The traffic generation number shown for each of the hypothetical projects, as well as for the current use, should be used for comparative purposes only.  While they do demonstrate the relative amounts of traffic that would be generated in the PM peak-hour, they are based upon surveys done throughout the United States (Trip Generation, Institute of Traffic Engineers, Vol. 6).  These do not necessarily match the rates that would be derived from surveys done solely within this region.  In order to normalize these rates to local conditions, the City�s traffic model, in accordance with the SCAG regional model, uses local socio-economic, demographic, and travel information to account for local differences.  Therefore, the actual generation rates derived from  the traffic model vary somewhat from the national averages.  Also, the wide ranges in traffic generation numbers between sites within the same development scenario are due to the size differences of the sites.  For example, the 61-acre B-6 site would have a significantly larger development at the same intensity than would the 3-acre Opportunity Site 5.  Lastly, �current� generation numbers are based upon the full occupancy and use of the buildings, unless otherwise noted.

Forecasting the traffic impacts of the three development scenarios requires the establishment of a �base line� condition in a future year, against which the impacts of the additional project traffic can be determined.  For the purposes of this analysis, the year 2008 was chosen as the forecast year.  It�s assumed that each of the three development scenarios would be fully constructed and occupied by that year.  Roadway improvements that are reasonably assured of being implemented by the forecast year have been added to the network.  Lastly, traffic is assumed to continue to grow by approximately the same rate during the next four years.  

As with a typical traffic study done for a single proposed project, this analysis of the multiple-site scenarios will identify the intersections that are significantly impacted by �project� traffic.  Thirty-five (35) intersections scattered throughout the city and surrounding the project sites were selected for the analysis.   Rather than to use the City�s current project impact criteria of:

2% or greater with the intersection operating at LOS E or F, or the addition of project traffic to a LOS D intersection causes it to deteriorate to LOS E or F;

staff has elected to utilize the following City of Los Angeles criteria for this analysis:

4% or greater when the intersection is operating at LOS C, 2% or greater at LOS D, and 1% or greater at LOS E or F.

Staff believes that this �sliding scale� criteria provides a more sensitive indicator of a project�s impact to the circulation system. 

This analysis is intended to provide general information on the relationship between development intensity at nine opportunity sites, and the impacts to surrounding traffic conditions.  The results are not intended to represent the impacts of any single project or development at a specific site.  Staff will present the results of the analysis at the study session. 

Updates of Empire Interchange/I-5 HOV and SR-134 Ramps Projects

Empire Interchange/I-5 HOV Project

The Empire project will create a �diamond� interchange (on- and off-ramps in both freeway directions) from a new roadway connection between Empire Avenue on the west side of the freeway and North San Fernando Road on the east.  Traveling east on Empire, the new roadway will extend Empire beneath Victory Place, proceed under the railroad tracks to connect with the Southbound I-5 San Fernando Road off-ramp at a signalized intersection, continue under the I-5 freeway via the existing tunnel, which will be widened to accommodate two-way traffic, before finally connecting with North San Fernando at a signalized intersection at the Northbound I-5 Scott Road off-ramp.  As part of the project, the existing on-ramp to the Southbound I-5 will be relocated to the south so that it may be accessed from the new roadway connection.  Additionally, the railroad tracks and right-of-way will be realigned to provide additional room to widen the I-5 for High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and elevated to allow Buena Vista traffic to pass beneath the rail line without the street needing to be depressed. 

Staff has recently been exploring with Caltrans the feasibility of modifying the project design to permanently close the San Fernando Road underpasses of the I-5 and railroad in both directions, and also closing the Northbound I-5 Lincoln Street off-ramp.  (See following schematic design.)  The impetus for this design change is to improve traffic safety and operations, improve area circulation and efficiency, and reduce traffic impacts to adjacent residential neighborhoods.  The Police Department is a strong proponent of this closure as a means of eliminating a speeding and accident problem area.  Several accidents have occurred in the underpasses due to excessive travel speeds, and to the difficult merge into the curved tunnel by motorists exiting the freeway via the Lincoln off-ramp.  The closure of the Lincoln ramp will improve freeway operations by increasing the spacing between the prior on-ramp and the Buena Vista off-ramp, thus eliminating the need for traffic entering and exiting the freeway to weave within a short distance.   

This modification will greatly simplify the street system through the interchange area, eliminating a tangle of streets that is confusing even to residents.  With the new Empire connection in operation, most motorists will find it to be more direct than the existing San Fernando underpasses.  Existing traffic counts and forecasted demand show that the new roadway connection will accommodate all of re-directed traffic, including the Airport traffic that currently uses the Lincoln Street off ramp-to-Thornton Avenue route.  An added benefit to the modification is that it will reduce traffic volumes on North San Fernando Road adjacent to the residential neighborhood west of Grismer Avenue, and on Thornton Avenue adjacent to that residential area and adjacent community park.     

Staff is not aware of any significant impacts or disadvantages of proceeding with this change. The Police and Fire Departments support the design modification.  While the  Burbank Airport has some concerns related to maintaining adequate access to the airport, especially in the immediate vicinity of the terminal, it has no objection to the proposed closures of the San Fernando Road underpasses and the Scott Road off-ramp.  Caltrans staff is fully supportive of the change, and is awaiting final direction from the City before proceeding further.

Caltrans has combined the Empire Interchange project with the I-5 HOV improvements between the SR-134 and SR-170 freeways for the purposes of funding and construction.  Although funding the combined $270 million project remains unsettled in the current State budgetary environment, the project continues to remain scheduled for design completion in Fall 2006 and start of construction in early 2007.  Staff is continuing to work with our transportation lobbyist and local Caltrans and MTA officials to ensure that work will proceed at the earliest possible date.    

SR-134 Ramps Project

This project involves the construction of a new on-ramp to the Westbound SR-134 Freeway, at Hollywood Way.  The ramp entry will be off of Alameda Avenue, just east of Hollywood Way, and will circle under the Hollywood Way and Alameda Avenue bridges before joining the existing on-ramp near Pass Avenue.  This additional on-ramp will allow a more efficient traffic movement through the intersection and onto the freeway.  While Caltrans will construct the new ramp, the City has completed the relocations of the adjacent off-ramp and BWP electrical substation to provide the necessary right-of-way for the ramp project.  With the exception of providing ongoing assistance and local coordination to Caltrans, the City has completed its project obligations as specified in the Cooperation Agreement. 

Caltrans� schedule has continuously maintained a Fall, 2004 date for starting construction of the on-ramp.  However, in the last few months, as the State budget shortages have led to shrinking transportation funds, Caltrans has had to re-schedule project deliveries to coincide with projected funding availability.  This has meant that only projects that are �construction ready� have been able to be funded, and even many of these have been placed on waiting lists.  Caltrans recently notified staff that they (Caltrans) had underestimated the cost of acquiring right-of-way easements and relocating utilities, and that they would not be able to get the ramp project ready for construction in time to meet the Fall schedule.  Staff has been discussing several options for keeping the project on schedule, including potentially fronting the needed funding ($3.5 million) in exchange for an in-kind payback.  As the funding environment has continued to deteriorate, with most projects being re-scheduled, it appears likely that the ramp project will be delayed at least one year, and very possibly two.   Staff is working with the San Fernando Valley Transportation Strikeforce, David Grannis (Planning Company Associates), the MTA, and Caltrans to ensure that this important project is constructed as soon as possible.            

Follow-up items from prior study sessions

City input into Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) bus service

During the past year the MTA has decentralized their bus operations and administration into five semi-autonomous service areas known as �Sectors.�  The San Fernando Valley Sector area includes Burbank, Glendale, and the rest of the Valley, and is administered by a  General Manager (GM) with staff located in Chatsworth.   The GM reports to a regional governing body, the SFV Sector Board, which is comprised of nine members appointed by the MTA Board to represent the interests of SFV cities and area transit users.  Board Members Stacey Murphy and Glendale Council Member Rafi Manoukian represent the Eastern Cluster of cities, which also includes the City of San Fernando.    

The Board�s responsibilities include reviewing operations and budget reports from Sector staff, making recommendations regarding possible service improvements, and hearing comments from bus riders and other transit interests on service performance.  Board Members frequently ask Sector staff to follow-up on service deficiencies and other identified problems, and to explore specific opportunities for improving route coverages and schedules.  MTA�s stated objective in establishing the Sector Board is to eventually have it assume direct responsibility for the operations of Tier 2, or �intercommunity� bus lines, which generally carry between 2,000 and 10,000 passengers a day, and operate on major arterials or freeways using standard transit vehicles; and Tier 3, or �community-based� services, which generally carry less than 2,000 passengers a day, and operate on secondary streets using a variety of vehicles ranging from vans to standard 40-foot buses.   While the Board has general �advisory� responsibilities regarding Tier 1, or �core regional service� lines, which carry over 10,000 passengers a day and provide frequent service, it�s ability to make significant changes to those routes or schedules is more constrained by MTA policy. 

MTA Sector and City staffs regularly work together to make small adjustments to existing routes, schedules, and stop locations.  Many changes are temporary in nature and are necessitated by construction activities that require roadway detours or sidewalk closures.  The staffs occasionally work out minor adjustments to the bus schedules to improve coordination between transit modes, and make minor changes in routes to improve service coverage.  While most staff-level coordination between the Sector and City is typically limited to making these minor adjustments to existing services, opportunities for implementing more substantive changes are also periodically discussed.

Feasibility of a noon-time shuttle service

Noon-time shuttle services are typically intended to serve as alternatives to automobile usage for workers wishing to access nearby restaurant or shopping destinations during normal or extended lunch periods.  They usually operate within a downtown area, or between employment centers and eating/shopping areas.  Since most people must adhere to set work schedules, travel times need to be minimized in order to leave sufficient time for lunch and possibly some minimal shopping.  The circulating shuttle or trolley must provide frequent service so that riders are confident that they will be able to return to work on time.  An optimal service area is one that encompasses a relatively dense mixture of employment, shopping and restaurant uses that are too spread out to walk to during the limited time available.

The Burbank Transportation Management Organization (BTMO) attempted to establish a noon-time shuttle service on two separate occasions.  In 1992, it operated a shuttle bus to take Media District employees to the Downtown mall and restaurants during lunchtime.  It reportedly failed to attract riders due to distance and travel-time considerations, and the proximity of alternative destinations.  In 1997, the BTMO obtained clean air grant funding to provide free taxi service for its members during the lunch period.  That service also failed to attract noontime users, and was soon discontinued. 

A potentially more successful service may be a circulating shuttle(s) operating between the north side of the mall (Ikea area) and the Downtown Village area, possibly connecting to the Empire Center as well.  A Downtown service was implemented during the 1996 Thanksgiving-Christmas season, all-day Thursday through Sunday, shuttling shoppers and others between area destinations and parking areas.  That service was provided at a cost of $10,000 to the City, and was not as heavily utilized as anticipated.  However, with the growing popularity and density of uses in the Downtown area, it may be time to re-look at a connecting shuttle, or trolley service, to ease traffic and parking congestion.  

The frequencies at which a Downtown circulator must operate to be successful requires that it either be a dedicated service, or the area must be covered by numerous fixed-route buses that provide the necessary coverage and headways.  Each of the four fixed-route services proposed in the Arroyo Verdugo Transportation Audit study are planned to connect to the Downtown area, and could potentially be coordinated to provide regular connecting service through the area.  Instituting a dedicated shuttle service would require the identification of the area to be served, the necessary stops at parking areas and destinations to adequately serve the area, possible vehicle acquisitions, and a budget to cover labor and maintenance costs.  If so directed, staff will develop a service plan for operating a shuttle service for a pre-determined �test period.�          

Concept and operation of car-sharing programs

Car-sharing has been reasonably successful in Europe and in a few large US cities.  It works best in areas with high population densities, a mix of residential and commercial uses, and a well-developed public transit system.  Users are typically transit riders that need access to a car during the workday for personal needs and appointments.  Shared vehicles are often parked at transit stations and other public places, or at private businesses, and are available by reservation to members of the program.  Private entities, both for-profit and not, own and insure the cars, and sign up individual clients at a nominal initial cost.  Clients then pay an hourly fee (typically around $10/hour) each time they use a car.  Many cities and transportation agencies view car-sharing as a way to promote transit ridership, and thereby reduce automobile usage during commute periods.  Car-sharing is also being viewed by some as a potential alternative to car ownership for older people and others that may need only infrequent use of a vehicle.

Flexcar, a Seattle firm that operates car-sharing fleets in several cities, is attempting to establish a program in the Los Angeles market.  Their website shows that they currently have cars at 21 locations, two of which are in Burbank.  Flexcar representatives initially contacted staff approximately six months ago, when they were beginning to secure locations in the LA area, requesting to place a car at the Downtown Burbank Metrolink Station.  They felt that having a Flexcar at this station would generate interest, and ultimately clients, due to the high volumes of passengers passing through the station and the presence of the entertainment industry in the area.  Following the resolution of some administrative issues, Flexcar was allowed to use a prominently located parking space at the station to park the car and place a small sign.  Ultimately, however, the program did not generate the interest that the company had anticipated, and Flexcar chose to remove the car from the station and look for a more productive location.  The two current Flexcar locations in Burbank are at the 3400 Riverside office building and Warner Bros. Studios. 

The apparent lack of interest in the Flexcar program at the Downtown Burbank Metrolink Station could be attributable to several factors.  While, Flexcar believed that rail users would sign up for the program if they could easily link its use with their commute trip, it is difficult to schedule appointments and tasks at the right times to make this a consistently workable arrangement.  It appears from the number of workplace locations where Flexcar currently has cars assigned, that large employers recognize that their transit-commuting workers would prefer to have a car available to them throughout the day, at their workplace.  Moreover, many large companies, including the City of Burbank, have designated vehicles available for commuters as part of their Rideshare or trip-reduction programs.  Finally, with the higher incidence of modified work schedules, people may be increasingly able to take care of their personal needs during their flex days away from work. 

Staff continues to periodically speak with Flexcar representatives concerning other potential locations and ideas for marketing their service, and monitors the continuing development of the car-sharing industry in the region.                 

Feasibility of an internal shuttle service at the Empire Center

Due to the expansive nature of the Empire Center, shopping at multiple stores requires a substantial amount of walking or, alternatively, moving the car to locate nearer to more outlying stores.  Shoppers making large purchases at individual stores, and elderly and disabled people, must necessarily do the latter.  Members of both the Burbank Advisory Council on Disabilities and the Burbank Transportation Commission have suggested the need for an internal shuttle to transport shoppers between the stores and their cars.  The Advisory Council drafted a letter to the Empire Center owner, Zelman Development, citing several accessibility issues and requesting that it consider initiating an internal shuttle service.  In the initial response letter, and in a subsequent meeting (held on October 29) with Advisory Council and staff representatives, Zelman President Ben Reiling acknowledged that most customers choose to relocate their cars rather than try to walk from one area to another while burdened with their purchases.  He explained, however, that the tenant leases did not allow him to pass the cost of a shuttle service onto them without their concurrence, and that the larger tenants were not supportive of contributing toward funding the costs.  Mr. Reiling said that he would discuss it with the tenants again, but was not optimistic that they would agree.      

If neither the Empire Center owner nor the tenants are willing to fund the expense of an internal shuttle operation, it would need to be provided by a private or public operator.  A private service could be viable if funded by a combination of center owner/tenants and shoppers, who may be willing to pay a nominal fare for an internal ride or a higher fare for a connecting ride to the Downtown area as part of a circulating shuttle service.  The establishment of a fixed or flexible service of the BLT between the Downtown area and Golden State/Airport area could conceivably circulate through the center; however it would probably not be able to operate at the required frequency or flexibility that would serve this purpose.       

go to the top