo hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhh
hhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhOutdoorGarden
Brewery/ Tasting Room
Pool/Pool DeckKitchen/ Staff Offi ce Restroom
m
E SOUTH S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
N
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
W CHARTR
E
S
S
T
W STUECK
L
E
A
V
E
N
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
E CENTER
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
E
M
I
L
Y
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
S
H
E
L
E
N
A
S
T
S
D
I
C
K
E
L
S
T
W OAK ST
S
C
L
E
M
E
N
T
I
N
E
S
T
S
P
H
I
L
A
D
E
L
P
H
I
A
S
T
E ELLSWO
R
T
H
A
V
E
E WATER S
T
E CENTER S
T
S
M
E
L
R
O
S
E
S
T
E SANTA A
N
A
S
T
W CYPRESS
S
T
S
C
L
A
U
D
I
N
A
S
T
E BROADW
A
Y
W L I N C O L N A V E
W ELM ST
W C E N T E R S T
W BROADW
A
Y
E LINCOLN
A
V
E
W SANTA A
N
A
S
T
S
H
A
R
B
O
R
B
L
V
D
W WATER S
T
S
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
S
L
E
M
O
N
S
T
S
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
B
L
V
D
ProjectProject
SiteSite
Car Park 2Car Park 2
Car
Park 1
Car
Park 1Car
Park 3
Car
Park 3Car
Park 4
Car
Park 4
Car Park 5Car Park 5
Car Park 6Car Park 6
Car
Park 7
Car
Park 7
W:
\
O
r
a
n
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
N
D
r
i
v
e
\
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
\
O
C
1
7
\
0
4
9
7
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
R
o
u
t
e
.
m
x
d
Figure 2
Proposed Leisuretown Trolley Route
Existing Stop Future Stop TrolleyRoute
TABLE 1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Use Size (sf)Description
Restaurant
Restaurant 1,963 Restaurant with breakfast, lunch, and dinner entrees.
Outdoor Dining 628 Outdoor dining space for restaurant.
Kitchen 971 Additional kitchen space for restaurant in adjacent building.
Staff Office 248 Staff office space in adjacent building.
Storage 321 Storage space for restaurant.
Restaurant Total 4,131
Brewery
Brewery 4,810 Low production brewery.
Brewery Office 425 Brewery management office space.
Brewery Total 5,235
Tasting Room
Tasting Room 808 Brewery tasting room.
Outdoor Garden 1,647
Combination of seating area, recreational game area, hammock
grove, and lounge area.
Pool Deck 1,670 Pool chair lougne area for tasting room.
Overlook Area 640 Elevated seated area overlooking outdoor garden.
Retail 320 Retail space selling Modern Times merchandise and package food.
Restroom 599 Restroom for garden area and pool deck.
Storage 160 Storage for outdoor garden.
Tasting Room Total 5,844
Note
sf: square feet
TABLE 2
ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.42.040
Parking and Loading - Non-Residential Parking Requirements
Use Class Required Spaces
Restaurant - Full
Service
Restaurants within a Commericial Retail Center - Small: 8 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
GFA
Brewery/Tasting Room
1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA, which may include a maximum of 10% office
space, plus, if the percentage of office space exceeds 10% of the GFA, 4 spaces per 1,000
square feet of GFA for the floor area in excess of 10% Tasting Room and outside patios: 17
spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Retail - General General: 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Office-General 3 stories or lower: 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA.
Warehousing &
Storage–Enclosed
Buildings with 100,000 square feet or less of GFA: 1.55 spaces per 1,000 square feet of GFA,
which may include a maximum of up to 10% office space
Note:
GFA - gross floor area
Land Use Size Required Spaces [a] Rate Unit Required Spaces
Restaurant [b] [c] 3.562 ksf 8 per 1 ksf GFA 29
Brewery [d] 5.235 ksf 1.55 per 1 ksf GFA 9
Tasting Room 0.808 ksf 17 per 1 ksf GFA 14
Pool Deck 1.670 ksf 5.6 per 1 ksf GFA 10
Garden Area [e] 2.886 ksf 5.6 per 1 ksf GFA 17
Retail 0.320 ksf 4 per 1 ksf GFA 2
Staff Office 0.248 ksf 4 per 1 ksf GFA 1
Storage 0.481 ksf 1.55 per 1 ksf GFA 1
Required Parking Subtotal 83
Proximity to other uses and TNC's (5%) -4
Captive Ratio (5%) -4
Required Parking Total 75
Provided on Site 31, 25, or 19
Off-Site Parking 44, 50, or 56
Notes:
ksf - thousand square feet
GFA - gross floor area
[a]: Source - Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.42.040, unless otherwise noted.
[b]: Parking requirement of 8 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Floor Area determined by City of Anaheim Planning Department staff.
[c]: Incorporates 1.963 ksf restaruant, 0.971 ksf kitchen, and 0.628 ksf patio
TABLE 3
PARKING ANALYSIS
MODERN TIMES
APPENDIX B: TRAFFIC COUNTS
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1343
Thu, May 18, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:4
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:130 1 3001011 0 0000
7:00 AM 15 99 3 4 186 12 1 2 27 7 0 8 364 10001
7:15 AM 14 111 8 3 201 14 3 1 17 6 6 9 393 20002
7:30 AM 9 149 8 12 239 20 7 0 16 7 7 8 482 31004
7:45 AM 10 134 9 5 199 14 4 4 21 5 3 7 415 00000
8:00 AM 13 124 11 4 153 12 7 3 19 10 5 4 365 00000
8:15 AM 16 101 10 4 131 23 7 9 23 9 1 8 342 10001
8:30 AM 15 104 11 6 148 13 11 3 22 13 2 10 358 10001
8:45 AM 20 88 12 8 102 15 5 3 12 5 3 11 284 20002
VOLUMES 112 910 72 46 1,359 123 45 25 157 62 27 65 3,003 10 1 0 0 11
APPROACH % 10% 83% 7% 3% 89% 8% 20% 11% 69% 40% 18% 42%
APP/DEPART 1,094 /1,021 1,528 /1,588 227 /142 154 /252 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28 1,655
APPROACH % 8% 86% 6% 3% 90% 7% 21% 8% 72% 36% 27% 36%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.904 0.808 0.879 0.875 0.858
APP/DEPART 600 /568 876 /898 102 /67 77 /122 0
4:00 PM 23 204 10 4 154 22 14 9 20 11 2 16 489 30003
4:15 PM 18 217 8 7 145 23 8 11 18 12 5 13 485 31004
4:30 PM 20 170 13 7 144 16 5 9 26 10 6 28 454 30003
4:45 PM 15 244 19 6 145 24 7 5 23 12 7 15 522 10001
5:00 PM 18 252 19 10 162 15 2 8 18 33 1 30 568 22105
5:15 PM 17 233 16 13 151 12 9 5 16 12 4 15 503 21003
5:30 PM 15 225 16 9 148 17 8 1 22 9 2 13 485 10001
5:45 PM 22 182 7 12 157 14 5 4 17 11 3 18 452 20002
VOLUMES 148 1,727 108 68 1,206 143 58 52 160 110 30 148 3,958 17 4 1 0 22
APPROACH % 7% 87% 5% 5% 85% 10% 21% 19% 59% 38% 10% 51%
APP/DEPART 1,983 /1,936 1,417 /1,493 270 /224 288 /305 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73 2,078
APPROACH % 6% 88% 6% 5% 85% 10% 21% 15% 64% 43% 9% 48%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.942 0.952 0.886 0.598 0.915
APP/DEPART 1,089 /1,055 712 /757 124 /124 153 /142 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Center WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Center
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Center
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Center Center
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:15 AM
PM
4:45 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
T816
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1343
Thu, May 18, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:5
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:13X X 20XX2XX X 0000
7:00 AM 71220 0184700400 0 324 00000
7:15 AM 81350 0220300600 0 372 00000
7:30 AM 101380 0226400500 0 383 00000
7:45 AM 141580 0217800400 0 401 00000
8:00 AM 9 153 0 0 159 6 0 0 11 0 0 0 338 00000
8:15 AM 121480 0151500900 0 325 00000
8:30 AM 111210 01331000900 0 284 00000
8:45 AM 131100 0114600600 0 249 10001
VOLUMES 84 1,085 0 0 1,404 49 0 0 54 0 0 0 2,676 1 0 0 0 1
APPROACH % 7% 93% 0% 0% 97% 3% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
APP/DEPART 1,169 /1,085 1,453 /1,459 54 /00 /132 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0 1,494
APPROACH % 7% 93% 0% 0% 98% 2% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.908 0.916 0.591 0.000 0.931
APP/DEPART 625 /584 843 /848 26 /00 /62 0
4:00 PM 18 262 0 0 188 14 0 0 20 0 0 0 502 10001
4:15 PM 18 227 0 0 191 12 0 0 24 0 0 0 472 00000
4:30 PM 11 235 0 0 184 17 0 0 31 0 0 0 478 00000
4:45 PM 8 259 0 0 192 13 0 0 11 0 0 0 483 00000
5:00 PM 9 270 0 0 204 6 0 0 23 0 0 0 512 00000
5:15 PM 5 255 0 0 196 7 0 0 11 0 0 0 474 00000
5:30 PM 9 253 0 0 202 6 0 0 19 0 0 0 489 00000
5:45 PM 7 214 0 0 189 6 0 0 10 0 0 0 426 10001
VOLUMES 85 1,975 0 0 1,546 81 0 0 149 0 0 0 3,836 2 0 0 0 2
APPROACH % 4% 96% 0% 0% 95% 5% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
APP/DEPART 2,060 /1,975 1,627 /1,697 149 /00 /164 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 31 1,037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0 1,958
APPROACH % 3% 97% 0% 0% 96% 4% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.957 0.983 0.696 0.000 0.956
APP/DEPART 1,068 /1,037 826 /858 64 /00 /63 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Center Street Promenade WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Center Street Promenade
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Center Street Promenade
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Center Street Promenade Center Street Promenade
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:15 AM
PM
4:45 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1343
Thu, May 18, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:6
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:120 1 2012112 1 0000
7:00 AM 16 85 18 18 150 19 28 80 22 29 76 9 550 13004
7:15 AM 12 100 16 23 184 19 26 107 40 27 105 17 676 00000
7:30 AM 20 117 11 32 181 18 25 153 33 32 126 8 756 12104
7:45 AM 27 122 20 29 177 18 39 146 30 22 107 12 749 10001
8:00 AM 11 99 14 18 136 14 39 120 36 20 87 14 608 12104
8:15 AM 20 114 23 16 128 16 32 93 21 19 57 16 555 03003
8:30 AM 13 84 9 14 108 19 36 80 34 23 64 11 495 01001
8:45 AM 20 73 13 16 84 19 33 74 16 18 73 13 452 42006
VOLUMES 139 794 124 166 1,148 142 258 853 232 190 695 100 4,841 8 13 2 0 23
APPROACH % 13% 75% 12% 11% 79% 10% 19% 64% 17% 19% 71% 10%
APP/DEPART 1,057 /1,163 1,456 /1,578 1,343 /1,130 985 /970 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51 2,789
APPROACH % 12% 77% 11% 12% 80% 8% 16% 66% 18% 18% 74% 9%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.842 0.919 0.923 0.869 0.922
APP/DEPART 569 /620 849 /921 794 /685 577 /563 0
4:00 PM 40 219 24 28 150 31 33 110 31 23 73 28 790 52007
4:15 PM 33 179 19 37 144 34 35 112 25 32 112 21 783 35109
4:30 PM 44 175 16 32 149 34 55 115 18 23 99 14 774 62008
4:45 PM 37 199 22 36 144 23 49 112 27 21 109 14 793 750113
5:00 PM 53 214 31 25 165 37 41 105 17 36 102 23 849 821011
5:15 PM 47 201 17 18 157 32 42 101 15 27 142 15 814 53109
5:30 PM 38 209 18 30 152 39 36 131 20 29 125 14 841 33006
5:45 PM 40 177 20 20 149 31 30 130 30 32 104 13 776 81009
VOLUMES 332 1,573 167 226 1,210 261 321 916 183 223 866 142 6,420 45 23 3 1 72
APPROACH % 16% 76% 8% 13% 71% 15% 23% 65% 13% 18% 70% 12%
APP/DEPART 2,072 /2,056 1,697 /1,660 1,420 /1,287 1,231 /1,417 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66 3,297
APPROACH % 16% 76% 8% 13% 72% 15% 24% 65% 11% 17% 73% 10%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.911 0.945 0.926 0.893 0.971
APP/DEPART 1,086 /1,068 858 /832 696 /634 657 /763 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Broadway WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Broadway
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:15 AM
PM
4:45 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Broadway Broadway
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Broadway
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1343
Thu, May 18, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:7
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:120 1 2011011 0 0000
7:00 AM 6 98 4 7 202 6 16 27 17 15 30 5 433 01001
7:15 AM 10 108 11 12 238 10 18 51 19 13 41 11 542 30003
7:30 AM 9 130 12 10 231 10 13 59 18 23 49 10 574 30003
7:45 AM 81576 10 2099 1044281650 12 559 12003
8:00 AM 4 99 5 9 1764 1550221338 6 441 10001
8:15 AM 6 134 4 7 162 4 5 44 16 9 27 7 425 20002
8:30 AM 7 103 5 6 160 4 8 23 17 10 29 3 375 01001
8:45 AM 3 105 6 3 123 3 6 32 10 4 22 10 327 00000
VOLUMES 53 934 53 64 1,501 50 91 330 147 103 286 64 3,676 10 4 0 0 14
APPROACH % 5% 90% 5% 4% 93% 3% 16% 58% 26% 23% 63% 14%
APP/DEPART 1,040 /1,093 1,615 /1,761 568 /443 453 /379 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39 2,116
APPROACH % 6% 88% 6% 4% 92% 4% 16% 59% 25% 23% 63% 14%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.817 0.892 0.964 0.860 0.922
APP/DEPART 559 /591 928 /1,014 347 /277 282 /234 0
4:00 PM 18 262 15 8 176 11 9 39 11 11 43 13 616 11002
4:15 PM 23 218 16 9 176 8 11 49 11 18 44 17 600 01001
4:30 PM 13 245 7 12 184 14 12 28 10 14 45 14 598 10001
4:45 PM 8 246 19 8 165 13 15 49 8 14 41 15 601 10001
5:00 PM 19 278 13 20 193 12 7 36 15 17 51 16 677 06006
5:15 PM 18 272 15 14 170 15 19 53 8 8 51 11 654 13004
5:30 PM 18 266 8 13 179 12 9 36 5 11 58 10 625 11002
5:45 PM 17 243 12 18 173 15 11 46 14 13 51 17 630 21003
VOLUMES 134 2,030 105 102 1,416 100 93 336 82 106 384 113 5,001 7 13 0 0 20
APPROACH % 6% 89% 5% 6% 88% 6% 18% 66% 16% 18% 64% 19%
APP/DEPART 2,269 /2,249 1,618 /1,611 511 /530 603 /611 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 72 1,059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54 2,586
APPROACH % 6% 90% 4% 8% 86% 6% 18% 66% 16% 16% 67% 17%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.951 0.927 0.809 0.935 0.955
APP/DEPART 1,179 /1,170 834 /810 259 /273 314 /333 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Santa Ana WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Santa Ana
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:15 AM
PM
5:00 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Santa Ana Santa Ana
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Santa Ana
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
DATE:LOCATION:PROJECT #:SC1343
Thu, May 18, 17 NORTH & SOUTH:LOCATION #:8
EAST & WEST:CONTROL:STOP E/W
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄ W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:0 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 5 96 3 7 203 7 8 2 7 12 2 11 363 0 2 0 0 2
7:15 AM 4 112 7 6 269 5 3 5 11 13 3 10 448 0 4 0 0 4
7:30 AM 3 130 3 4 256 1 0 1 14 11 5 15 443 0 3 0 0 3
7:45 AM 4 155 5 7 255 5 1 3 17 8 0 8 468 0 1 0 0 1
8:00 AM 3 102 9 9 201 3 4 1 12 7 2 4 357 1 5 0 0 6
8:15 AM 4 135 6 7 167 6 2 1 11 7 4 8 358 0 2 0 0 2
8:30 AM 3 105 1 6 170 6 2 2 9 6 1 5 316 0 2 0 0 2
8:45 AM 2 129 4 5 125 2 1 1 9 0 1 3 282 0 1 0 0 1
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
VOLUMES 28 964 38 51 1,646 35 21 16 90 64 18 64 3,035 1 20 0 0 21
APPROACH %3%94%4%3%95%2%17%13%71%44%12%44%
APP/DEPART 1,030 /1,069 1,732 /1,801 127 /85 146 /80 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 16 493 18 24 983 18 12 11 49 44 10 44 1,722
APPROACH %3%94%3%2%96%2%17%15%68%45%10%45%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.803 0.915 0.857 0.790 0.920
APP/DEPART 527 /559 1,025 /1,076 72 /43 98 /44 0
03:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 6 261 4 12 179 5 5 1 9 2 0 9 493 0 1 0 0 1
4:15 PM 5 268 8 3 206 3 5 1 5 1 2 4 511 0 1 0 0 1
4:30 PM 2 252 6 8 183 5 0 2 12 2 0 5 477 1 1 0 0 2
4:45 PM 10 273 4 15 176 8 1 2 8 7 3 3 510 0 5 0 0 5
5:00 PM 4 279 6 10 200 7 3 2 7 4 1 5 528 0 1 0 0 1
5:15 PM 9 306 7 9 188 4 3 2 9 4 0 6 547 0 1 0 0 1
5:30 PM 6 274 5 8 172 10 2 2 9 4 1 5 498 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 12 271 5 17 186 3 2 3 5 5 1 5 515 0 1 0 0 1
VOLUMES 54 2,184 45 82 1,490 45 21 15 64 29 8 42 4,079 1 11 0 0 12
APPROACH %2%96%2%5%92%3%21%15%64%37%10%53%
APP/DEPART 2,283 /2,258 1,617 /1,584 100 /131 79 /106 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 31 1,130 23 44 746 24 10 9 30 17 3 21 2,088
APPROACH %3%95%2%5%92%3%20%18%61%41%7%51%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.919 0.938 0.875 0.932 0.954
APP/DEPART 1,184 /1,164 814 /793 49 /73 41 /58 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Water WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Water
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ES WS TOTAL
7:00 AM 2 0 3 2 7 2 0 3 2 7 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 1 3 2 6 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 0 2 2
7:30 AM 0 2 2 2 6 0 1 2 2 5 0 1 0 0 1
7:45 AM 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 1
8:00 AM 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 2
8:15 AM 0 1 2 2 5 0 1 2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 1 0 3 2 6 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 2 2 5
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 3 4 18 13 38 2 3 14 8 27 1 1 4 5 11
3:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 3
4:15 PM 2 0 5 0 7 2 0 3 0 5 0 0 2 0 2
4:30 PM 0 1 2 3 6 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 4
4:45 PM 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 1
5:00 PM 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 2
5:15 PM 1 0 6 2 9 1 0 4 1 6 0 0 2 1 3
5:30 PM 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 2
5:45 PM 0 1 6 1 8 0 0 4 1 5 0 1 2 0 3
TOTAL 3 4 23 14 44 3 1 13 7 24 0 3 10 7 20
Note:
Bicycles riding in the street at the intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street during the associated peak hour were included in the vehicle count.
This increases the AM EBT, AM WBL, and PM NBT by 1 vehicle. This increases the PM SBT by 2 vehicles.
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Water Water
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Water
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:00 AM
PM
5:00 PM
ALL PED AND BIKE PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
T816
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1343
Tue, May 23, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:9
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:120 1 2011011 0 0000
7:00 AM 3 89 6 12 209 2 4 24 15 32 38 6 440 00000
7:15 AM 3 103 13 10 271 4 7 24 12 37 26 7 517 00000
7:30 AM 511512 9 2680 1346153143 8 565 00000
7:45 AM 2 147 17 8 291 7 8 33 11 24 31 15 594 00000
8:00 AM 6 90 8 7 202 2 6 22 12 30 24 12 421 00000
8:15 AM 1 134 12 8 188 5 4 27 6 25 18 6 434 00000
8:30 AM 3 92 6 5 168 7 4 6 11 35 20 8 365 00000
8:45 AM 5 106 12 10 144 3 2 10 8 19 15 8 342 01001
VOLUMES 28 876 86 69 1,741 30 48 192 90 233 215 70 3,678 0 1 0 0 1
APPROACH % 3% 88% 9% 4% 95% 2% 15% 58% 27% 45% 42% 14%
APP/DEPART 990 /995 1,840 /2,064 330 /346 518 /273 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 13 454 48 39 1,039 13 32 127 53 124 138 36 2,116
APPROACH % 3% 88% 9% 4% 95% 1% 15% 60% 25% 42% 46% 12%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.776 0.891 0.716 0.909 0.891
APP/DEPART 515 /522 1,091 /1,216 212 /214 298 /164 0
4:00 PM 11 257 16 14 147 7 4 21 5 21 11 14 528 00022
4:15 PM 3 223 23 16 153 10 3 24 4 20 31 10 520 00000
4:30 PM 11 280 17 16 178 5 4 27 6 23 42 15 624 00101
4:45 PM 15 269 27 9 164 6 6 19 6 23 36 7 587 00000
5:00 PM 14 292 25 5 187 6 5 17 7 16 39 11 624 00011
5:15 PM 16 263 23 12 153 8 9 25 6 20 43 9 587 00101
5:30 PM 15 278 28 6 167 5 7 27 4 13 36 12 598 00101
5:45 PM 11 248 23 13 145 10 4 27 7 10 28 13 539 00000
VOLUMES 96 2,110 182 91 1,294 57 42 187 45 146 266 91 4,607 0 0 3 3 6
APPROACH % 4% 88% 8% 6% 90% 4% 15% 68% 16% 29% 53% 18%
APP/DEPART 2,388 /2,240 1,442 /1,482 274 /463 503 /422 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 56 1,104 92 42 682 25 24 88 25 82 160 42 2,422
APPROACH % 4% 88% 7% 6% 91% 3% 18% 64% 18% 29% 56% 15%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.946 0.941 0.856 0.888 0.970
APP/DEPART 1,252 /1,168 749 /788 137 /223 284 /243 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
South WEST SIDE EAST SIDE South
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:00 AM
PM
4:30 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim South South
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
South
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
Location: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 33 25 12:00 157 176
0:15 27 13 12:15 170 189
0:30 20 11 12:30 135 170
0:45 26 106 14 63 169 12:45 139 601 204 739 1340
1:00 15 22 13:00 134 185
1:15 7 13 13:15 140 156
1:30 13 7 13:30 159 165
1:45 15 50 10 52 102 13:45 162 595 174 680 1275
2:00 14 8 14:00 169 194
2:15 19 15 14:15 152 161
2:30 15 13 14:30 163 179
2:45 11 59 11 47 106 14:45 192 676 190 724 1400
3:00 8 10 15:00 172 175
3:15 9 12 15:15 183 177
3:30 22 15 15:30 176 173
3:45 12 51 14 51 102 15:45 193 724 179 704 1428
4:00 10 13 16:00 234 184
4:15 18 13 16:15 191 201
4:30 23 28 16:30 239 194
4:45 35 86 25 79 165 16:45 242 906 190 769 1675
5:00 26 34 17:00 239 221
5:15 48 50 17:15 237 187
5:30 54 60 17:30 241 185
5:45 56 184 71 215 399 17:45 220 937 181 774 1711
6:00 47 92 18:00 215 174
6:15 54 95 18:15 217 154
6:30 71 140 18:30 187 140
6:45 86 258 171 498 756 18:45 180 799 147 615 1414
7:00 80 152 19:00 167 148
7:15 120 213 19:15 139 105
7:30 143 208 19:30 144 113
7:45 143 486 230 803 1289 19:45 93 543 101 467 1010
8:00 133 182 20:00 101 103
8:15 115 151 20:15 111 81
8:30 118 137 20:30 90 87
8:45 122 488 125 595 1083 20:45 73 375 95 366 741
9:00 92 93 21:00 104 92
9:15 97 123 21:15 103 112
9:30 113 127 21:30 102 87
9:45 118 420 137 480 900 21:45 103 412 72 363 775
10:00 106 106 22:00 78 63
10:15 119 115 22:15 86 62
10:30 110 127 22:30 72 71
10:45 136 471 147 495 966 22:45 68 304 45 241 545
11:00 126 152 23:00 61 41
11:15 131 174 23:15 52 40
11:30 150 135 23:30 48 40
11:45 132 539 155 616 1155 23:45 42 203 35 156 359
Total Vol.3198 3994 7192 7075 6598 13673
NB SB EB WB Combined
10273 10592 20865
Split %44.5% 55.5%34.5%51.7% 48.3%65.5%
Peak Hour 11:30 7:15 7:15 16:45 16:15 16:30
Volume 609 833 1372 959 806 1749
P.H.F.0.90 0.91 0.92 0.99 0.91 0.95
Daily Totals
AMPM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT1 Anaheim between Center and Center Street Promenade Prepared by AimTD tel. 714 253 7888
Location: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 38 27 12:00 191 191
0:15 24 15 12:15 178 202
0:30 22 15 12:30 162 181
0:45 28 112 14 71 183 12:45 149 680 211 785 1465
1:00 15 25 13:00 153 172
1:15 8 14 13:15 163 184
1:30 13 8 13:30 173 171
1:45 15 51 12 59 110 13:45 189 678 181 708 1386
2:00 15 8 14:00 190 203
2:15 19 15 14:15 164 176
2:30 16 13 14:30 193 179
2:45 11 61 15 51 112 14:45 194 741 219 777 1518
3:00 10 10 15:00 199 192
3:15 9 12 15:15 210 199
3:30 24 14 15:30 194 192
3:45 13 56 17 53 109 15:45 226 829 193 776 1605
4:00 10 14 16:00 249 205
4:15 18 13 16:15 213 203
4:30 27 28 16:30 271 232
4:45 34 89 25 80 169 16:45 249 982 201 841 1823
5:00 26 33 17:00 248 257
5:15 48 51 17:15 246 202
5:30 58 61 17:30 242 202
5:45 60 192 75 220 412 17:45 231 967 185 846 1813
6:00 50 96 18:00 233 186
6:15 55 98 18:15 217 181
6:30 82 146 18:30 199 151
6:45 102 289 169 509 798 18:45 189 838 161 679 1517
7:00 92 157 19:00 183 156
7:15 135 214 19:15 154 127
7:30 161 211 19:30 151 127
7:45 167 555 244 826 1381 19:45 101 589 124 534 1123
8:00 149 180 20:00 106 128
8:15 128 161 20:15 122 100
8:30 134 139 20:30 95 108
8:45 130 541 131 611 1152 20:45 77 400 110 446 846
9:00 106 101 21:00 113 107
9:15 118 129 21:15 111 126
9:30 130 151 21:30 108 114
9:45 128 482 148 529 1011 21:45 107 439 86 433 872
10:00 115 123 22:00 79 69
10:15 139 126 22:15 85 68
10:30 125 130 22:30 70 79
10:45 151 530 152 531 1061 22:45 72 306 51 267 573
11:00 141 169 23:00 64 48
11:15 145 180 23:15 55 46
11:30 160 152 23:30 50 42
11:45 153 599 185 686 1285 23:45 38 207 36 172 379
Total Vol.3557 4226 7783 7656 7264 14920
NB SB EB WB Combined
11213 11490 22703
Split %45.7% 54.3%34.3%51.3% 48.7%65.7%
Peak Hour 11:45 7:15 7:15 16:30 16:15 16:30
Volume 684 849 1461 1014 893 1906
P.H.F.0.90 0.87 0.89 0.94 0.87 0.94
Daily Totals
AMPM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT2 Anaheim between Center Street Promenade and Broadway Prepared by AimTD tel. 714 253 7888
Location: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 38 33 12:00 161 174
0:15 26 22 12:15 143 190
0:30 24 15 12:30 124 185
0:45 29 117 13 83 200 12:45 131 559 184 733 1292
1:00 15 23 13:00 143 191
1:15 8 11 13:15 151 168
1:30 13 8 13:30 165 178
1:45 13 49 12 54 103 13:45 161 620 171 708 1328
2:00 16 7 14:00 176 195
2:15 16 13 14:15 156 176
2:30 9 13 14:30 178 180
2:45 12 53 12 45 98 14:45 193 703 175 726 1429
3:00 13 16 15:00 186 200
3:15 11 14 15:15 199 191
3:30 18 17 15:30 184 187
3:45 17 59 17 64 123 15:45 199 768 188 766 1534
4:00 13 15 16:00 219 179
4:15 14 15 16:15 231 198
4:30 28 32 16:30 248 209
4:45 38 93 26 88 181 16:45 259 957 213 799 1756
5:00 34 41 17:00 236 241
5:15 53 60 17:15 244 197
5:30 65 71 17:30 231 215
5:45 83 235 95 267 502 17:45 215 926 211 864 1790
6:00 75 104 18:00 211 170
6:15 94 112 18:15 208 181
6:30 89 162 18:30 178 164
6:45 92 350 184 562 912 18:45 186 783 183 698 1481
7:00 97 208 19:00 189 157
7:15 114 250 19:15 175 143
7:30 136 231 19:30 158 131
7:45 137 484 246 935 1419 19:45 116 638 121 552 1190
8:00 136 191 20:00 99 113
8:15 125 171 20:15 109 128
8:30 108 160 20:30 115 114
8:45 97 466 133 655 1121 20:45 115 438 120 475 913
9:00 99 105 21:00 110 140
9:15 119 130 21:15 91 140
9:30 114 134 21:30 88 125
9:45 126 458 136 505 963 21:45 103 392 94 499 891
10:00 118 122 22:00 77 89
10:15 134 122 22:15 55 74
10:30 113 128 22:30 61 75
10:45 123 488 146 518 1006 22:45 49 242 61 299 541
11:00 121 154 23:00 52 52
11:15 123 155 23:15 41 47
11:30 135 149 23:30 64 46
11:45 145 524 170 628 1152 23:45 44 201 33 178 379
Total Vol.3376 4404 7780 7227 7297 14524
NB SB EB WB Combined
10603 11701 22304
Split %43.4% 56.6%34.9%49.8% 50.2%65.1%
Peak Hour 11:30 7:00 7:15 16:30 16:45 16:30
Volume 584 935 1441 987 866 1847
P.H.F.0.91 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.90 0.97
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT3 Anaheim between Broadway and Santa Ana Prepared by AimTD tel. 714 253 7888
Daily Totals
AMPM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Prepared by: Field Data Services of Arizona, Inc.
CITY: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 39 33 12:00 186 171
0:15 26 23 12:15 178 178
0:30 25 18 12:30 177 169
0:45 27 117 11 85 202 12:45 151 692 175 693 1385
1:00 18 21 13:00 142 180
1:15 9 13 13:15 156 158
1:30 12 7 13:30 173 162
1:45 18 57 13 54 111 13:45 144 615 140 640 1255
2:00 18 9 14:00 184 191
2:15 13 14 14:15 169 167
2:30 9 5 14:30 204 165
2:45 10 50 11 39 89 14:45 154 711 195 718 1429
3:00 8 13 15:00 218 187
3:15 11 16 15:15 207 164
3:30 18 18 15:30 227 185
3:45 11 48 18 65 113 15:45 217 869 174 710 1579
4:00 12 16 16:00 259 165
4:15 12 22 16:15 235 170
4:30 28 34 16:30 263 189
4:45 31 83 36 108 191 16:45 272 1029 188 712 1741
5:00 27 43 17:00 266 236
5:15 51 61 17:15 291 176
5:30 55 68 17:30 264 195
5:45 65 198 93 265 463 17:45 262 1083 192 799 1882
6:00 53 106 18:00 239 161
6:15 63 112 18:15 237 162
6:30 88 169 18:30 234 160
6:45 99 303 214 601 904 18:45 210 920 141 624 1544
7:00 87 196 19:00 195 145
7:15 115 274 19:15 151 123
7:30 136 255 19:30 151 125
7:45 148 486 282 1007 1493 19:45 129 626 124 517 1143
8:00 140 211 20:00 112 102
8:15 124 195 20:15 114 111
8:30 136 154 20:30 103 79
8:45 114 514 143 703 1217 20:45 99 428 101 393 821
9:00 94 111 21:00 93 118
9:15 115 110 21:15 90 100
9:30 118 125 21:30 78 96
9:45 110 437 129 475 912 21:45 91 352 97 411 763
10:00 115 131 22:00 62 76
10:15 128 119 22:15 55 68
10:30 117 141 22:30 57 80
10:45 111 471 128 519 990 22:45 43 217 46 270 487
11:00 157 149 23:00 52 41
11:15 134 133 23:15 47 46
11:30 154 145 23:30 52 31
11:45 149 594 160 587 1181 23:45 36 187 35 153 340
Total Vol.3358 4508 7866 7729 6640 14369
NB SB EB WB Combined
11087 11148 22235
Split %42.7% 57.3%35.4%53.8% 46.2%64.6%
Peak Hour 11:45 7:15 7:15 16:45 17:00 16:45
Volume 690 1022 1561 1093 799 1888
P.H.F.0.93 0.91 0.91 0.96 0.85 0.94
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT4 Anaheim between Santa Ana and Water. Prepared by AimTD LLC tel. 714 253 7888
Daily Totals
AM PM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Prepared by: Field Data Services of Arizona, Inc.
CITY: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 40 30 12:00 184 172
0:15 26 22 12:15 178 178
0:30 27 16 12:30 165 163
0:45 28 121 11 79 200 12:45 145 672 171 684 1356
1:00 18 21 13:00 138 171
1:15 9 11 13:15 151 163
1:30 11 6 13:30 172 163
1:45 18 56 13 51 107 13:45 138 599 138 635 1234
2:00 18 11 14:00 177 196
2:15 13 11 14:15 157 165
2:30 8 7 14:30 211 157
2:45 11 50 14 43 93 14:45 160 705 184 702 1407
3:00 9 15 15:00 215 183
3:15 11 16 15:15 205 168
3:30 17 18 15:30 233 183
3:45 13 50 19 68 118 15:45 220 873 173 707 1580
4:00 12 16 16:00 265 162
4:15 10 22 16:15 241 153
4:30 24 34 16:30 273 187
4:45 27 73 41 113 186 16:45 279 1058 179 681 1739
5:00 26 43 17:00 270 233
5:15 47 68 17:15 303 179
5:30 50 75 17:30 270 191
5:45 57 180 97 283 463 17:45 271 1114 185 788 1902
6:00 60 112 18:00 239 160
6:15 61 122 18:15 239 157
6:30 83 187 18:30 224 144
6:45 92 296 225 646 942 18:45 209 911 138 599 1510
7:00 92 216 19:00 192 139
7:15 103 300 19:15 149 124
7:30 133 263 19:30 148 116
7:45 141 469 293 1072 1541 19:45 126 615 117 496 1111
8:00 133 222 20:00 104 91
8:15 119 201 20:15 112 112
8:30 141 158 20:30 102 80
8:45 117 510 146 727 1237 20:45 99 417 101 384 801
9:00 97 116 21:00 86 110
9:15 113 113 21:15 94 93
9:30 107 126 21:30 78 94
9:45 107 424 126 481 905 21:45 87 345 92 389 734
10:00 112 135 22:00 63 79
10:15 122 119 22:15 56 66
10:30 105 142 22:30 62 81
10:45 108 447 124 520 967 22:45 43 224 49 275 499
11:00 152 150 23:00 55 41
11:15 133 127 23:15 47 47
11:30 156 145 23:30 53 28
11:45 137 578 155 577 1155 23:45 37 192 36 152 344
Total Vol.3254 4660 7914 7725 6492 14217
NB SB EB WB Combined
10979 11152 22131
Split %41.1% 58.9%35.8%54.3% 45.7%64.2%
Peak Hour 11:45 7:15 7:15 16:30 17:00 16:45
Volume 664 1078 1588 1125 788 1904
P.H.F.0.90 0.90 0.91 0.98 0.85 0.95
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT5 Anaheim between Water and South. Prepared by AimTD LLC tel. 714 253 7888
Daily Totals
AM PM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Prepared by: Field Data Services of Arizona, Inc.
CITY: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 0 3 12:00 11 7
0:15 1 0 12:15 78
0:30 0 2 12:30 113
0:45 0116 7 12:45 8 37 8 26 63
1:00 2 0 13:00 9 15
1:15 0 1 13:15 13 7
1:30 0 2 13:30 16 11
1:45 0203 5 13:45 10 48 9 42 90
2:00 1 0 14:00 11 5
2:15 1 2 14:15 14 3
2:30 0 1 14:30 0 7
2:45 2414 8 14:45 0 25 5 20 45
3:00 1 1 15:00 12 12
3:15 0 1 15:15 8 6
3:30 2 1 15:30 14 17
3:45 1414 8 15:45 8 42 6 41 83
4:00 0 2 16:00 9 14
4:15 1 1 16:15 9 16
4:30 2 0 16:30 10 18
4:45 4703 10 16:45 13 41 16 64 105
5:00 2 2 17:00 11 12
5:15 5 3 17:15 11 12
5:30 6 0 17:30 16 19
5:45 10 23 3 8 31 17:45 10 48 13 56 104
6:00 8 4 18:00 15 15
6:15 7 6 18:15 9 18
6:30 16 6 18:30 12 17
6:45 8 39 6 22 61 18:45 14 50 15 65 115
7:00 11 10 19:00 9 11
7:15 22 13 19:15 7 9
7:30 16 7 19:30 6 10
7:45 11 60 7 37 97 19:45 13 35 13 43 78
8:00 16 2 20:00 8 8
8:15 11 5 20:15 10 2
8:30 7 7 20:30 11 7
8:45 4 38 9 23 61 20:45 6 35 9 26 61
9:00 8 6 21:00 8 6
9:15 5 4 21:15 7 9
9:30 13 4 21:30 2 3
9:45 6 32 1 15 47 21:45 5 22 5 23 45
10:00 5 5 22:00 3 3
10:15 8 5 22:15 5 5
10:30 14 4 22:30 1 8
10:45 6 33 2 16 49 22:45 3 12 3 19 31
11:00 11 10 23:00 1 4
11:15 8 10 23:15 31
11:30 4 3 23:30 0 2
11:45 11 34 3 26 60 23:45 2629 15
Total Vol.277 167 444 401 434 835
NB SB EB WB Combined
678 601 1279
Split %62.4% 37.6%34.7%48.0% 52.0%65.3%
Peak Hour 7:15 7:00 7:00 17:15 17:30 17:30
Volume 65 37 97 52 65 115
P.H.F.0.74 0.71 0.69 0.81 0.86 0.82
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT6 Water between Zeyn and Anaheim. Prepared by AimTD LLC tel. 714 253 7888
Daily Totals
AM PM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Prepared by: Field Data Services of Arizona, Inc.
CITY: Anaheim PROJECT:
AM Period NB SB EB WB PM Period NB SB EB WB
0:00 1 0 12:00 76
0:15 2 0 12:15 910
0:30 3 1 12:30 119
0:45 1712 9 12:45 9 361136 72
1:00 2 0 13:00 10 11
1:15 1 0 13:15 4 8
1:30 0 2 13:30 15 12
1:45 0302 5 13:45 11 40 14 45 85
2:00 0 1 14:00 8 14
2:15 2 0 14:15 15 14
2:30 0 4 14:30 8 0
2:45 0216 8 14:45 12 43 0 28 71
3:00 0 1 15:00 14 13
3:15 0 1 15:15 7 11
3:30 2 2 15:30 14 9
3:45 2415 9 15:45 17 52 11 44 96
4:00 0 2 16:00 14 10
4:15 1 3 16:15 20 4
4:30 0 2 16:30 15 11
4:45 3 4 8 15 19 16:45 24 73 11 36 109
5:00 1 2 17:00 20 14
5:15 2 11 17:15 18 10
5:30 3 9 17:30 16 9
5:45 10 16 15 37 53 17:45 20 74 7 40 114
6:00 11 6 18:00 13 12
6:15 8 19 18:15 11 13
6:30 6 19 18:30 14 13
6:45 5 302165 95 18:45 18 56 17 55 111
7:00 9 23 19:00 13 12
7:15 11 40 19:15 8 13
7:30 15 17 19:30 13 11
7:45 5 401999 139 19:45 13 47 9 45 92
8:00 9 13 20:00 7 4
8:15 7 12 20:15 10 5
8:30 9 8 20:30 8 6
8:45 2 27 7 40 67 20:45 6 31 9 24 55
9:00 10 10 21:00 13 10
9:15 3 7 21:15 13 4
9:30 4 7 21:30 9 8
9:45 9 26 4 28 54 21:45 3 38 2 24 62
10:00 3 10 22:00 3 5
10:15 4 7 22:15 6 3
10:30 4 7 22:30 4 7
10:45 9 20 4 28 48 22:45 2 15 5 20 35
11:00 4 9 23:00 4 4
11:15 9 6 23:15 32
11:30 4 1 23:30 3 1
11:45 10 27 9 25 52 23:45 1111819
Total Vol.206 352 558 516 405 921
NB SB EB WB Combined
722 757 1479
Split %36.9% 63.1%37.7%56.0% 44.0%62.3%
Peak Hour 6:45 6:30 6:45 16:15 18:00 16:30
Volume 40 103 141 79 55 123
P.H.F.0.67 0.64 0.69 0.82 0.81 0.88
Thursday, June 08, 2017 SC1376
ADT7 Water between Anaheim and Alley. Prepared by AimTD LLC tel. 714 253 7888
Daily Totals
AM PM
cs@aimtd.com Tell. 714 253 7888
T816
DATE:LOCATION: PROJECT #:SC1376
Thu, Jun 8, 17 NORTH & SOUTH: LOCATION #:6
EAST & WEST: CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM ▲
PM N
MD ◄W E ►
OTHER S
OTHER ▼
NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND
NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR TOTAL NB SB EB WB TTL
LANES:120 1 2012112 1 0000
7:00 AM 10 68 12 12 142 8 20 65 23 29 54 10 453 10001
7:15 AM 22 84 13 16 177 11 26 104 33 35 84 10 615 22004
7:30 AM 17 106 13 16 185 11 36 107 28 28 90 21 658 21003
7:45 AM 20 92 12 27 184 22 37 95 31 27 79 21 647 42006
8:00 AM 19 112 18 20 150 20 28 80 22 21 71 16 577 23106
8:15 AM 15 83 13 14 117 21 26 78 27 20 54 13 481 12003
8:30 AM 14 97 11 16 113 19 25 69 19 19 54 6 462 10001
8:45 AM 9 8912 24 96134042101265 8 420 22004
VOLUMES 126 731 104 145 1,164 125 238 640 193 191 551 105 4,313 15 12 1 0 28
APPROACH % 13% 76% 11% 10% 81% 9% 22% 60% 18% 23% 65% 12%
APP/DEPART 961 /1,085 1,434 /1,563 1,071 /877 847 /788 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 78 394 56 79 696 64 127 386 114 111 324 68 2,497
APPROACH % 15% 75% 11% 9% 83% 8% 20% 62% 18% 22% 64% 14%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.886 0.900 0.917 0.905 0.949
APP/DEPART 528 /596 839 /931 627 /513 503 /457 0
4:00 PM 36 188 15 40 128 42 37 121 31 21 72 13 744 2120014
4:15 PM 33 164 11 24 148 40 32 93 21 19 75 18 678 04004
4:30 PM 34 182 18 32 153 32 44 102 18 23 115 25 778 680014
4:45 PM 42 205 14 26 160 31 34 91 21 27 84 20 755 550010
5:00 PM 40 162 15 36 168 41 32 92 21 42 120 27 796 34007
5:15 PM 43 212 11 20 155 29 34 97 21 22 115 13 772 61007
5:30 PM 41 169 22 17 148 22 40 112 33 21 118 21 764 41005
5:45 PM 32 195 21 22 152 20 37 104 24 30 103 13 753 60006
VOLUMES 301 1,477 127 217 1,212 257 290 812 190 205 802 150 6,040 32 35 0 0 67
APPROACH % 16% 78% 7% 13% 72% 15% 22% 63% 15% 18% 69% 13%
APP/DEPART 1,905 /1,952 1,686 /1,639 1,292 /1,121 1,157 /1,328 0
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES 159 761 58 114 636 133 144 382 81 114 434 85 3,101
APPROACH % 16% 78% 6% 13% 72% 15% 24% 63% 13% 18% 69% 13%
PEAK HR FACTOR 0.919 0.901 0.925 0.837 0.974
APP/DEPART 978 /1,008 883 /851 607 /536 633 /706 0
Anaheim
NORTH SIDE
Broadway WEST SIDE EAST SIDE Broadway
SOUTH SIDE
Anaheim
N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL N SIDE S SIDE E SIDE W SIDE TOTAL NS SS ESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 00000
TOTAL 00 0 00 0000 0 00000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:15 AM
PM
4:30 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGS PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Anaheim Anaheim Broadway Broadway
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 cs@aimtd.com
Anaheim
Anaheim
Broadway
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
DA
T
E
:
LO
C
A
T
I
O
N
:
An
a
h
e
i
m
PROJECT #:SC1376
Th
u
,
J
u
n
8
,
1
7
NO
R
T
H
&
S
O
U
T
H
:
An
a
h
e
i
m
LOCATION #:1
EA
S
T
&
W
E
S
T
:
Wa
t
e
r
CONTROL:STOP E/W
N-
L
E
G
S
-
L
E
G
E
-
L
E
G
W
-
L
E
G
T
O
T
A
L
N
-
L
E
G
S
-
L
E
G
E
-
L
E
G
W
-
L
E
G
T
O
T
A
L
N
-
L
E
G
S
-
L
E
G
E
-
L
EG
W
-
L
E
G
T
O
T
A
L
12
:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 2 2
12
:
1
5
A
M
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 1 1
12
:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
12
:
4
5
A
M
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
0 0 0 1 1
1:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
1:
1
5
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
1:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
1:
4
5
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
2:
0
0
A
M
2
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
2
0 0 0 0 0
2:
1
5
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
2:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 1 1
2:
4
5
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
3:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
3:
1
5
A
M
1
0
1
0
2
1
0
1
0
2
0 0 0 0 0
3:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 1 1
3:
4
5
A
M
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
0 0 0 0 0
4:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
4:
1
5
A
M
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 2 2
4:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
4:
4
5
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
5:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
5:
1
5
A
M
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 1 0 1
5:
3
0
A
M
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0 1 1
5:
4
5
A
M
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
2
0 0 0 0 0
6:
0
0
A
M
2
0
1
2
5
2
0
1
1
4
0 0 0 1 1
6:
1
5
A
M
1
0
2
2
5
0
0
1
1
2
1 0 1 1 3
6:
3
0
A
M
1
2
1
6
10
1
2
1
4
8
0 0 0 2 2
6:
4
5
A
M
1
0
3
0
4
1
0
3
0
4
0 0 0 0 0
7:
0
0
A
M
0
2
2
1
5
0
2
2
0
4
0 0 0 1 1
7:
1
5
A
M
1
0
1
2
4
1
0
1
2
4
0 0 0 0 0
7:
3
0
A
M
2
0
0
1
3
2
0
0
1
3
0 0 0 0 0
7:
4
5
A
M
1
0
2
2
5
1
0
1
2
4
0 0 1 0 1
8:
0
0
A
M
1
1
2
0
4
1
1
2
0
4
0 0 0 0 0
8:
1
5
A
M
0
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
1
2
0 0 0 0 0
8:
3
0
A
M
2
0
1
2
5
0
0
1
2
3
2 0 0 0 2
8:
4
5
A
M
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
2
2
0 0 0 0 0
9:
0
0
A
M
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0 0 0 0 0
9:
1
5
A
M
1
0
4
0
5
1
0
4
0
5
0 0 0 0 0
9:
3
0
A
M
0
1
6
1
8
0
0
5
1
6
0 1 1 0 2
9:
4
5
A
M
0
0
6
3
9
0
0
2
2
4
0 0 4 1 5
10
:
0
0
A
M
0
2
1
1
4
0
0
1
0
1
0 2 0 1 3
10
:
1
5
A
M
0
0
1
2
3
0
0
1
0
1
0 0 0 2 2
10
:
3
0
A
M
0
1
6
1
8
0
0
5
1
6
0 1 1 0 2
10
:
4
5
A
M
0
0
5
3
8
0
0
2
2
4
0 0 3 1 4
11
:
0
0
A
M
0
0
2
1
3
0
0
2
1
3
0 0 0 0 0
11
:
1
5
A
M
1
0
2
1
4
1
0
2
1
4
0 0 0 0 0
11
:
3
0
A
M
0
1
3
5
9
0
0
2
4
6
0 1 1 1 3
11
:
4
5
A
M
0
3
2
1
6
0
3
1
1
5
0 0 1 0 1
AM
T
O
T
A
L
17
13
58
52
14
0
14
8
44
32
98
3 5 14 20 42
PM
T
O
T
A
L
34
26
11
6
10
2
27
8
28
16
88
64
19
6
6 10 28 38 82
AM
+
P
M
T
O
T
A
L
51
39
17
4
15
4
41
8
42
24
13
2
96
29
4
9 15 42 58 124
A
M
PE
D
A
N
D
B
I
K
E
A
M
A
M
PE
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
&
B
I
K
E
S
T
U
D
Y
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
A
M
PE
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
C
R
O
S
S
I
N
G
S
PR
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
:
A
i
m
T
D
L
L
C
.
t
e
l
:
7
1
4
2
5
3
7
8
8
8
c
s
@
a
i
m
t
d
.
c
o
m
APPENDIX C: LOS RESULTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: EX AM
Command: EX AM
Volume: EX AM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.404 A xxxxx 0.404 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.337 A xxxxx 0.337 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway A xxxxx 0.525 A xxxxx 0.525 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana A xxxxx 0.539 A xxxxx 0.539 + 0.000 V/C
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.404
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28
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: 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28
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: 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 46 518 36 24 792 60 21 8 73 28 21 28
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.81 0.19 1.00 1.86 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.71 1.00 0.43 0.57
Final Sat.: 1700 4769 331 1700 3161 239 350 133 1217 1700 729 971
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.337
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 18 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 41 584 0 0 822 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.95 0.05 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3315 85 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.525
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 25 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51
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: 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51
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: 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 70 438 61 102 678 69 129 526 139 101 425 51
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.76 0.24 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 2984 416 1700 3086 314 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.15 0.08 0.06 0.13 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:10 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.539
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 25 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 494 34 41 854 33 56 204 87 65 178 39
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 0.70 0.30 1.00 0.82 0.18
Final Sat.: 1700 3181 219 1700 3274 126 1700 1192 508 1700 1394 306
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
1: Water & Anaheim 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 12 49 45 10 44 16 493 18 24 983 18
Future Vol, veh/h 12 12 49 45 10 44 16 493 18 24 983 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 10 10 0 4
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Mvmt Flow 13 13 53 49 11 48 17 536 20 26 1068 20
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1444 1734 550 1185 1734 290 1092 0 0 565 0 0
Stage 1 1134 1134 - 590 590 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 310 600 - 595 1144 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.64 6.64 7.04 4.24 - - 4.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.57 4.07 3.37 2.27 - - 2.27 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 89 82 466 139 82 692 606 - - 969 - -
Stage 1 207 266 - 449 481 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 661 476 - 446 263 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 70 77 463 102 77 684 605 - - 967 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 70 77 - 102 77 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 200 258 - 432 463 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 582 458 - 364 255 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 43.9 68 0.3 0.2
HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 605 - - 169 156 967 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.47 0.69 0.027 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.1 - - 43.9 68 8.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - E F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.2 4 0.1 - -
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: EX PM
Command: EX PM
Volume: EX PM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.398 A xxxxx 0.398 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.349 A xxxxx 0.349 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway B xxxxx 0.621 B xxxxx 0.621 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana A xxxxx 0.597 A xxxxx 0.597 + 0.000 V/C
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.398
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73
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: 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73
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: 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 65 954 70 38 606 68 26 19 79 66 14 73
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.79 0.21 1.00 1.80 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.64 1.00 0.16 0.84
Final Sat.: 1700 4751 349 1700 3057 343 356 260 1083 1700 274 1426
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.05
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.349
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 19 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 1037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 1037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 1037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 1037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 1037 0 0 794 32 0 0 64 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.92 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3268 132 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.621
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66
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: 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66
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: 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 175 823 88 109 618 131 168 449 79 113 478 66
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 1.65 0.35 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3072 328 1700 2805 595 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.10 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.04
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EX PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:12 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.597
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 72 1059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 72 1059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 72 1059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 72 1059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 72 1059 48 65 715 54 46 171 42 49 211 54
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.80 0.20
Final Sat.: 1700 3253 147 1700 3161 239 1700 1365 335 1700 1354 346
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.16
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
2: Anaheim & Water 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 9 30 17 3 21 31 1131 23 44 748 24
Future Vol, veh/h 10 9 30 17 3 21 31 1131 23 44 748 24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 10 10 0 3
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 11 9 32 18 3 22 33 1191 24 46 787 25
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1559 2186 409 1769 2186 618 816 0 0 1225 0 0
Stage 1 896 896 - 1278 1278 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 663 1290 - 491 908 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98 4.18 - - 4.18 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34 2.24 - - 2.24 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 75 44 586 52 44 427 795 - - 554 - -
Stage 1 297 352 - 173 231 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 412 228 - 523 348 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 60 38 584 36 38 423 795 - - 553 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 60 38 - 36 38 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 284 322 - 164 219 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 369 216 - 440 318 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 65.6 123.7 0.3 0.7
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 795 - - 108 68 553 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.478 0.635 0.084 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.7 - - 65.6 123.7 12.1 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F F B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.1 2.8 0.3 - -
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: EP AM
Command: EP AM
Volume: EP AM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.414 A xxxxx 0.414 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.345 A xxxxx 0.345 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway A xxxxx 0.531 A xxxxx 0.531 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana A xxxxx 0.544 A xxxxx 0.544 + 0.000 V/C
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.414
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 522 63 24 799 60 21 8 73 41 21 34
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: 46 522 63 24 799 60 21 8 73 41 21 34
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: 46 522 63 24 799 60 21 8 73 41 21 34
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 522 63 24 799 60 21 8 73 41 21 34
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 46 522 63 24 799 60 21 8 73 41 21 34
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.68 0.32 1.00 1.86 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.71 1.00 0.38 0.62
Final Sat.: 1700 4551 549 1700 3163 237 350 133 1217 1700 649 1051
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.345
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 18 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 41 615 0 0 837 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 41 615 0 0 837 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 41 615 0 0 837 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 41 615 0 0 837 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 41 615 0 0 837 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.94 0.06 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3301 99 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.531
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 25 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 70 464 61 102 695 71 134 526 139 102 425 51
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: 70 464 61 102 695 71 134 526 139 102 425 51
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: 70 464 61 102 695 71 134 526 139 102 425 51
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 70 464 61 102 695 71 134 526 139 102 425 51
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 70 464 61 102 695 71 134 526 139 102 425 51
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3005 395 1700 3085 315 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.15 0.08 0.06 0.13 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:16 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.544
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 26 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 516 34 41 872 33 60 204 87 66 178 39
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 516 34 41 872 33 60 204 87 66 178 39
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 516 34 41 872 33 60 204 87 66 178 39
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 516 34 41 872 33 60 204 87 66 178 39
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 516 34 41 872 33 60 204 87 66 178 39
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.88 0.12 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 0.70 0.30 1.00 0.82 0.18
Final Sat.: 1700 3190 210 1700 3276 124 1700 1192 508 1700 1394 306
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
3: Water & Anaheim 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 12 49 45 10 44 16 502 18 24 989 27
Future Vol, veh/h 25 12 49 45 10 44 16 502 18 24 989 27
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 10 10 0 4
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Mvmt Flow 27 13 53 49 11 48 17 546 20 26 1075 29
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1461 1756 558 1198 1761 295 1108 0 0 575 0 0
Stage 1 1146 1146 - 600 600 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 315 610 - 598 1161 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.64 6.64 7.04 4.24 - - 4.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.57 4.07 3.37 2.27 - - 2.27 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 86 80 461 136 79 687 598 - - 961 - -
Stage 1 204 262 - 442 476 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 657 471 - 444 258 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 68 75 458 99 74 679 597 - - 959 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 68 75 - 99 74 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 197 254 - 425 458 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 578 453 - 361 250 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 75.7 72.9 0.3 0.2
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 597 - - 136 151 959 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.687 0.713 0.027 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.2 - - 75.7 72.9 8.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - F F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 3.8 4.2 0.1 - -
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: EP PM
Command: EP PM
Volume: EP PM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.411 A xxxxx 0.411 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.359 A xxxxx 0.359 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway B xxxxx 0.640 B xxxxx 0.640 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana B xxxxx 0.611 B xxxxx 0.611 + 0.000 V/C
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.411
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 65 958 118 38 618 68 26 19 79 81 14 80
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: 65 958 118 38 618 68 26 19 79 81 14 80
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: 65 958 118 38 618 68 26 19 79 81 14 80
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 65 958 118 38 618 68 26 19 79 81 14 80
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 65 958 118 38 618 68 26 19 79 81 14 80
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.67 0.33 1.00 1.80 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.64 1.00 0.15 0.85
Final Sat.: 1700 4541 559 1700 3063 337 356 260 1083 1700 253 1447
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.06
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.359
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 19 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 1089 0 0 817 36 0 0 68 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 1089 0 0 817 36 0 0 68 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 1089 0 0 817 36 0 0 68 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 1089 0 0 817 36 0 0 68 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 1089 0 0 817 36 0 0 68 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.92 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3257 143 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.640
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 32 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 175 865 88 109 642 134 178 449 79 115 478 66
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: 175 865 88 109 642 134 178 449 79 115 478 66
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: 175 865 88 109 642 134 178 449 79 115 478 66
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 175 865 88 109 642 134 178 449 79 115 478 66
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 175 865 88 109 642 134 178 449 79 115 478 66
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.82 0.18 1.00 1.65 0.35 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3086 314 1700 2813 587 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.10 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.04
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
EP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:21 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.611
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 72 1094 48 65 741 54 53 171 42 51 211 54
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 72 1094 48 65 741 54 53 171 42 51 211 54
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 72 1094 48 65 741 54 53 171 42 51 211 54
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 72 1094 48 65 741 54 53 171 42 51 211 54
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 72 1094 48 65 741 54 53 171 42 51 211 54
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.80 0.20
Final Sat.: 1700 3257 143 1700 3169 231 1700 1365 335 1700 1354 346
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.16
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
4: Anaheim & Water 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 4
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 7.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 9 30 17 3 21 31 1147 23 44 756 41
Future Vol, veh/h 30 9 30 17 3 21 31 1147 23 44 756 41
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 10 10 0 3
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 32 9 32 18 3 22 33 1207 24 46 796 43
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1585 2220 422 1790 2230 627 842 0 0 1242 0 0
Stage 1 913 913 - 1295 1295 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 672 1307 - 495 935 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98 4.18 - - 4.18 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34 2.24 - - 2.24 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 71 42 575 50 41 422 777 - - 546 - -
Stage 1 290 346 - 169 227 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 407 224 - 520 338 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 57 36 573 34 36 418 777 - - 545 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 57 36 - 34 36 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 277 316 - 160 215 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 363 212 - 436 309 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 153.9 134 0.3 0.6
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 777 - - 83 65 545 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - 0.875 0.664 0.085 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 - - 153.9 134 12.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F F B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 4.6 2.9 0.3 - -
FUTURE YEAR (2018) CONDITIONS
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: FUT AM
Command: FUT AM
Volume: FUT AM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.407 A xxxxx 0.407 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.340 A xxxxx 0.340 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway A xxxxx 0.530 A xxxxx 0.530 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana A xxxxx 0.544 A xxxxx 0.544 + 0.000 V/C
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.407
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 523 36 24 800 61 21 8 74 28 21 28
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: 46 523 36 24 800 61 21 8 74 28 21 28
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: 46 523 36 24 800 61 21 8 74 28 21 28
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 523 36 24 800 61 21 8 74 28 21 28
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 46 523 36 24 800 61 21 8 74 28 21 28
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.81 0.19 1.00 1.86 0.14 0.20 0.08 0.72 1.00 0.43 0.57
Final Sat.: 1700 4772 328 1700 3159 241 347 132 1221 1700 729 971
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.25 0.25 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.340
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 18 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 41 590 0 0 830 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 41 590 0 0 830 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 41 590 0 0 830 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 41 590 0 0 830 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 41 590 0 0 830 21 0 0 26 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.95 0.05 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3316 84 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.530
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 25 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 71 442 62 103 685 70 130 531 140 102 429 52
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: 71 442 62 103 685 70 130 531 140 102 429 52
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: 71 442 62 103 685 70 130 531 140 102 429 52
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 71 442 62 103 685 70 130 531 140 102 429 52
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 71 442 62 103 685 70 130 531 140 102 429 52
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.75 0.25 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 2982 418 1700 3085 315 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.08 0.16 0.08 0.06 0.13 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:25 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.544
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 26 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 499 34 41 863 33 57 206 88 66 180 39
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 499 34 41 863 33 57 206 88 66 180 39
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 499 34 41 863 33 57 206 88 66 180 39
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 499 34 41 863 33 57 206 88 66 180 39
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 499 34 41 863 33 57 206 88 66 180 39
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 0.70 0.30 1.00 0.82 0.18
Final Sat.: 1700 3183 217 1700 3275 125 1700 1191 509 1700 1397 303
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.26 0.26 0.03 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
5: Water & Anaheim 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 5
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 6.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 12 49 45 10 44 16 498 18 24 993 18
Future Vol, veh/h 12 12 49 45 10 44 16 498 18 24 993 18
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 10 10 0 4
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Mvmt Flow 13 13 53 49 11 48 17 541 20 26 1079 20
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1458 1751 555 1196 1751 292 1103 0 0 571 0 0
Stage 1 1145 1145 - 596 596 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 313 606 - 600 1155 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.64 6.64 7.04 4.24 - - 4.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.57 4.07 3.37 2.27 - - 2.27 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 86 80 463 136 80 690 600 - - 964 - -
Stage 1 204 262 - 445 478 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 659 473 - 442 259 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 68 75 460 99 75 682 599 - - 962 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 68 75 - 99 75 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 197 254 - 428 460 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 580 455 - 360 251 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 45.5 71.9 0.3 0.2
HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 599 - - 165 152 962 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.481 0.708 0.027 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.2 - - 45.5 71.9 8.8 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - E F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.3 4.2 0.1 - -
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: FUT PM
Command: FUT PM
Volume: FUT PM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.402 A xxxxx 0.402 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.352 A xxxxx 0.352 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway B xxxxx 0.627 B xxxxx 0.627 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana B xxxxx 0.602 B xxxxx 0.602 + 0.000 V/C
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.402
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 66 964 71 38 612 69 26 19 80 67 14 74
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: 66 964 71 38 612 69 26 19 80 67 14 74
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: 66 964 71 38 612 69 26 19 80 67 14 74
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 66 964 71 38 612 69 26 19 80 67 14 74
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 66 964 71 38 612 69 26 19 80 67 14 74
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.79 0.21 1.00 1.80 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.64 1.00 0.16 0.84
Final Sat.: 1700 4750 350 1700 3056 344 354 258 1088 1700 270 1430
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.05
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.352
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 19 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 1047 0 0 802 32 0 0 65 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 1047 0 0 802 32 0 0 65 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 1047 0 0 802 32 0 0 65 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 1047 0 0 802 32 0 0 65 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 1047 0 0 802 32 0 0 65 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.92 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3270 130 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.627
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 31 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 177 831 89 110 624 132 170 453 80 114 483 67
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: 177 831 89 110 624 132 170 453 80 114 483 67
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: 177 831 89 110 624 132 170 453 80 114 483 67
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 177 831 89 110 624 132 170 453 80 114 483 67
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 177 831 89 110 624 132 170 453 80 114 483 67
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 1.65 0.35 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3071 329 1700 2806 594 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.10 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.04
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FUT PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:30 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.602
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 73 1070 48 66 722 55 46 173 42 49 213 55
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: 73 1070 48 66 722 55 46 173 42 49 213 55
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: 73 1070 48 66 722 55 46 173 42 49 213 55
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 73 1070 48 66 722 55 46 173 42 49 213 55
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 73 1070 48 66 722 55 46 173 42 49 213 55
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.91 0.09 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.79 0.21
Final Sat.: 1700 3254 146 1700 3159 241 1700 1368 332 1700 1351 349
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.16
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
6: Anaheim & Water 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 6
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 4.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 9 30 17 3 21 31 1142 23 44 755 24
Future Vol, veh/h 10 9 30 17 3 21 31 1142 23 44 755 24
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 10 10 0 3
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 11 9 32 18 3 22 33 1202 24 46 795 25
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1572 2205 413 1784 2205 624 823 0 0 1236 0 0
Stage 1 903 903 - 1289 1289 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 669 1302 - 495 916 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98 4.18 - - 4.18 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34 2.24 - - 2.24 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 73 43 583 50 43 423 790 - - 548 - -
Stage 1 295 350 - 170 229 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 409 225 - 520 345 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 58 37 581 34 37 419 790 - - 547 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 58 37 - 34 37 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 282 320 - 161 217 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 365 214 - 437 315 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 68.6 134 0.3 0.7
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 790 - - 105 65 547 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.041 - - 0.491 0.664 0.085 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.8 - - 68.6 134 12.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F F B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.2 2.9 0.3 - -
FUTURE YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:34 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: FP AM
Command: FP AM
Volume: FP AM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:35 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.417 A xxxxx 0.417 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.348 A xxxxx 0.348 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway A xxxxx 0.536 A xxxxx 0.536 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana A xxxxx 0.549 A xxxxx 0.549 + 0.000 V/C
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:35 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.417
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 21 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 46 527 63 24 807 61 21 8 74 41 21 34
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: 46 527 63 24 807 61 21 8 74 41 21 34
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: 46 527 63 24 807 61 21 8 74 41 21 34
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 46 527 63 24 807 61 21 8 74 41 21 34
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 46 527 63 24 807 61 21 8 74 41 21 34
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.68 0.32 1.00 1.86 0.14 0.20 0.08 0.72 1.00 0.38 0.62
Final Sat.: 1700 4555 545 1700 3161 239 347 132 1221 1700 649 1051
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.12 0.12 0.01 0.26 0.26 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:35 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.348
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 19 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 41 621 0 0 845 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 41 621 0 0 845 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 41 621 0 0 845 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 41 621 0 0 845 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 41 621 0 0 845 25 0 0 30 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.94 0.06 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3302 98 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:35 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.536
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 25 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 71 468 62 103 702 72 135 531 140 103 429 52
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: 71 468 62 103 702 72 135 531 140 103 429 52
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: 71 468 62 103 702 72 135 531 140 103 429 52
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 71 468 62 103 702 72 135 531 140 103 429 52
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 71 468 62 103 702 72 135 531 140 103 429 52
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.77 0.23 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3002 398 1700 3084 316 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.08 0.16 0.08 0.06 0.13 0.03
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP AM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:35 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.549
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 26 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 521 34 41 881 33 61 206 88 67 180 39
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 521 34 41 881 33 61 206 88 67 180 39
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 521 34 41 881 33 61 206 88 67 180 39
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 521 34 41 881 33 61 206 88 67 180 39
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 521 34 41 881 33 61 206 88 67 180 39
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.88 0.12 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 0.70 0.30 1.00 0.82 0.18
Final Sat.: 1700 3192 208 1700 3277 123 1700 1191 509 1700 1397 303
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.27 0.27 0.04 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.13 0.13
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
7: Anaheim & Water 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 7
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 12 49 45 10 44 16 507 18 24 999 27
Future Vol, veh/h 25 12 49 45 10 44 16 507 18 24 999 27
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 2 0 2 2 0 2 4 0 10 10 0 4
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Mvmt Flow 27 13 53 49 11 48 17 551 20 26 1086 29
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1475 1772 564 1210 1777 297 1119 0 0 581 0 0
Stage 1 1157 1157 - 606 606 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 318 615 - 604 1171 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.64 6.64 7.04 7.64 6.64 7.04 4.24 - - 4.24 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.64 5.64 - 6.64 5.64 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.57 4.07 3.37 3.57 4.07 3.37 2.27 - - 2.27 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 84 78 456 133 77 685 592 - - 955 - -
Stage 1 201 259 - 439 473 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 654 468 - 440 255 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 66 73 453 96 72 677 591 - - 953 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 66 73 - 96 72 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 194 251 - 422 455 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 575 450 - 357 247 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 80.6 77.4 0.3 0.2
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 591 - - 132 147 953 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.708 0.732 0.027 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.3 - - 80.6 77.4 8.9 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - F F A - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 4 4.4 0.1 - -
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 1-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario Report
Scenario: FP PM
Command: FP PM
Volume: FP PM
Geometry: Existing
Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee
Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation
Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution
Paths: Default Path
Routes: Default Route
Configuration: Default Configuration
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 2-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Impact Analysis Report
Level Of Service
Intersection Base Future Change
Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in
LOS Veh C LOS Veh C
# 1 Anaheim/Center A xxxxx 0.414 A xxxxx 0.414 + 0.000 V/C
# 2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade A xxxxx 0.362 A xxxxx 0.362 + 0.000 V/C
# 3 Anaheim/Broadway B xxxxx 0.646 B xxxxx 0.646 + 0.000 V/C
# 4 Anaheim/Santa Ana B xxxxx 0.617 B xxxxx 0.617 + 0.000 V/C
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 3-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #1 Anaheim/Center
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.414
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 20 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1! 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 66 968 119 38 624 69 26 19 80 82 14 81
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: 66 968 119 38 624 69 26 19 80 82 14 81
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: 66 968 119 38 624 69 26 19 80 82 14 81
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 66 968 119 38 624 69 26 19 80 82 14 81
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 66 968 119 38 624 69 26 19 80 82 14 81
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 2.67 0.33 1.00 1.80 0.20 0.21 0.15 0.64 1.00 0.15 0.85
Final Sat.: 1700 4542 558 1700 3061 339 354 258 1088 1700 251 1449
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.21 0.21 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.06
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 4-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #2 Anaheim/Center St Promenade
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.362
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 19 Level Of Service: A
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Center St Promenade
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Protected Permitted Protected Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 31 1099 0 0 825 36 0 0 69 0 0 0
Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Initial Bse: 31 1099 0 0 825 36 0 0 69 0 0 0
User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
PHF Volume: 31 1099 0 0 825 36 0 0 69 0 0 0
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 31 1099 0 0 825 36 0 0 69 0 0 0
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 31 1099 0 0 825 36 0 0 69 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 1.92 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Final Sat.: 1700 5100 0 0 3258 142 0 0 1700 0 0 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crit Moves: **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 5-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #3 Anaheim/Broadway
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.646
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 32 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Broadway
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit Prot+Permit
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 177 873 89 110 648 135 180 453 80 116 483 67
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: 177 873 89 110 648 135 180 453 80 116 483 67
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: 177 873 89 110 648 135 180 453 80 116 483 67
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 177 873 89 110 648 135 180 453 80 116 483 67
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 177 873 89 110 648 135 180 453 80 116 483 67
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.81 0.19 1.00 1.66 0.34 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00
Final Sat.: 1700 3085 315 1700 2814 586 1700 3400 1700 1700 3400 1700
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.23 0.23 0.11 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.14 0.04
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
FP PM Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:51:39 Page 6-1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Of Service Computation Report
ICU 1(Loss as Cycle Length %) Method (Base Volume Alternative)
********************************************************************************
Intersection #4 Anaheim/Santa Ana
********************************************************************************
Cycle (sec): 100 Critical Vol./Cap.(X): 0.617
Loss Time (sec): 5 Average Delay (sec/veh): xxxxxx
Optimal Cycle: 30 Level Of Service: B
********************************************************************************
Street Name: Anaheim Blvd Santa Ana St
Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound
Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted
Rights: Include Include Include Include
Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Volume Module:
Base Vol: 73 1105 48 66 748 55 53 173 42 51 213 55
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: 73 1105 48 66 748 55 53 173 42 51 213 55
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: 73 1105 48 66 748 55 53 173 42 51 213 55
Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Reduced Vol: 73 1105 48 66 748 55 53 173 42 51 213 55
PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
FinalVolume: 73 1105 48 66 748 55 53 173 42 51 213 55
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Saturation Flow Module:
Sat/Lane: 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700 1700
Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Lanes: 1.00 1.92 0.08 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 0.80 0.20 1.00 0.79 0.21
Final Sat.: 1700 3258 142 1700 3167 233 1700 1368 332 1700 1351 349
------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------|
Capacity Analysis Module:
Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.34 0.34 0.04 0.24 0.24 0.03 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.16
Crit Moves: **** **** **** ****
********************************************************************************
HCM 2010 TWSC
8: Anaheim & Water 06/16/2017
Baseline Synchro 9 Report
Page 8
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 8.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 30 9 30 17 3 21 31 1158 23 44 763 41
Future Vol, veh/h 30 9 30 17 3 21 31 1158 23 44 763 41
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 10 10 0 3
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - 135 - - 135 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
Heavy Vehicles, % 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mvmt Flow 32 9 32 18 3 22 33 1219 24 46 803 43
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1597 2238 426 1805 2248 633 849 0 0 1253 0 0
Stage 1 920 920 - 1306 1306 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 677 1318 - 499 942 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98 4.18 - - 4.18 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34 2.24 - - 2.24 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 70 41 571 49 40 418 772 - - 540 - -
Stage 1 288 343 - 166 224 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 404 221 - 517 335 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 56 35 569 33 35 414 772 - - 539 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 56 35 - 33 35 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 275 313 - 157 212 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 360 210 - 433 306 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 158 141.7 0.3 0.6
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 772 - - 82 63 539 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.042 - - 0.886 0.685 0.086 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 9.9 - - 158 141.7 12.3 - -
HCM Lane LOS A - - F F B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 4.7 3 0.3 - -
APPENDIX D: SIGNAL WARRANTS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 12 45 X North/South
Through 493 983 12 10 East/West
Right 18184944
Total 527 1,025 73 99
Intersection Geometry
1
4
68
Approach with Worst Case Delay WB
99
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing 1.9 99 1,724
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 12 45 X North/South
Through 493 983 12 10 East/West
Right 18184944
Total 527 1,025 73 99
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,552 99
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 10 17 X North/South
Through 1,131 748 9 3 East/West
Right 23243021
Total 1,185 816 49 41
Intersection Geometry
1
4
123.7
Approach with Worst Case Delay WB
41
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing 1.4 49 2,091
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 10 17 X North/South
Through 1,131 748 9 3 East/West
Right 23243021
Total 1,185 816 49 41
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2,001 49
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing + Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 25 45 X North/South
Through 502 989 12 10 East/West
Right 18274944
Total 536 1,040 86 99
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,576 99
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing + Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 25 45 X North/South
Through 502 989 12 10 East/West
Right 18274944
Total 536 1,040 86 99
Intersection Geometry
1
4
75.7
Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
86
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing + Project 1.8 99 1,761
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing + Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 30 17 X North/South
Through 1,147 756 9 3 East/West
Right 23413021
Total 1,201 841 69 41
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2,042 69
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Existing + Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 30 17 X North/South
Through 1,147 756 9 3 East/West
Right 23413021
Total 1,201 841 69 41
Intersection Geometry
1
4
153.9
Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
69
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Existing + Project 2.9 69 2,152
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
FUTURE YEAR (2018) CONDITIONS
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018)
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 12 45 X North/South
Through 498 993 12 10 East/West
Right 18 18 49 44
Total 532 1,035 73 99
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,567 99
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018)
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 12 45 X North/South
Through 498 993 12 10 East/West
Right 18 18 49 44
Total 532 1,035 73 99
Intersection Geometry
1
4
71.9
Approach with Worst Case Delay WB
99
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Future Year (2018) 2 99 1,739
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018)
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 10 17 X North/South
Through 1,142 755 9 3 East/West
Right 23 24 30 21
Total 1,196 823 49 41
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2,019 49
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018)
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 10 17 X North/South
Through 1,142 755 9 3 East/West
Right 23 24 30 21
Total 1,196 823 49 41
Intersection Geometry
1
4
134
Approach with Worst Case Delay WB
41
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Future Year (2018) 1.5 49 2,109
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
FUTURE YEAR (2018) PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018) Plus Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 25 45 X North/South
Through 507 999 12 10 East/West
Right 18 27 49 44
Total 541 1,050 86 99
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 1,591 99
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018) Plus Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour AM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 16 24 25 45 X North/South
Through 507 999 12 10 East/West
Right 18 27 49 44
Total 541 1,050 86 99
Intersection Geometry
1
4
80.6
Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
86
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Future Year (2018) Plus Project 1.9 99 1,776
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018) Plus Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 30 17 X North/South
Through 1,158 763 9 3 East/West
Right 23 41 30 21
Total 1,212 848 69 41
* Note: Traffic Volume for Major Street is Total Volume of Both Approches.
Traffic Volume for Minor Street is the Volume of High Volume Approach.
Number of Approach Lanes 2 1
NO
Traffic Volume (VPH) * 2,060 69
Major Street Minor Street Warrant MetAnaheim Blvd Water St
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800
Mi
n
o
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
H
i
g
h
e
r
V
o
l
u
m
e
A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
-
V
P
H
Major Street - Total of Both Approaches - Vehicle Per Hour (VPH)
Warrant 3B, Peak Hour
* Note: 150 vph applies as the lower threshold volume for a minor-street
approach with two or more lanes and 100 vph applies as the lower
threshold volume for a minor-street approach with one lane.
Source: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Caltrans, 2014
150*
100*
2 or More Lanes & 2 or More Lanes
1 Lane & 1 Lane
2 or More Lanes & 1 Lane
Project Leisuretown
Major Street Anaheim Blvd Scenario Future Year (2018) Plus Project
Minor Street Water St Peak Hour PM
Turn Movement Volumes Major Street Direction
NB SB EB WB
Left 31 44 30 17 X North/South
Through 1,158 763 9 3 East/West
Right 23 41 30 21
Total 1,212 848 69 41
Intersection Geometry
1
4
158
Approach with Worst Case Delay EB
69
Warrant Met NO
Limiting Value 4 100 800
Condition Satisfied? Not Met Not Met Met
Peak Hour Delay on
Minor Approach
(vehicle-hours)
Peak Hour Volume
on Minor Approach
(vph)
Peak Hour Entering
Volume Serviced
(vph)
Future Year (2018) Plus Project 3 69 2,170
Warrant 3A, Peak Hour
Number of Approach Lanes for Minor Street
Total Approaches
Worst Case Delay for Minor Street
Stopped Delay (seconds per vehicle)
Total Vehicles on Approach
8141 E. Kaiser Boulevard | Suite 110 | Anaheim, CA 92808 | (714) 941-8800 | Fax (949) 859-3209
www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 10, 2017
To: Chris Bennett, LAB Holdings
From: Spencer Reed, P.E.
Subject: Leisuretown Project Description Change Assessment
OC17-0497
This memorandum documents a trip generation, impact, and parking assessment associated with
changes to the project description of the proposed Leisuretown project (Project) located at 549 and
555 South Anaheim Boulevard in Anaheim, California. These changes are based on the September
2017 project description submitted to the City of Anaheim Planning Department. This assessment
was developed based on the technical analysis and determinations from the Leisuretown Project
Transportation Impact Analysis Report (Fehr & Peers, August 2017) and the Leisuretown Parking
Study Memorandum (Fehr & Peers, August 9, 2017).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the restoration of a historical craftsman home, a barrel-vaulted mid-century
retail building, and a masonry warehouse into brewpub operated by Modern Times Brewery. The
project will include a low-volume production brewery, tasting room, restaurant, retail, staff offices,
outdoor gardens, and a pool. The outdoor gardens will provide a combination of seating areas, an
elevated seated overlook area, restroom, recreational games, a hammock grove, and lounge
gardens. Table 1 offers a more detailed description of the elements of the project. The pool area
will serve as a unique experience for customers of the tasting room to sit on pool chairs around the
pool.
The layout of the site plan will not differ from what has been previously submitted and analyzed.
The Project is still proposing to provide between 19 and 31 parking spaces on-site, with the
remainder to be provided off-site in CarPark 2.
ATTACHMENT NO. 6
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 2 of 7
TRIP GENERATION ASSESSMENT
The trip generation rates and credits associated with the August 2017 project description are still
valid for the September 2017 project description. Documentation regarding the trip generation
rates and credits is provided in the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report. As
presented in Table 2, the September 2017 project description is expected to generate an estimated
net external 866 daily trips, including 48 trips (28 inbound/20 outbound) during the AM peak hour,
and 72 trips (47 inbound/25 outbound) during the PM peak hour.
In addition, similar to the August 2017 project description, the revised Project will alter the Polly
the Trolley route to add an additional stop at the Project site. The route will be adjusted to provide
shuttle service from CarPark 2 and the other CarParks to the Project site. A potential rerouting of
the Polly the Trolley service is provided in the Leisuretown Parking Study Memorandum submitted
to the City of Anaheim. It was assumed that Polly the Trolley would operate with 15 minute
headways, resulting in 96 daily trips with four additional inbound and outbound trips during the
AM and PM peak hours.
As identified in Table 1, the September 2017 project description will generate an additional
estimated net external 5 daily trips, including 2 trips (1 inbound/1 outbound) during the AM peak
hour; this would result in a 1% increase in the daily trip generation and a 4% increase in the AM
peak hour trip generation in comparison to the August 2017 project description.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
The Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report conducted intersection level of
service (LOS) analysis at five intersections, roadway segment analysis at four locations, and a signal
warrant analysis for the unsignalized intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street. This
analysis was conducted for the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year (2018) Plus Project
conditions.
INTERSECTION IMPACTS
As presented in the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report, the four signalized
study intersections operate at LOS B or better in both the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year
(2018) Plus Project conditions. In the Existing Plus Project condition, the intersection of Anaheim
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 3 of 7
Boulevard and Santa Ana Street would operate with the highest AM peak hour volume to capacity
(v/c) ratio of 0.544. This represented an increase in the v/c ratio of 0.005 from the Existing baseline
of 0.539. In the Opening Year (2018) Plus Project condition, the intersection of Anaheim Boulevard
and Santa Ana Street would operate with the highest AM peak hour v/c ratio of 0.549. This
represented an increase in the v/c ratio of 0.005 from the Opening Year (2018) baseline of 0.544.
The City of Anaheim does not have a significant impact threshold for signalized intersections
operating at LOS A or B. However, the City of Anaheim does identify an intersection as significantly
impacted if it operates at LOS C with inclusion of project traffic and the project increases the v/c
ratio by 0.050 or greater.
The September 2017 project description generates 2 additional AM peak hour trips (1 inbound and
1 outbound) than what was studied in the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis
Report. No significant change to the v/c ratios for both the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year
(2018) Plus Project conditions would be expected to occur with these additional trips. Therefore,
the intersection would continue to operate at LOS A and not result in a significant impact with the
September 2017 project description.
ROADWAY IMPACTS
As presented in the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report, the four roadway
study segments operate at LOS C or better in both the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year
(2018) Plus Project conditions. In the Existing Plus Project condition, the segment of Anaheim
Boulevard between Center Street Promenade and Broadway would operate with the highest daily
v/c ratio of 0.706. This represented an increase in the v/c ratio of 0.022 from the Existing baseline
of 0.684. In the Opening Year (2018) Plus Project condition, the segment of Anaheim Boulevard
between Center Street Promenade and Broadway would operate with the highest daily v/c ratio of
0.713. This represented an increase in the v/c ratio of 0.022 from the Opening Year (2018) baseline
of 0.691.
The City of Anaheim does not have a significant impact threshold for roadway segments operating
at LOS A or B. However, the City of Anaheim does identify a roadway segment as significantly
impacted if it operates at LOS C with inclusion of project traffic and the project increases the v/c
ratio by 0.050 or greater.
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 4 of 7
The September 2017 project description generates 5 more daily trips than what was studied in the
Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report. These additional daily trips would result
in no significant change to the v/c ratios for both the Existing Plus Project and Opening Year (2018)
Plus Project conditions. Therefore, the roadway segment would continue to operate at LOS C and
not result in a significant impact with the September 2017 project description.
SIGNAL WARRANT
As presented in the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report, the intersection of
Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street was tested against eight signal warrant criteria from the 2014
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). The Existing condition of the
intersection was used for the eight signal warrants, while the peak hour signal warrant was used for
the Existing Plus Project, Opening Year (2018), and Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions.
The Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report found that the intersection did not
meet any of the signal warrant criteria.
Appendix D of the Leisuretown Project Transportation Impact Analysis Report presents the technical
calculations for the signal warrant analysis. Given that the Existing and Opening Year (2018)
conditions have not changed as part of the September site plan, it is assumed that the intersection
will not meet the signal warrant criteria for those conditions. According to the calculations provided
in Appendix D, any of the following changes to the minor street volume would need to occur at the
intersection to meet the peak hour signal warrant criteria.
• Existing Plus Project Condition
o AM Peak Hour (either)
Warrant 3A – addition of 14 eastbound trips and an addition of
approxiamtely 70 seconds of side street stop control delay
Warrant 3B – addition of 36 eastbound trips
o PM Peak Hour (either)
Warrant 3A – addition of 31 eastbound trips
Warrant 3B – addition of 31 eastbound trips
• Opening Year (2018) Plus Project conditions
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 5 of 7
o AM Peak Hour (either)
Warrant 3A – addition of 14 eastbound trips and an addition of
approxiamtely 65 seconds of side street stop control delay
Warrant 3B – addition of 33 eastbound trips
o PM Peak Hour (either)
Warrant 3A – addition of 31 eastbound trips
Warrant 3B – addition of 31 eastbound trips
According to the Project trip generation estimates provided in Table 2, the September 2017 project
description only generates an additional 2 AM peak hour trips. The changes to the minor street
intersection volume would not meet the necessary change needed to meet the intersection peak
hour signal warrant criteria.
PARKING ASSESSMENT
Parking requirement rates and credits associated with the August 2017 project description are still
valid for the September 2017 project description. Documentation regarding the parking
requirement rates and credits is provided in the Leisuretown Parking Study Memorandum. As
presented in Table 3, the Project will require a total of 76 parking spaces. The Project will provide
31, 25, or 19 parking spaces on-site, depending on the outcome of the alley abandonment and CUP
hearings. As such, the Project will require 45, 51, or 57 parking spaces off-site. Accessible parking
will be required per the 2016 California Building Code Section 11B-208.2 (California Building
Standards Commission, 2017). If 1 to 25 parking spaces are provided in a parking facility, then 1
accessible parking space shall be required; if 26 to 50 parking spaces are provided in a parking
facility, then 2 accessible parking spaces shall be required. Additionally, for every six or fraction of
six parking spaces required by Section 11B-208.2 at least one shall be a van parking space.
To determine if the Project can provide the parking spaces in off-site public parking facilities, Fehr
& Peers reviewed recent parking data collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data
collection documented the parking supply and demand of public parking structures (CarParks, see
Figure 2), lots, and street parking located in Center City. The CarParks operate 24-hours a day and
range in price rate from $3 per hour (with $7 daily maximum) to $4 per hour (with $12 daily
maximum). The data collection determined a supply of approximately 3,653 parking spaces in the
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 6 of 7
CarParks, with a peak weekday (Wednesday – Friday) utilization of approximately 2,494 parking
spaces (68.3%) at 11:00 AM on Thursday and a peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of
approximately 1,805 parking spaces (49.4%) at 1:00 PM on Sunday. The off-site parking requirement
of 55, 61, or 67 parking spaces could be accommodated by the remaining supply in the CarParks.
The developer, LAB Holdings has an entitlement to 170 parking spaces in CarPark 2, and currently
does not exercise the option of using those 170 parking spaces. This entitlement will be used to
accommodate the off-site parking requirement of the Project. To determine if the off-site parking
requirement can be accommodated in CarPark 2, Fehr & Peers reviewed recent parking data
collected at CarPark 2 by the City of Anaheim in November 2016. The data collection determined a
supply of approximately 625 parking spaces in CarPark 2, with a peak weekday (Wednesday –
Friday) utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces (62.1%) at 11:00 AM on Wednesday and a
peak weekend (Saturday – Sunday) utilization of approximately 543 parking spaces (86.9%) at 1:00
PM on Sunday. CarPark 2 is utilized by the River Church (201 East Broadway) on Sundays. Outside
of the Sunday 8:00 AM to 2:00 PM timeframe in which the church is utilizing CarPark 2, the peak
weekend utilization is approximately 278 parking spaces (44.5%) at 3:00 PM on Saturday.
Additionally, CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for temporary vehicle storage. This
rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking spaces available to other users.
The off-site parking requirement of 45, 51, or 57 parking spaces could be accommodated by the
remaining supply in CarPark 2.
According to Shared Parking, Second Edition parking utilization for restaurants with active bar
lounges is typically at its highest, with approximately 90% to 100% of parking spaces being utilized,
on weekdays and weekends from 6:00 to 10:00 PM. Therefore, the Project is anticipated to have its
highest parking utilization during these time periods. The parking supply of the CarParks can
accommodate the anticipated highest utilization of the Project. The utilization of the CarParks from
6:00 to 10:00 PM ranges from approximately 28.8% to 55.1% on weekdays and from approximately
19.7% to 28.0% on weekends. While the Project will have the available parking supply in CarPark 2
to meet the off-site parking requirement of 55, 61, or 67 parking spaces, parking is available in all
of the CarParks for patrons. It is anticipated that patrons will park in any available parking facility.
CONCLUSION
An assessment of the trip generation, traffic impacts, and parking was conducted for the September
2017 project description of the Leisuretown Project. It was determined that the changes would
Chris Bennett
October 10, 2017
Page 7 of 7
result in an additional estimated net external 5 daily trips, including 2 trips (1 inbound/1 outbound)
during the AM peak hour, which results in a 1% increase in the daily trip generation, and a 4%
increase in the AM peak hour trip generation in comparison to the August 2017 project description.
These trip generation changes were determined to have no change on the intersection or roadway
segment impact determination as the number of additional trips generated does not cause the
Project to exceed any significance threshold.
The Project will require 76 parking spaces with 31, 25, or 19 parking spaces being provided on-site
and 45, 51, or 57 parking spaces being provided in CarPark 2 respectively. According to data
collected by the City of Anaheim in November 2016, CarPark 2 has a supply of approximately 625
parking spaces with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 388 parking spaces and a peak
weekend utilization of 543 parking spaces. CarPark 2 has up to 289 parking spaces rented for
temporary vehicle storage. This rental agreement can be ended at any time to make the parking
spaces available to other users. All of the CarParks have a combined supply of approximately 3,653
parking spaces, with a peak weekday utilization of approximately 2,494 parking spaces and a peak
weekend utilization of approximately 1,805 parking spaces. CarPark 2 and the other CarParks can
accommodate the Project off-site parking requirement.
A series of parking management strategies has been recommended for the Project to efficiently
utilize the available parking supply. These strategies include changes to the existing trolley service,
management of employee parking, and coordination with City of Anaheim programs. While the
available parking supply in Center City can accommodate the Project parking requirement, these
strategies should be considered for inclusion in the parking management program of the Project.
TA
B
L
E
1
PR
O
J
E
C
T
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
Us
e
Si
z
e
(
s
f
)
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
2,
2
0
4
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
w
i
t
h
b
r
e
a
k
f
a
s
t
,
l
u
n
c
h
,
a
n
d
d
i
n
n
e
r
e
n
t
r
e
e
s.
Ou
t
d
o
o
r
D
i
n
i
n
g
21
9
Ou
t
d
o
o
r
d
i
n
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
.
Ki
t
c
h
e
n
1,
0
9
7
Ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
k
i
t
c
h
e
n
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
i
n
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
St
o
r
a
g
e
60
9
St
o
r
a
g
e
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
.
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
T
o
t
a
l
4,
1
2
9
Br
e
w
e
r
y
Br
e
w
e
r
y
5,
0
2
2
Lo
w
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
b
r
e
w
e
r
y
.
Br
e
w
e
r
y
O
f
f
i
c
e
49
9
Br
e
w
e
r
y
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
.
Br
e
w
e
r
y
T
o
t
a
l
5,
5
2
1
Ta
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
Ta
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
80
8
Br
e
w
e
r
y
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
.
Ou
t
d
o
o
r
G
a
r
d
e
n
1
,
6
4
7
Co
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
s
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
r
e
a
,
r
e
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
g
a
m
e
a
r
e
a
,
h
a
m
m
o
c
k
g
r
o
v
e
,
a
n
d
lo
u
n
g
e
a
r
e
a
.
Po
o
l
D
e
c
k
1,
5
2
8
Po
o
l
c
h
a
i
r
l
o
u
g
n
e
a
r
e
a
f
o
r
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
.
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
A
r
e
a
64
0
El
e
v
a
t
e
d
s
e
a
t
e
d
a
r
e
a
o
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
i
n
g
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
g
a
r
d
e
n
.
Re
s
t
r
o
o
m
65
9
Re
s
t
r
o
o
m
f
o
r
g
a
r
d
e
n
a
r
e
a
a
n
d
p
o
o
l
d
e
c
k
.
St
o
r
a
g
e
16
0
St
o
r
a
g
e
f
o
r
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
g
a
r
d
e
n
.
Ta
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
T
o
t
a
l
5,
4
4
2
Sh
a
r
e
d
S
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
/
O
f
f
i
c
e
St
a
f
f
O
f
f
i
c
e
31
5
St
a
f
f
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
i
n
a
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
.
Sh
a
r
e
d
S
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
/
O
f
f
i
c
e
31
5
Re
t
a
i
l
Re
t
a
i
l
3
2
0
R
e
t
a
i
l
s
p
a
c
e
s
e
l
l
i
n
g
M
o
d
e
r
n
T
i
m
e
s
m
e
r
c
h
a
n
d
is
e
a
n
d
p
a
c
k
a
g
e
f
o
o
d
.
Re
t
a
i
l
32
0
TA
B
L
E
2
TR
I
P
G
E
N
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
S
O
N
IT
E
L
a
n
d
Tr
i
p
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
R
a
t
e
s
[
a
]
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
T
r
i
p
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Us
e
Si
z
e
Da
i
l
y
Tr
i
p
R
a
t
e
Da
i
l
y
AM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
T
r
i
p
s
PM Peak Hour Trips
Co
d
e
Ra
t
e
Ra
t
e
%
I
n
%
O
u
t
Ra
t
e
%
I
n
%
O
u
t
Un
i
t
Tr
i
p
s
In
Ou
t
Total In Out Total
Hi
g
h
-
T
u
r
n
o
v
e
r
(
S
i
t
-
D
o
w
n
)
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
[
b
]
93
2
4.
1
2
9
ks
f
12
7
.
1
5
10
.
8
1
55
%
45
%
9.
8
5
60
%
40
%
pe
r
k
s
f
52
5
25
20
45 25 16 41
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
[
c
]
5%
0%
5%
(2
6
)
0
0
0 (1)(1)(2)
Pa
s
s
-
b
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
[
d
]
5%
5%
5%
(2
5
)
(1
)
(1
)
(2)(1)(1)(2)
Ne
t
E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
i
p
s
47
4
24
19
43 23 14 39
Ta
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
[
e
]
,
[
f
]
,
[
g
]
-
5.
2
8
2
ks
f
73
.
2
6
0.
0
0
0%
0%
6.
1
0
76
%
24
%
pe
r
k
s
f
38
7
3
0
3 24 11 35
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
[
c
]
5%
0%
5%
(1
9
)
0
0
0 (1)(1)(2)
Pa
s
s
-
b
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
[
d
]
5%
0%
5%
(1
8
)
0
0
0 (1)(1)(2)
Ne
t
E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
i
p
s
35
0
3
0
3 22 9 31
Sh
a
r
e
d
S
t
a
f
f
i
n
g
/
O
f
f
i
c
e
S
p
a
c
e
[
h
]
-
0.
3
1
5
ks
f
10
0
.
2
1
5.
4
1
55
%
45
%
7.
9
8
68
%
32
%
pe
r
k
s
f
32
1
1
2 2 1 3
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
[
c
]
5%
0%
5%
(2
)
0
0
0 0 0 0
Ne
t
E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
i
p
s
30
1
1
2 2 1 3
Re
t
a
i
l
[
i
]
82
0
0.
3
2
0
ks
f
42
.
7
0
0.
0
0
0%
0%
3.
7
1
48
%
52
%
pe
r
k
s
f
14
0
0
0 0 1 1
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
[
c
]
5%
0%
5%
(1
)
0
0
0 0 0 0
Pa
s
s
-
b
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
[
d
]
5%
5%
5%
(1
)
0
0
0 0 0 0
Ne
t
E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
i
p
s
12
0
0
0 0 1 1
To
t
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
r
i
p
s
95
8
29
21
50 51 29 80
In
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
[
c
]
(4
8
)
0
0
0 (2)(2)(4)
Pa
s
s
-
b
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
[d
]
(4
4
)
(1
)
(1
)
(2)(2)(2)(4)
Ne
t
E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
T
r
i
p
s
86
6
28
20
48 47 25 72
Po
l
l
e
y
t
h
e
T
r
o
l
l
e
y
T
r
i
p
s
96
4
4
8 4 4 8
To
t
a
l
T
r
i
p
s
96
2
32
24
56 51 29 80
Au
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
7
T
r
i
p
G
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
95
7
31
23
54 52 28 80
Di
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
5
1
1
2 (1)1 0
%
C
h
a
n
g
e
f
r
o
m
A
u
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
7
1%
4%0%
No
t
e
s
:
[a
]
:
T
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
i
n
T
a
b
l
e
1
.
[b
]
:
H
i
g
h
-
T
u
r
n
o
v
e
r
(
S
i
t
-
D
o
w
n
)
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
i
nc
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
s
:
2
.
2
0
4
k
s
f
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
,
1
.
0
9
7
k
s
f
k
i
t
c
h
e
n,
0
.
2
1
9
k
s
f
p
a
t
i
o
,
a
n
d
0
.
6
0
9
k
s
f
s
t
o
r
a
g
e
.
[c
]
:
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
s
t
h
e
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
tr
i
p
s
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
s
t
h
a
t
o
c
c
u
r
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
.
C
r
e
d
i
t
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
NC
H
R
P
8
-
5
1
E
n
h
a
n
c
i
n
g
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
T
r
i
p
C
a
p
t
u
r
e
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
i
on
f
o
r
M
i
x
e
d
-
U
s
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
.
[d
]
:
A
p
a
s
s
-
b
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
t
o
b
e
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
r
e
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
g
iv
e
n
t
h
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
s
i
t
e
n
e
a
r
a
m
a
j
o
r
t
h
o
r
o
u
g
h
fa
r
e
s
.
[e
]
:
T
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
i
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
s
:
0
.
8
0
8
k
s
f
ta
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
,
1
.
6
4
7
k
s
f
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
g
a
r
d
e
n
,
1
.
5
2
8
k
s
f
p
oo
l
d
e
c
k
,
0
.
6
4
0
k
s
f
o
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
a
r
e
a
,
a
n
d
0
.
6
5
9
k
s
f
r
e
st
r
o
o
m
.
[f
]
:
T
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
h
o
u
r
s
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
f
r
o
m
1
1
:
0
0
A
M
t
o
2
:0
0
A
M
.
T
h
r
e
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
a
r
e
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
t
o
b
e
w
o
r
k
i
ng
a
t
b
r
e
w
e
r
y
,
a
n
d
t
h
r
e
e
A
M
p
e
a
k
h
o
u
r
i
n
b
o
u
n
d
t
r
i
p
s
w
e
r
e
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
o
s
e
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
.
[g
]
:
B
r
e
w
e
r
y
a
n
d
b
r
e
w
e
r
y
o
f
f
i
c
e
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
l
a
n
d
u
s
e
f
o
r
t
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
a
s
t
h
e
p
ri
m
a
r
y
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
e
a
k
h
o
u
r
t
r
i
p
s
w
a
s
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
to
b
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
.
As
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
i
n
T
a
b
l
e
1
f
o
o
t
n
o
t
e
[
d
]
,
t
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
on
r
a
t
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
f
o
r
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
a
n
d
p
a
t
i
o
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
o
o
t
a
g
e
o
n
l
y
a
s
i
t
w
a
s
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
om
a
n
d
p
a
t
i
o
w
e
r
e
t
h
e
r
e
a
s
o
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
M
p
e
a
k
h
o
u
r
t
rips.
Tr
i
p
s
a
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
w
e
r
e
n
o
t
e
x
c
l
u
d
e
d
f
ro
m
t
h
e
d
a
t
a
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
h
e
r
e
b
y
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
g
i
n
a
c
o
n
s
er
v
a
t
i
v
e
t
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
f
o
r
t
a
s
t
i
n
g
r
o
o
m
.
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
r
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
(
I
T
E
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
C
o
d
e
9
3
1
)
d
a
i
l
y
a
n
d
A
M
p
e
a
k
h
o
u
r
r
a
t
e
u
t
i
l
i
z
e
d
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
h
o
u
r
s
o
f
o
p
e
r
at
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
o
f
t
h
e
u
s
e
s
.
[h
]
:
T
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
s
h
a
r
e
d
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
t
h
a
t
s
up
p
o
r
t
s
b
o
t
h
T
a
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
a
n
d
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
b
le
n
d
e
d
r
a
t
e
s
d
e
s
c
r
i
b
e
d
i
n
[
b
]
a
n
d
[
e
]
.
[i
]
:
T
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
r
e
t
a
i
l
s
p
a
c
e
c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
b
a
se
d
o
n
I
T
E
t
r
i
p
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
r
a
t
e
s
.
AM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
PM
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
A
u
g
u
s
t
2
0
1
7
La
n
d
U
s
e
S
i
z
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
S
p
a
c
e
s
[
a
]
R
a
t
e
U
n
i
t
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
S
p
ac
e
s
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
S
p
a
c
e
s
C
h
a
n
g
e
Re
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
[
b
]
[
c
]
3
.
5
2
0
k
s
f
8
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
2
9
2
9
0
Br
e
w
e
r
y
[
d
]
5
.
5
2
1
k
s
f
1
.
5
5
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
9
9
0
Ta
s
t
i
n
g
R
o
o
m
0
.
8
0
8
k
s
f
1
7
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
1
4
1
4
0
Po
o
l
D
e
c
k
1
.
5
2
8
k
s
f
5
.
6
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
9
1
0
-
1
Ga
r
d
e
n
A
r
e
a
[
e
]
2
.
9
4
6
k
s
f
5
.
6
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
1
7
1
7
0
Re
t
a
i
l
0.
3
2
0
k
s
f
4
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
2
2
0
St
a
f
f
O
f
f
i
c
e
0
.
3
1
5
k
s
f
4
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
2
1
1
St
o
r
a
g
e
0.
7
6
9
k
s
f
1
.
5
5
p
e
r
1
k
s
f
G
F
A
2
1
1
Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
8
4
8
3
1
Pr
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
t
o
o
t
h
e
r
u
s
e
s
a
n
d
T
N
C
'
s
(
5
%
)
-
4
-
4
0
Ca
p
t
i
v
e
R
a
t
i
o
(
5
%
)
-
4
-
4
0
Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
T
o
t
a
l
7
6
7
5
1
Pr
o
v
i
d
e
d
o
n
S
i
t
e
3
1
,
2
5
,
o
r
1
9
3
1
,
2
5
,
o
r
1
9
0
,
0
,
o
r
0
Of
f
-
S
i
t
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
4
5
,
5
1
,
o
r
5
7
4
4
,
5
0
,
o
r
5
6
1
,
1
,
o
r
1
No
t
e
s
:
ks
f
-
t
h
o
u
s
a
n
d
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
GF
A
-
g
r
o
s
s
f
l
o
o
r
a
r
e
a
[a
]
:
S
o
u
r
c
e
-
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
C
o
d
e
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
8
.
4
2
.
04
0
,
u
n
l
e
s
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
n
o
t
e
d
.
[b
]
:
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
f
8
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
p
e
r
1
,
00
0
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
e
e
t
o
f
G
r
o
s
s
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
d
b
y
C
it
y
o
f
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
t
a
f
f
.
[c
]
:
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
s
2
.
2
0
4
k
s
f
r
e
s
t
a
r
u
a
n
t
,
1
.
0
9
7
k
s
f
k
it
c
h
e
n
,
a
n
d
0
.
2
1
9
k
s
f
p
a
t
i
o
[d
]
:
I
n
c
o
p
o
r
a
t
e
s
5
.
0
2
2
k
s
f
o
f
b
r
e
w
e
r
y
a
n
d
0
.
4
9
9
k
s
f
o
f
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
'
s
l
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
t
e
a
m
th
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
u
p
s
t
a
i
r
s
a
t
5
4
9
S
.
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
.
T
h
i
s
a
c
c
o
un
t
s
f
o
r
9
%
o
f
b
r
e
w
e
r
y
s
q
u
a
r
e
f
o
o
t
a
g
e
[e
]
:
I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
s
1
.
6
4
7
k
s
f
o
u
t
d
o
o
r
g
a
r
d
e
n
,
0
.
6
4
0
k
sf
o
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
a
r
e
a
,
a
n
d
0
.
6
5
9
k
s
f
r
e
s
t
r
o
o
m
TA
B
L
E
3
PA
R
K
I
N
G
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
City of Anaheim
INTERDEPARTMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
To: Nicholas Taylor/Planning Department
Case No.: DEV 2017-00026/CUP 2017-05910
Leisuretown
549 - 559 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Date: October 4, 2017
From: Lieutenant Brian McElhaney
Anaheim Police Department
Vice, Narcotics and Criminal Intelligence Section Commander
Contact: Name: S.P.S.R. Michele Irwin
Phone: 714-765-1461
Email: mmirwin@anaheim.net
The Police Department has reviewed the above case. Please see the following comments and
conditions for more information:
COMMENTS:
The Police Department has received an I.D.C. Route Sheet for DEV 2017-00026/CUP
2017-05910. The applicant is requesting to permit a brewery and tasting room in
conjunction with a restaurant, retail stores and a swimming pool.
The location is in Census Tract Number 874.01 which has a population of 3,954. This
population allows for 4 on-sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and there is
presently 1 license in the tract. It also allows for 2 off-sale licenses and there are
presently 2 licenses in the tract.
This location is within Reporting District 1725 which is 240% above the city average in
crime. There were 4 calls for service to this location in the last year and they consisted
of: 1 suspicious vehicle, 1 abandoned vehicle, 1 suspicious subject and 1 vandalism.
The ¼ mile radius surrounding this location is 169% above the city average in crime.
The calls for service primarily consisted of: 55 petty thefts, 25 auto burglaries, 27
vandalisms, 23 grand theft autos and 19 drug abuse violations.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Lack of parking on-site could negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood with
parking and disturbance issues. The Police Department wants to see mitigating
measures included that will keep parking/loitering from occurring. Parking permits for
the neighborhood, shuttles to and from other open parking lots, and a designated
Uber/Lift area have been discussed. The Police Department requests the following
conditions be placed on the Conditional Use Permit:
ATTACHMENT NO. 7
1.
Any Graffiti painted or marked upon the premises
or on any adjacent area under the control of the
licensee shall be removed or painted over within
24 hours of being applied.
Police Department
2.
Security measures shall be provided to the
satisfaction of the Anaheim Police Department to
deter unlawful conduct of employees and
patrons, promote the safe and orderly assembly
and movement of persons and vehicles, and to
prevent disturbances to the neighborhood by
excessive noise created by patrons entering or
leaving the premises.
Police Department
3.
Any and all security officers provided shall comply
with all State and Local ordinances regulating their
services, including, without limitation, Chapter
11.5 of Division 3 of the California Business and
Profession Code. (Section 4.16.070 Anaheim
Municipal Code)
Police Department
4.
Petitioner shall not share any profits, or pay any
percentage or commission to a promoter or any
other person, based upon monies collected as a
door charge, cover charge, or any other form of
admission charge, including minimum drink
orders, or the sale of drinks.
Police Department
5.
The outdoor patio and pool area shall close to
patrons at 9:00p.m., Sunday – Thursday, and
10:00p.m., Friday and Saturday. All patrons
remaining must move into the indoor restaurant
or tasting room. Restaurant and tasting room to
close at midnight daily.
Police Department
6.
Managers, owners, and wait staff need to call the
Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and
obtain LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and
Drugs Program) Training. The contact number is
714-558-4101.
Police Department
7.
That subject alcoholic beverage license shall not
be exchanged for a public premise (bar) type
license nor shall the establishment be operated
as a public premise as defined in Section 23039
of the Business and Professions Code.
Police Department
8.
The patio must be fenced and fully enclosed. If
there is a pedestrian gate it must be self-closing
and have a sign posted on the interior that reads
“No alcohol beyond this point.”
Police Department
9.
Parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles,
passageways, recesses and grounds contiguous
to buildings, shall be provided with enough
lighting to illuminate and make clearly visible the
presence of any person on or about the premises
during the hours of darkness and provide a safe,
secure environment for all persons, property,
and vehicles onsite.
Police Department
10.
There shall be no entertainment allowed in any
outdoor area unless a special event permit has
been obtained.
Police Department
11.
There shall be no entertainment inside the
brewery or restaurant without obtaining an
entertainment permit from the City of Anaheim.
12.
The petitioner(s) shall be responsible for
maintaining free of litter the area adjacent to the
premises over which they have control, as
depicted.
Police Department
13.
At all times when the premise is open for
business, the premise shall be maintained as a
bona fide restaurant and shall provide a menu
containing an assortment of foods normally
offered in such restaurant.
Police Department
14.
The permitted event or activity shall not create
sound levels which violate any ordinance of the
City of Anaheim.
Police Department
15.
The number of persons inside the restaurant shall
not exceed the maximum occupancy load as
determined by the Anaheim Fire Department.
Signs indicating the occupant load shall be posted
in a conspicuous place on an approved sign near
the main exit from the room. (Section 25.114(a)
Uniform Fire Code)
Police Department
16.
The business shall not be operated in such a way
as to be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare.
Police Department
17.
Any violation of the application, or any attached
conditions, shall be sufficient grounds to revoke
the permit.
Police Department
18.
If rod iron is used for the fencing to the north,
there shall be some form of decorative screening
used that will help screen headlights from
shinning into the residence.
Police Department
19.
The storage containers shall be constructed to
have sound attenuating material inside to help
with noise reduction.
Police Department
Concur:
Office of Chief of Police
f:\home\mmirwin\CUP\2017-00026 DEV 549 – 559 S Anaheim Blvd Leisuretown.doc
LEISURETOWN
SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
1
1
2
233
4
2
29
5
3
6
7
4
8
9
5
10
6
11
7
12
8
13
9
1410
15
11
11
16
17
13
18
14
19
20
21
16
22
17
23
18
24
19
25
20
26
27
22
22
12
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
30
28
24
27
26
25
23
21
EAST ENTRANCE
OUTDOOR DINING ROOM
PATIO SEATING
FIRE PIT
GRUIT GARDEN
ADA RAMP AND STAIRS
REMNANT GARDEN FENCE
BURNS YARD
NORTH ENTRANCE
PAVILLION FLEXIBLE USE AREA
RAISED TREE PLANTER
LIFT
M.T. FAMILY ROOM WITH FIREPLACE
SOURYARD
PICNIC AREA
COVERED OUTDOOR TASTING LOUNGE
M.T. POOL
OUTDOOR SHOWER
POOL CABANAS
EMERGENCY EGRESS GATE
BICYCLE PARKING
AUTOMOBILE PARKING
VALET/UBER DROP
TRASH ENCLOSURE
WEST ENTRANCE
SOUTH ENTRANCE
BAMBOO HEDGE
6’ HT. CMU POOL WALL W/ ANTI-GRAFFITI PLANTING
ABC RAIL
WOOD DECK
8’ HT. PROPERTY LINE AND ALLEY CLOSURE WALL(TBD)
LOADING/UNLOADING AREA
SHIPPING CONTAINER
COVERED SEATING
555 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
EXISTING
EXISTING
559 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
549 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.
15
LEGEND
A
B
CD
10
’
LANDSCAPE SETBACK LINE 32
31
SE
T
B
A
C
K
L
I
N
E
15’
UL
T
.
R
.
O
.
W
.
10/02/2017
SETBACK LINE
1
0
’
33
33
33
Leisure Town 10/02/2017
CUP2017-05910/VAR2017-05059(DEV2017-00026)
SITE ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN
EXISTING
PROPOSED
34
SECTION B
SECTION A
Use Category Use Description (Adopted from F&P Traffic Study)Label Area (GSF)
Restaurant Restaurant with breakfast, lunch and dinner entrees A1, A2, A4, A5, A8 2,204
Kitchen Additional Kitchen Space for Restaurant in Adj. Building D1 1,097
Outdoor Dining Outdoor Dining Space for Restaurant A9 219
Storage Storage Space for Restaurant A7 609
Restaurant Total 4,129
Brewery Low Production Brewery B1, B2, B3 5,022
Brewery Office Brewery Management Office Space A3, A6 499
Brewery Total 5,521
Tasting Brewery Tasting Room B4, B5 808
Garden Combination of Seating Area, Recreational Game Area,
Hammock Grove, and Lounge Area F1, G2 1,647
Pool Deck Pool Chair Lounge Area for Tasting Room G3 1,528
Overlook Elevated Seated area overlooking outdoor garden E4 640
Storage Storage for outdoor garden E3 160
Restroom Restroom for garden area and pool deck C1 659
Tasting Total 5,442
Office Employee Lounge and Restroom D2, D3 315
Staff Office Total 315
Retail 1 Retail in Container Bldg A E1 160
Retail 2 Retail in Container Bldg B E2 160
Retail Total 320
Veggie Garden Vegetable Garden Adjacent to Historical Building G1 460
Pool Water Area of proposed pool G4 493
Not Used Total 953
Staff Office
Retail
Not Used
Leisuretown Parking and Traffic Study Area Tabulation
(Extrapolated from Fehr and Peers Traffic and Parking Study)
PC FINAL
10/02/2017
Brewery
(Used Only for
Parking Req.)
Tasting
Restaurant
Lot Size 34,675 S.F.
Total Gross Building Area 12,453 S.F.
F.A.R. 0.36
Level Label Room Description Area (S.F.)
Building A Level 1 A1 Café 600
Level 1 A2 Kitchen 565
Level 1 A3 Office 114
Level 1 A4 Other (to count as Café GFA)510
L1 GFA Subtotal 1,789
Level 2 A5 Café 310
Level 2 A6 Office 385
Level 2 A7 Storage 609
Level 2 A8 Other (to count as Café GFA)219
L2 GFA Subtotal 1,523
Bldg A Total 3,312
A9 Bldg A Outdoor Dining 219
Building B B1 Factory 3,552
B2 Storage 270
B3 Bar Prep 1,200
B4 Assembly Area 690
Bldg B Total 5,712
B5 Bldg B Outdoor Dining 118
Building C C1 Restroom 659
Bldg C Total 659
Building D D1 Kitchen 1,097
D2 Employee Lounge 199
D3 Employee Restroom 116
Bldg D Total 1,412
Container Building A E1 Retail (Container 1)160
E2 Retail (Container 2)160
E3 Storage (Container 3)160
E4 Upper Roof Deck 640
Container Bldg A Total 1,120
Container Building B F1 Covered Seating (Container 4)238
Container Bldg B Total 238
Site Work G1 Garden 460
G2 Outdoor Seating 1,409
G3 Pool Deck 1,528
G4 Pool (Water Only)493
Pool Total 2,021
*All Square Footage updated to reflect the most current Floor Plans from Core & Shell and Tenant Improvements Plan Check Submissions
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
(New Building)
Leisuretown Area Calculations
PC FINAL
10/02/2017
Leisuretown Area Breakdown
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
(Existing Bldg GFA unchanged,
Occupancy change only)
ATTACHMENT NO. 8
LEISURETOWN pool club
1
2
3
4
58
7
6
1 6
5 9
3
4 8
2 7
9
555 S. ANAHEIM BLVD.B EXISTING
10/02/2017
ALLEYPARKING RESIDENCESOUTDOOR DINING & GARDENTASTING ROOM & BREWERY
CARGO CONTAINER
LINED W/ ACOUSTIC
BAFFLES
BAMBOO HEDGE
BAMBUSA OLDHAMII
(GIANT TIMBER BAMBOO)
@ 42” O.C.
±125‘-6”
±95’-9”
±66‘-0”
PARKING RESIDENCES
±207’-6”
±151’-6”
±95’-6”
CARGO CONTAINER
LINED W/ ACOUSTIC
BAFFLES
OUTDOOR DINING & GARDEN
LANDSCAPE W/ ACACIA
AND SUMAC TREES
KITCHEN
8’-0” SITE WALL
SITE SECTION A
SITE SECTION B
LEISURETOWN
10/02/2017
CL
CL
±30’-0”
X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXXXXXXXX
X
X
X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
X
X
X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
P
A
P
A
PA
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
PA PA PA PA PA
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
PA
P
A
PA
P
A
P
A
PA
P
A
PA
P
A
P
A
P
A
PA
P
A
PA PA
P
A
P
A
PAPAPAPA LIMIT OF WORK
L
I
M
I
T
O
F
W
O
R
K
LIMIT OF WORK
LIMIT OF WORK
LIMIT OF WORK
PA
P
P PLLLIMIT OF WORK LIMIT OF WORK
L
P
P
P L
L
L
P
A
P
A
P
A
1
5
9
.
2
6
1
5
6
.
7
4
P
A
PA ADA TURNINGCLEARANCE ADA TURNINGCLEARANCE
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
P
b
f
b
f
r
e
r
e
r
e
b
f
b
f
P
P
P
P
c
t
c
t
c
t
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
a
v
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
a
v
a
v
M
M
M
M
M
M
L
J
L
J
G
W
G
W
G
W
G
W
G
W
G
W
a
d
a
d
a
d
a
d
a
d
d
d
d
G
W
a
j
a
j
a
j
a
j
a
j
G
W
a
j
a
j
L
J
p
w
p
w
d
d
d
d
M
s
l
M
s
l
G
W
G
W
G
W
A
S
A
S
M
M
v
v
v
v
v
v
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm LLLLLLLLLmmmmmmmmm
A
S
M
M
M
M
M
a
j
v
v
v
v
v
A
S
A
S
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
S
M
l
l
l
A
A
A
A
A
A
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
A
D
A
D
A
D
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
c
c
S
M
c
c
c
c
c
c
j
c
c
c
c
c
c
A
A
A
A
D
A
D
A
O
b
f
S
S
SS SSSSSS
r
o
S
S
S
v
v vv
S
S
SSS
A
A
A
A AAAAA
A
v
v
c
t
c
t
c
t
r
o
r
o
r
o
dw S lll
l
l
l
S
a
j
v
v
M
PPPPPPPXXXXXXP PPPPP P PPPP P PP PPXXX
h
h
h h hh
h
h
h
h
h
h
AAA
A
A
A
M rororo
r
o
r
o
r
o
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
slsl
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
d
d
d
d
O
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
N
N
N
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
LeLeLeLeLeLe
L
e
LeLeLeLe Lm
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
Le
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
L
e
LeLeLeLeLeLeLe
M
M
M
M
M
v
v
v
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a
j
M
A
S
A
S
L
L
L
L
L
E
r
o
r
o
X XXX P
M
M
S
M
v
v
v
v
a
v
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
E
E
E
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
ctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctctct
c
t
L
L
L
L
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
ctctctctctctctct
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
a
v
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
a
v
a
v
a
v
a
v
d
l
d
l
m
m
m
m
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
0
3
.
0
6
.
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1
0
.
0
2
.
2
0
1
7
C
U
P
R
E
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
0
5
1
0
2
0
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
1
0
/
0
2
/
2
0
1
7
L
1
.
0
0
PROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
I
P
U
A
N
A
T
I
P
U
T
R
E
E
(
1
8
"
C
A
L
I
P
E
R
)
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
S
U
P
E
R
V
I
S
O
R
W
A
L
D
O
R
A
G
E
L
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
S
E
T
B
A
C
K
LANDSCAPE SETBACK
N
E
W
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
S
A
T
2
5
'
O
.
C
.
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
P
E
C
I
E
S
:
T
R
I
S
T
A
N
I
A
L
A
U
R
I
N
A
'
E
L
E
G
A
N
T
'
2
5
'
-
0
"
T
Y
P
.
1
0
'
3
'
-
6
"
10'
18"4'
8'-6"4'4'18'
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
4
'
-
6
"
H
E
I
G
H
T
C
R
A
F
T
S
M
A
N
S
T
Y
L
E
A
B
C
R
A
I
L
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
R
E
H
O
U
S
E
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
6
'
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
O
L
I
D
B
U
R
N
I
S
H
E
D
C
M
U
B
L
O
C
K
W
A
L
L
W
I
T
H
2
"
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
P
A
T
T
E
R
N
C
A
C
T
U
S
S
U
C
H
A
S
C
E
R
E
U
S
P
E
R
U
V
I
A
N
U
S
A
N
D
S
U
C
C
U
L
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
T
B
A
S
E
O
F
W
A
L
L
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
6
'
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
O
L
I
D
B
U
R
N
I
S
H
E
D
C
M
U
B
L
O
C
K
W
A
L
L
W
I
T
H
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
P
A
T
T
E
R
N
A
N
D
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
P
O
O
L
R
A
M
P
PROPOSED BAMBOO HEDGE @ 42"PROPOSED LANDSCAPE ISLAND, 5GALLON PLANTS AT 30" O.C.8' HEIGHT METAL SCREEN ATCONTAINER EDGE BY OTHERS PROPOSED 8' HE
I
G
H
T
D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
W
O
O
D
G
A
T
E
S
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
8
'
H
E
I
G
H
T
DECO
R
A
T
I
V
E
W
O
O
D
A
N
D
M
E
T
A
L
G
A
T
E
S
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
I
K
E
R
A
C
K
S
I
N
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
Z
E
D
D
E
C
O
M
P
O
S
E
D
G
R
A
N
I
T
E
P
A
V
I
N
G
CITRUS TREE HEDGE WITH FICUSPUMILA VINE AT WALL
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
6
'
H
E
I
G
H
T
P
E
R
F
O
R
A
T
E
D
M
E
T
A
L
P
O
O
L
A
R
E
A
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
C
Y
E
G
R
E
S
S
G
A
T
E
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
E
V
E
R
G
R
E
E
N
H
E
D
G
E
S
P
E
C
I
E
S
S
U
C
H
A
S
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
L
I
G
U
S
T
R
U
M
O
R
S
I
M
I
L
A
R
@
2
4
"
O
.
C
.
A
N
D
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
V
I
N
E
S
@
8
'
O
.
C
.
,
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
.
C
A
C
T
U
S
S
U
C
H
A
S
C
E
R
E
U
S
P
E
R
U
V
I
A
N
U
S
A
N
D
S
U
C
C
U
L
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
T
B
A
S
E
O
F
W
A
L
L
3'-6"
W
A
T
E
R
U
S
E
C
L
A
S
S
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
S
P
E
C
I
E
S
W
U
C
O
L
S
:
W
a
t
e
r
U
s
e
C
l
a
s
s
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
S
p
e
c
i
e
s
i
s
a
O
W
N
E
R
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
C
o
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
v
e
E
x
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
P
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
i
s
a
g
u
i
d
e
t
o
t
h
e
w
a
t
e
r
n
e
e
d
s
o
f
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
p
l
a
n
t
s
.
C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
A
B
V
.
P
E
R
C
E
N
T
O
F
E
T
o
H
-
H
I
G
H
7
0
%
-
9
0
%
M
-
M
E
D
I
U
M
4
0
%
-
6
0
%
L
-
L
O
W
1
0
%
-
3
0
%
V
L
-
V
E
R
Y
L
O
W
<
1
0
%
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
T
R
E
E
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
A
T
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
:
1
.
O
n
e
(
1
)
2
4
"
B
o
x
t
r
e
e
p
e
r
3
,
0
0
0
S
F
p
a
r
k
i
n
g
s
p
a
c
e
s
.
T
O
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
T
A
L
L
A
R
E
A
:
6
,
2
4
4
s
q
.
f
t
.
T
O
T
A
L
D
R
I
V
E
A
I
S
L
E
A
R
E
A
=
8
,
0
0
0
s
q
.
f
t
.
T
O
T
A
L
T
R
E
E
S
I
N
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
=
8
T
O
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
S
=
3
1
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
N
O
T
E
S
P
L
A
N
T
L
E
G
E
N
D
S
Y
M
B
O
L
B
O
T
A
N
I
C
A
L
N
A
M
E
C
O
M
M
O
N
N
A
M
E
S
I
Z
E
F
O
R
M
T
R
E
E
S
C
E
R
C
I
S
O
C
C
I
D
E
N
T
A
L
I
S
W
E
S
T
E
R
N
R
E
D
B
U
D
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
A
R
B
U
T
U
S
'
M
A
R
I
N
A
'
M
A
R
I
N
A
S
T
R
A
W
B
E
R
R
Y
T
R
E
E
2
4
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
B
A
M
B
U
S
A
O
L
D
H
A
M
I
I
G
I
A
N
T
T
I
M
B
E
R
B
A
M
B
O
O
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
M
U
L
T
I
C
E
R
C
I
S
'
F
O
R
E
S
T
P
A
N
S
Y
'
E
A
S
T
E
R
N
R
E
D
B
U
D
3
6
"
B
O
X
M
U
L
T
I
-
T
R
U
N
K
,
H
I
G
H
B
R
A
N
C
H
I
N
G
C
I
T
R
U
S
S
P
P
.
S
E
E
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
V
A
R
I
E
T
I
E
S
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
T
R
I
S
T
A
N
I
A
L
A
U
R
I
N
A
'
E
L
E
G
A
N
T
'
E
L
E
G
A
N
T
W
A
T
E
R
G
U
M
2
4
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
C
U
P
R
E
S
S
U
S
S
E
M
P
E
R
V
I
R
E
N
S
I
T
A
L
I
A
N
C
Y
P
R
E
S
S
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
A
C
A
C
I
A
S
T
E
N
O
P
H
Y
L
L
A
S
H
O
E
S
T
R
I
N
G
A
C
A
C
I
A
2
4
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
M
A
L
U
S
D
O
M
E
S
T
I
C
U
S
A
P
P
L
E
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
E
S
P
A
L
L
I
E
R
H
A
N
D
R
O
A
N
T
H
U
S
I
M
P
E
T
I
G
I
N
O
S
U
S
P
I
N
K
T
R
U
M
P
E
T
T
R
E
E
2
4
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
R
O
S
O
P
I
S
C
H
I
L
E
N
S
I
S
T
H
O
R
N
L
E
S
S
C
H
I
L
E
A
N
M
E
S
Q
U
I
T
E
4
8
"
B
O
X
M
U
L
T
I
-
T
R
U
N
K
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
P
L
A
T
A
N
U
S
R
A
C
E
M
O
S
A
C
A
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
S
Y
C
A
M
O
R
E
2
4
"
B
O
X
N
A
T
U
R
A
L
F
O
R
M
R
A
V
E
N
A
L
A
M
A
D
A
G
A
S
C
A
R
I
E
N
S
I
S
T
R
A
V
E
L
L
E
R
'
S
P
A
L
M
1
0
'
F
T
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
R
H
U
S
L
A
N
C
E
A
A
F
R
I
C
A
N
S
U
M
A
C
2
4
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
Q
U
E
R
C
U
S
V
I
R
G
I
N
I
A
N
A
S
O
U
T
H
E
R
N
L
I
V
E
O
A
K
6
0
"
B
O
X
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
P
A
T
H
O
D
E
A
C
A
M
P
A
N
U
L
A
T
A
A
F
R
I
C
A
N
T
U
L
I
P
T
R
E
E
3
6
"
B
O
X
M
U
L
T
I
S
H
R
U
B
S
/
G
R
A
S
S
E
S
S
I
Z
E
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
A
C
H
I
L
L
E
A
M
I
L
L
E
F
O
L
I
U
M
Y
A
R
R
O
W
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
0
"
A
D
E
N
A
N
T
H
O
S
'
S
I
L
V
E
R
H
A
Z
E
'
W
O
O
L
L
Y
B
U
S
H
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
A
G
A
V
E
J
O
E
H
O
A
K
J
O
E
H
O
A
K
A
G
A
V
E
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
A
G
A
V
E
M
E
D
I
O
P
I
C
T
A
A
L
B
A
V
A
R
I
E
G
A
T
E
D
A
G
A
V
E
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
A
L
O
E
B
A
R
B
A
R
I
D
E
N
S
I
S
A
L
O
E
V
E
R
A
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
A
R
T
E
M
I
S
I
A
D
O
U
G
L
A
S
I
A
N
A
M
U
G
W
O
R
T
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
6
"
A
R
T
E
M
I
S
I
A
A
B
S
I
N
T
H
I
U
M
W
O
R
M
W
O
R
D
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
A
S
T
E
L
I
A
'
S
I
L
V
E
R
S
H
A
D
O
W
'
S
I
L
V
E
R
A
S
T
E
L
I
A
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
B
E
S
C
H
O
R
N
E
R
I
A
'
F
L
A
M
I
N
G
O
G
L
O
W
'
M
E
X
I
C
A
N
L
I
L
Y
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
0
"
B
O
U
G
A
I
N
V
I
L
L
E
A
'
O
R
A
N
G
E
K
I
N
G
'
O
R
A
N
G
E
K
I
N
G
B
O
U
G
A
I
N
V
I
L
L
E
A
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
-
S
T
K
A
S
S
H
O
W
N
C
H
A
M
A
E
M
E
L
U
M
N
O
B
I
L
E
C
H
A
M
O
M
I
L
E
4
"
P
O
T
S
1
'
-
0
"
C
H
O
N
D
R
O
P
E
T
A
L
U
M
T
E
C
T
O
R
U
M
C
A
P
E
R
U
S
H
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
C
O
R
D
Y
L
I
N
E
F
R
U
T
I
C
O
S
A
T
I
P
L
A
N
T
1
2
"
P
O
T
2
'
-
0
"
C
Y
M
B
O
P
O
G
O
N
C
I
T
R
A
T
U
S
L
E
M
O
N
G
R
A
S
S
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
D
A
S
Y
L
I
R
I
O
N
L
O
N
G
I
S
S
I
M
U
M
B
E
A
R
G
R
A
S
S
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
D
I
A
N
E
L
L
A
T
A
S
M
A
N
I
C
A
F
L
A
X
L
I
L
Y
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
6
"
D
Y
C
K
I
A
R
E
D
D
E
V
I
L
R
E
D
L
E
A
F
E
D
D
Y
C
K
I
A
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
6
"
E
C
H
I
N
O
C
A
C
T
U
S
G
R
U
S
O
N
I
I
G
O
L
D
E
N
B
A
R
R
E
L
C
A
C
T
U
S
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
E
N
S
E
T
E
V
E
N
T
R
I
C
O
S
U
M
'
M
A
U
R
E
L
I
I
'
R
E
D
B
A
N
A
N
A
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
A
S
S
H
O
W
N
F
I
C
U
S
P
U
M
I
L
A
C
R
E
E
P
I
N
G
F
I
G
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
A
S
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
U
Q
U
I
E
R
I
A
S
P
L
E
N
D
E
N
S
O
C
O
T
I
L
L
O
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
6
0
G
A
U
R
A
L
I
N
D
E
R
H
E
I
M
E
R
I
'
S
O
W
H
I
T
E
'
W
H
I
T
E
G
A
U
R
A
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
H
E
D
Y
C
H
I
U
M
C
O
R
O
N
A
R
I
U
M
W
H
I
T
E
G
I
N
G
E
R
L
I
L
Y
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
H
E
S
P
E
R
A
L
O
E
P
A
R
V
I
F
L
O
R
A
R
E
D
Y
U
C
C
A
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
J
U
N
I
P
E
R
U
S
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
S
'
A
L
P
I
N
E
C
A
R
P
E
T
'
A
L
P
I
N
E
C
A
R
P
E
T
J
U
N
I
P
E
R
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
L
A
V
A
N
D
U
L
A
H
E
T
E
R
O
P
H
Y
L
L
A
S
W
E
E
T
L
A
V
E
N
D
E
R
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
4
'
L
E
U
C
A
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
'
E
B
O
N
Y
'
P
U
R
P
L
E
L
E
U
C
A
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
4
'
L
I
G
U
S
T
R
U
M
J
A
P
O
N
I
C
U
M
'
T
E
X
A
N
U
M
'
W
A
X
L
E
A
F
P
R
I
V
E
T
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
0
"
O
.
C
.
L
E
Y
M
U
S
C
O
N
D
E
N
S
A
T
U
S
'
C
A
N
Y
O
N
P
R
I
N
C
E
'
C
A
N
Y
O
N
P
R
I
N
C
E
W
I
L
D
R
Y
E
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
0
"
O
.
C
.
L
O
T
U
S
B
E
R
L
O
T
H
I
P
A
R
R
O
T
'
S
B
E
A
K
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
M
I
S
C
A
N
T
H
U
S
T
R
A
N
S
M
O
R
R
I
S
O
N
E
N
S
I
S
E
V
E
R
G
R
E
E
N
M
A
I
D
E
N
G
R
A
S
S
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
M
U
H
L
E
N
B
E
R
G
I
A
D
U
B
I
A
L
I
T
T
L
E
M
U
H
L
Y
G
R
A
S
S
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
N
E
P
H
R
O
L
E
P
I
S
C
O
R
D
I
F
O
L
I
A
S
W
O
R
D
F
E
R
N
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
6
"
P
A
C
H
Y
C
E
R
E
U
S
M
A
R
G
I
N
A
T
U
S
M
E
X
I
C
A
N
F
E
N
C
E
P
O
S
T
C
A
C
T
U
S
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
8
"
P
A
R
T
H
E
N
O
C
I
S
S
U
S
T
R
I
C
U
S
P
I
D
A
T
A
B
O
S
T
O
N
I
V
Y
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
A
S
S
H
O
W
N
P
E
D
I
L
A
N
T
H
U
S
M
A
C
R
O
C
A
R
P
U
S
S
L
I
P
P
E
R
P
L
A
N
T
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
P
E
N
N
I
S
E
T
U
M
S
P
A
T
H
E
O
L
A
T
U
M
S
L
E
N
D
E
R
V
E
L
D
T
G
R
A
S
S
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
6
"
P
H
I
L
O
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
M
O
N
S
T
E
R
A
D
E
L
I
C
I
O
S
A
S
P
L
I
T
L
E
A
F
P
H
I
L
O
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
1
0
"
/
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
P
H
I
L
O
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
'
X
A
N
A
D
U
'
X
A
N
A
D
U
P
H
I
L
O
D
E
N
D
R
O
N
1
0
"
/
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
P
H
O
R
M
I
U
M
'
B
L
A
C
K
A
D
D
E
R
'
B
L
A
C
K
F
L
A
X
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
R
O
S
M
A
R
I
N
U
S
O
F
F
I
C
I
N
A
L
I
S
R
O
S
E
M
A
R
Y
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
R
U
S
S
E
L
I
A
E
Q
U
I
S
E
T
I
F
O
R
M
I
S
C
O
R
A
L
F
O
U
N
T
A
I
N
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
0
"
S
A
L
V
I
A
'
D
A
R
A
'
S
C
H
O
I
C
E
'
D
A
R
A
'
S
C
H
O
I
C
E
S
A
G
E
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
S
A
L
V
I
A
O
F
F
I
C
I
N
A
L
I
S
'
P
U
P
U
R
S
C
E
N
S
'
P
U
R
P
L
E
S
A
G
E
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
'
-
0
"
S
A
L
V
I
A
L
.
'
S
A
N
T
A
B
A
R
B
A
R
A
'
M
E
X
I
C
A
N
S
A
G
E
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
2
'
-
6
"
S
A
M
B
U
C
U
S
M
E
X
I
C
A
N
A
E
L
D
E
R
F
L
O
W
E
R
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
4
'
-
0
"
S
A
N
S
E
V
I
E
R
I
A
T
R
I
F
A
S
C
I
A
T
A
C
Y
L
I
N
D
R
I
C
A
L
S
N
A
K
E
P
L
A
N
T
1
0
"
P
O
T
1
'
-
6
"
T
E
U
C
R
I
U
M
C
H
A
M
A
E
D
R
Y
S
G
E
R
M
A
N
D
E
R
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
8
"
T
E
U
C
R
I
U
M
F
R
U
T
I
C
A
N
S
'
A
Z
U
R
E
U
M
'
A
Z
U
R
E
B
U
S
H
G
E
R
M
A
N
D
E
R
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
3
'
-
0
"
V
E
R
B
E
N
A
B
O
N
A
R
I
E
N
S
I
S
B
R
A
Z
I
L
I
A
N
V
E
R
B
E
N
A
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
1
G
A
L
L
O
N
W
I
S
T
E
R
I
A
S
I
N
E
N
S
I
S
C
H
I
N
E
S
E
W
I
S
T
E
R
I
A
1
5
G
A
L
L
O
N
-
S
T
K
A
S
S
H
O
W
N
O
T
H
E
R
P
E
R
C
O
L
A
T
I
O
N
P
I
T
/
S
O
I
L
S
T
E
S
T
'
B
I
O
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
'
R
O
O
T
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
T
Y
P
A
R
B
I
O
B
A
R
R
I
E
R
2
0
'
L
E
N
G
T
H
A
T
H
X
P
C
c
t
r
e
b
f
h
d
l
A
M
G
L
O
d
L
a
v
L
J
a
j
a
d
p
w
s
l
v
m
N
S
M
l
A
A
j
A
D
r
o
c
c
S
A
S
E
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
N
E
W
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
:
4
,
1
4
4
S
.
F
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
:
3
5
S
.
F
.
5
'
-
9
"
2'-4"
4'
5
'
-
4
1
/
1
6
"
1
2
'
-
1
9
/
1
6
"
5
'
1'-4"6'-4"
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
4
'
-
6
"
H
E
I
G
H
T
C
R
A
F
T
S
M
A
N
S
T
Y
L
E
W
O
O
D
E
N
T
R
Y
G
A
T
E
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
I
A
R
O
B
U
S
T
A
T
R
E
E
(
2
5
'
B
T
W
)
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
P
E
R
C
I
T
Y
O
F
A
N
A
H
E
I
M
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
S
U
P
E
R
V
I
S
O
R
W
A
L
D
O
R
A
G
E
L
1'-8"
4'
4
'
-
5
"
6
'
-
1
0
"
2'-5"
4'-5"2'4'2'-11"4'EXISTING FICUS TREE (14" CALIPER) TO BEREMOVED PER CITY OF ANAHEIMMAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR WALDO RAGEL
(
6
)
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
I
A
R
O
B
U
S
T
A
T
R
E
E
(
1
5
'
B
T
W
)
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
1'-4"
4'-10"2'-10"
2
'
-
6
"
4'-7"2'-10"
2'-4"6'-10"7'-4"
3
'
4'
1'-5"1'-8"1'3'2'
1
'
-
4
"
2'-8"
1
4
'
-
7
"
PROPOSED 8' HEIGHT D
E
C
O
R
A
T
I
V
E
W
O
O
D
FENCE WITH
F
I
C
U
S
P
U
M
I
L
A
V
I
N
E
6
'
B
O
A
R
D
F
O
R
M
E
D
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
W
A
L
L
4
'
-
6
"
C
R
A
F
T
S
M
A
N
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
A
T
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
Y
A
R
D
V
A
L
E
T
D
R
O
P
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
.
O
.
W
.
,
S
E
E
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
TRASHENCLOSURE
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
B
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
EXISTING BUILDING D
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
09/11/2017 PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
COVER
E
D
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
PROPOSEDSHIPPINGCONTAINERSPROPOSEDSHIPPINGCONTAINERSPROPOSEDSHIPPINGCONTAINERS
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
D
I
N
I
N
G
R
O
O
M
P
A
T
I
O
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
G
R
U
I
T
G
A
R
D
E
N
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
T
A
S
T
I
N
G
L
O
U
N
G
E
F
A
M
I
L
Y
R
O
O
M
W
I
T
H
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
SOURYARD
B
E
E
R
G
A
R
D
E
N
PA
V
I
L
I
O
N
F
L
E
X
I
B
L
E
U
S
E
A
R
E
A
P
O
O
L
C
A
B
A
N
A
S
O
U
T
D
O
O
R
L
O
W
D
E
C
K
8
'
H
E
I
G
H
T
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
A
N
D
A
L
L
E
Y
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
W
A
L
L
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
/
U
N
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
3
2
'
x
1
2
'
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
s
n
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
P
b
f
b
f
b
f
r
e
r
e
r
e
b
f
b
f
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
s
n
c
t
c
t
c
t
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
a
v
a
v
a
v
a
v
a
v
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
a
v
M
M
M
M
M
M
L
J
L
J
C
P
C
P
C
P
C
P
C
P
C
P
a
d
a
d
a
d
a
d
d
d
d
C
P
a
j
a
j
a
j
a
j
C
P
C
P
L
J
p
w
C
P
C
P
A
S
A
S
M
A
S
M
v
v
v
v
v
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
LLLLLLLLLLLmmmmmmmmmmm
A
S
M
M
M
M
M
a
j
v
v
v
v
v
A
S
A
S
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
S
M
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
A
A
A
A
A
A
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
j
A
D
A
D
A
D
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
c
c
c
c
S
M
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
j
j
c
c
c
c
c
c
A
A
A
A
D
A
D
A
O
b
f
P
j
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
r
o
S
S
S
v
v
v
v
S
S
S
S
S
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
v
v
c
t
c
t
c
t
r
o
r
o
r
o
d
l
S
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
S
d
l
a
j
v
v
M
PPPPPPPXXXXXXP PPPPP P PPPP P PP
P
P
X
X
X
s
n
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
h
A
A
A
A
A
A
M
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
r
o
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
d
d
d
d
O
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
c
t
N
N
N
Lm
M
M
M
M
M
v
v
v
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
a
j
M
M
A
S
A
S
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
T
R
T
G
I
N
E
E
R
C
E
3
8
7
9
8
S
T
C
A
T
A
M
REGIS
I
V
I
L
R
N
I
A
N
O
R
F
R
E
E
E
I
D
P
R
O
S
O
R
A
M
E
S
S
I
N
A
L
E
N
E
F
O
O
L
C
A
F
I
3
1
5
1
A
i
r
w
a
y
A
v
e
n
u
e
,
S
u
i
t
e
T
-
1
C
o
s
t
a
M
e
s
a
,
C
A
9
2
6
2
6
(
7
1
4
)
9
6
6
-
9
0
6
0
C
I
V
I
L
W
O
R
K
S
9
/
1
1
/
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
#
1
S
I
T
E
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
C
-
2
.
0
K
F
R
R
R
DN
UP
UP
DN
UP
14'-6 1/2"
VIF
9'-7 1/4"
VIF
11'-1 1/2"
VIF
5'-7 1/2"
VIF
13'-5 1/4"
VIF
7'-10 3/4"
VIF
10
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
VI
F
8'
-
7
3
/
4
"
VI
F
14
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
VI
F
B1
B2
B4
B5
7'
-
0
1
/
2
"
VI
F
B3
BA BB BC BD BE BF BG
DN
DN
3.5D2
5.5D1
5'
-
8
"
2'-6"
2"
3.5D1 29
A04.20
A-06
RESTROOM
WOMEN'S
A-05
RESTROOM
MEN'S
A-04
KITCHEN
A-01
LOUNGE
CAFEA-03
OFFICE
A-02
STATION
COFFEE
A-07
STORAGE
A-08
CLOSET
A-11
HALLWAY
RESTROOM
A-09
STAIRWELL
A-10
LOUNGE
A-01
A-04
A-03
B-01
A-10
A-09
A-07
04 TYP.
07
TYP.
31
07TYP.
15
06
TYP.
08
11
11
12
13
14
07TYP.
2'-0"
TYP.
1'-0"
TYP.
22
0904
24 TYP.
04
TYP.
5.5D1
04
EXD5
TYP.
THROUGHOUT
36TYP.
5.5C3
SIM.
DN
DN
OPEN
(HVAC)
OPEN
(HVAC)
14'-6 1/2"
VIF
9'-7 1/4"
VIF
11'-1 1/2"
VIF
5'-7 1/2"
VIF
13'-5 1/4"
VIF
7'-10 3/4"
VIF
10
'
-
8
1
/
2
"
VI
F
8'
-
7
3
/
4
"
VI
F
14
'
-
5
1
/
4
"
VI
F
B1
B2
B4
B5
7'
-
0
1
/
2
"
VI
F
B3
BA BB BC BD BE BF BG
A-21 A-22
3.5D1
17
A04.20
2'
-
0
"
A-23
A-24
LOUNGE
CAFE
A-20
STORAGE
A-21
STORAGE
A-22
OFFICE
A-09
STAIRWELL
A-23
STORAGE
3.5D1
A-20
7
A04.20
08
08
2'-9"
4'
-
8
"
2'-9"
22 TYP.
07
TYP.
31
4'
-
8
"
3.5D3
3.5D3
EXD5
TYP.
THROUGHOUT
37
FIRST & SECOND
FLOOR PLANS
BUILDING A -
CAFE/ LOUNGE
A01.10
EXISTING WALL / COLUMNS TO REMAIN
EXISTING CMU WALL.
EXISTING ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE / CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN
AREA NOT IN CONTRACT
FIRE EXTINGUISHER (CAB.) - SEE SHEET NOTE #4 (FINAL LOCATION TO
BE COORDINATED)
ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGN - SEE SHT. NOTE #13, SHT. A00.45, & ELEC.
DRAWINGS
PLAN LEGEND
FLOOR PLAN KEYNOTES
NOTE: NOT ALL KEYNOTES MAY PERTAIN TO THIS SHEET.
STRUCTURAL STEEL COLUMN - REFERENCE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
OVERHEAD COILING DOOR - REFERENCE DOOR SCHEDULE.
EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING STAIR TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING CONCRETE BUMP-OUT TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACE
EQUIPMENT PER FOOD SERVICE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SEE FOOD SERVICE
DRAWINGS.
HANDRAIL AT EXISTING STAIRS.
MILLWORK COUNTER/ CABINET. REFERENCE PLANS AND INTERIOR ELEVATIONS.
MILLWORK ADA COMPLIANT COUNTER. REFERENCE PLANS AND INTERIOR
ELEVATIONS.
MILLWORK BY OTHERS. SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY
EXISTING RESTROOMS, SEE SHEET A01.10R FOR COMPLIANT RESTROOMS.
FURRED OUT WALL. REFERENCE WALL TYPES.
EXISTING PASS THROUGH WINDOW. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING FIREPLACE.
EXISTING ELECTRICAL PANEL. PROTECT IN PLACE.
TRENCH DRAIN. REFERENCE PLUMBING DRAWINGS
OUTLINE OF CONCRETE MAT SLAB. REFERENCE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS AND FINISH
FLOOR PLANS.
BREWERY EQUIPMENT.
SHIPPING CONTAINER. COORDINATE WITH EXISTING STRUCTURAL FOOTINGS AND
REFERENCE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS.
EXISTING OVERHEAD ROLL-UP DOOR. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING STRUCTURAL COLUMNS. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING WINDOW. PROTECT IN PLACE
EXISTING TRASH ENCLOSURE.
MECHANICAL UNIT. REFERENCE STRUCTURAL AND MECHANICAL DRAWINGS.
ROOF MOUNTED EXHAUST - REFERENCE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS
STAIRS. REFERENCE PLANS
ADA WHEELCHAIR LIFT. REFERENCE PLANS AND STRUCTURAL PLANS
SLIDING GLASS BARN DOORS. REFERENCE PLANS AND DOOR SCHEDULE.
EXISTING STEEL TRELLIS. PROTECT IN PLACE.
CONCRETE INFILL. REFERENCE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.
STAIR GUARDRAIL TO MATCH EXISTING ST-09 PROFILE. VIF
TRELLIS GUARDRAIL. REFERENCE PLANS AND EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS.
MERCHANDISE STORAGE CONTAINER BY TENANT/ OWNER. SHOWN FOR REFERENCE
ONLY.
PARTITION TO UNDERSIDE OF CLEARSTORY WINDOW.
ROOF SCREEN AT MECHANICAL PLATFORM.
FLOOR REGISTER. REFERENCE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS
EXPOSED DISH HOOD DUCT, HEAVY GAUGE DUCTING. REFERENCE MECHANICAL
DRAWINGS
EXISTING ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION, PROTECT IN PLACE. REFERENCE ELECTRICAL
DRAWINGS
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
FLOOR PLAN SHEET NOTES
1.ALL STRUCT. INFO. SHOWN ON THIS SHT. IS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. FOR ALL FRAMING,
REFER TO STRUCT. DWGS. PREPARED BY THE STRUCT. ENGINEER. G.C.TO VERIFY
ANY DISCREPANCIES W/ THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK.
2.DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3.PROVIDE FURRED WALLS AS REQ'D FOR ALL UTILITY & DRAIN LINES THAT EXTEND UP
THE INTERIOR WALL SURFACE.
4.PROVIDE 2A- / 2A-10BC / 10BC FIRE EXTINGUISHER IN LOCATIONS AS REQUIRED BY
FIRE DEPARTMENT. PROVIDE SIGN.
5.APPROVED SET OF PLANS FOR BUILDING, FIRE SPRINKLER, FIRE ALARM, ETC. SHALL
BE ON THE JOB SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND NO INSPECTIONS WILL BE MADE
WITHOUT COMPLIANCE WITH THE ABOVE PROVISION.
6.REFER TO SHEETS "WALL TYPES" FOR WALL TYPE DESIGNATIONS. REFER TO SHEETS
"BUILDING DEPARTMENT DIAGRAM " FOR EGRESS AND FIRE-RATED ASSEMBLY
INFORMATION.
7.REFER TO SHEET "SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS" FOR GRAPHIC SYMBOLS AND
ABBREVIATIONS.
8.
REFER TO SHEETS "INTERIOR FINISH SCHEDULE" FOR FLOOR FINISHES.
9. REFER TO SHEETS "DOOR SCHEDULES" FOR DOOR TYPES & INFORMATION.
10.ALL ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGNS SHOWN SHALL BE CLEARLY VISIBLE AND NOT
OBSTRUCTED BY PIPES, MECH. DUCTWORK, EQUIP., ETC. G.C TO PROVIDE PENDANT
EXTENSIONS AT ALL CLG. HUNG EXIT SIGNS AS REQ'D PER CBC, SEC. 1011.
11. ALL FOOD SERVICE EQUIPMENT SHOWN ON PLANS FOR REFERENCE ONLY. REFER TO
FOOD SERVICE DRAWINGS.
12.ALL BREWERY EQUIPMENT TO BE COORDINATED WITH TENANT PRIOR TO
INSTALLATION.
13.ALL MILLWORK SHOWN BY OTHER SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY.
FEC
NEW WALL / COLUMN
20 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING A - CAFE/ LOUNGE
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
18 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING A - CAFE / LOUNGE
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
N
N
MO
D
E
R
N
T
I
M
E
S
54
9
,
5
5
5
&
5
5
9
S
A
n
a
h
e
i
m
B
l
v
d
An
a
h
e
i
m
,
C
A
9
2
8
0
5
6/
9
/
2
0
1
7
3
:
3
2
:
4
9
A
M
P
:
\
2
0
1
7
\
1
7
0
2
3
_
M
o
d
e
r
n
T
i
m
e
s
A
t
L
e
i
s
u
r
e
t
o
w
n
\
D
e
s
i
g
n
\
C
a
d
\
S
h
e
e
t
s
\
M
o
d
e
r
n
T
i
m
e
s
\
A
0
1
.
1
0
_
F
I
R
S
T
&
S
E
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
PL
A
N
S
-
B
U
R
N
S
H
O
U
S
E
.
d
w
g
Project Number: 17-023
#DATE ISSUE
1
2.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
4-19-2017 DD SUBMITTAL
6-7-2017 PLAN CHECK SUBMISSION
ADA COUNTER
1
5
B
B
L
-
M
A
S
H
8
9
.
7
1
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
1
5
B
B
L
-
K
E
T
T
L
E
9
3
.
1
7
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
1
5
B
B
L
-
W
H
I
R
L
P
O
O
L
9
0
.
6
3
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
4
5
B
B
L
H
L
T
1
4
2
.
7
6
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
3
0
B
B
L
B
R
I
T
E
1
3
2
.
2
0
"
H
x
6
0
"
D
3
0
B
B
L
F
E
R
M
E
N
T
E
R
1
3
6
.
8
9
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
6
0
B
B
L
F
E
R
M
E
N
T
E
R
1
6
6
.
6
1
"
H
x
8
7
.
5
6
"
D
6
0
B
B
L
F
E
R
M
E
N
T
E
R
1
6
6
.
6
1
"
H
x
8
7
.
5
6
"
D
3
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
9
2
.
2
5
"
H
x
6
0
"
D
3
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
9
2
.
2
5
"
H
x
6
0
"
D
6
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
1
0
9
"
H
x
7
7
"
D
6
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
1
0
9
"
H
x
7
7
"
D
1
2
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
1
3
6
.
5
"
H
x
9
6
"
D
1
2
0
B
B
L
F
O
E
D
E
R
1
3
6
.
5
"
H
x
9
6
"
D
TRENCH
TRENCH
3
0
B
B
L
B
R
I
T
E
1
3
2
.
2
0
"
H
x
6
0
"
D
3
0
B
B
L
F
E
R
M
E
N
T
E
R
1
3
6
.
8
9
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
TRENCH
N
O
R
W
E
S
C
O
-
W
A
T
E
R
T
A
N
K
7
7
-
1
/
2
"
H
x
6
4
"
D
F
U
T
U
R
E
C
L
T
1
4
2
.
7
6
"
H
x
7
1
.
8
1
"
D
G
L
Y
C
O
L
R
E
S
E
R
V
O
I
R
-
I
E
Z
A
T
2
2
D
8
4
.
8
"
H
x
8
5
"
L
x
3
4
"
W
B
-
0
1
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
B-03 TASTING ROOMB-02 BAR 27A04.4030A04.30
1
'
-
0
"
1'-6"
4
'
-
9
1
/
2
"
2
'
-
1
1
"
4"
1'-4"
2
'
-
9
"
2
'
-
9
"
3'-0"
2
'
-
7
"
2
'
-
7
"
1'-0"
2
'
-
0
"
6"
5
'
-
6
"
6"
3
'
-
5
"
1'-0"
3'-7"
1
'
-
6
"
1'-0"
1
8
T
Y
P
.
1
6
T
Y
P
.
06TYP.
1
7
20TYP.21TYP.
2
2
T
Y
P
.
5
'
-
0
"
9
'
-
1
0
"
8
'
-
1
1
"
8
'
-
1
1
"
4'-0"
3'-6"7'-0"8'-6"7'-0"
3
'
-
0
"
7'-0"6'-9"6'-9"
E
Q
.
E
Q
.
C
L
8
"
EQ.
C
L
EQ.
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
5
'
-
8
"
C
L
C
L
C
L
C
L
18'-0"VIF WA
W
F
WB
W
C
W
D
1
9
'
-
0
"
V
I
F
1
9
'
-
0
"
V
I
F
1
9
'
-
4
1
/
2
"
V
I
F
14'-10"
VIF
14'-10"
VIF
14'-10"
VIF
14'-10"
VIF
W
E
1
9
'
-
0
"
V
I
F
W
1
W
2
W
3
W
4
W
5
0908TYP.
3
4
2
2
T
Y
P
.
B-01
B
-
0
3
5'-0"
1'-0"
E
Q
.
E
Q
.
C
L
EQ.EQ.
C
L
B
-
0
4
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
MODERN TIMES
549, 555 & 559
S Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim, CA 92805
6/13/2017 11:08:16 AM P:\2017\17023_Modern Times At Leisuretown\Design\Cad\Sheets\Modern Times\A01.20_GROUND FLOOR PLAN -BREWERY.dwg
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
1
7
-
0
2
3
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
4
-
1
9
-
2
0
1
7
D
D
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
6
-
7
-
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
B
-
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
A
0
1
.
2
0
1FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING B - BREWERY/ BARSCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
M
U
W
A
L
L
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
/
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
A
R
E
A
N
O
T
I
N
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
(
C
A
B
.
)
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
#
4
(
F
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
)
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
-
S
E
E
S
H
T
.
N
O
T
E
#
1
3
,
S
H
T
.
A
0
0
.
4
5
,
&
E
L
E
C
.
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
P
L
A
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
O
T
E
:
N
O
T
A
L
L
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
M
A
Y
P
E
R
T
A
I
N
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
E
E
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
C
O
I
L
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
U
M
P
-
O
U
T
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
P
E
R
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
S
E
E
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
H
A
N
D
R
A
I
L
A
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
/
C
A
B
I
N
E
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
1
.
1
0
R
F
O
R
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
.
F
U
R
R
E
D
O
U
T
W
A
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
S
S
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
T
R
E
N
C
H
D
R
A
I
N
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
U
T
L
I
N
E
O
F
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
M
A
T
S
L
A
B
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
F
I
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
.
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
.
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
.
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
W
I
T
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
R
O
L
L
-
U
P
D
O
O
R
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
U
N
I
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
A
N
D
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
R
O
O
F
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
E
X
H
A
U
S
T
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
D
A
W
H
E
E
L
C
H
A
I
R
L
I
F
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
S
L
I
D
I
N
G
G
L
A
S
S
B
A
R
N
D
O
O
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
S
T
A
I
R
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
-
0
9
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
V
I
F
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
E
R
C
H
A
N
D
I
S
E
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
/
O
W
N
E
R
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
U
N
D
E
R
S
I
D
E
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
S
T
O
R
Y
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
R
O
O
F
S
C
R
E
E
N
A
T
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
.
F
L
O
O
R
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
D
I
S
H
H
O
O
D
D
U
C
T
,
H
E
A
V
Y
G
A
U
G
E
D
U
C
T
I
N
G
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
,
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
6
3
7
3
8
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
1
.
A
L
L
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
I
N
F
O
.
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
I
S
S
H
T
.
I
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
O
R
A
L
L
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
D
W
G
S
.
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
G
.
C
.
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
Y
D
I
S
C
R
E
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
W
/
T
H
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
E
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
W
O
R
K
.
2
.
D
I
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
R
E
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
.
3
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
F
U
R
R
E
D
W
A
L
L
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
F
O
R
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
&
D
R
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
S
T
H
A
T
E
X
T
E
N
D
U
P
T
H
E
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
.
4
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
2
A
-
/
2
A
-
1
0
B
C
/
1
0
B
C
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
Y
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
I
G
N
.
5
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
S
E
T
O
F
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
,
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
,
F
I
R
E
A
L
A
R
M
,
E
T
C
.
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
O
N
T
H
E
J
O
B
S
I
T
E
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
N
O
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
"
F
O
R
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
"
F
O
R
E
G
R
E
S
S
A
N
D
F
I
R
E
-
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
7
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
&
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
"
F
O
R
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
A
N
D
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
8
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
F
L
O
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
.
9
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
S
"
F
O
R
D
O
O
R
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
0
.
A
L
L
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
O
W
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
V
I
S
I
B
L
E
A
N
D
N
O
T
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
B
Y
P
I
P
E
S
,
M
E
C
H
.
D
U
C
T
W
O
R
K
,
E
Q
U
I
P
.
,
E
T
C
.
G
.
C
T
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
E
N
D
A
N
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
T
A
L
L
C
L
G
.
H
U
N
G
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
1
1
.
A
L
L
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
1
2
.
A
L
L
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
E
N
A
N
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
3
.
A
L
L
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
O
W
N
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
E
C
N
E
W
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
1
1
1
4
1
3
1
2
-
A
0
1
.
0
3
1
6
1
9
1
8
1
7
-
A
0
1
.
0
3
2
6
29
2
8
2
7
-
A
0
1
.
0
3
C
-
0
5
C
-
0
2
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
W
O
M
E
N
S
C-0
1
RESTR
O
O
M
MEN
S
C
-
0
3
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
M
E
N
S
C
-
0
4
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
W
O
M
E
N
S
C
-
0
5
E
Q
U
I
P
.
1
2
A
0
4
.
1
0
1
3
A
0
4
.
1
0
23A04.10
2
2
A
0
4
.
1
0
B
1
BA
B
B
B
C
B
2
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
E
N
L
A
R
G
E
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
&
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
0
1
.
3
0
25FLOOR PLAN - PRO
P
O
S
E
D
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
L
O
A
D
B
E
A
R
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
M
U
W
A
L
L
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
/
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
I
E
S
T
O
B
E
D
E
M
O
L
I
S
H
E
D
.
(
S
E
E
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
/
S
C
O
P
E
)
.
A
R
E
A
N
O
T
I
N
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
(
C
A
B
.
)
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
#
4
(
F
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
)
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
-
S
E
E
S
H
T
.
N
O
T
E
#
1
3
,
S
H
T
.
A
0
0
.
4
5
,
&
E
L
E
C
.
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
P
L
A
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
O
T
E
:
N
O
T
A
L
L
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
M
A
Y
P
E
R
T
A
I
N
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
E
E
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
R
O
L
L
-
U
P
D
O
O
R
W
I
T
H
G
L
A
S
S
P
A
N
E
L
S
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
4
.
1
0
H
Y
D
R
A
U
L
I
C
S
I
N
G
L
E
S
W
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
W
I
T
H
G
L
A
S
S
P
A
N
E
L
S
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
4
.
1
0
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
/
W
I
N
D
O
W
P
E
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
1
0
.
0
0
D
O
O
R
P
E
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
1
0
.
0
1
W
A
L
L
I
N
F
I
L
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
A
0
0
.
1
6
P
R
E
P
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
T
O
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
D
R
Y
W
A
L
L
F
I
N
I
S
H
L
I
N
E
O
F
S
O
F
F
I
T
A
B
O
V
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
T
A
I
R
S
W
I
T
H
A
L
U
M
I
N
U
M
H
A
N
D
R
A
I
L
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
S
C
R
E
E
N
B
L
O
C
K
W
A
L
L
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
C
M
U
B
L
O
C
K
W
A
L
L
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
(
O
P
E
N
T
O
T
H
E
S
K
Y
)
I
N
F
I
L
L
W
A
L
L
W
I
T
H
C
L
E
A
R
S
T
O
R
Y
W
I
N
D
O
W
A
B
O
V
E
-
S
E
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
T
E
N
A
N
T
D
E
M
I
S
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
F
L
O
O
R
D
R
A
I
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
S
T
E
E
L
F
R
A
M
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
A
L
I
G
N
E
D
T
O
E
D
G
E
O
F
W
I
N
D
O
W
F
R
A
M
E
W
H
E
R
E
I
T
O
C
C
U
R
S
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
U
N
I
T
S
W
I
T
H
P
E
R
I
M
E
T
E
R
S
C
R
E
E
N
B
Y
F
U
T
U
R
E
T
E
N
A
N
T
S
U
N
D
E
R
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
E
P
E
R
M
I
T
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
R
O
O
F
P
A
D
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
R
O
O
F
A
C
C
E
S
S
L
A
D
D
E
R
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
R
O
O
F
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
E
X
H
A
U
S
T
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
R
O
O
F
S
C
U
P
P
E
R
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
D
O
W
N
S
P
O
U
T
S
/
G
U
T
T
E
R
S
T
O
D
R
A
I
N
I
N
T
O
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
B
O
X
B
E
L
O
W
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
4
.
1
0
C
O
N
T
R
A
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
L
O
R
S
T
R
I
P
E
;
S
E
E
0
7
/
A
0
0
.
4
0
C
E
N
T
E
R
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
L
I
G
H
T
F
I
X
T
U
R
E
I
N
R
O
O
M
A
L
L
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
N
E
W
W
A
L
L
S
T
O
B
E
D
1
-
6
N
E
W
G
A
T
E
/
F
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
A
D
J
.
"
G
4
"
W
O
O
D
+
S
T
E
E
L
G
A
T
E
B
Y
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
.
S
E
E
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
A
N
D
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L
1
.
0
1
A
N
D
L
1
.
0
7
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
L
Y
R
E
P
L
I
C
A
T
E
D
A
N
D
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
,
T
Y
P
.
T
E
M
P
E
R
E
D
G
L
A
S
S
A
T
S
T
A
I
R
L
A
N
D
I
N
G
T
E
M
P
E
R
E
D
G
L
A
S
S
A
T
N
E
W
H
A
N
D
I
C
A
P
A
C
C
E
S
S
I
B
L
E
D
O
O
R
A
N
D
S
I
D
E
L
I
T
E
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
R
U
N
O
F
S
T
A
I
R
S
W
I
T
H
1
3
.
5
"
T
R
E
A
D
A
N
D
7
.
5
"
R
I
S
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
R
U
N
O
F
S
T
A
I
R
S
W
I
T
H
1
0
"
T
R
E
A
D
A
N
D
7
.
5
"
R
I
S
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
R
U
N
O
F
S
T
A
I
R
S
W
I
T
H
1
1
.
5
"
T
R
E
A
D
A
N
D
7
.
5
"
R
I
S
E
R
.
L
O
W
E
S
T
T
R
E
A
D
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
O
D
I
F
I
E
D
T
O
B
E
O
F
T
H
E
S
A
M
E
T
R
E
A
D
W
I
D
T
H
A
S
O
T
H
E
R
S
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
I
N
-
S
W
I
N
G
I
N
G
F
R
O
N
T
E
N
T
R
Y
D
O
O
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
A
T
3
1
.
5
"
H
I
G
H
F
R
O
M
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
N
O
S
E
O
F
T
R
E
A
D
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
,
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
2
"
X
2
"
B
A
L
U
S
T
E
R
S
S
P
A
C
E
D
A
T
4
.
5
"
O
.
C
.
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
L
Y
R
E
P
L
I
C
A
T
E
D
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
A
T
3
1
.
5
"
H
I
G
H
F
R
O
M
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
N
O
S
E
O
F
T
R
E
A
D
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
R
U
N
,
R
E
P
L
I
C
A
T
E
D
2
"
X
2
"
B
A
L
U
S
T
E
R
S
S
P
A
C
E
D
A
T
4
.
5
"
O
.
C
.
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
B
A
S
E
M
E
N
T
S
T
A
I
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
1
.
A
L
L
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
I
N
F
O
.
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
I
S
S
H
T
.
I
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
O
R
A
L
L
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
D
W
G
S
.
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
G
.
C
.
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
Y
D
I
S
C
R
E
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
W
/
T
H
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
E
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
W
O
R
K
.
2
.
D
I
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
R
E
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
S
T
U
D
,
F
A
C
E
O
F
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
,
O
R
F
A
C
E
O
F
M
A
S
O
N
R
Y
,
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
.
3
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
F
U
R
R
E
D
W
A
L
L
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
F
O
R
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
&
D
R
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
S
T
H
A
T
E
X
T
E
N
D
U
P
T
H
E
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
.
4
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
2
A
-
/
2
A
-
1
0
B
C
/
1
0
B
C
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
Y
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
I
G
N
.
5
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
S
E
T
O
F
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
,
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
,
F
I
R
E
A
L
A
R
M
,
E
T
C
.
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
O
N
T
H
E
J
O
B
S
I
T
E
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
N
O
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
"
F
O
R
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
"
F
O
R
E
G
R
E
S
S
A
N
D
F
I
R
E
-
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
7
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
&
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
"
F
O
R
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
A
N
D
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
8
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
F
L
O
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
.
9
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
S
"
F
O
R
D
O
O
R
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
0
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
W
I
N
D
O
W
/
S
T
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
1
.
A
L
L
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
O
W
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
V
I
S
I
B
L
E
A
N
D
N
O
T
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
B
Y
P
I
P
E
S
,
M
E
C
H
.
D
U
C
T
W
O
R
K
,
E
Q
U
I
P
.
,
E
T
C
.
G
.
C
T
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
E
N
D
A
N
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
T
A
L
L
C
L
G
.
H
U
N
G
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
1
2
.
T
H
E
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
C
Y
P
O
W
E
R
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
H
A
L
L
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
O
W
E
R
F
O
R
D
U
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
9
0
M
I
N
U
T
E
S
A
N
D
S
H
A
L
L
C
O
N
S
I
S
T
O
F
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
B
A
T
T
E
R
I
E
S
U
N
I
T
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
O
R
A
N
O
N
-
S
I
T
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
T
O
R
,
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
0
8
.
3
1
3
.
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
A
T
A
L
L
T
I
M
E
S
.
T
O
E
N
S
U
R
E
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
E
D
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
F
O
R
D
U
R
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
9
0
M
I
N
U
T
E
S
I
N
C
A
S
E
O
F
P
O
W
E
R
L
O
S
S
,
T
H
E
S
I
G
N
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
E
D
T
O
A
N
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
C
Y
P
O
W
E
R
S
Y
S
T
E
M
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
F
R
O
M
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
B
A
T
T
E
R
I
E
S
,
U
N
I
T
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
O
R
A
N
O
N
-
S
I
T
E
G
E
N
E
R
A
T
O
R
,
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
8
.
3
1
4
.
E
X
I
T
D
O
O
R
S
T
O
B
E
O
P
E
N
A
B
L
E
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
I
N
S
I
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
T
H
E
U
S
E
O
F
A
K
E
Y
O
R
A
N
Y
H
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
K
N
O
W
L
E
D
G
E
.
1
5
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
"
A
0
0
.
5
1
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
D
J
A
C
E
N
C
I
E
S
A
N
D
D
I
S
T
A
N
C
E
S
F
R
O
M
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
"
F
I
R
E
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
D
I
S
T
A
N
C
E
S
P
L
A
N
"
A
0
0
.
5
4
F
O
R
F
I
R
E
S
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
O
F
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
1
6
.
T
H
E
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
S
Y
S
T
E
M
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
E
D
B
Y
A
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
C
E
N
T
R
A
L
R
E
M
O
T
E
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
,
O
R
P
R
O
P
R
I
E
T
A
R
Y
S
U
P
E
R
V
I
S
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
N
O
T
N
O
R
M
A
L
L
Y
O
C
C
U
P
I
E
D
2
4
-
H
O
U
R
S
A
D
A
Y
,
O
R
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
W
I
T
H
2
4
-
H
O
U
R
G
U
A
R
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
.
C
F
C
9
0
3
.
4
F
E
C
LEISURETOWN
555 S Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim, CA 92805
9/11/2017 4:22:06 PM P:\2016\16183_Leisuretown\Design\Cad\Sheets\Bldg B+C Package\17_0911_CUP UPDATES\A1.30_PLANS ANDINTERIOR ELEVATIONS RS & BC.dwg
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
1
6
-
1
8
3
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
0
3
.
0
6
.
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
0
7
.
2
4
.
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
#
1
0
9
.
0
1
.
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
#
2
F
K
D
W
R
1
R
A
R
B
R
C
R
E
R
2
6
'
-
8
"
23'-6"
VIF
1
2
'
-
1
1
"
4
7
'
-
1
"
V
I
F
D
-
0
1
S
T
A
F
F
D
-
0
2
T
A
K
E
O
U
T
D
-
0
3
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
T
A
F
F
3
.
5
D
1
5
.
5
D
1
5
.
5
D
1
13'-2"
3
0
A
0
1
.
3
0
3
.
5
D
2
2"
3
4
D
-
0
1
D
-
0
2
D
-
0
3
2
3
6
A
0
1
.
3
0
A
B
1
2
W
X
1
2
D
X
1
2
H
L
O
C
K
E
R
S
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
P
E
R
E
M
P
L
O
Y
E
E
.
O
W
N
E
R
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
N
U
M
B
E
R
O
F
L
O
C
K
E
R
S
N
E
E
D
E
D
.
4"
3'-0"
2'-8"
1'-0"2'-8"4"
S
T
-
2
,
T
Y
P
.
S
T
-
2
,
T
Y
P
.
I
P
-
5
,
T
Y
P
.
2'-10"4"1'-2"2'-8"7'-0"
I
P
-
5
,
T
Y
P
.
12W X 12D X 12H LOCKERSPROVIDED TO EACH EMPLOYEE.OWNER TO VERIFY NUMBER OFLOCKERS NEEDED. STAFFLOUNGE AND RESTROOMDESIGNATED AS EMPLOYEE USEAREA ONLY
MODERN TIMES
549, 555 & 559
S Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim, CA 92805
9/12/2017 10:57:42 AM P:\2017\17023_Modern Times At Leisuretown\Design\Cad\Sheets\Modern Times\A01.30_GROUND FLOOR PLAN -COMMISSARY.dwg
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
1
7
-
0
2
3
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
4
-
1
9
-
2
0
1
7
D
D
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
6
-
7
-
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
7
-
1
3
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
1
8
-
1
4
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
2
9
-
0
1
-
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
#
1
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
-
C
O
M
M
I
S
S
A
R
Y
/
S
T
A
F
F
L
O
U
N
G
E
A
0
1
.
3
0
2
0
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
-
C
O
M
M
I
S
S
A
R
Y
/
S
T
A
F
F
L
O
U
N
G
E
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
M
U
W
A
L
L
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
/
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
A
R
E
A
N
O
T
I
N
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
(
C
A
B
.
)
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
#
4
(
F
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
)
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
-
S
E
E
S
H
T
.
N
O
T
E
#
1
3
,
S
H
T
.
A
0
0
.
4
5
,
&
E
L
E
C
.
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
P
L
A
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
O
T
E
:
N
O
T
A
L
L
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
M
A
Y
P
E
R
T
A
I
N
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
E
E
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
C
O
I
L
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
U
M
P
-
O
U
T
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
P
E
R
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
S
E
E
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
H
A
N
D
R
A
I
L
A
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
/
C
A
B
I
N
E
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
1
.
1
0
R
F
O
R
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
.
F
U
R
R
E
D
O
U
T
W
A
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
S
S
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
T
R
E
N
C
H
D
R
A
I
N
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
U
T
L
I
N
E
O
F
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
M
A
T
S
L
A
B
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
F
I
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
.
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
.
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
.
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
W
I
T
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
R
O
L
L
-
U
P
D
O
O
R
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
U
N
I
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
A
N
D
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
R
O
O
F
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
E
X
H
A
U
S
T
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
D
A
W
H
E
E
L
C
H
A
I
R
L
I
F
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
S
L
I
D
I
N
G
G
L
A
S
S
B
A
R
N
D
O
O
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
S
T
A
I
R
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
-
0
9
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
V
I
F
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
E
R
C
H
A
N
D
I
S
E
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
/
O
W
N
E
R
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
U
N
D
E
R
S
I
D
E
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
S
T
O
R
Y
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
R
O
O
F
S
C
R
E
E
N
A
T
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
.
F
L
O
O
R
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
D
I
S
H
H
O
O
D
D
U
C
T
,
H
E
A
V
Y
G
A
U
G
E
D
U
C
T
I
N
G
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
,
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
U
T
U
R
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
A
B
O
V
E
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
O
P
E
N
T
O
T
H
E
S
K
Y
2
N
D
L
E
V
E
L
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
A
N
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
L
O
A
D
S
I
G
N
F
O
R
8
0
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
S
A
T
T
H
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
A
R
E
A
.
P
O
S
T
E
D
S
I
G
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
A
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
L
E
G
I
B
L
E
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
N
D
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
O
W
N
E
R
O
R
O
W
N
E
R
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
Z
E
D
A
G
E
N
T
.
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
6
3
7
3
8
3
9
4
0
4
1
4
2
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
1
.
A
L
L
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
I
N
F
O
.
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
I
S
S
H
T
.
I
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
O
R
A
L
L
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
D
W
G
S
.
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
G
.
C
.
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
Y
D
I
S
C
R
E
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
W
/
T
H
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
E
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
W
O
R
K
.
2
.
D
I
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
R
E
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
.
3
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
F
U
R
R
E
D
W
A
L
L
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
F
O
R
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
&
D
R
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
S
T
H
A
T
E
X
T
E
N
D
U
P
T
H
E
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
.
4
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
2
A
-
/
2
A
-
1
0
B
C
/
1
0
B
C
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
Y
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
I
G
N
.
5
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
S
E
T
O
F
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
,
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
,
F
I
R
E
A
L
A
R
M
,
E
T
C
.
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
O
N
T
H
E
J
O
B
S
I
T
E
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
N
O
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
"
F
O
R
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
"
F
O
R
E
G
R
E
S
S
A
N
D
F
I
R
E
-
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
7
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
&
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
"
F
O
R
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
A
N
D
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
8
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
F
L
O
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
.
9
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
S
"
F
O
R
D
O
O
R
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
0
.
A
L
L
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
O
W
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
V
I
S
I
B
L
E
A
N
D
N
O
T
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
B
Y
P
I
P
E
S
,
M
E
C
H
.
D
U
C
T
W
O
R
K
,
E
Q
U
I
P
.
,
E
T
C
.
G
.
C
T
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
E
N
D
A
N
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
T
A
L
L
C
L
G
.
H
U
N
G
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
1
1
.
A
L
L
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
1
2
.
A
L
L
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
E
N
A
N
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
3
.
A
L
L
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
O
W
N
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
E
C
N
E
W
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
30ENLARGED MEN'S & WOMEN'S RESTROOM PLAN - BLD
G
D
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
N
7DENLARGED FLOO
R
P
L
A
N
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
7
C
E
N
L
A
R
G
E
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
2
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
7BENLARGED FLOO
R
P
L
A
N
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"
7
A
E
N
L
A
R
G
E
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
2
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
N
6BSTAFF LOUNGE -
E
A
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SCALE: 1/2"=1'-0"
6
A
S
T
A
F
F
L
O
U
N
G
E
-
E
A
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
2
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
S
P
E
C
#
C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
R
R
-
1
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
3
5
7
&
B
-
3
5
7
1
(
T
W
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
S
)
B
-
3
5
7
4
W
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
B
-
3
5
7
9
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
1
0
2
8
0
0
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
-
M
T
D
.
S
E
A
T
C
O
V
E
R
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
,
S
A
N
.
N
A
P
K
I
N
D
I
S
P
O
S
A
L
,
&
T
O
I
L
E
T
T
I
S
S
U
E
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
@
W
O
M
E
N
S
(
B
-
3
5
7
1
M
O
U
N
T
S
F
L
U
S
H
O
N
O
N
E
S
I
D
E
@
A
D
A
S
T
A
L
L
)
R
R
-
2
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
3
4
7
1
(
T
W
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
S
)
B
-
3
4
7
4
W
A
L
L
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
1
0
2
8
0
0
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
-
M
T
D
.
S
E
A
T
C
O
V
E
R
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
&
T
O
I
L
E
T
T
I
S
S
U
E
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
@
M
E
N
S
(
M
O
U
N
T
S
F
L
U
S
H
O
N
O
N
E
S
I
D
E
@
A
D
A
S
T
A
L
L
)
R
R
-
3
N
O
T
U
S
E
D
R
R
-
4
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
3
6
9
0
3
1
0
2
8
0
0
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
P
A
P
E
R
T
O
W
E
L
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
&
W
A
S
T
E
R
E
C
E
P
T
A
C
L
E
(
A
D
J
.
T
O
D
O
O
R
)
R
R
-
5
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
5
8
0
6
1
0
2
8
0
0
1
1
/
4
"
D
I
A
.
S
T
A
I
N
L
E
S
S
S
T
E
E
L
G
R
A
B
B
A
R
S
W
/
S
N
A
P
F
L
A
N
G
E
R
R
-
6
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
8
2
2
1
0
2
8
0
0
L
A
V
A
T
O
R
Y
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
S
O
A
P
D
I
S
P
E
N
S
E
R
R
R
-
7
C
U
S
T
O
M
M
I
R
R
O
R
0
8
8
3
0
0
F
R
A
M
E
L
E
S
S
M
I
R
R
O
R
S
(
C
U
S
T
O
M
S
I
Z
E
)
R
R
-
8
K
O
A
L
A
K
A
R
E
:
K
B
1
1
0
-
S
S
R
E
1
0
2
8
0
0
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
S
T
A
I
N
L
E
S
S
S
T
E
E
L
F
I
N
I
S
H
B
A
B
Y
C
H
A
N
G
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
R
R
-
9
B
R
A
D
L
E
Y
C
O
R
P
.
S
E
R
I
E
S
6
0
0
(
O
R
E
Q
.
)
1
0
2
1
1
3
C
E
I
L
I
N
G
-
H
U
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
S
S
T
A
I
N
L
E
S
S
S
T
E
E
L
(
W
/
A
N
T
I
-
G
R
A
F
F
I
T
I
F
I
L
M
)
R
R
-
1
0
N
O
T
U
S
E
D
R
R
-
1
1
B
O
B
R
I
C
K
:
B
-
3
7
0
6
5
0
1
0
2
8
0
0
R
E
C
E
S
S
E
D
S
A
N
I
T
A
R
Y
N
A
P
K
I
N
/
T
A
M
P
O
N
V
E
N
D
O
R
R
R
-
1
2
D
Y
S
O
N
:
A
I
R
B
L
A
D
E
d
B
-
A
B
1
4
1
0
2
8
0
0
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
H
A
N
D
D
R
Y
E
R
:
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
,
A
U
T
O
M
A
T
I
C
,
G
R
A
Y
N
O
T
E
:
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
P
L
U
M
B
.
D
W
G
S
.
F
O
R
M
F
R
.
&
M
O
D
E
L
#
O
F
P
L
U
M
B
.
F
I
X
T
U
R
E
S
E
-
0
3
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
E
-
0
4
S
T
A
G
E
O
P
E
N
3
0
A
0
4
.
1
0
1
8
A
0
4
.
1
0
E
-
1
2
L
I
F
T
A
D
A
0
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
1
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
2
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
2
6
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
T
Y
P
.
E
-
0
3
E
-
0
2
E
-
0
1
1
9
1
9
1
9
0
9
0
8
1
0
1
9
0
6
T
Y
P
.
0
6
T
Y
P
.
1
0
0
9
0
9
3
-
5
/
8
C
1
1
-
1
/
2
"
C
2
2
4
3
-
5
/
8
C
1
1
-
1
/
2
"
C
2
2
4
2
8
A
0
4
.
4
0
3
0
A
0
4
.
4
0
1
"
4
"
4
"
1
"
3
-
5
/
8
C
3
3
8
6
C
3
S
3
S
5
S
4
S
8
S
9
20'-0"12'-10"7'-2"8'-2"20'-0"
S
1
0
S
1
1
11'-2"
S
6
12'-2"
S
7
8"
S
1
8'-0"
S
2
9"
R
F
ADA TURNING
CLEARANCE
ADA TURNING
CLEARANCE
E
-
0
1
S
H
O
P
B
O
T
T
L
E
E
-
0
2
S
H
O
P
D
E
S
S
E
R
T
4
0
3
9
3
9
4
0
3
9
3
9
3
9
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
0
4
1
E
-
0
3
B
T
A
T
B
S
B
S
A
S
C
T
E
S
D
T
F
T
4
T
5
T
6
T
7
T
8
T
9
T
3
MODERN TIMES
549, 555 & 559
S Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim, CA 92805
9/12/2017 10:59:02 AM P:\2017\17023_modern Times At Leisuretown\Design\Cad\Sheets\modern Times\A01.40_GROUND FLOOR PLANS-SHIP. CON.dwg
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
1
7
-
0
2
3
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
4
-
1
9
-
2
0
1
7
D
D
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
6
-
7
-
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
7
-
1
3
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
1
8
-
1
4
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
2
9
-
0
1
-
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
#
1
G
R
O
U
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
S
A
0
1
.
4
0
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
M
U
W
A
L
L
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
/
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
A
R
E
A
N
O
T
I
N
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
(
C
A
B
.
)
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
#
4
(
F
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
)
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
-
S
E
E
S
H
T
.
N
O
T
E
#
1
3
,
S
H
T
.
A
0
0
.
4
5
,
&
E
L
E
C
.
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
P
L
A
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
O
T
E
:
N
O
T
A
L
L
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
M
A
Y
P
E
R
T
A
I
N
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
E
E
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
C
O
I
L
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
U
M
P
-
O
U
T
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
P
E
R
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
S
E
E
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
H
A
N
D
R
A
I
L
A
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
/
C
A
B
I
N
E
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
1
.
1
0
R
F
O
R
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
.
F
U
R
R
E
D
O
U
T
W
A
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
S
S
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
T
R
E
N
C
H
D
R
A
I
N
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
U
T
L
I
N
E
O
F
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
M
A
T
S
L
A
B
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
F
I
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
.
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
.
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
.
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
W
I
T
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
R
O
L
L
-
U
P
D
O
O
R
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
U
N
I
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
A
N
D
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
R
O
O
F
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
E
X
H
A
U
S
T
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
D
A
W
H
E
E
L
C
H
A
I
R
L
I
F
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
S
L
I
D
I
N
G
G
L
A
S
S
B
A
R
N
D
O
O
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
S
T
A
I
R
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
-
0
9
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
V
I
F
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
E
R
C
H
A
N
D
I
S
E
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
/
O
W
N
E
R
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
U
N
D
E
R
S
I
D
E
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
S
T
O
R
Y
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
R
O
O
F
S
C
R
E
E
N
A
T
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
.
F
L
O
O
R
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
D
I
S
H
H
O
O
D
D
U
C
T
,
H
E
A
V
Y
G
A
U
G
E
D
U
C
T
I
N
G
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
,
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
U
T
U
R
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
A
B
O
V
E
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
O
P
E
N
T
O
T
H
E
S
K
Y
2
N
D
L
E
V
E
L
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
A
N
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
L
O
A
D
S
I
G
N
F
O
R
8
0
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
S
A
T
T
H
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
A
R
E
A
.
P
O
S
T
E
D
S
I
G
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
A
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
L
E
G
I
B
L
E
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
N
D
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
O
W
N
E
R
O
R
O
W
N
E
R
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
Z
E
D
A
G
E
N
T
.
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
6
3
7
3
8
3
9
4
0
4
1
4
2
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
1
.
A
L
L
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
I
N
F
O
.
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
I
S
S
H
T
.
I
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
O
R
A
L
L
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
D
W
G
S
.
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
G
.
C
.
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
Y
D
I
S
C
R
E
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
W
/
T
H
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
E
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
W
O
R
K
.
2
.
D
I
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
R
E
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
.
3
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
F
U
R
R
E
D
W
A
L
L
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
F
O
R
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
&
D
R
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
S
T
H
A
T
E
X
T
E
N
D
U
P
T
H
E
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
.
4
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
2
A
-
/
2
A
-
1
0
B
C
/
1
0
B
C
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
Y
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
I
G
N
.
5
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
S
E
T
O
F
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
,
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
,
F
I
R
E
A
L
A
R
M
,
E
T
C
.
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
O
N
T
H
E
J
O
B
S
I
T
E
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
N
O
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
"
F
O
R
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
"
F
O
R
E
G
R
E
S
S
A
N
D
F
I
R
E
-
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
7
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
&
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
"
F
O
R
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
A
N
D
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
8
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
F
L
O
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
.
9
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
S
"
F
O
R
D
O
O
R
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
0
.
A
L
L
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
O
W
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
V
I
S
I
B
L
E
A
N
D
N
O
T
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
B
Y
P
I
P
E
S
,
M
E
C
H
.
D
U
C
T
W
O
R
K
,
E
Q
U
I
P
.
,
E
T
C
.
G
.
C
T
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
E
N
D
A
N
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
T
A
L
L
C
L
G
.
H
U
N
G
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
1
1
.
A
L
L
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
1
2
.
A
L
L
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
E
N
A
N
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
3
.
A
L
L
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
O
W
N
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
E
C
N
E
W
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
2
0
G
R
O
U
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
S
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
N
E
-
1
0
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
O
P
E
N
E
-
1
1
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
O
P
E
N
E
-
1
2
L
I
F
T
A
D
A
3
0
A
0
4
.
1
0
E
-
1
3
S
T
A
I
R
E
-
1
4
S
T
A
I
R
0
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
1
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
2
8
A
0
8
.
1
0
2
6
2
6
2
7
1
9
1
9
3
2
3
2
3
0
S
3
S
5
S
4
S
8
S
9
20'-0"12'-10"7'-2"8'-2"20'-0"
S
1
0
S
1
1
11'-2"
S
6
12'-2"
S
7
8"
S
1
8'-0"
S
2
9"
O
P
E
N
T
O
B
E
L
O
W
D
N
D
N
U
P
P
E
R
L
E
V
E
L
O
F
O
F
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
I
S
A
P
U
B
L
I
C
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
.
I
T
I
N
C
L
U
D
E
S
T
H
E
F
O
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
O
F
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
O
P
E
N
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
E
-
1
0
A
N
D
E
-
1
1
,
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
B
E
T
W
E
E
N
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
S
A
T
G
R
I
D
L
I
N
E
S
S
6
T
O
S
7
,
A
N
D
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
A
T
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
B
E
T
W
E
E
N
G
R
I
D
L
I
N
E
S
T
3
T
O
T
5
,
A
N
D
B
E
T
W
E
E
N
T
6
A
N
D
T
8
4
2
4
2
T
A
T
B
S
B
S
A
S
C
T
E
S
D
T
F
T
4
T
5
T
6
T
7
T
8
T
9
T
3
MODERN TIMES
549, 555 & 559
S Anaheim Blvd
Anaheim, CA 92805
9/12/2017 10:59:41 AM P:\2017\17023_modern Times At Leisuretown\Design\Cad\Sheets\modern Times\A01.50_SECOND FLOOR PLANS-SHIP. CON.dwg
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
1
7
-
0
2
3
#
D
A
T
E
I
S
S
U
E
1
2
.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
4
-
1
9
-
2
0
1
7
D
D
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
A
L
6
-
7
-
2
0
1
7
P
L
A
N
C
H
E
C
K
S
U
B
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
7
-
1
3
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
1
8
-
1
4
-
2
0
1
7
H
E
A
L
T
H
D
E
P
T
C
O
R
R
.
#
2
9
-
0
1
-
2
0
1
7
P
.
C
.
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
#
1
S
E
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
S
A
0
1
.
5
0
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
M
U
W
A
L
L
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
/
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
A
R
E
A
N
O
T
I
N
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
(
C
A
B
.
)
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
#
4
(
F
I
N
A
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
)
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
-
S
E
E
S
H
T
.
N
O
T
E
#
1
3
,
S
H
T
.
A
0
0
.
4
5
,
&
E
L
E
C
.
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
P
L
A
N
L
E
G
E
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
N
O
T
E
:
N
O
T
A
L
L
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
M
A
Y
P
E
R
T
A
I
N
T
O
T
H
I
S
S
H
E
E
T
.
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
T
E
E
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
C
O
I
L
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
B
U
M
P
-
O
U
T
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
P
E
R
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
S
E
E
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
H
A
N
D
R
A
I
L
A
T
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
/
C
A
B
I
N
E
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
A
D
A
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
C
O
U
N
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
,
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
A
0
1
.
1
0
R
F
O
R
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
T
R
E
S
T
R
O
O
M
S
.
F
U
R
R
E
D
O
U
T
W
A
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
S
S
T
H
R
O
U
G
H
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
P
A
N
E
L
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
T
R
E
N
C
H
D
R
A
I
N
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
U
M
B
I
N
G
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
O
U
T
L
I
N
E
O
F
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
M
A
T
S
L
A
B
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
F
I
N
I
S
H
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
.
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
.
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
.
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
W
I
T
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
F
O
O
T
I
N
G
S
A
N
D
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
H
E
A
D
R
O
L
L
-
U
P
D
O
O
R
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
C
O
L
U
M
N
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
A
S
H
E
N
C
L
O
S
U
R
E
.
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
U
N
I
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
A
N
D
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
R
O
O
F
M
O
U
N
T
E
D
E
X
H
A
U
S
T
-
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
S
T
A
I
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
D
A
W
H
E
E
L
C
H
A
I
R
L
I
F
T
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
P
L
A
N
S
S
L
I
D
I
N
G
G
L
A
S
S
B
A
R
N
D
O
O
R
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
.
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
E
E
L
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
.
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
I
N
F
I
L
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
S
T
A
I
R
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
-
0
9
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
.
V
I
F
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
G
U
A
R
D
R
A
I
L
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
P
L
A
N
S
A
N
D
E
X
T
E
R
I
O
R
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
M
E
R
C
H
A
N
D
I
S
E
S
T
O
R
A
G
E
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
B
Y
T
E
N
A
N
T
/
O
W
N
E
R
.
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
P
A
R
T
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
U
N
D
E
R
S
I
D
E
O
F
C
L
E
A
R
S
T
O
R
Y
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
R
O
O
F
S
C
R
E
E
N
A
T
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
P
L
A
T
F
O
R
M
.
F
L
O
O
R
R
E
G
I
S
T
E
R
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
P
O
S
E
D
D
I
S
H
H
O
O
D
D
U
C
T
,
H
E
A
V
Y
G
A
U
G
E
D
U
C
T
I
N
G
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
M
E
C
H
A
N
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
,
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
.
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
F
U
T
U
R
E
R
O
O
F
D
E
C
K
A
B
O
V
E
T
R
E
L
L
I
S
O
P
E
N
T
O
T
H
E
S
K
Y
2
N
D
L
E
V
E
L
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
A
N
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
L
O
A
D
S
I
G
N
F
O
R
8
0
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
S
A
T
T
H
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
A
R
E
A
.
P
O
S
T
E
D
S
I
G
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
A
N
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
L
E
G
I
B
L
E
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
N
T
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
N
D
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
O
W
N
E
R
O
R
O
W
N
E
R
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
Z
E
D
A
G
E
N
T
.
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
1
9
2
0
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
4
2
5
2
6
2
7
2
8
2
9
3
0
3
1
3
2
3
3
3
4
3
5
3
6
3
7
3
8
3
9
4
0
4
1
4
2
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
H
E
E
T
N
O
T
E
S
1
.
A
L
L
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
I
N
F
O
.
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
T
H
I
S
S
H
T
.
I
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
O
R
A
L
L
F
R
A
M
I
N
G
,
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
D
W
G
S
.
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
T
H
E
S
T
R
U
C
T
.
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
.
G
.
C
.
T
O
V
E
R
I
F
Y
A
N
Y
D
I
S
C
R
E
P
A
N
C
I
E
S
W
/
T
H
E
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
B
E
G
I
N
N
I
N
G
W
O
R
K
.
2
.
D
I
M
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
R
E
T
O
F
A
C
E
O
F
F
I
N
I
S
H
,
U
N
L
E
S
S
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
N
O
T
E
D
.
3
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
F
U
R
R
E
D
W
A
L
L
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
F
O
R
A
L
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
&
D
R
A
I
N
L
I
N
E
S
T
H
A
T
E
X
T
E
N
D
U
P
T
H
E
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
W
A
L
L
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
.
4
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
2
A
-
/
2
A
-
1
0
B
C
/
1
0
B
C
F
I
R
E
E
X
T
I
N
G
U
I
S
H
E
R
I
N
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
B
Y
F
I
R
E
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
S
I
G
N
.
5
.
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
S
E
T
O
F
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
,
F
I
R
E
S
P
R
I
N
K
L
E
R
,
F
I
R
E
A
L
A
R
M
,
E
T
C
.
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
O
N
T
H
E
J
O
B
S
I
T
E
D
U
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
N
D
N
O
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
M
A
D
E
W
I
T
H
O
U
T
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
W
I
T
H
T
H
E
A
B
O
V
E
P
R
O
V
I
S
I
O
N
.
6
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
S
"
F
O
R
W
A
L
L
T
Y
P
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
D
I
A
G
R
A
M
"
F
O
R
E
G
R
E
S
S
A
N
D
F
I
R
E
-
R
A
T
E
D
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
7
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
"
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
&
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
"
F
O
R
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Y
M
B
O
L
S
A
N
D
A
B
B
R
E
V
I
A
T
I
O
N
S
.
8
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
I
N
T
E
R
I
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
"
F
O
R
F
L
O
O
R
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
S
.
9
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
S
H
E
E
T
S
"
D
O
O
R
S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E
S
"
F
O
R
D
O
O
R
T
Y
P
E
S
&
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
0
.
A
L
L
I
L
L
U
M
I
N
A
T
E
D
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
S
H
O
W
N
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
C
L
E
A
R
L
Y
V
I
S
I
B
L
E
A
N
D
N
O
T
O
B
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
B
Y
P
I
P
E
S
,
M
E
C
H
.
D
U
C
T
W
O
R
K
,
E
Q
U
I
P
.
,
E
T
C
.
G
.
C
T
O
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
P
E
N
D
A
N
T
E
X
T
E
N
S
I
O
N
S
A
T
A
L
L
C
L
G
.
H
U
N
G
E
X
I
T
S
I
G
N
S
A
S
R
E
Q
'
D
P
E
R
C
B
C
,
S
E
C
.
1
0
1
1
.
1
1
.
A
L
L
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
S
H
O
W
N
O
N
P
L
A
N
S
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
R
E
F
E
R
T
O
F
O
O
D
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
.
1
2
.
A
L
L
B
R
E
W
E
R
Y
E
Q
U
I
P
M
E
N
T
T
O
B
E
C
O
O
R
D
I
N
A
T
E
D
W
I
T
H
T
E
N
A
N
T
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
A
T
I
O
N
.
1
3
.
A
L
L
M
I
L
L
W
O
R
K
S
H
O
W
N
B
Y
O
T
H
E
R
S
H
O
W
N
F
O
R
R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E
O
N
L
Y
.
F
E
C
N
E
W
W
A
L
L
/
C
O
L
U
M
N
N
2
0
S
E
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
-
S
H
I
P
P
I
N
G
C
O
N
T
A
I
N
E
R
S
S
C
A
L
E
:
1
/
4
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
CITY OF ANAHEIM
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
INFILL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS**
CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT CASE NO. 2017-00026
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2017-05910
VARIANCE NO. 2017-05095
PROJECT OWNER:
NAME: Shaheen Sadeghi
COMPANY: Nest & Rest, LLC
ADDRESS: 709 Randolph Avenue
CITY/ST/ZIP: Costa Mesa, CA 92626
E-MAIL: chris@thelab.com
PHONE: 949-933-5296
PROJECT APPLICANT:
NAME: Jacob McKean
COMPANY: Modern Times Beer, LLC
ADDRESS: 3725 Greenwood Street
CITY/ST/ZIP: San Diego, CA 92110
E-MAIL: jacob@moderntimesbeer.com
PHONE: 760-468-0432
AGENT:
NAME: Chris Bennett
COMPANY: LAB Holding / Nest & Rest, LLC
ADDRESS: 709 Randolph Avenue
CITY/ST/ZIP: Costa Mesa, CA 92626
E-MAIL: chris@thelab.com
PHONE: 949-933-5296
PROJECT ADDRESS: 549-555 South Anaheim Boulevard,
APN(s): 251-07-123, 251-07-124
PROJECT LOCATION: The Proposed Project is located on 0.79-acres at the northwest corner of
Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street.
SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING:
This 0.79-acre property is developed with a 3,312 square foot, two-story single-family residence
(“Burns’ Building” Building A), a 5,712 square foot barrel-vaulted retail building (“Barrel
Building” Building B), and a 1,412 automotive repair building (Building D). The Proposed Project
also includes a portion of the 20-foot wide alley adjacent to the north side of the property. The
portion of the alley abutting the Project Site has been abandoned by the City and purchased by the
ATTACHMENT NO. 9
property owner. Surrounding land uses include single-family residential to the west across a public
alley, condominiums to the north, commercial land uses across Anaheim Boulevard to the east,
and an auto sales land use to across Water Street to the south.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Applicant is proposing to re-purpose and improve the existing
buildings to accommodate a full-service restaurant and coffee shop in Building A, establish a
production brewery and tasting room in Building B, construct a new freestanding restroom
building (Building C), and establish a “take-out” restaurant in Building D. Site improvements
would include an outdoor dining area adjacent to Building A, a centralized garden area with seating
to the rear of Building B, two-story shipping containers surrounding the garden area to the west
and north, and a swimming pool south of Building B. The Applicant proposes to construct a six-
foot high block wall adjacent to the condominiums to the north.
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Medium Density Residential
ZONING: “C-G” General Commercial Zone
Residential Opportunity Zone
Boulevard Residential District of the South Anaheim
Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay Zone
INFORMATION DEMONSTRATING THAT THE PROJECT SATISFIES THE CONDITIONS
DESCRIBED IN SECTION 15332 OF TITLE 14 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF
REGULATIONS:
1. Is the project consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable
general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations?
The property is located in the underlying “C-G” General Commercial Zone and within the
Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone and the Boulevard Residential District of the
South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor (SABC) Overlay zone. In 2013, the reclassification of
the site to “RO” Overlay implemented a key strategy of the City’s 2006-2014 General Plan
Housing Element by rezoning the properties identified as Housing Opportunities Sites in
the Housing Element. The proposed rezoning of these approximately 166 sites allowed
“by-right” housing development by applying one of two overlay zones to these properties:
the Residential Opportunity (RO) Overlay Zone or the Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone.
The General Plan designates the property for Low-Medium Density Residential land uses,
but the Proposed Project would reuse existing commercial structures and may implement
the underlying “C-G” Zoning.
The Proposed Project would be consistent with the general plan designation goals and
policies of the General Plan for the downtown area, including:
• Ensure that Downtown maintains a mix of uses attractive to broad segments of
Anaheim’s population and that stimulate activity during day and evening hours,
every day of the week;
• Encourage the preservation and protection of building of historical significance;
• Intensify and revitalize strategically located commercial sites in keeping with the
Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines.
The Zoning Code requires a CUP in this zone to permit a brewery with a tasting room and
outdoor dining area order to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The Zoning Code
permits breweries with accessory tasting rooms without the need for a CUP in most
commercial and industrial zones in the City; however, a CUP is required in this case
because the tasting room exceeds the 750 square foot size limitation allowed by right in
the C-G zone.
The Zoning Code requires that parking demand be calculated by combining all of the
proposed uses for the entire Proposed Project, which results in a requirement of 99 parking
spaces. In the parking study demand study prepared by Fehr & Peers (August 2017), the
actual demand is estimated to be 76 spaces. Accordingly, the Applicant is proposing to
provide a total of 76 parking spaces, of which 31 parking spaces would be provided on-site
and an additional 45 parking spaces would be provided off-site through a parking license
agreement with the City, in CarPark 2 located at 235 East Center Street.
The Zoning Code requires a street setback of 15’ from Anaheim Boulevard and 10’ on
Water Street. The Applicant is requesting a variance to allow a reduced setback from
Anaheim Boulevard at 9’6”, and from Water Street at 1’6”. Staff believes the reduced street
setbacks are justified because the proposed site improvements are constrained due to the
existing development of three buildings that will be protected in place, including the
preservation of the historic Burns House.
The Zoning Code requires a 10- foot landscape setback when a commercial project is
proposed adjacent to residential land uses. The Applicant purchased the public alley
adjacent to the condominiums to the north and has incorporated this area into the project
to provide additional on-site parking. In order to maximize the amount of parking gained
in this area, the Applicant has designed this area in an efficient manner that provides no
setback from the adjacent residential property. Staff believes that this setback reduction is
justified due to the development constraints of the as a result of the preservation of the
historic Burns House.
The Zoning Code requires an eight foot tall, solid masonry wall to separate a proposed
commercial project when adjacent to residential land uses. The plans indicate that a six
foot masonry wall would be constructed in this area, but the Applicant has also stated the
desire to construct an open-style fence, such as wrought iron, with shrubbery to provide
screening. Staff does not believe the material or height deviation is appropriate nor can the
required variance findings be made. Staff recommends that a full-height masonry wall be
installed to maintain adequate screening and noise attenuation between the two uses.
2. Is the proposed development located within the City limits on a project site of no more than
five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses?
The Project Site is located on a 0.76-acre site that is surrounded by urban uses, including
single-family residential to the west across a public alley, condominiums to the north,
commercial land uses across Anaheim Boulevard to the east, and an auto sales land use to
across Water Street to the south.
3. Does the project site have value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species?
The Project Site is developed with existing buildings and surface paving and has no value
as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
4. Would approval of the project result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality?
a. Traffic:
Construction - There would be a temporary minor increase in traffic due to construction
vehicles during the construction phase. However, this impact would be temporary. No
significant impacts would occur.
Operation - The Proposed Project consists of a restaurant, brewery, outdoor garden
area, and tasting room utilizing existing buildings on the Project Site. Based on Institute
of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Handbook 9th Edition, the Proposed
Project is estimated to generate 48 trips during the AM Peak Hour, and 72 trips during
the PM Peak Hour. A traffic impact analysis was prepared by Fehr & Peers, (September
2017), which concluded that the proposed Project would not significantly impact traffic
at any signalized study intersection or roadway segment, and that a traffic signal is not
warranted for the intersection of Anaheim Boulevard and Water Street.
b. Noise:
Construction The Proposed Project would generate temporary noise during
construction activities. Equipment used during construction could create noise impacts
through the duration of the construction process. However, these impacts are
temporary and would cease upon completion of construction. Chapter 6.70 of the
City’s noise ordinance exempts construction noise between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday Adherence to the City Noise ordinance would
result in no significant impacts.
Operation The Proposed Project is a restaurant, brewery, outdoor garden area, and
tasting room utilizing existing buildings on the Project Site. To ensure that the Proposed
Project does not cause any disturbances in the neighborhood, staff recommends
conditions of approval that would restrict outdoor noise to ambient music only.
Although not being requested at this time, any future outdoor entertainment, including
live music, would require approval of a separate Entertainment Permit. Through the
permit review process, staff would have the ability to require certain protections to
ensure that the music does not disturb any nearby residents. Any outdoor entertainment
proposed in the future would be significantly limited and only allowed up to four times
a year through the issuance of a Special Event Permit. Similar to an Entertainment
Permit, a Special Event Permit could include restrictions to ensure that such
entertainment does not disturb surrounding properties. Any outdoor entertainment in
excess of the four events permitted by the Special Event Permit would require a
Conditional Use Permit. Outdoor hours would be limited, and a minimum of a 6-foot
high masonry wall would be constructed between the Project Site and the condominiums
to the north to comply with the Zoning Code and ensure that adequate screening and
noise buffering be provided. No significant impacts would occur.
c. Air Quality:
The Project Site is located within SoCAB, which is characterized by relatively poor air
quality and is a Federal- and State-designated nonattainment area for O3, PM10 and
PM2.5 (US EPA 2012). SCAQMD has established significance thresholds for both
construction and operational activities relative to these criteria pollutants. Based on the
following analysis, implementation of the Project would result in less than significant
impacts relative to the daily significance thresholds for criteria air pollutant
construction emissions established by the SCAQMD.
Construction - The Proposed Project is a restaurant, brewery, outdoor garden area, and
tasting room utilizing existing buildings on the 0.79-acre Project Site. General
construction activities, such as site preparation, grading, and travel by construction
workers can contribute to air pollutants. All construction activities would comply with
SCAQMD Rule 403 (SCAQMD 2005) regarding the control of fugitive dust emissions,
and existing City dust suppression practices that minimize dust and other emissions.
Controls include frequent watering of the site, the covering and/or wetting of trucks
hauling dirt, sand, soil or other loose materials off-site, street sweeping, as needed, to
remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud that would otherwise be carried
off by trucks departing the site, suspending grading and excavation activities in high
winds (25 miles per hour [mph] or more) as well as implementation of a traffic control
plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities, etc., that would
be incorporated into the construction plans.
Construction of the Project is conservatively anticipated to last 7 months and
construction would be broken into three phases: demolition, grading, and building
construction (which consists of building construction, paving, and architectural
coating).
Pollutant emissions resulting from Project construction activities were calculated using
the CalEEMod model. Construction emissions are based on conservative assumptions,
which imply a default equipment mix and a worst-case construction schedule. As
shown in Table 1, entitled “Project-Related Construction and Operational Emissions,”
the incremental increase in emissions from Project construction activities fall well
below SCAQMD significance thresholds for regional emissions.
Operation - The Proposed Project’s incremental increase in regional emissions
resulting from operation of the Project would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds.
Mobile source emission calculations utilize the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rate
calculated by CalEEMod, based on the specific proposed land use and intensity. The
daily VMT rate is based on the number of daily trips for each land use and applied to a
commute percentage and an average trip length, both of which are land use specific
values derived from CalEEMod. These values account for variations in trip frequency
and length associated with commuting to and from the Project. Emission factors
specific to the buildout year are projected based on SoCAB-specific fleet turnover rates
and the impact of future emission standards and fuel efficiency standards. The increase
in the consumption of fossil fuels to provide power, heat, and ventilation was
considered in the calculations as stationary point source emissions. Future fuel
consumption rates are estimated based on land use specific energy consumption rates.
The emission factors used in this analysis represent a State-wide average of known
power producing facilities, utilizing various technologies and emission control
strategies, and do not take into account any unique emissions profile. At this time, these
emission factors are considered conservative and representative. Area source emissions
were calculated by CalEEMod and include emissions from natural gas and landscape
fuel combustion, consumer products, and architectural coatings (future maintenance).
As shown in Table 1, the operational emissions pollutant concentrations resulting from
Project operation would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Therefore, air quality
impacts would be less than significant.
Table 1 Project-Related Construction and Operational Emissions
Mass Daily Thresholds
(pounds per day)
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
2017 Project Emissions 3.42 31.92 21.29 0.04 3.04 2.33
2018 Project Emissions 50.17 20.09 15.88 .03 1.49 1.20
Exceed Threshold? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Operational Emissions
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Project Emissions 1.90 5.95 15.35 0.04 3.24 0.94
Exceed Threshold? NO NO NO NO NO NO
Source of emissions: CalEEMod 2013.2.2
Source of thresholds: SCAQMD
Regional emissions refer to the ambient conditions surrounding the site. Therefore,
pollutant emissions associated with construction of the Project would be less than
significant. Operational related impacts are typically associated with emissions produced
from Project-generated vehicle trips. Based on the Project’s anticipated compliance with
SCAQMD Rule 403 and the scale of development, it is anticipated that no significant
impacts would occur to existing air quality standards.
d. Water Quality:
Grading and construction associated with site work on the Project Site would result in
temporary disturbance of surface soils, which could potentially result in erosion and
sedimentation on site, which are major visible water quality impacts attributable to
construction activities. Any stockpiles of excavated areas would be susceptible to high
rates of erosion from wind and rain and, if not manage properly, could result in increased
sedimentation in local drainage ways.
The Proposed Project must comply with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 Permit. The NPDES MS4 Permit Program,
which is administered in the project area by the City of Anaheim and County of Orange,
issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), helps
control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into receiving
waters. Project operation must also comply with the NPDES General Construction Permit.
The contractor would be required to comply with Chapter 10.09 of the Anaheim Municipal
Code, which prohibits the active or passive discharge or disposal of soil or construction
debris into the storm drain. Additionally, the Project would be required to obtain coverage
under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction
Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ). Construction activities
subject to the Construction General Permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to
ground such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires
implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP would
generally contain a site map showing the construction perimeter, existing and proposed
buildings, storm water collection and discharge points, general pre- and post-construction
topography, drainage patterns across the site, and adjacent roadways.
The SWPPP must also include project construction features designed to protect against
stormwater runoff, known as Best Management Practices (BMPs). Additionally, the
SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for
“non-visible” pollutants, should the BMPs fail; and a sediment monitoring plan, should the
site discharge directly into a water body listed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Section A
of the Construction General Permit describes the elements that must be contained in the
SWPPP. Incorporation of these policies and ordinances and the requirements contained
within would reduce project impacts to less than significant.
5. Can the project site be adequately served by all required utilities and public services?
a. Fire Protection:
The Proposed Project.may result in a small increase in demands for fire protection services.
However, the increased demand for fire protection services would be considered minimal
and would be met with existing fire resources. Impacts to fire services are anticipated to
be adequately funded by an increase in tax revenue, over an extended period of time,
relative to the increase in development intensity. Additional fire personnel and associated
facilities and equipment would be provided through the annual Operating Budget and
Capital Improvement Program review process. Annually, Fire Department needs would
be assessed and budget allocations revised accordingly to ensure that adequate levels of
service are maintained throughout the City. Building plans submitted for new development
on the Project Site would be required to comply with fire safety requirements. Additionally,
development of the Project Site would not result in the need for new or physically altered
fire protection facilities. Impacts to fire services would be less than significant.
b. Police Protection:
The Census Tract allows for up to four on-sale Alcoholic Beverage Control licenses and
there is presently one within the tract. The crime rate in this Reporting District is 240 percent
above the city average and there were four calls for service at this location in the past year.
In the quarter mile surrounding the subject property the crime rate is 169 percent above the
city average and calls for service primarily consisted of petty theft, auto burglaries, and
vandalism. Staff does not anticipate that the addition of alcoholic beverage sales at this
location would contribute to an increase in crime if the business is operated in a responsible
manner and in compliance with the recommended conditions of approval. These conditions
include typical Police Department conditions for similar uses, such as requiring a security
plan and ABC LEAD (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) training for employees,
security measures, limited outdoor hours of operation and entertainment as described below,
and a fenced in patio, among others. Development of the Project Site would not result in the
need for new or physically altered police protection facilities. Impacts to police services
would be less than significant.
b. Schools:
The Proposed Project does not include any residential uses that could increase new
residents, and therefore increase the number of students attending area schools. Therefore,
the Project would not significantly impact school services.
d. Parks:
The Proposed Project does not include any residential uses that could increase new
residents, and therefore increase the number of residents utilizing recreational facilities in
the City. Therefore, the Project would not significantly impact school services.
e. Other Public Facilities:
The Proposed Project does not include any residential uses that could increase new
residents, and therefore increase the number of residents utilizing library facilities in the
City. Therefore, impacts associated with library services and facilities would be less than
significant.
f. Wastewater/Sewer:
The Proposed Project would be served by the Anaheim Public Works Department for
wastewater (Sanitary Sewer) collection service. The Proposed Project is located within a
developed area and there is an existing Public wastewater (Sanitary Sewer) main in Water
Street, adjacent to the Project. The Proposed Project would be required to connect to this
existing wastewater (Sanitary Sewer) line. The existing wastewater facilities are not
identified as deficient in either the “Existing” or “Build-out” conditions in the latest
Combined Central Anaheim Area Master Plan of Sanitary Sewers. Due to the small size of
the Proposed Project, no significant impacts on existing wastewater infrastructure would
occur and the existing facilities would be adequate to serve the wastewater collection
requirements of the Project. Impacts to wastewater treatment facilities (OCSD) would be
less than significant.
g. Storm Water Drainage:
On-site drainage improvements proposed in conjunction with the proposed site work would
be required to meet the City’s and Orange County Flood Control District’s flood control
criteria including design discharges, design/construction standards and maintenance
features. All new development projects in the City are also required to include specific
design Best Management Practices to ensure that no stormwater runoff generated on site
would be allowed to leave the site without pre-treatment for urban pollutants. The Proposed
Project would not alter any drainage pattern in a manner that would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or offsite. The Proposed Project would not involve an alteration of
the course of a stream or river. Erosion and siltation impacts potentially resulting from the
Proposed Project would, for the most part, occur during the Project’s site preparation and
earthmoving phase. Implementation of the NPDES permit requirements, as they apply to
the site, would reduce potential erosion, siltation, and water quality impacts. Less than
significant impacts would occur.
h. Water Supplies:
The City of Anaheim receives water from two main sources: the Orange County
Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD), and
imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD).
Groundwater is pumped from 18 active wells located within the City, and imported water
is delivered to the City through seven treated water connections and one untreated
connection.
According to the City of Anaheim 2016 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), local
groundwater has been the least expensive and most reliable source of water supply for the
City. The City depends heavily on the groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater
Basin each year. Due to the small size of the Proposed Project, the supply of local water
needed to support these units is not substantial. Therefore, the production rates of local
wells would not be significantly impacted. Development of the Project Site would not
result in a significant deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table.
Less than significant impacts to groundwater supplies would occur.
i. Solid Waste Disposal:
Assembly Bill 939 requires local jurisdictions to divert at least 50 percent of their solid
waste into recycling. As of 2012, the City is diverting approximately 65 percent of its
waste into recycling. Waste from the City is currently being diverted to the Olinda Alpha
Landfill in the City of Brea and the Frank R. Bowerman Landfill in the City of Irvine.
Combined, the two landfills accept approximately 23,500 tons of waste per day, or over
seven million tons annually. The Proposed Project’s contribution of solid waste would be
minimal and would not significantly impact landfill operations. No significant impacts
would occur.
j. Electricity: k. Natural Gas: l. Telephone Service: m. Television Service:
The Project Site is located in a built-out, urban setting. The site and the surrounding
neighborhood are fully served by various utility service providers. There are no anticipated
significant service or system upgrades needed to serve the proposed commercial use. Any
increase in demand for these services would be considered to be less than significant.
** Authority: See Public Resources Code Section 21083 and Section 15332 of Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
DETERMINATION:
I find that the answers given above are adequately supported by the information sources cited
following each question and that the effects of the proposed project are typical of those generated
within that class of projects (i.e., Class 32 – Infill Development Projects) characterized as in-fill
development meeting the conditions of Section 15332 of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations. The Proposed Project will not cause a significant effect on the environment and is,
therefore, categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental
documents under the California Environmental Quality Act.
10/10/17
Signature of City of Anaheim Representative Date
Christine Saunders, Associate Planner (714) 765-5238
Printed Name, Title Phone Number
Modern Times
Beer
California’s First
Employee-Owned Brewery
ATTACHMENT NO. 10
•Founded in Pt Loma in 2013
•One of only a few breweries with
an on-site coffee roastery in the
world
•Fastest growing regional brewery
in California
•123 Employees Today
(+25 since Jan 1)
A Brief History
Our Values
California’s first and only
employee-owned brewery,
with over a hundred
employees actively earning
shares in the company
today
Commitment to
providing a living
wage and benefits
to all employees,
starting at $15
hourly
Fierce advocate of
independent
brewers and
keeping wages and
our business’ multi-
million dollar
economic impact
local whenever
possible
Excellent benefits package
including reimbursement
for taking public transit to
work and a paid 2-month
sabbatical for full-time
employees after five years
Our Products
A Focus on Art & Design
•Our San Diego brewery and tasting
room has been awarded an Orchid
Award by the San Diego Architectural
Foundation, the first ever Orchid for
a brewery tasting room, and is
regularly featured in beer and design
media around the world
•We have an in-house design team
lauded for our tasting room art
installations, can designs, and
merchandise
•Our can and merchandise designs
have been featured on leading design
sites like Lovely Package, The Dieline,
and Oh, Beautiful Beer!
Investment in our Communities
•Each of our 3 recurring annual
festivals contributes $10,000+
to charity partners
•Modern Times also leads a
monthly beach cleanup effort
around SD
•We’re a regular contributor of
product and silent auction gifts
to charity events around
Southern California
Investment in our Communities
“We believe that the food and beverage
industries in general, and the beer industry
in particular, have great potential to create
public benefits in the form of job
opportunities and tax revenue for the
jurisdictions within which they locate their
breweries, brewpubs, and retail tasting
stores. This industry has a high multiplier
effect, generating 4.7 indirect and induced
jobs for each direct brewery job created.
In conclusion, I hope that you will expedite
the approval of Modern Times’ conditional
use permit, building permit, and any other
approvals required.”
Russell F.H. Gibbon
Business Development Manager
City of San Diego
Responsible Serving Standards
•Our high pricing reflects our quality, and
we never offer discounts, happy hour
deals, or any similar inducements
•Every patron is ID’d to ensure age and
also to assess each person’s pre-existing
inebriation
•We stamp the hands of every person as
they are carded to prevent confusion
between servers
•We utilize trained door persons during
peak hours
•We require LEAD certification of all staff
within 30 days of hiring as well as any
local training programs
•We install an HD security camera system
which backs up to a cloud-based archive
Point Loma Tasting Room & Brewery “The Fermentorium” (2013)
Point Loma Tasting Room & Brewery “The Fermentorium” (2013)
North Park Tasting Room “The Flavordome” (2014)
Los Angeles Brewbpub “The Dankness Dojo” (2017)
Los Angeles Brewbpub “The Dankness Dojo” (2017)
Anaheim Brewpub & Beer Garden “Leisuretown” (2018)
Anaheim Brewpub & Beer Garden “Leisuretown” (2018)
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Kevin Adams <kmadams1287@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 6:19 PM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, &
brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this
company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
While I am sure you are already aware of Modern Times background and business profile, I can say with
certainty that the owners are extremely passionate about their craft and their community. This is a very
easy statement to make considering Modern Times is the first employee owned brewery in California. I
personally make a trip from Chino to their San Diego facility about once every 4 weeks to enjoy the quality
products, hospitality, and open creativity that invites unity and togetherness within the walls of their
facilities.
I am incredibly anxious and excited to hear that Modern Times will have a home in the OC. Anaheim
should welcome the opportunity to have Modern Times be a part of such a diverse yet flourishing
community. With so many great breweries and venues already in Anaheim, Modern Times will not only
adhere to, but also set a new high standard for alcohol serving venues in the area.
Many Thanks,
Kevin Adams
11829 Farndon Ave
Chino CA 91710
ATTACHMENT NO. 11
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:beerviews2013 <beerviews2013@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 11:00 AM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, &
brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this
company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in
California, with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in
DTLA, Encinitas, and Portland, OR, all of which will feature top-tier cuisine, award-winning beers, cafes, and
eclectic, vintage-inspired art installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this
stunning amount of growth has, and always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful
investment in its employees, customers, and communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently
evidenced by becoming California’s first employee-owned brewery, a move which has created huge
opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship and responsibility for everyone at the
company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting rooms has ever had a single call
for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law enforcement, garnering a reputation
as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times
being a permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident
they will be among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol-serving businesses in
Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Aaron ybarra
Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy S8.
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Jonathan Broomfield <jonbroomfield@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:50 AM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, &
brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this
company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery
in California, with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming
locations in DTLA, Encinitas, and Portland, OR, all of which will feature top-tier cuisine, award-winning
beers, cafes, and eclectic, vintage-inspired art installations and architecture. The business model that has
contributed to this stunning amount of growth has, and always will be, one of strong business ethics,
transparency, and meaningful investment in its employees, customers, and communities. This principled
approach to progress is most recently evidenced by becoming California’s first employee-owned brewery,
a move which has created huge opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship
and responsibility for everyone at the company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the
existing tasting rooms has ever had a single call for service, and they have maintained excellent
relationships with local law enforcement, garnering a reputation as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern
Times believes deeply in improving any community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern
Times being a permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I
am confident they will be among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol-
serving businesses in Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Jonathan Broomfield
20756 Raintree Ln
Trabuco Canyon, CA 92679
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:brad <brad@bradnkristy.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 4:16 PM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Cc:info@moderntimesbeer.com
Subject:Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, & brewery location
(Leisuretown) in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in
California, with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in
DTLA, Encinitas, and Portland, OR, all of which will feature top-tier cuisine, award-winning beers, cafes, and
eclectic, vintage-inspired art installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this
stunning amount of growth has, and always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful
investment in its employees, customers, and communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently
evidenced by becoming California’s first employee-owned brewery, a move which has created huge
opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship and responsibility for everyone at the
company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting rooms has ever had a single call
for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law enforcement, garnering a reputation
as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times
being a permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident
they will be among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol-serving businesses in
Downtown Anaheim.
Thank you,
Brad Cronkrite
1820 N Cornet Circle
Anaheim, CA 92807
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Justin Moir <jmoir4@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 12:21 PM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Modern Times Leisuretown
Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, &
brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this
company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in
California, with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in
DTLA, Encinitas, and Portland, OR, all of which will feature top-tier cuisine, award-winning beers, cafes, and
eclectic, vintage-inspired art installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this
stunning amount of growth has, and always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful
investment in its employees, customers, and communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently
evidenced by becoming California’s first employee-owned brewery, a move which has created huge
opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship and responsibility for everyone at the
company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting rooms has ever had a single call
for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law enforcement, garnering a reputation
as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times
being a permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident
they will be among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol-serving businesses
in Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Justin Moir
3900 Klamath River Drive
Ontario, Ca 91761
Sent from my iPhone
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Kelly Kraus-Lee <kellyakraus@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 8:35 AM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe,
& brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of
this company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
I have been impressed with the recent developments in Anaheim. As a life-long Orange County
resident, most of my time in Anaheim was spent at Disneyland. As Disneyland annual passes got
more expensive year after year, however, I stopped visiting the city at all for many years. Now, with
the recent developments of the packing house and center street, I find myself in Anaheim more often
and have been really impressed so far.
I have frequented the San Diego Modern Times locations because they are my favorite brewery and
when they open in LA, I will frequent that location even more often if there is not a closer location.
However, I would prefer to keep my money in my own community. As such, I have been anxiously
awaiting the opening of the Anaheim location. Modern Times would be a tremendous asset to our
community: providing a safe space for the community to gather, providing jobs to local residents, and
creating additional tax revenue for the city.
I can't wait to see Leisuretown become a reality.
Warmly,
Kelly Kraus-Lee
3050 S Bristol St.
Santa Ana, CA 92704
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:cfoodie11@gmail.com
Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2017 12:24 AM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, & brewery
location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this company joining the
business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in California,
with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in DTLA, Encinitas, and
Portland, OR, all of which will feature top‐tier cuisine, award‐winning beers, cafes, and eclectic, vintage‐inspired art
installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this stunning amount of growth has, and
always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful investment in its employees, customers, and
communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently evidenced by becoming California’s first employee‐
owned brewery, a move which has created huge opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship
and responsibility for everyone at the company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting
rooms has ever had a single call for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law
enforcement, garnering a reputation as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any
community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times being a
permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident they will be
among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol‐serving businesses in Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Craig Brady
Executive Sous Chef
The Ranch Restaurant and Saloon
Anaheim, CA
Sent from my iPhone
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Matthew Ewing <matthewcewing@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, October 09, 2017 10:46 PM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, &
brewery location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this
company joining the business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in
California, with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in
DTLA, Encinitas, and Portland, OR, all of which will feature top-tier cuisine, award-winning beers, cafes, and
eclectic, vintage-inspired art installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this
stunning amount of growth has, and always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful
investment in its employees, customers, and communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently
evidenced by becoming California’s first employee-owned brewery, a move which has created huge
opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship and responsibility for everyone at the
company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting rooms has ever had a single call
for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law enforcement, garnering a reputation
as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times
being a permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident
they will be among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol-serving businesses
in Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Matt Ewing
371 S. Gilbuck Drive
Anaheim, Ca 92802
1
Nicholas J. Taylor
From:Colby Clark <ccheevo@aol.com>
Sent:Monday, October 09, 2017 8:35 PM
To:Nicholas J. Taylor
Subject:Re: Support For Modern Times Leisuretown Project in Anaheim
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I am writing you today in enthusiastic support of Modern Times’ plans to open a new restaurant, cafe, & brewery
location, named Leisuretown, in Downtown Anaheim. I am very excited at the prospect of this company joining the
business community and neighborhood in Downtown Anaheim.
Since their launch in 2013, Modern Times has become the fastest growing–and 14th largest–craft brewery in California,
with tasting rooms in Point Loma and North Park San Diego, as well as three upcoming locations in DTLA, Encinitas, and
Portland, OR, all of which will feature top‐tier cuisine, award‐winning beers, cafes, and eclectic, vintage‐inspired art
installations and architecture. The business model that has contributed to this stunning amount of growth has, and
always will be, one of strong business ethics, transparency, and meaningful investment in its employees, customers, and
communities. This principled approach to progress is most recently evidenced by becoming California’s first employee‐
owned brewery, a move which has created huge opportunities for their staff while creating a deep sense of stewardship
and responsibility for everyone at the company. As for their commitment to public safety, none of the existing tasting
rooms has ever had a single call for service, and they have maintained excellent relationships with local law
enforcement, garnering a reputation as a benefit to neighborhoods. Modern Times believes deeply in improving any
community they’re involved in.
I believe this location will be of tremendous value to the Anaheim community. I look forward to Modern Times being a
permanent member of our city, and to frequenting the location they are looking to build. I am confident they will be
among the best operators in the area and will set a high standard for alcohol‐serving businesses in Downtown Anaheim.
Many Thanks,
Colby Clark
4771 Orlando Dr
Yorba Linda, CA 92886
200 S. Anaheim Blvd.
Suite #162
Anaheim, CA 92805
Tel: (714) 765-5139
Fax: (714) 765-5280
www.anaheim.net
City of Anaheim
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
There is no new correspondence
regarding this item.