The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-79 - North Newport Center EIR AddendumRESOLUTION NO. 2007- 79 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CERTIFYING THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER ADDENDUM TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2006011119) WHEREAS, The Irvine Company wishes to implement the General Plan 2006 Update for North Newport Center, which consists of parts of Newport Center Block 500, Newport Center Block 600, parts of San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island. WHEREAS, in that regard, The Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the "Project'): Zoning Amendment specified in the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan to allow future development in North Newport Center. 2. Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company LLC Concerning North Newport Center (Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza), to allow future development on the Property. 3. Transfer of development rights specified in the Development Agreement as follows: The transfer to Block 500 of development rights for development of approximately 277,161 square feet currently assigned to Newport Center Block 600 and designated for office, hotel, and supporting retail uses, of which up to 72,000 square feet may be utilized by the City for a City Hall building. 4. Traffic Study No. TS2001 -001 to evaluate potential traffic impacts and circulation system improvements. 5. North Newport Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. WHEREAS, on July 25, 2006, the City Council certified the adequacy and completeness of the EIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (EIR No. 2006011119) by adopting Resolution No 2006 -75. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15168, the City prepared the EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update as a program EIR (the "Program EIR "). WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach has prepared the North Newport Center Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "North Newport Center Addendum "). WHEREAS, the Planning Department has determined that the North Newport Center Addendum complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA "). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach held a duly - noticed public hearing to consider the Project, the Program EIR, and the North Newport Center Addendum on November 15, 2007, and November 29, 2007. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering all submitted evidence and arguments, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the North Newport Center Addendum with a vote of 4 ayes, 2 noes, and 1 absent. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a duly - noticed public hearing to consider the Project, the Program EIR, and the North Newport Center Addendum on December 11, 2007. WHEREAS, after thoroughly considering the Program EIR, the North Newport Center Addendum, and the public testimony and written submissions, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the City Council finds the following facts, findings, and reasons to support certifying the North Newport Center Addendum: The Project is consistent with and implements the General Plan Update. The Program EIR, which is conclusively presumed to be valid pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.2, reviews the existing conditions of the City and North Newport Center; analyzes potential environmental impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in North Newport Center; identifies policies from the General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in North Newport Center; and identifies additional mitigations measures, if necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in North Newport Center. 3. The Project does not increase development intensities or associated impacts beyond the levels considered in the Program EIR. 4. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan Update has been implemented for the Project. 5. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes to the environmental setting of the General Plan Update have occurred. 2 6. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no new information of substantial importance has become available that was not known and that could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at that time of certification. Thus, no new information indicates that: (A) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Program EIR; (B) Significant effects from the Project will be substantially more severe than identified in the Program EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the Program EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative. 7. Since no substantial changes to the circumstances or environmental setting have occurred, and since no new information relating to significant effects, mitigation measures, or alternatives has become available, the Project does not require additional environmental review, consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15168. 8. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, and the North Newport Center Addendum, the City Council has determined that the Project falls within the scope of the Program EIR, and that the Program EIR therefore applies to the Project, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15168. 9. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, and the North Newport Center Addendum, the City Council has determined that no subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR is required or appropriate under Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162; 15163, and 15164. The North Newport Center Addendum therefore satisfies CEQA's environmental review requirements for the Project. 10. The North Newport Center Addendum, which the City prepared to evaluate whether the Project would cause any new or potentially more severe significant adverse effects on the environment, specifically analyzed, in addition to several other potential impacts, potential impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, and traffic. The analysis and conclusions for potential traffic impacts were based on, and relied upon, traffic studies entitled Newport Center Trip Transfer Traffic Study and North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study (Austin - Foust Associates, Inc.), attached to the North Newport Center Addendum and K, which, together with the North Newport Center Addendum, provide the substantial evidence upon which the City Council has based its findings. 11. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the North Newport Center Addendum, the City Council finds that the Project will not have, when compared to the Program EIR, any new or more severe adverse environmental impacts, including, without limitation, no new or more severe significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, or traffic. 12. The City Council also makes the following, more specific finding: The North Newport Center Addendum specifically analyzes the Project's potential impacts on traffic and circulation, based on traffic studies entitled Newport Center Trip Transfer Traffic Study and North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study (Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.), attached to the North Newport Center Addendum. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the North Newport Center Addendum and the traffic studies, the City Council finds that the Project will not have any new or more severe significant traffic or circulation impacts. 13. The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 14. The Project does not have the potential to disadvantage long -term environmental goals in order to achieve short-term environmental goals, as documented in the North Newport Center Addendum, which identified no new or more severe significant adverse effects on the environment. 15. The Project will not result in any new or more severe significant impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when viewed in connection with planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 16. The Project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, in that no new or more severe significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health or public services. 17. These factual findings are based on the Program EIR, the North Newport Center Addendum, and all documents referred in or attached to it, including without limitation the traffic studies, the submissions of the applicant, the records and files of the City's Planning Department related to the Project, and any other documents referred to or relied upon by the City Council. 11 18. The City Council has considered the Program EIR and the North Newport Center Addendum, and has concluded that the North Newport Center Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City. 19. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 753.5(d). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, as follows: 1. That the preceding recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council for the North Newport Center Addendum. 2. That it certify the North Newport Center Addendum for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the North Newport Center Addendum on file in the Planning Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED on the 11th day of December, 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Henn, Curry, Daigle, Rosansky, Webb, Gardner, Mayor 5elich NOES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS None ABSENT, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ATTEST: d 6A ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Prepared by: City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 November 2007, Section Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1.0 Introduction .............................................................................. ............................1 -1 1.1 Purpose of Addendum ................................................ ............................1 -1 1.2 Previous Environmental Documentation and discretionary actions ........ 1-2 Section 2.0 Project Description .................................................................. ............................2 -1 2.1 Project Location .......................................................... ............................2-1 2.2 Project Characteristics ......................... ......... ......... ...........2 -1 2.2.1 North Newport Center PC Text .................-..... ............................2 -1 2.2.2 Transfer of Development Rights ..................... ............................2 -3 2.2.3 Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan (TPO Approval) ....................................... .............••.............2 -3 2.2.4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ( AH /P) ........................2 -4 2.2.5 Development Agreement ................................ .. ..........................2-4 2.2.6 Discretionary Actions ...................................... ............... .............2-4 Section 3.0 Environmental Analysis .......................................................... ............................3 -1 3.1 Aesthetics ................................................................... ............................3 -1 3.2 Agricultural Resources ................................................ ............................3 -4 3.3 Air Quality ................................................................... ............................3 -4 3.4 Biological Resources .............................................................................. 3 -8 3.5 Cultural Resources . ........................ ............................... --.......3 -10 3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources ..................... ...........................3 -12 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................ ...........................3 -14 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality ...... ............................... ...........................3 -17 3.9 Land Use and Planning ............................................. ...........................3 -20 3.10 Noise ......................................................................... ...........................3 -24 3.11 Population and Housing ............................................. ...........................3 -27 3.12 Public Services .................................... ................................................. 3 -28 3.13 Recreation and Open Space ..................................... ...........................3 -31 3.14 Transportation/ Traffic ................................................. ...........................3 -33 3.15 Utilities and Service Systems .................................... ...........................3 -45 FAUSERSkPW451iaMCPPN Ss PAS- 200nPA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CQDrafl Add.d.m111907.doc I Table Of Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2008 Update EIR TABLES Table Pape 1 Development Area Summary ............................................................. ............................2 -3 2 Trip Generation Summary .............................. ......... ............................... .........3 -35 3 One Percent Analysis ........................................................................ ...........................3 -36 4 ICU Summary ..................................................... ............................... ...........................3 -40 5 Converted Uses ................................................................................ ...........................3 -42 EXHIBITS Exhibit Follows Page 1 Local Vicinity Map ......................................................... ............................... ...........2 -2 2 Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, San Joaquin Boundaries ....... ............................2 -2 3 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations . ............................... ......... ...........2 -2 F1USERSIPLMShar eMPA's1PAS- 20071PA20 07 -05112 0 074 2 -11 CQDeaft Addendum- 111907.dw 11 Table of C. Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM This document, prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), constitutes an Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Program Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Screencheck No. 2006011119 certified on July 25, 2006. This Addendum was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code § §21000, at seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations § §15000, at seq. CEQA Guidelines §15164(a) states that "the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15162(a), a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration is only required when: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Fauseas\PLN\S �PNs%P :- 2oonPnzom- 15»007 -12.11 Caoanadde�a„m -111W d. 1 -1 In6oductic Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The proposed North Newport Center Project includes the following City actions to implement the 2006 General Plan: 1. Approval of a zoning amendment to adopt the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan (herein referred to as the North Newport Center PC Text), including the reclassification of property to the Planned Community (PC) District and amendment to two existing Planned Community Development Plans; 2. Approval of a transfer of development rights, pursuant to General Plan policy, to convert unbuilt hotel entitlement to office entitlement and to relocate this entitlement and existing office and commercial development from Block 600 to Block 500; 3. Approval of a traffic study of the North Newport Center Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System improvement Plan pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance ( herein refereed to as the TPO approval); 4. Approval of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (herein referred to as the AHIP) pursuant to the 2006 General Plan Housing Element; and 5. Approval of a Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company Concerning North Newport Center (herein referred to as the Development Agreement) pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45, Development Agreements The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze the potential differences between the impacts evaluated in the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final EIR, hereafter referred to as the General Plan EIR, and those that would be associated with the North Newport Center Project. As described in detail herein, there are no new significant impacts resulting from these changes nor is there any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts. The potential impacts associated with these proposed changes would either be the same or less than the anticipated levels ascribed in the certified General Plan EIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which future development projects subject to the 2006 General Plan and PC Text would be undertaken. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15164, this Addendum to the certified General Plan Final EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the North Newport Center PC Text. Pursuant to §15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach (City) is the lead agency for the project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment. Newport Beach has the authority for project approval and certification of the accompanying environmental documentation. In taking action on any of the approvals outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, the City, as the lead agency and decision making body, must consider the whole of the data presented in the General Plan EIR and this Addendum to the General Plan EIR. 1.2 PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION AND DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The General Plan EIR was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with the buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza (North Newport Center). The location of North Newport Center, approvals granted, and actions being addressed as part of this Addendum to the General Plan EIR are further addressed in Section 2.0, Project Description. The adopted 2006 General Plan placed the F:USERSMPLWhomd%PNs1PA - 200TPA 7- 151 MD7 -12 -11 CQDiafl Md9M=A11907.d. 1 -2 Introductk Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR following designations on the four subareas included in the Project and analyzed full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Fashion Island Regional Commercial (CR) Block 500 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -1-13) and Open Space (OS) Block 600 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -1-13) and Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -1-13) and Open Space (OS) When a project is large and complex, such as a General Plan update, and will be implemented over a multi -year period, a Program EIR enables the lead agency to approve the overall program. When individual activities within the program are proposed, the agency is then required to examine the individual activities to determine if their effects were adequately analyzed in the Program EIR. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines §15162, the lead agency can approve the activities as being within the scope of the project covered by the Program EIR. The State CEQA Guidelines §15168(a) defines a Program EIR as: ...an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: (1) Geographically, (2) A logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions, (3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or (4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways. The State CEQA Guidelines §15168(c)(2) states: (2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. As previously noted, CEQA Guidelines §15162(a) states that a subsequent EIR is not necessary in the absence of the following: (1) substantial changes to the project, (2) substantial changes to the project circumstances, or (3) new information of substantial importance. Use of a Program EIR for the update of the General Plan afforded the City many advantages that would not be realized if projects had been evaluated on an action -by- action basis. These advantages are outlined in CEQA Guidelines §15168(b), which states: "The Program EIR can: (1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action, (2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case- by-case analysis, (3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, F.( USER ,%PLNGNre"Ns \PAs- 20D71PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 =Dreft Addwdum111907.dw 1' -3 Introduck Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update OR (4) Allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts, and (5) Allow reduction in paperwork." Page 1 -1 of the General Plan EIR states: "This EIR has been prepared as a Program EIR pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines... This EIR will review the existing conditions of the City of Newport Beach and the Planning Area, analyze potential environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, identify policies from the proposed General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts, and identify additional mitigation measures, if necessary, to reduce potentially significant impacts of the General Plan Update." Page 1-4 of the General Plan EIR states: "This EIR has been prepared to analyze potentially significant environmental impacts associated with future development resulting from implementation of the proposed General Plan Update, and also addresses appropriate and feasible mitigation measures or project alternatives that would minimize or eliminate these impacts Page 1 -5 states: "The proposed General Plan Update will serve as a comprehensive document that will guide future potential growth and development within the City ... The EIR will analyze all aspects of the proposed General Plan Update to determine whether any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively; may cause a significant effect on the environment with regards to the environmental issues [identified in the EIR]" As such, the General Plan Final EIR assessed potential impacts associated with the implementation of land uses set forth in the General Plan, including land use changes due to full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza under the General Plan Update. Page 3 -15 of the General Plan EIR states: "The Plan allows for expanded retail opportunities at Fashion Island, including an additional anchor department store and ancillary shops, another hotel or additions to existing hotels, and 600 additional housing units." The Draft EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update analyzed 600 housing units in Newport Center, which includes Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Through Planning Commission and City Council hearings the 600 housing units were reduced to a maximum of 450 units. This reduction is reflected in Volume 1A -Final Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR Changes and Responses to Comments). The 2006 General Plan also documented the approval of these 450 residential units for Newport Center.' Of the 450 units permitted in Newport Center by the adopted 2006 General Plan, 430 units are incorporated into this proposed PC Text Amendment. Previous Discretionary Actions The following City of Newport Beach Ordinances and Resolutions related to development of the four sub -areas are listed below and incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof: Fashion Island Planned Community Development Plan (adopted November 23, 1987) Amendment No. 632, Ordinance No. 87-45, November 23,1987 Amendment No. 699; Resolution No. 90 -7, February 12, 1990 Amendment No. 701, Resolution No. 91 -22, March 11, 1991 Amendment No. 811, Resolution No. 94 -102, November 14, 1994 ' City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, Table LU -2, pages 3-18 to 3 -20. F.kUSER,cAKN iared\PN's1PAS- 20071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 C=mft ddwdum- 111W7.dm 1.4 Introductic Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Amendment No. 825, Resolution No. 95 -115, October 9, 1995 Amendment No. 889, Ordinance No. 99 -27, November 8, 1999 PD 2002 -002, Ordinance No. 2003 -001, January 28, 2003 Block 500 Amendment No. 827, Ordinance No. 95 -32, August 28, 1995 San Joaquin Plaza Ordinance No. 1649, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on December 22, 1975 (Amendment No. 455) Amendment No. 1: March 12, 1979, P.C. Amendment No. 527; Resolution No. 9517 Amendment No. 2: November 23, 1987, P.C. Amendment No. 653; Resolution No. 87 -164 Amendment No. 3: January 13, 1992, P.C. Amendment No. 729; Resolution No. 92 -5 Amendment No. 4: April 27, 1992, P.C. Amendment No. 755; Resolution No. 9233 Amendment No. 5: October 9, 1995, P.C. Amendment No. 825, Resolution No. 95 -115 Amendment No. 6: March 22, 2005, Code Amendment No. 2004-013; Resolution No. 1656, Ordinance 2005-3 Block 600 Ordinance No. 1719, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on March 28, 1977 (Amendment No. 483) Ordinance No. 92-45, adopted by the City of Newport Beach on November 9, 1992 (Amendment No. 771) GPA 97 -3 (D), adopted by the City of Newport Beach on June 22, 1998 (Resolution No. 98- 48) P:wseMPUaSs .dTNMPA9- 2aunra007- -1512 7-12 -11 ccwrennddendu�llIe .d. 1 -5 Wroduck Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION Fashion Island, Block 500; Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are located in Newport Center in the City of Newport Beach, California. As depicted in Exhibit 1, Newport Center is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, MacArthur Boulevard to the southeast, Jamboree Road to the northwest, and Coast Highway to the southwest. Fashion Island is an approximate 75 -acre regional shopping center located in the center of Newport Center; Newport Center Drive is a ring road that connects to a roadway system providing access to the various blocks that form Newport Center. Block 500 (approximately 15 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, an internal access road and Avocado Avenue to the south, Newport Center Drive to the southwest, and Santa Rosa Drive to the west. Block 600 (approximately 25 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, Santa Rosa Drive to the southeast, Newport Center Drive to the southwest, and Santa Cruz Drive to the west. San Joaquin Plaza (approximately 23 acres) is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northwest, San Clemente Drive to the south, Santa Cruz Drive to the east, and Santa Barbara Drive and internal access roads to the west. The four sites are depicted on Exhibit 2. The areas surrounding Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are developed. To the north of Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza across San Joaquin Hills Road, land uses include residential and a golf course within The Big Canyon Planned Community (PC 8). Uses to the south of Fashion Island are predominately commercial. To the south of Block 500 are medical and commercial office uses. To the south of San Joaquin Plaza are multi - family residential and commercial office uses. To the west are commercial uses, residential uses, the Marriott Hotel, and the Newport Beach Country Club. To the east, across MacArthur Boulevard are residential uses. 2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 2.2.1 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PC TEXT The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a "Planned Community District' to address land use designation and regulations in Planned Communities. The proposed project is the adoption of the North Newport Center PC Text, which incorporates Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company (Applicant) into a single Planned Community District. Concurrently, the existing Block 500 PC Text and the San Joaquin Plaza PC Text would be amended to remove identified portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza from their respective Planned Community Districts, and the Newport Beach Zoning Code would be amended to remove Block 600 from the Administrative Professional Financial zoning district. The purposes of a Planned Community District, as stated in the Municipal Code are as follows: 20.35.10 Specific Purposes The PC district is intended to: A. To provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, comprehensive projects so as to take advantage of the F:WSERS%PLMShare PR's PA - 2007\ PA20 0 7 - 1 51 2007-12-11 CCOmft Md dum111907.d= 2 -1 Environnli Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR superior environment which can result from large -scale community planning; B. To allow diversification of land uses as they relate to each other in a physical and environmental arrangement while insuring substantial compliance with the spirit, intent and provisions of this Code; C. To include various types of land uses, consistent with the General Plan, through the adoption of a development plan and text materials which set forth land use relationships and development standards. The PC Text has been prepared to implement and be consistent with the adopted 2006 City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan) and City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final EIR (General Plan EIR). The proposed PC Text reflects the uses and designations permitted under the 2006 General Plan. No changes to the existing 2006 General Plan land use designations are required. The existing General Plan land uses designations for the four sub - areas are as follows: Fashion Island Regional Commercial (CR) Block 500 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) and Open Space (OS) Block 600 Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) and Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) and Open Space (OS) The existing zoning designations for the four sub -areas are as follows. Adoption of the North Newport Center PC Text would incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600; and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company (Applicant) to create the North Newport Center PC Text. The existing and proposed zoning designations are shown on Exhibit 3. Fashion Island Planned Community (PC -35 Fashion Island) Block 500 Planned Community (PC -46 Block 500) Block 600 Administrative, Professional, Financial (APF); Open Space (OS) San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community (PC -19 San Joaquin Plaza) As identified on Table 1, the proposed amendment to the PC Text would incorporate the intensities set forth in the adopted 2006 General Plan. Future implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza would not allow for any increase in development intensities beyond that permitted by the General Plan for these sub - areas. The PC Text identifies the permitted land uses and development standards that will be used to guide future development. As previously noted, Fashion Island, is a regional shopping center located in the center of the larger Newport Center area. The proposed PC Text envisions Fashion Island to incorporate uses including retail, restaurants, bars, theater /nightclubs and services. The proposed PC Text provides that Blocks 500 and 600 and San Joaquin Plaza may be developed as a regional mixed use center incorporating administrative, professional, and financial uses together with hotel and residential uses and retail and other commercial uses. F: UISERSIPLN6SharecPPNs1PAs- 20071PA W- 15112007 -12 -11 CCOMftAddend.e 111907.dm 2 -2 'Environme' Local Vicinity North Newport Center Addendum AAN wVE 1,500 750 0 1,500 s Feet Exhibit 1 Source: CAA Planning 2007 Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, San Joaquin Boundaries Exhibit 2 North Newport CenterAddendum PC -56 i�V IJ PC -56 SANTA CRUZ DR. r¢ PG-56 J GLE �y �P 'Pt= Gk. PC -56 y� �s y N PC -56 SANTA ROSA DR. 4'6.38 PC__ PC-56 PC-56 PC-56 — 9S W PC-56 A o J 6 W 2 9 U ,O. 9SJ �S H�Cy � 4P COL � Sp A� p -Open Space AP APF - Administrative. Professional, Financial PC-56 - Fashion Island Planned Community text - Proposed Zoning N� text - Current Zoning is*- Proposed to be changed 8 a � Source: CAA Planning 2007 0 Existing and Proposed Zoning Designations Exhibit 3 North Newport Centel Addendum R:Projec NewporVJ0117Graphica 3_Zone_110907.pdf Addendum to City of Newport Beach Genera/ Plan 2006 Update ElR TABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY EISEMAN a 1-M.- m R ®_® _ c s mm Regional 1,619,525 sf 0 0 0 1,619,525 sf Commercial Movie Theatre 1,700 seats 1,700 seats (27,500 sf) (27,500 sf) Hotel (a) (b) 425 rooms (b) (b) 490 rooms Residential 0 (c) (C) (c) 430 du Office/Commercial 0 310,684 sf 1,001,634 sf 337,261 sf 1,746,979 sf sf square feet du: dwelling unit a Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of available . square footage. b 65 hotel rooms may be relocated in either Block 500, Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. In no case shall the total number of hotel rooms in the Fashion Island /Block 500 /Block 600/San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community exceed 490. c. Residential units are permitted in Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. In no case shall the total number of dwelling units exceed 430. 2.2.2 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS The 2006 General Plan also allows a transfer of development rights within Newport Center in accordance with the following Land Use Element policy: LU 6.14.3 Transfers of Development Rights Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. As part of the Project, The Irvine Company, herein referred to as Applicant, is proposing to transfer a portion of the existing development rights from Block 600 to Block 500. The transfer includes the conversion of 165 unbuilt hotel rooms to office space, and the transfer of this entitlement to Block 500. It also includes the removal of the following existing uses from Block 600, and transfer of this entitlement to Block 500: 17,300 square feet (sf) of health club, 16,444 sf of restaurant, and 8,289 sf of office. Up to 72,000 sf of the transferred development rights could be used for a new City Hall in Block 500. 2.2.3 PHASED LAND USE DEVELOPMENT AND CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TPO APPROVAL) The Project is not expected to be completed within 60 months of approval, and it includes a circulation improvement plan, explained in detail in the Development Agreement. The Project therefore qualifies as a Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan under the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, Municipal Code §15.40.030.6.2. A traffic study has been prepared pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and "feasible mitigation" (consistent with the 2006 General Plan Circulation Element) is part of the Project. This mitigation is that the Applicant will construct a third eastbound turn lane at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road. Consistent with the TPO, this improvement will be completed early in the development phasing (i.e., before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building [other than a parking structure]) constructed as part of the Project, but in no event later than 60 months from the operative date of the Development Agreement. In addition, the Applicant will work with the City on design and development of circulation enhancements in the F9USERSIPLN15haretllPA 's1PAS- Z 71PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CC1Dmft AdderMUm -1 11907AW 2 -3 EnvIr Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update E1R North Newport Center area, consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, including widening of Avocado Avenue between San Miguel Drive and San Nicolas Drive, dedication of public right -of -way and enhancement of San Miguel Drive between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, and installation of traffic signals on Newport Center Drive. 2.2.4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (AHIP) The 2006 General Plan Housing Element requires an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) for any development including more than 50 dwelling units. The North Newport Center AHIP describes how the Applicant would provide affordable housing to meet the Housing Element goal of 15 percent. The Applicant may build new affordable units, restrict income and rent levels for existing apartments in the vicinity of North Newport Center, or a combination of these methods. The exact number of units may vary, depending on the income levels served, and all units must be affordable for a period of 30 years. 2.2.5 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT As a part of the project, a Development Agreement is proposed between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company. Key provisions of the proposed Development Agreement are as follows. • Cancellation of Circulation Improvement and Open Space Agreement and Bonita Canyon Annexation and Development Agreement • Vesting of North Newport Center development rights for 20 years • Payment of in -lieu park fees for 430 residential units, including early payment of a portion of fees as matching grant for OASIS Senior Center • Payment of public benefd fee to fund construction of new City Hall building or other municipal purpose • Circulation enhancements in the North Newport Center area • Four -year option for the City to purchase a site in Block 500 for City Hall as well as the use of 375 parking spaces. • Dedication of the site north of San Miguel Drive, west of MacArthur Boulevard, south of San Joaquin Hills Road and east of Avocado Avenue for open space, if a new City Hall is constructed on a site in Newport Center other than Block 500 • Limit on future increases in development fees • Limit on future amendments to Municipal Code pertaining to development of the North Newport Center property 2.2.6 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS The City of Newport Beach, as the lead agency for the Project, would rely on the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Program Final EIR and this Addendum as the primary environmental documentation for the approval of the discretionary actions discussed below. F: \USEWPLN%Sh..d \PA's \PAs- 200APA2007- 15112007- 12 -11 =Dr ft M".dum111S07.dw 2-4 EnvironnX Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. • Approval of the Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR: The North Newport Center Project requires the acceptance of the environmental document as having been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the State and City CEQA Guidelines, as well as certification that the information contained in the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR and this Addendum was considered in the final decisions on the Project. • Approval of the Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations Amendment No. PD2007 -003 as the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations: The Project includes the adoption of the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan to incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by The Irvine Company into one PC District, and to provide consistency between the 2006 General Plan and the zoning designation for the four sub -areas of North Newport Center. Additionally, the Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza PC Texts would be modified to remove areas to be included in the North Newport Center PC Text. • Code Amendment CA2007- -007: An amendment to Municipal Code is required to change the zoning classification of Block 600 from Administrative Financial Professional (APF) to Planned Community (PC) District and the open space corner lots in Block 500 and Block 600 from the Open Space (OS) District to the Planned Community (PC) District. • Approval of Transfer of Development Rights: The project includes the transfer of development rights from Block 600 to Block 500 pursuant to General Plan policy. The transfer of development rights requires approval of the City Council. • Traffic Study No. TS2007 -001: In accordance with Municipal Code Title 15, Chapter 15.40, the project is a Comprehensive Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improvement Plan as all phases of construction are not anticipated to be completed within 60 months of approval and the project is subject to a Development Agreement. As such, a Traffic Phasing Ordinance study has been prepared. • North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan: An Affordable Housing Implementation Plan is required by the 2006 General Plan Housing Element, and is included in the Project. • Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002: The Development Agreement between the City and Applicant would vest development rights and establish public benefits to the City. F.k USERS 1PLM5harecRPKs1PAS- 20071PA20 07- 1 51 20 0] -12 -11 CCIOmft Addendum- 111907.dm : M Envlronmt Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The analysis in this document will evaluate if the potential impacts associated with the subsequent approvals outlined in Section 2.0, Project Description, are substantially the same as those addressed in City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether Project implementation would result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in a previously identified significant impact. If the comparative analysis identifies that there would be no change in impact from that identified in the General Plan EIR, a determination of "No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis" has been made. This analysis provides the City of Newport Beach with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the General Plan EIR was certified require additional environmental review or preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. 3.1 AESTHETICS The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on aestheticlvisual quality if it would result in any of the following: • Have a substantial adverse effect a scenic vista • Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings • Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Aesthetic and visual impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a Substantial Adverse Effect a Scenic Vista Page 4.1-6 of the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR (General Plan EIR) identifies that there are no officially designated scenic highways within the City. As such, Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are not designated as scenic vistas or located within a scenic preservation zone. Page 4.1 -9 of the General Plan EIR identifies a public coastal view is located along Newport Center Drive from Newport Center Drive east to west extending to Farallon Drive /Granville Drive, the beginning of which is located approximately 0.45 miles south of Block 600 and at the southern edge of Fashion Island. The General Plan EIR states that "...existing and future development would be regulated by the F.IUSERSIPL "hat"PN.%PAS- 2007,PA20 07 -051120 07 -12 -11 CODmft Addendum- iHSD7.d. 3 -1 Enwronme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR proposed General Plan Update policies, and scenic vistas would not be adversely affected. Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant." Substantially Damage Scenic Resources, Including, but not Limited to, Trees, Rock Outcroppings, and Historic Buildings within a State Scenic Highway The General Plan EIR identifies that there are no officially designated scenic highways in the City. State Route 1 (Coast Highway) is eligible for State Scenic Highway designation. Coast Highway is not contiguous to the Project. The General Plan EIR further states "Consequently, because no scenic highways are currently designated within the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would have no impact." Substantially Degrade the Existing Visual Character or Quality of the Site and Its Surroundings The General Plan EIR identifies Newport Center /Fashion Island as an area of high overall visual quality (see page 4.1 -18). It further states `In these areas, new development allowed under the proposed General Plan Update would be done in such a way as to fit into the existing visual setting. Policy LU 1.1 requires that new development `maintain and enhance' existing development." Policy LU 1.1 states: Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and view sheds (See page 4.1 -24) Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are within the City's high -rise height limitation zone. Fashion Island height limits range from 40 feet to 125 feet as detailed in Section 5d. Development within Block 500 and Block 600 is permitted up to 375 feet high. The height limit for San Joaquin Plaza is 65 feet. Fashion Island is currently developed with retail, entertainment, services and supporting uses that serve local and regional residents. Block 500 is developed with general office and medical uses. Block 600 is currently developed with high- rise office and hotel buildings. San Joaquin Plaza contains business and professional office uses. Full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza would be required to comply with the City's high -rise height limitations, compliment the height of existing buildings in Newport Center, and not create a significant shadow, or shading, impact. Shading describes the effect of shadows cast on adjacent areas by proposed structures. The proposed PC Text requires a that shade and shadow study be prepared for any structure' over 200 feet in height that has the potential to affect the residential area located north of San Joaquin Hills Road (Big Canyon). The purpose of the study is to ensure that new development will not result in added shade and shadow to the residential area beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time. The General Plan EIR notes that the 2006 General Plan includes policies associated with aesthetic improvements such as landscaping, pedestrian amenities, and design standards for architecture and lighting. Future development projects in North Newport Center would be required to conform to these General Plan standards as well as standards set forth in the PC Text and its Design Regulations. The General Plan EIR states "Thus, the visual character would change as development intensity increased, but the impacts would not be considered F.IUSERa \PW1SharedlPNS\ PAS - 2007 1PA2007 - 151=07 -12 -11 CC%Daft Adc6ndum- 111807.dw 3-2 Environmt Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. significantly adverse.... Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update would have a less -than- significant impact on the visual character of developed urban areas. (See page 4.1 -19) Create a New Source of Substantial Light or Glare, Which Would Adversely Affect Day or Nighttime Views in the Area The General Plan EIR notes that the city is primarily built out and currently has significant amounts of ambient light. It further notes that new development could create new sources of light and glare from uses such as exterior building lighting, parking lots and structures, reflective building surfaces, and vehicular headlines. Sources of light and glare could affect adjacent sensitive land uses generally considered to be undeveloped land and residential uses adjacent to commercial or industrial uses. The 2006 General Plan includes policies to address potential nighttime lighting impacts. These include policies to prevent lighting spillage onto, adjacent properties while other policies allow the integration of land uses with requirements for addressing lighting for land use compatibility. The General Plan EIR states "Therefore, with implementation of the above - mentioned policies, nighttime lighting impacts and potential spillover would be les than significant." (See page 4.1 -22) The proposed Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations also contain lighting provisions to implement these General Plan policies. Mitigation Proaram Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following condition is included in the North Newport Center PC Text relating shade and shadow: 1_ Prior to issuance of a building permit for a structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to shade residential areas north of San Joaquin Hills Road, a shade study shall be prepared by the Applicant and submitted to the City. The shade study shall demonstrate that the new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time. The shade study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and the Planning Director shall determine conformance with the standards identified herein as part of the plan review process. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR states "...all other project impacts associates with aesthetics and visual resources would be less than significant under the proposed Newport Beach General Plan Update ."2 Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR 3.2 2 Visual impacts associated with Banning Ranch were found to be unavoidable. Banning Ranch is not a part of the North Newport Center Project. PIUSEMPW {ShamdiPNs1PAs- 2M71PA2007- 151%2007 -12 -11 C=mftAddendun l 1907.dw : 3-3 Envil rnf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The General Plan EIR identifies that the topic of Agricultural Resources was focused out because the City of Newport Beach contains no designated farmland by the California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping Program, 3 no land designated Farmland would be converted to non - agricultural use as a result of implementation of the 2006 General Plan, no sites in the City are zoned for agricultural use, and no sites would be affected by a Williamson Act contract. (See page 6-4) 3.3 AIR QUALITY The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on air quality if it would result in any of the following: • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan • Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is in non - attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Air quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Conflict With or Obstruct Implementation of the Applicable Air Quality Plan Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of any Criteria Pollutant for Which the Project Is In Non- Attainment Under An Applicable Federal Or State Ambient Air Quality Standard The General Plan EIR identifies that projects that are consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) are those whose use and activities are consistent with the applicable assumptions used in the 3 California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping Program, Important Farmland in Califomia 2004 Map (2004) F:WSERfiPLNL1 etlTNO' PAS -20W1P 07- 1 51 20 0] -12 -11 CQDMft AWWdum -1119 7AW 3-4 Environmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR development of the AQMP. Because the growth projections assumed for buildout of the 2006 General Plan are higher than what would have been assumed in the AQMP, the "...proposed General Plan Update would not be consistent with the AQMP attainment forecasts and attainment of the standards could be delayed.... this impact would be significant." This was identified as a project and cumulative unavoidable impact. As previously identified in Table 1 of this Addendum, total development (existing and future) for Fashion Island is 1,619,525 sf of regional commercial uses and 1,000 movie theatre seats; hotel uses are permitted through a transfer of development rights. Total development (existing and future) for Block 600 is 1,001,634 sf of office /commercial and 425 hotel rooms. Total office /commercial development is 310,684 sf for Block 500 and 337,261 sf for San Joaquin Plaza. In addition, 430 residential units and 65 hotel rooms may be developed in Blocks 500 or 600 or San Joaquin Plaza. Through the transfer of development rights included in the Project, the entitlement for 165 new hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of office /commercial use allocated to Block 600 is to be transferred to Block 500 for the development of 205,161 sf of office /commercial use in Block 50Q.The Project does not propose any new land uses, nor any additional intensity of development, not previously permitted and contemplated in the 2006 General Plan for the four sub - areas. As such, the Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Violate Any Air Quality Standard or Contribute Substantially to an Existing or Projected Air Quality Violation The General Plan EIR identifies that construction related emissions could be mitigated but would be expected to remain significant and unavoidable. Future development in North Newport Center consistent with the assumptions of the 2006 General Plan may involve excavation, grading operations, building construction, and demolition of existing structures and pavement. All development will be required to comply with standard construction practices as set forth in the SCAQMD Handbook, including best management practices (BMPs) for the control of emissions. BMPs include control of fugitive dust through watering exposed surfaces, covering exposed ground, and sweeping streets. Additional measures involve construction traffic emission control including ensuring all vehicles and equipment are operating efficiently. It is anticipated that standard control measures would reduce potential impacts of air emissions and odors. Page 4.2 -13 of the General Plan EIR states: "Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in construction emissions that would contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation." The General Plan EIR evaluated the effects of full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza on air quality and accounted for construction impacts. The General Plan EIR concluded that despite implementation of General Plan Policies NR 8.1 through NR 8.5, which would help to reduce construction- related air quality impacts, the development contemplated in the General Plan would result in a significant and unavoidable air quality impact. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations FA USERSIPLN1Sh "MPA's1PM- 20071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CC%Draft AdderW.111907.dw 3 -5 Envil Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The General Plan notes that the implementation of General Plan land uses is not expected to expose existing or future sensitive uses within the City to substantial carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations. This impact was determined to be less than significant for all uses in the City. As such, this conclusion would also be applicable to the North Newport Center Project. Create Objectionable Odors Affecting a Substantial Number of People Odors can occur from construction activities related to the operation of construction vehicles and the application of architectural coatings. Odors can also occur from operation of uses such as restaurants, manufacturing' facilities, etc. The ,General Plan EIR' notes uses such as restaurants are typically required to have ventilation systems; trash receptacles are required by City and Health Department regulations. The General Plan EIR states that "Consequently, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people within the City and potential impacts would be less than significant." (See page 4.2 -17). No land uses or activities would be permitted in the North Newport Center District that would result in changes in the conclusions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Climate Change The proposed North Newport Center Project serves to implement the principal goals of the 2006 General Plan. These goals and policies include the following :4 • A successful mixed -use district that integrates an economic and commercial center serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the subregion, with expanded opportunities for residents to live close to jobs, commerce, entertainment, and recreation, and is supported by a pedestrian - friendly environment. • Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2. • Provide the opportunity for an additional anchor tenant, other retail, and /or entertainment and supporting uses that complement, are integrated, with, and enhance the economic vitality of existing development. • Encourage that some new development be located and designed to orient to the inner side of Newport Center Drive, establishing physical and visual continuity that diminishes the dominance of surface parking lots and encourages pedestrian activity. • Encourage that pedestrian access and connections among uses within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses. • Encourage that new development in Fashion Island complement and be of equivalent or higher design quality than existing buildings. Reinforce the existing promenades by encouraging retail expansion that enhances the storefront visibility to the promenades and provides an enjoyable retail and pedestrian experience. Ibid., pages 3 -97 to 3 -98.: F.XUSERSIPLNShared\PN.s PAs- 20071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CODiaRMd d.r 11 1 W7.d. Enviranme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 20013 Update EIR Full implementation of entitlements for Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza consistent with the 2006 General Plan will assist the City in achieving its General Plan goals. Regarding long- term air quality impacts, the General Plan EIR states that the nature of Newport Center has the capacity to contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled because the project area promotes a mixed -use, pedestrian - friendly district 5 The Project is not expected to result in any climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas emissions beyond the impacts of the development set forth in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of future development in the City, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The analysis included carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions. As discussed above, the Project would not generate any new air quality impacts not already identified in the General Plan EIR: The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. With respect to global climate change resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, no "new information of substantial importance on climate change is now available that was not known and could not have been known when the City approved the General Plan EIR in 2006. For example, in 1979, the National Research Council published "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment, ". which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. The State of California adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. Consideration of strategies to control emissions of greenhouse gases which may contribute in some manner to global climate change is under consideration at all regulatory levels; however, there is no one agency responsible for regulating greenhouse gases, and there are no established standards to evaluate the significance of greenhouse gas emissions. However, the most common greenhouse gas emissions are from vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption. These issues have been addressed in General Plan EIR. Analyses prepared for or by California State Agencies on climate change issues do not provide for the provision of specific measures to incorporate into particular projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, except for generalized recommendations about such matters as encouraging jobs /housing proximity. The California Energy Commission recently explained that accessibility and mixed use are two factors that reduce vehicles trips, which are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions in California e The Project's incremental contribution to any cumulative global climate change impact is mitigated by various characteristics of the Project that serve to render its contribution less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main concerns raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog " -type development would serve to potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase those vehicular emissions (i.e., CO2 that contribute to greenhouse gases). The Project would allow for 5 City of Newport Beach; Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, page 4.2 -12: 6 California Energy Commission, The Role of Land Use in Meeting California's Energy and Climate Change Goals, Draft, June 26, 2007, pages 7,17-19. F: \USERSIPLNMa("PA'sIPAs- 200TPA O7W 151@ 7 -12 -11 C=taft MdMdum 111907.tl G 3-7 EnvfronmE Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR in -fill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips. Mitiaation Proaram Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impact of increased population on implementation of the AQMP; to reduce cumulative impacts associated with construction emissions; or to reduce operational activities. These impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Findina of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. it states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on biological resources if it would result in any of the following: • Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or the CDFG or USFWS • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance FUSERS W%Shared%PNMPAz- 200TPA20W- 151@ 7 -12 -11 CC1Dr Ad dendum-11190].doc 38 Environml Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Biological resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a Substantial Adverse Effect, Either Directly or Indirectly Through - Habitat Modifications, On Any Species Identified as a Candidate, Sensitive, or Special Status Species in Local or Regional Plans, Policies, or the CDFG or USFWS Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Any Riparian Habitat or Other Sensitive Natural Community Identified in Local or Regional Plans, Policies, Regulations or By the CDFG or USFWS Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Federally Protected Wetlands as Defined By Section 404 Of The Clean Water Act (Including, But Not Limited To, Marsh, Vernal Pool, Coastal, Etc.) Through Direct Removal, Filling, Hydrological Interruption, or Other Means Interfere Substantially With the Movement of Any Native Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or With Established Native Resident or Migratory Wildlife Corridors, or Impede the Use of Native Wildlife Nursery Sites Conflict with Any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources, Such As a Tree Preservation Policy or Ordinance Conflict with the Provisions of an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or Other Approved Local, Regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are located within Newport Center, a built urban environment. Landscaped areas within Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza include non- native landscape materials including turf, trees, and plants. No wetlands or riparian habitat community exist in the sub - areas. The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any species identified by the California Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a species for concern because the site has been developed for the past 40 years and contains no habitat suitable for wildlife. Landscaping may be removed as a result of future development. The General Plan EIR notes that development could result in the removal of mature trees that may be used as perching and nesting sites for migratory birds and raptors. The General Plan EIR identifies mitigation associated with this potential impact and states "With compliance with these policies, impacts would be less than significant...... The County of Orange Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) surveyed and mapped habitat vegetation and species throughout the County, including the four sub- areas. No candidate, sensitive or special status species were FAUSEMPLN %Shared%PA's%PA.- 200APA20D]- 151%200] -12 -11 C=mflA mdum111907.dac 3-9 Envimnmi Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. identified in the vicinity of the site. 7 Additionally, North Newport Center is identified as having no conservation value and is not included in the NCCP or HCP. The General Plan EIR analyzes the potential biological effects associated with buildout of the 2006 General Plan, including Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. These sites would be required to comply with applicable 2006 General Plan policies regarding biological resources. Pages 4.3 -22, 4.3 -24, and 4.3 -27 of the Biological Resources Analysis in the General Plan EIR address development in Newport Center, inclusive of fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Page 4.3 -27 identifies that that the 2006 General Plan policies ensure that build -out consistent with the General Plan would not impact native, resident, or migratory wildlife species or corridors. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR; the General Plan EIR identifies that compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would mitigate biological resources impacts to a level considered less than significant. Findina of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the seventy of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "For' purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project would have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources if it would result in any of the following: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries 7 U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service, Natural Community Conservation Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan, EIR, and EIS- County of Orange Central and Coastal Subregion, May 1996. F:WSERSIPL SharedTNsT .MO71PA2007- 151\2007 -12 -11 C=mftAddend.m111907.d. 3-10 EnNlonm Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Cultural resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource as Defined In Section 15064.5 The four sub -areas of the North Newport Center PC District are not identified as a historic area or an area containing historical resources by the City of Newport Beach General Plan. The Project would not result in any adverse physical or aesthetic effects to any building, structure, or object having historical, cultural, or religious significance. As such, no historic resources would be impacted by the Project. Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of an Archaeological Resource Pursuant To Section 15064.5 Disturb Any Human Remains, Including Those Interred Outside of Formal Cemeteries The General Plan EIR notes that ground- disturbing activities can damage or destroy archaeological and/or Native American cultural resources. The 2006 General Plan contains policies to ensure the protection of such resources. The General Plan EIR states that "...implementation of the proposed General Plan Update policies would ensure that impacts to archaeological and Native American cultural resources would be less than significant...." (See page 4.4 -16) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Directly or Indirectly Destroy a Unique Paleontological Resource or Site or Unique Geologic Feature Paleontological resources may be present in fossil- bearing soils and rock formations below the ground surface. Ground - disturbing activities in these soils and formations have the potential to damage or destroy these resources. The General Plan EIR states that compliance with General Plan policies `...would reduce this impact to a less- than - significant level by ensuring that paleontological resources would be subject to scientific recovery and evaluation..." (See page 4.4 -17) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. FAUSER$1PL %ghamd%PA8sWAS- ZO071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CCO.ft Mdmdum 111907.tl c 3 -11 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Level of Sianificance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Fi_ndina of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in a significant impact if the project would: • Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving - Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault - Strong seismic ground shaking - Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction - Landslides • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of top soil • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence; liquefaction or collapse • Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property • Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State • Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. F:\ USERS% PLNLSha,ellPA's1➢AS- 200TPA200]- 151200] -12 -11 CCDMft AtldWd.m 1119W.dOe 3-12 Envimme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analysis Expose People or Structures to Potential Substantial Adverse Effects, Including the Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involving the Rupture of a Known Earthquake Fault, Strong Ground Shaking, Seismic - Related Ground Failure, or Landslides The General Plan EIR notes that there are no Alquist - Priolo zones in the City; no impact would result. Policies are provided in the 2006 General Plan to ensure that adverse effects caused by seismic and geologic hazards are minimized. Moderate to large earthquakes would cause ground shaking in Newport Center, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Compliance with regulations and policies of the General Plan EIR would "...ensure that impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking remain at a less -than- significant level." With respect to seismic - related ground failure, none of Newport Center is in an identified liquefaction area. Result In Substantial Soil Erosion or the Loss of Top Soil With respect to top soil, the General Plan EIR notes that most of the City is built out and top soil is not an issue. With respect to soil erosion, shoreline areas and coastal bluffs are highly susceptible to erosion from wave action and stream erosion. The four subareas are not located near the coast or bluff areas. All demolition and construction activities are required to comply with the California Building Code and other regional and local regulations (e.g., State Water Resources Control Board provisions) that require the implementation of measures to reduce soil erosion. The General Plan EIR identifies that potential impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Be Located on Expansive Soil, as Defined In Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), Creating Substantial Risks to Life or Property The General Plan EIR considered buildout of the City, inclusive of fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza in its geology analysis. Page 4.5 -13 of the General Plan EIR discusses the General Plan Update's concentration of development in areas including Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, and notes that the impact is considered less than significant. All four sub - areas have been subject to development which has required the analysis of soil conditions. With respect to soil characteristics, the certified Final EIR for the Island Hotel (formerly Four Seasons), dated October 21, 1983, discussed geology and soils in Newport Center. The Final EIR states that Newport Center is: ...part of an uplifted marine terrace of Pleistocene age. The marine terrace soils are composed essentially of weakly cemented to loose sands and silty sands which in parts of Newport Center reach a depth of as much as 50 feet. The upper one to two feet of this material have weathered to form a moderately expansive, clayey soil The Pleistocene sediments are underlain by clay shales, clay siltstones, and sandstones of Miocene age, Monterey Formation. Because policies of the General Plan require that development not be located on unstable soils or geologic units, the General Plan EIR found that the potential impact was less than significant. The Uniform Building Code and California Building Code include regulations governing Ff1U5ERSVPLNV Shared\ PNs'P A - MO-APA 007- 15112W7 -12 -11 (X,YOmff Mdend.m111907.dw 3 -13 Envimnme Addendum to City of Newport Beach Genera! Plan 2006 Update OR seismically resistant construction and construction to protect people and property from construction and building hazards. Result in the Loss of Availability of a Known Mineral Resource That Would Be Of Value to the Region and the Residents of the State Result in the Loss of Availability of a Locally Important Mineral Resource Recovery Site Delineated on a Local General Plan, Specific Plan, or Other Land Use Plan The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of value to the region or the State. No impacts would occur. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to geology and soils could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No mineral resources were identified. Finding of Consistencv With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEC,A Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact to the public or the environment through hazards and hazardous materials if it would result in any of the following: • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school F:RISERSIPLNMamd1PNM PAS- 200TPA2007- 151VOD1 -02 -11 CC1Creft a aaendum-n+SOTdm 3 -14 Envimnme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment • For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan •' Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hazards and hazardous material- related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or the Environment through the Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials Emit Hazardous Emissions or Handle Hazardous or Acutely Hazardous Materials, Substances, or Waste within One - Quarter Mile of an Existing or Proposed School Be Located on a Site Which Is Included On A List Of Hazardous Materials Site Compiled Pursuant To Government Code Section 65962.5, and as a Result, Would Create a Significant Hazard To The Public Or The Environment Impair Implementation Of or Physically Interfere With an Adopted Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan The General Plan EIR acknowledges that implementation of the 2006 General Plan land uses would result in an increase in commercial development that could increase the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. The General Plan also notes that construction activities can result in the exposure of hazardous materials (e.g., lead -based paint and asbestos). The City contains sites that have been identified as being contaminated by the release of hazardous substances into the soil; sites containing leaking underground storage tanks; and large and small generators of hazardous materials.. The General Plan EIR notes that projects are required to comply with existing regulations and General Plan policies to protect construction workers and the public. Potential impacts were determined to be less than significant. Future development in North Newport Center could require the demolition of structures. Demolition and construction activities on the four sub -areas would also be subject to compliance with these regulations and policies. The Island Hotel (formerly Four Seasons) in Block 600 is listed as having a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) .8 A remediation plan has been submitted to the Orange County Local 8 Ibid., Table 4.6-5. F:\ USERS\ PLN\ShareU\PNs \PAs- 2007\PA2007 -1 51=07 -12 -11 CCOmftAtl dum- 111W7Am 3-15 ` Envi7UnmE Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Oversight Program (Local Lead Agency) and to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The conclusion of this effort is pending. The contaminant identified is diesel fuel. None of the leaks that have been reported in the City have impacted a drinking source of groundwater. As with all development in the City, the Project must comply with existing regulations and General Plan policies regarding hazardous materials. General Plan Policy S 7.3 educates residents and businesses about reducing or eliminating their use of hazardous materials. Policy S 7.6 requires that all users, producers, and transporters of hazardous materials and wastes clearly identify the materials and comply with applicable law. The General Plan >EIR notes that increased population and development could result in congested traffic conditions. The 2006 General Plan identifies policies to ensure that the city's Emergency Management Plan is regularly updated, provides for efficient and orderly citywide evacuation, and ensures that emergency service personnel are knowledgeable of the relevant response plans for the City. Such information is also distributed through the community. General Plan policies for handling emergencies would reduce hazardous materials impacts due to growth to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk of Loss, Injury or Death Involving Wildland Fires, Including Where Wildlands Are Adjacent To Urbanized Areas or Where Residences Are Intermixed With Wildlands North Newport Center is not susceptible to wildland fires; the four sub -areas are completely surrounded by existing urban development. For a Project Located Within an Airport Land Use Plan, or Where Such a Plan has Not Been Developed, Within Two Miles Of a Public Airport Or Public Use Airport, Result In a Safety Hazard For People Residing Or Working In The Project Area The four sub -areas are identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action. Therefore, the zone change has been forwarded to the ALUC, and a hearing is scheduled prior to public hearings before the City's Planning Commission and City Council Additionally, the four sub -areas are within the AELUP Height Restriction Zone. Within this zone, notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required for construction or alteration to any building more than 200 feet above ground level Prior to construction or alteration of a building more than 200 feet above ground level a Determination of No Hazard must be obtained from the FAA. A determination of No Hazard is the FAA's independent finding that a proposed structure will not pose a hazard to air navigation. The PC Text requires that any structure above 200 feet will be forwarded to the FAA for their independent analysis. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following conditions are included in the North Newport Center PC Text relating the adherence to the AELUP and FAA restrictions: F; wseaskPwksher "NSPAS- 200APA2007- 151Ua07a2 -11 cC1DMft d.�d.M -m WTdW 3 -16 Entmonmc Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR 1. For development of structures that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level at a development site, applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (FAA Form 7460 -1). Following the FAA's Aeronautical Study of a project, the project must comply with conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA. Subsequent to the FAA findings, the City shall refer the project to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County for consistency analysis. 2. No buildings within the Fashion Island /Block 500 /Block 600 /San Joaquin Plaza Planned Community area should penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. 3. Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (Form' 7460 -1) for any construction cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials relevant to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Findinn of Consistencv With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: "Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on hydrology and water quality, as well as the City's storm drain system, if it would result in any of the following: • Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site • Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff • Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects F.USERS\PLN4Si 1PA's1PAS- 200APA2007- 1511200] -12 -11 CQD18t AddmduT-11190].d.. 3 -17 Environmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR • Otherwise substantially degrade water quality • Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map • Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which, would impede or redirect flows • Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a levee or dam + Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hydrology and water quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Violate Any Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements Create or Contribute Runoff Water Which Would Exceed the Capacity of Existing or Planned Stormwater Drainage Systems or Provide Substantial Additional Sources of Polluted Runoff Otherwise Substantially Degrade Water Quality The General Plan EIR notes that the implementation of development set forth in the 2006 General Plan could result in an increase in pollutants in storm water and wastewater. However, water quality standards and waste discharge requirements would not be violated with compliance with regulations including but not limited to the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit and preparation and implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans required for compliance with the NPDES General Construction Stormwater Activity Permit. Permit and regulation compliance would be required for future development projects within Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code ensures compliance with federal water quality standards. The Municipal Code also regulates grading, fill, drainage, and erosion control. All construction and development must comply with applicable federal, State, and City laws. Also, General Plan Update policies "would reduce the risk of water degradation from the operation of new developments to the maximum extent practicable "9 The impact of development under the General Plan Update would be less than significant. As identified in the General Plan EIR, Policy NR 3.16 Street Drainage Systems states "Require all street drainage systems and other physical improvements created by the City, or developers of new subdivisions, to be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize adverse impacts on water quality. Investigate the possibility of treating or diverting street drainage to minimize 9 [bid., page 4.732. FIUSER SIPW\Shamd1PNS\PA4- 20071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CCU)Mft Adds dum 111907.dw 3-98 Environmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR impacts to water bodies.i10 General Plan Policy LU 2.8, Adequate Infrastructure, states "Accommodate the types, densities, and mix of land uses that can be adequately supported by transportation and utility infrastructure (water, sewer, storm drainage, energy, and so on) and public services (schools, parks, libraries, seniors, youth, police, fire, and so on)." The General Plan EIR concludes that impacts are less than significant. General Plan Update Policies "would ensure that new development can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drainage infrastructure .02 Impacts are less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially Deplete Groundwater Supplies or Interfere Substantially With Groundwater Recharge Such That There Would Be A Net Deficit in Aquifer Volume or a Lowering of the Local Groundwater Table The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the General Plan could create additional impervious surfaces which could interfere with groundwater recharge. The General Plan EIR goes on to note that, however, intensification of development would not affect groundwater recharge. As the four sub -areas are currently developed, there would be no substantive change in the amount of impervious surfaces. The EIR finds that "new development would not substantially affect groundwater recharge. Potential impacts to groundwater recharge would be less than significant." 13 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Require or Result In the Construction and /or Expansion of New Storm Drain Infrastructure That Would Cause Significant Environmental Effects On a citywide basis, the General Plan EIR notes that buildout may require the expansion of storm drains or the construction of new storm drain infrastructure. The existing site drainage has been designed to handle run off from existing structures on the four sub - areas. As future site- specific development is proposed, drainage plans will be developed. The General Plan EIR contains policies that ensure that new development can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drain infrastructure. The General Plan EIR states "It is not anticipated that this construction of necessary storm drainage upgrades in and of itself would result in impacts separate from the General Plan Update. (See page 4.7 -37) The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR: Substantially Alter The Existing Drainage Pattern Of The Site Or Area, Including Through The Alteration of The Course Of A Stream Or River, Or Substantially Increase The Rate Or Amount Of Surface Runoff In A Manner Which Would Result In Flooding On- Or Off-Site Place Housing within a 100 -Year Flood Hazard Area as Mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or Other Flood Hazard Delineation Map 70 Ibid., page 4.14 -45. " Ibid., page 4.1434. 12 Ibid., page 4.736. 3 Ibid., page 4,7 -33. F,k USER S1PtNISharedNA$ \PA5- 200TPA2007. 15112°07.12 -11 CcomftAtlEentlum-111907.tl 3-19 EnVlNnmi Addendum to C8y of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Place Within a 100 -Year Flood Hazard Area Structures Which Would Impede or Redirect Flows Expose People or Structures to A Significant Risk or Loss, Injury or Death Involving Flooding, Including Flooding As A Result Of A Levee or Dam Expose People or Structures to Significant Risk or Loss, Injury or Death Involving Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow While the General Plan EIR identifies areas of the City that would be vulnerable to flooding and coastal wave systems, the Project is not located in a flood hazard zone14 nor is it proximate to the Pacific Ocean. No impacts are anticipated. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Sianificance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to hydrology and water quality could be mitigated to a >level considered less than significant. Fin_d_inp of Gonsistencv With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the seventy of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states: `Implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on land use and planning if it would result in any of the following: • Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses Physically divides an established community • Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect 10 Ibid., Figure 4.73 Flood Zones. F:(USERSIPLN1SheredlPNSs PAS- 200TPA2007. 15112007 -12 -11 C=mft Addendum111S07.dw 3-20 Envitonme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR • Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Land use impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Intensify Development within the Planning Area that Creates Incompatibilities with Adjacent Land Uses Conflict with any Applicable Land Use Plan, Policy, Or Regulation Of An Agency With Jurisdiction Over The Project (Including, But Not Limited To The General Plan, Specific Plan, Local Coastal Program, Or Zoning Ordinance) Adopted For The Purpose Of Avoiding Or Mitigating An Environmental Effect The General Plan EIR notes that buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses may result in new uses and structures at an increased intensity that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses. These incompatibilities, can result from factors including differences in scale of development, noise and traffic levels, and hours of operation. Conflicts can also occur where mixed use development occurs. Newport Center /Fashion Island is a location in the City identified for mixed use development. The General Plan EIR describes this area as: Newport Center /Fashion Island is a regional; center of business and commerce that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, hotel, and residential uses in a master planned mixed use development. Fashion Island, a regional shopping center, forms the nucleus of Newport Center, and is framed by this mixture of office, entertainment, and residential. New land uses in this subarea include additional commercial uses (approximately 430,000 square feet), approximately 600 multi - family residential units [reduced to 450 units in final Program EIR] and approximately 250 additional hotel rooms. Residential units have existed in this area since the 1970's, and increased through the 1990s. No conflicts of use between the residential and commercial uses have existed previously in this area, as evidenced by the lack of complaints by area residents. Goals and policies contained in the proposed General Plan Update would serve to promote a mixed use, pedestrian - friendly district for this subarea that would continue commercial and residential uses. Policy LU 6.14.5 encourages improved pedestrian connections and streetscape amenities connecting the area's diverse districts. Goals contained in the proposed General Plan Update related to mixed use development (Goal 5.3) specifically articulate that such development should promote compatibility among uses. General Plan Policy LU 5.3.1 calls for the consideration of compatibility issues in project design of mixed use development. Thus, mixed use development under the proposed General Plan Update would be, by design, compatible with adjacent non - residential uses.15 As previously noted in this Addendum, Fashion Island is a regional commercial center with retail uses, restaurants, bars, and theater /nightclubs. Block 500 includes office, administrative, professional, and financial uses. Block 600 includes hotel, office, administrative, professional and financial uses, and accessory uses. San Joaquin Plaza includes business and professional 15 Ibid., page 4. 8-11. F:WSERS%PU4 ShaiecPPNs {PAS- 2007\PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CCVD Addendum-111W7.dw Envimnmi Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR office uses. In addition to these four sub - areas, Newport Center includes the following sub- areas and land uses: Land uses outside of Newport Center include single- family and multi- family residences and a golf course in Big Canyon located north of Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza and across San Joaquin Hills Road. Single- family and multi - family residences and general commercial land uses are located east of Newport Center across MacArthur Boulevard. Parks /recreational land uses and single- family residences are located south of Newport Center, across Coast Highway. Open space, single - family residences, visitor - serving commercial and parks /recreational land uses are located west of Newport Center, across Jamboree Road. The General Plan land use designation for Fashion Island is Regional Commercial (CR). Page 3 -13 of the 2006 General Plan states that the CR designation "...Is intended to provide retail, entertainment, service, and supporting uses that serve local and regional residents ." The land use designations for Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) and Open Space (OS). As identified in the 2006 General Plan, 'The MU -H3 designation applies to properties located in Newport Center. It provides for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office hotel, multi- family residential and ancillary commercial uses. "16 Page 3 -16 of the 2006 General Plan states that the OS designation "...is intended to provide areas for a range of public and private uses to protect, maintain, and enhance the community's natural resources." As a part of the proposed project, Block 600 would be rezoned from Administrative, Professional, and Financial (APF) and Open Space (OS) to Planned Community (PC). The North Newport Center PC Text would be adopted to incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by the Applicant into a single Planned Community District, The PC Text would reflect the land uses permitted for these sub -areas under the 2006 General Plan. The General Plan EIR states the following with respect to changes in land use for Newport Center and Fashion Island under the General Plan Update: The Plan allows for expanded retail opportunities at Fashion Island, including an additional anchor department store and ancillary shops, another hotel or additions to existing hotels, and 600 additional housing units [reduced to 450 in Final 1e City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, page 3 -15. FAUSERS\PW\Sh..MPA5\PAS- 200] \PA200] -151\ 200] -12 -11 CMD.ft Addendum- 111907.doc 3 -22 Environme Land Use 100 administrative and professional offices, limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses 200 .administrative and professional offices, limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses. 300 administrative and professional offices, .limited accessory retail, financial, service, and entertainment uses 400 medical - related offices, short-term convalescent and long -term care services, professional offices, retail and other similar uses. 700 regional commercial office and multi - family residential 600 regional commercial office and multi - family residential 900 multi - family housing, visitor serving land uses Land uses outside of Newport Center include single- family and multi- family residences and a golf course in Big Canyon located north of Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza and across San Joaquin Hills Road. Single- family and multi - family residences and general commercial land uses are located east of Newport Center across MacArthur Boulevard. Parks /recreational land uses and single- family residences are located south of Newport Center, across Coast Highway. Open space, single - family residences, visitor - serving commercial and parks /recreational land uses are located west of Newport Center, across Jamboree Road. The General Plan land use designation for Fashion Island is Regional Commercial (CR). Page 3 -13 of the 2006 General Plan states that the CR designation "...Is intended to provide retail, entertainment, service, and supporting uses that serve local and regional residents ." The land use designations for Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) and Open Space (OS). As identified in the 2006 General Plan, 'The MU -H3 designation applies to properties located in Newport Center. It provides for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office hotel, multi- family residential and ancillary commercial uses. "16 Page 3 -16 of the 2006 General Plan states that the OS designation "...is intended to provide areas for a range of public and private uses to protect, maintain, and enhance the community's natural resources." As a part of the proposed project, Block 600 would be rezoned from Administrative, Professional, and Financial (APF) and Open Space (OS) to Planned Community (PC). The North Newport Center PC Text would be adopted to incorporate Fashion Island, Block 600, and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza owned by the Applicant into a single Planned Community District, The PC Text would reflect the land uses permitted for these sub -areas under the 2006 General Plan. The General Plan EIR states the following with respect to changes in land use for Newport Center and Fashion Island under the General Plan Update: The Plan allows for expanded retail opportunities at Fashion Island, including an additional anchor department store and ancillary shops, another hotel or additions to existing hotels, and 600 additional housing units [reduced to 450 in Final 1e City of Newport Beach, General Plan, July 25, 2006, page 3 -15. FAUSERS\PW\Sh..MPA5\PAS- 200] \PA200] -151\ 200] -12 -11 CMD.ft Addendum- 111907.doc 3 -22 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Vpdate EIR. Program EIR]... Plan policies encourage improved pedestrian connections and streetscape amenities connecting the area's diverse .districts .17 Areas where mixed use development is currently located (e.g., Balboa Peninsula, Mariners' Mile and Newport Center /Fashion Island), would be allowed to develop with more mixed use ... In many locations, the addition of uses similar to existing uses would occur. For instance, additional retail facilities would be permitted in the Fashion Island /Newport Center Area ... Where additional development that is the same as or similar to existing development could occur, these uses would be compatible.18 As previously addressed, the four sub -areas are identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport. The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action, Therefore, the zone change has been forwarded to the ALUC, and a hearing is scheduled prior to public hearings before the City's Planning Commission and City Council. As noted, the General Plan EIR does not identify land use incompatibilities for Newport Center, inclusive of the four sub -areas of the Project. The Project is proposed to provide for zoning consistent with the 2006 General Plan land use designations for the four sub - areas. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Physically Divides an Established Community The General, Plan EIR notes that the 2006 General Plan allows for "..,limited infill development in select subareas within the City... These types of proposed development would not divide established communities. Impacts would be less than significant" (See 4.8 -16) With respect to the Project, future development in the four sub -areas would not require the extension of roadways or other development features through developed areas that could physically divide the established community. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of apreviously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with Any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan As previously addressed, North Newport Center is identified as having no conservation value and is not included in the NCCP or HCP. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. 17 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update, July 26, 2006, page 3 -15. 8 Ibid., page 4.8 -9. F :WSEMPLWhamMPAblPAs.200TPA2007- 16112007 -12 -11 CCO ftMd ndum 111WTdw 3-23 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Level of Significance After Mitioation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to land use impacts pertaining to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.10 NOISE The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR: It states "...implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse noise impact if it would result in any of the following: • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. FAUSER$1PW4 M ecRPRsVM- MMPA20 0 7- 15 7120 07 -12 -1 1 CC{Dr 1007.4. 3 -24 Environnx Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analvsis Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Noise Levels In Excess Of Standards Established In the Local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or Applicable Standards of Other Agencies A Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity Above Levels Existing Without The Project The General Plan EIR identifies that locations throughout the City would experience changes in noise levels as a result of increased motor vehicles and development. Where existing land uses would be exposed to noise levels exceeding the City's noise standards as a result of future growth, the General Plan EIR identifies this as a significant impact. (See 4.9 -22) Figure 4.9 -5 of the General Plan EIR identifies that the four sub -areas would be located within 60 CNEL to 65 CNEL future noise contours. These noise contours do not account for any intervening structures or other noise- attenuating features. Additionally, measures for noise attenuation where needed to comply with the City's noise standards are available and include the use of walls, berms, building insulation, double paned windows, eta Traffic- related noise in the project vicinity has the potential to impact the four sub - areas. The General Plan EIR accounts for noise impacts due to new development under the General Plan Update. The EIR states that new development, "...would result from adoption of the proposed General Plan and regional growth would create noise that would affect new and existing receptors. Most of this noise would be produced by increased traffic on local roads. Many of the proposed General Plan policies, especially those associated with Goal N -2 (Transportation Noise) would reduce this impact. "19 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exposure of Persons to or Generation of Excessive Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels The General Plan EIR notes that vibration levels during construction that would exceed 72 vibration decibels (VdB) are considered significant Such an impact would be specific to a construction site and would be dependent on the types of construction equipment in use and proximity to sensitive receptors and uses. Where construction activities that generate high levels' of vibration could not be buffered from sensitive receptors and /or uses by approximately 150 feet, the General Plan EIR identifies that a significant impact would occur. With respect to the four sub - areas, there is a potential for such construction activities to occur under these conditions. As such, consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, such an impact would be significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. A Substantial Temporary or Periodic Increase in Ambient Noise Levels in the Project Vicinity above Levels Existing. Without the Project Potential noise impacts are commonly divided into two groups: temporary and long term. Temporary impacts are usually associated with noise generated by construction activities. 1s City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, page 4.942. FIUSERS%PLN%Shamd%PA's1PA - 20071PA2007. 15112007- 121100,0roRAddmdu0 111907,dm 3-25 Envlmnmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Generally, construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment (including trucks, graders, bulldozers; concrete mixers, and portable generators) and construction activities can reach high levels. The greatest construction noise levels are typically generated by heavy construction equipment. The City's Noise Ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise level limits during specific hours of the day. Noise - generating construction activities are permitted during the hours between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday, between 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or federal holidays. Compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance is considered to result in no significant short-term noise impacts. For A'Project Within An Airport Land Use Plan, Or Where Such A Plan Has Not Been Adopted, Within Two Miles Of A Public Airport Or Public Use Airport, Exposure Of People Residing Or Working In The Project Area To Excessive Noise Levels As previously noted, Newport Center, inclusive of the four sub - areas, is located within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. However, the site is not within the either the AELLIP 60 or 65 CNEL Noise Contour, and flight operations would not contribute significantly to the overall existing noise exposure on the site. No significant impacts on persons residing or working in the project area are anticipated as a result of project implementation because land use within the planning area boundaries of the AELUP must conform to noise standards, safety, and height restriction standards. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to noise impacts related to John Wayne Airport and construction activities could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Groundborne construction vibrations and long -term exposure to increased noise levels were identified to remain significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistencv With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. FaOSERSIPLMSham ,RPA's1PM- MMkPAZ007- 15112007 -12-11 C0Dmft Addendum- 11150Zd= 3-26 Envimmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR 3.11 POPULATION AND HOUSING The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states "...implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on population and housing if it would result in any of the following: • Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure) • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere • Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Induce Substantial Population Growth in an Area, Either Directly (For Example, By Proposing New Homes and Businesses) or Indirectly (For Example, Through the Extension of Roads or Other Infrastructure) The General Plan EIR finds that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would induce substantial growth either directly or indirectly. On a citywide basis, residential development would increase the number of units by 9,549 units (24 percent) over 2002 residential unit counts with a related population increase of 20,912 residents. These increases would exceed the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) projections. On a citywide basis, the City's projected population growth was considered significant. On a cumulative basis (countywide), the General Plan EIR noted that "...the proposed project would not result in substantial population growth beyond projections, and would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly." (See pages 4.10 -5 and -6) Buildout of the 2006 General Plan was found to have a less than significant cumulative contribution to growth in the County. (See pages 4.10 -6 and -7) The General Plan EIR analysis was based on a project with 600 units in Newport Center. The adopted 2006 General Plan allows for the development of 450 residential units within the MU- H3 designation.20 Of the 450 units, 430 units are proposed for the North Newport PC District. Residential uses are permitted in Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The Project does not include a request for site - specific development, including any residential development.' As such, the Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. " City of Newport Beach; General Plan, July 25, 2006, page 3-97. F:WSERS \PLN%Sh ra&PA's\PA - 200TPA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CC10,eft Mdendum111W.dw 3-27 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. Displace Substantial Numbers of Existing Housing, Necessitating the Construction of Replacement Housing Elsewhere Displace Substantial Numbers of People, Necessitating the Construction of Replacement Housing Elsewhere The General Plan EIR states that the 2006 General Plan would not displace a substantial number of existing homes or residents and that no impact would occur. Development on the four sub -areas would not require the displacement of any existing homes or residents. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Proaram No policies were identified in the 2006 General Plan to reduce the substantial increase in growth in the City. Measures were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with resource impacts with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR; the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to population and housing would remain significant and unavoidable. Findina of Consistencv With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport " Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.12 PUBLIC SERVICES The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It identifies that implementation of the proposed General Plan Update may have a significant adverse impact on public services if it would result in any of the following: Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire or police protection facilities, or schools or libraries; the need for new or physically altered fire or police protection facilities, or schools or libraries; the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Public service impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. F:I USER "LN%ShareNPNs PAs- 2007\PA2007- 151{ 2007 -12 -11 CMDrftM&tl durv111907.dw 3 -28 EnVlmnmt Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Summary Analvsis Result in Substantial Adverse Environmental Impacts Associated with the Provision of New or Physically Altered Fire or Police Protection Facilities, or Schools or Libraries; the Need For New or Physically Altered Fire or Police Protection Facilities, or Schools or Libraries; The Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios, Response Times, And Other Performance Objectives Fire Protection Fire stations are located throughout the City to provide prompt assistance to area residents. Each fire station operates within a specific district that comprises the immediate geographical area around the station. As identified on page 4.11 -3 of the General Plan EIR, Station 3 serves Newport Center. Station 3 has the following equipment and manpower: one Fire Chief; one fire engine with one Captain, one Engineer, and one Firefighter; one ladder truck with one Captain, one Engineer, and one Firefighter; and one paramedic van with two Firefighter Paramedics. The General Plan EIR states that in 2004, "eight fire stations serving the City of Newport Beach responded to a total of 8,863 incidents, which results in an average of about 1,107 incidents per station... These numbers are well within the number of calls recommended by the Insurance Service Office (ISO) when rating a community for fire insurance rates. Specifically, the ISO recommends that a second company be put in service in a fire station if that station receives more than 2,500 calls per year. The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could increase the demand for fire protection services which could result in the need for additional fire facilities. Policies of the General Plan require that adequate infrastructure be provided with new development. As such, the General Plan EIR found that compliance with applicable regulations and policies of the 2006 General Plan would ensure that project-specific and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. All new development that would occur under the 2006 General Plan would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing the provision of fire, protection services, including adequate fire access, fire flows, and number of hydrants. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Police Protection The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could increase the demand for police protection services which could result in the need for additional police facilities. The General Plan EIR states that, "The NBPD provides local police services to the City of Newport Beach. Centrally located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, the NBPD provides services in crime prevention and investigation, community awareness programs, and other services such as traffic control ."21 The EIR also states that the City of Newport Beach currently maintains an acceptable level of service and there are currently no immediate or near - future plans for expansion of police facilities, staff, or equipment inventory. Impacts to police services as a result of General Plan build -out would be less than significant because the "General Plan Update contains policies to ensure that adequate law enforcement is provided as the City experiences future development. For example, Policy LU 2.8 ensures that only land uses that can be adequately supported by the City's Public Services should be accommodated. Compliance with 21 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update; July 26, 2006, page 4.11 -13. F: IUSERSlPLNM. md1PA'a 1PA5- 200n PA2007 .l5112007 -12 -11 Ccoraft Add.nWa 111907,dw 3-29 Envi7onmt Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR this policy would ensure that adequate service ratios are maintained. "22 Therefore, adequate service ratios are currently being provided and would be maintained as a result of General Plan policies. As such, the General Plan EIR found that compliance with applicable regulations and policies of the 2006 General Plan would ensure that project - speck and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Schools The Newport-Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD) provides educational services to the City of Newport Beach. The General Plan EIR identifies that the School District serves the majority of the City and has 32 public schools including 22 elementary schools, 2 junior high schools, 5 high schools, 2 alternative education centers, and 1 adult school. There are also several private schools in the City or local area that are available to the City's residents for educational services. According to NMUSD administrators, current school capacity is adequate. NMUSD does not currently identify any projected needs. The General Plan EIR states In the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in the construction of approximately 14,215 dwelling units over existing conditions within the City. The increase in dwelling units would increase enrollment in the local schools serving Newport Beach. Using California Department of Finance population projections, and assuming that approximately 20 percent of the potential increase in population would represent children attending grades K through 12, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in an enrollment increase of approximately 6,230 students (3,115 elementary school students, 1,557 students for middle schools, and 1,558 high school students).23 The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan would likely result in the construction of new school facilities for NMUSD; these impacts would be less than significant on a project and cumulative basis 24 The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Library Facilities The Newport Beach Public Library provides library services and resources to the City of Newport Beach. The Central Library, which occupies four acres on Avocado Avenue near Newport Center, is a 15,305 square foot building that serves as a school library as well as a public library. As stated in the General Plan EIR, Upon full build -out of the proposed General Plan Update, the population in the Planning Area would increase by 31,131. This increase in residents would increase the demand for library services and facilities. Policy LU 2.8 of the proposed General Plan Update would help ensure that adequate library facilities a Ibid., page 4.11 -16. 23 Ibid., page 4.11 -23. 24 Ibid., page 4.11 -24. FIUSERSkPLN1ShamcRPA's\PF - 200nPA2007-151=7 -12 -11 0=O Md d.m 1.11907.d. 3-30 Environmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR are provided to the City's residents and that public services can adequately support new development.. Due to the growing need for electronic resources, former service standards (e.g., a certain number of volumes per thousand residents) are no longer appropriate when assessing the needs of the NBPL Therefore, increased development in the City does not necessarily immediately equate to an increase in total volumes or square feet of library space.25 The General Plan EIR identifies that the increase in population associated with the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of uses in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, would not result in a significant impact to library services. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of 'a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Sianificance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to public services would be less than significant. Finding of ConsistencwWith General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.13 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states that "... implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on parks and recreational facilities if it would result in any of the following: Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated • Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause- significant zs Ibid., page 4.11 -28. F: IUSERSIPLN'Shar.cPPRs1PM- 2W71PA 07- 15112007 -12 -11 COMAAEE d...111W7.d. 3 -31 Enwronm( Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Park and recreational facility impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or Clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Increase the Use of Existing Neighborhood and Regional Parks or Other Recreational' Facilities Such That Substantial Physical Deterioration of the Facility Would Occur or Be Accelerated Include Recreational Facilities or Require the Construction or Expansion of Recreational Facilities That Might Have an Adverse Physical Effect on the Environment Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated With the Provision of New or Physically Altered Government Services, Need for New or Physically Altered Government Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios or Other Performance Objectives for Parks The General Plan EIR identifies that the City has a deficiency of approximately 38.8 acres of park acreage, with 7 of 12 service areas experiencing a deficit of recreational acreage. Newport Center is in Service Area 9 and has 19 acres of existing parks, an excess of 8.1 acres of parks over the City standard of 5 acres per 1,000 persons. Page 4.12 -3 of the General Plan EIR identifies that a planned park in Newport Center "would help alleviate the citywide park deficit" although Newport Center has a park surplus. The Back Bay View Park was completed in 2005, and a new passive park, Newport Center Park, is planned for development. The General Plan EIR states that "the construction and enhancement of park and recreational facilities and implementation of the goals and policies proposed in the General Plan would ensure that increased demand and use resulting from an increase in citywide population would not significantly accelerate the deterioration of existing recreational facilities .,,26 The General Plan EIR notes the open space benefits that the Applicant has provided through the Circulation and Improvement and Open Space Agreement ( CIOSA). Page 4.12 -4 states: Some of the City's parks and open space areas consist of dedicated lands through the Circulation and Improvement and Open Space Agreement ( CIOSA). This agreement is between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company, and has allowed building entitlements for The Irvine Company in exchange for payments for circulation projects, an interest free loan, and land for open space and potential senior housing sites for the City. The amount of open space land dedication was substantially more than what would have been required under the City's Park Dedication Ordinance. Six sites have been dedicated under CIOSA in Newport Beach, and include: Back Bay View Park, Newport Center Park (formerly Newport Village), Newporter Knoll, Freeway Reservation, Upper Castaways, and Harbor Cove. Another site, located at Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, has been offered for z Ibid., page 4.12 -15. F: WSERSIPLMSherecPPA 'e1PAs- 20071PA20 07- 1 51120 07 -12 -11 Cwmft Mtl dum- 111W.dw Erwin mf Addendum to City of Newport Beach. General Plan 2008 Update EIR dedication and will be dedicated upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for final CIOSA project. The Applicant did not implement all of the development that was allowed pursuant to CIOSA, and provided more park and open space dedication than required for the development that was completed. Through the Development Agreement, the Project includes cancellation of CIOSA. The demand for park facilities that would have resulted from unbuilt entitlement in CIOSA would not be realized. As with new development projects throughout the City, future development in the four sub -areas would be required to comply with the 2006 General Plan Update policies on open space. Through the Development Agreement, the Project includes the payment of park in -lieu fees for 430 residential units, with half the total amount ($5,600,000) to be paid earlier than required. The General Plan EIR finds that compliance with General Plan Update would result in less than significant impacts to parks and recreational facilities. These policies include the requirement that future development dedicate land or pay in -.lieu fees at a minimum of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons, and require the use of funding from the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance to enhance existing parks and recreation facilities (General Plan Update Policies R1.1 and 'R2.1).27 General Plan Policy R 1.10 includes three planned parks in West Newport, Newport Center, and Newport Coast. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Proaram Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that impacts to parks and recreation facilities would be less than significant. Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the 'General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. 3.14 TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It states that "... implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on transportation or circulation if it would result in any of the followings 27 Ibid., page 4.12 -17. F: WSEa81PLW \SMmdPN.\PAs.2DOTPA2007- 151\2007 -12 -11 00Drsft Addmdum 111907.d0C 3 -33 ' Envlronme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2008 Update EIR • Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system ,(i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion, management agency for designated roads or highways • Result in a change in air traffic, patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) • Result in inadequate emergency access • Result in inadequate parking capacity • Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Cause an Increase in Traffic Which Is Substantial in Relation to the Existing Traffic toad and Capacity of The Street System (i.e., Result In A Substantial Increase In Either the Number of Vehicle Trips, the Volume to Capacity Ratio on Roads, or Congestion at Intersections) The General Plan EIR identifies that implementation of the 2006 General Plan could result in a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity on roadways, and congestion at intersections when compared to existing conditions in the City. Deficiencies could also occur at freeway segments and ramps. Volume 1A of the General Plan Final EIR identifies that the traffic study accounts for use of currently unused development entitlements. On page 4.13 -1 of the General Plan EIR, the traffic analysis assumes buildout of the City, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, consistent with the 2006 General Plan. However, improvements are identified in the General Plan Circulation Element to mitigate citywide impacts to a level that is considered less than significant. However, the City's roadway system must also accommodate regional cumulative vehicular traffic. With improvements identified in the Circulation Element, cumulative impacts to intersection operations can be mitigated to a less than significant level. However, the City's contribution to cumulative impacts associated with freeway segments and ramps would remain significant and unavoidable. The Project is not expected to be completed within 60 months of approval, and it includes a circulation improvement plan, explained in detail in the Development Agreement. The Project therefore qualifies as a Phased Land Use Development and Circulation Improvement Plan F:HRERS{PLNlahamdkPA's'PM. 071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 0=mftMdendum 111907.dw 3 -34 EnidN mi Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update E/R under the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, Municipal Code §15.40.030.6.2. A traffic study has been prepared pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and "feasible mitigation" (consistent with the 2006 General Plan Circulation Element) is part of the Project. The following provides a summary of the North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. in November 2007. The study is included in its entirety as Appendix A. The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) traffic study included the analysis of 40 intersections in the City including 5 intersections on Newport Center Drive using the City's required TPO procedure. This procedure includes both a one percent test and, where necessary, an intersection capacity utilization (ICU) analysis. Consistent with the City's TPO analysis guidelines, the Project is analyzed under short-range conditions (existing volumes plus a regional growth factor and approved projects) without and with cumulative projects (i.e., projects reasonably expected to be complete within one year after project completion which are located within the City of Newport Beach or its Sphere of Influence). Trip Generation Distribution and Analysis. The applicable trip rates and incremental trip generation for the Project is presented in Table 2. The increase in traffic includes a credit for the removal of existing uses. The Project is forecast to generate a net increase over existing of 348 trips in the AM peak hour, 311 trips in the PM peak hour, and 2,399 daily trips. TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour PM. Peak Hour ADT In Out Total In `' Out I -Total TRIP RATES (ITE) Residential DU 0.06 0.28 0.34 0.24 0.14 0.38 4.18 Quality Restaurant TSF 0.66 0.15 0.81 5.02 2.47 7.49 89.95 Shopping Center TSF 0.19 0.12 0.31 0.77 0.84 1.61 16.79 Office (Regression Eq)a TSF 0.95 0.13 1.08 0.19 0.93 1.12 7.07 Health Club TSF 0.51 0.70 1.21 2.07 1.98 4.05 32.93 TRIP GENERATION Existing Uses to be Removed Block 600 Quality Restaurant 16.4 TSF 1.1 2 13 83 41 123 1,479 Office 8.3 TSF 8 1 9 2 8 10 59 Health Club 17.3 TSF 9 12 21 36 34 70 570 Total Credit -28 -15 -43 -121 -83 -203 -2,108 Proposed Uses Block 500 .Office 205.2 TSF 195 27 222 39 191 230 1,451 Block 600 Residential 430 DU 26 120 146 103 60 163 1,797 Fashion Island Shopping Center 75.0 TSF 14 9 23 58 63 121 1,259 Total Proposed Trips 235 156 391 200 314 514 4,507 NETINCREASE 207 141 348 79 231 311 2,399 Trip rates per TSF determined from applying the ITE office' regression equations to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future .(614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rates based on the square footage increment (206 TSF). FIUSERS \PLN\Shamd \PA§\PAs- 20071PA2007- 151\ 2007 -12 -11 CCOmft Addendum-1 11907.don 3 -35 Environmc Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007 For trip distribution, an internal capture rate of 10 percent was used for residential and retail uses.. This rate was determined based on ITE's recommended procedure and is consistent with the City's General Plan EIR traffic study, which used a 10 percent capture rate for mixed use areas. For the office space, a five percent internal capture rate was used. A separate trip assignment was prepared for each of the three separate uses (retail /shopping center, residential, and office) in the Project. These assignments, shown by individual uses in Figures A -1 through A -3 in Appendix A, are as follows: 1. North on MacArthur Boulevard 20 -40 percent 2. North on Jamboree Road 15 -30 percent 3. West on Coast Highway 15 -30 percent 4. East on Coast Highway 10 percent One Percent Analysis. The results of the TPO One Percent Analysis are presented in Table 3. This analysis identifies the intersections where the Project adds one percent or more to the background peak hour volume, in which case a more vigorous capacity analysis is performed. Opening year for the Project is assumed to be 2009; therefore, the project year for this analysis is 2010. Table 3 identifies that 39 traffic study area intersections have increases of one percent or greater of existing -plus- approved or existing -plus- approved - plus - cumulative volumes during the AM or PM peak hour. As a result, further analysis is required and a peak hour ICU analysis was conducted for the 39 locations. TABLE 3 ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS -. - Intersection ,AM;Peak Hour Project Volumes- Less Than 1 %.of Peak Hour Volumes NB SB EB^ WB w/o Cumulative w /Cumulative 1. MacArthur & Campus 8 20 0 0 No No 2. MacArthur & Birch 8 20 20 0 No No 3. MacArthur& Von Karmen 8 20 0 0 No No 4, Jamboree & Campus 8 20 0 0 Yes Yes 5. Jamboree & Birch 8 20 0 0 Yes Yes 6. MacArthur & Jamboree 8 20 8 20 No No 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) 0 0 32 1 0 No No 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB) 29 20 0 0 No No 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB) 26 20 31 0 No No 10. Jamboree& Bayview 30 52 0 0 No No 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff /University 35 52 0 0 No No 12. Jamboree& Bison 42 53 0 1 No No 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford 42 54 0 0 No No 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 0 54 0 1 42 No No 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 1 0 0 17 No No 16. Jamboree &Coast Highway 0 17 30 15 No No 17. MacArthur & Bison 33 61 6 21 No No 18, MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon 39 80 0 0 N2 No 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin. Hills 0 82 40 0 No No F:\ USERS \PLN1Share \PA§ \PAS- 2007PA20W- 1 511 2 0 0 7 -12 -fl CMDmft Addendum- 111907Ad 3 -36 EnvironmE Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 3 (Continued) ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS _ Intersection AM Peak Hour - Project Volumes Less Than 1% of Peak Hour Volumes NB SB EB WB w/o Cumulative w /Cumulative 20�. MacArthur & San Miguel 1 0 11 7 No No 21. MacArthur & Coast Highway 0 11 2 19 No No 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 35 0 54 7 No No 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 36 0 49 4 No No 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills 0 9 0 0 No No 25. Avocado & San Miguel 49 8 10 9 No No 26. Balboa /Superior & Coast Highway 0 0 11 18 No No 27. Newport & Coast Highway 0 10 11 18 No No 28. Riverside & Coast Highway 0 1 0 22 26 No No 29. Tustin & Coast Highway 0 0 22 26 No No 30. Dover /Bayshore & Coast Highway 0 9 22 32 No No 31. Bayside & Coast Highway 0 0 31 32 No No 32. Newport Center & Coast Highway 0 9 29 1 No No 33. Avocado & Coast Highway 0 7 28 18 No No 34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway 0 0 14 19 No No 35. Marguerite & Coast Highway 0 0 14 19 No No 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 0 0 2 1 No No 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center 1 2 0 0 No No 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa 6 30 0 0 No No 39. Newport Center & San Miguel 3 17 2 0 No No 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center 0 1 0 10 No No Intersection:,. y;�tO 'Peak Pro /ect Hour Volumes �;r; ?`; Less Than .. Peak Hour,Volumes t" /a of " +. • 3 SB Tit!3 ,r'`WB„ a v✓ /o Cumulative; - w /Cu`mulativ& 1. MacArthur & Campus 21 6 0 0 No No 2. MacArthur & Birch 21 _ 6 0 0 No No 3. MacArthur & Von Karman 21 6 0 0 No No 4. Jamboree & Campus 21 6 0 0 Yes Yes 5. Jamboree & Birch 21 6 0 0 No No 6. MacArthur & Jamboree 21 6 21 6 No No 7. Bayview& Bristol South (EB) 0 0 18 0 Yes Yes 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB) 58 6 0 0 No No 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB) 28 6 15 0 No No 10. Jamboree & Bayview 57 25 0 0 No No 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff /University 59 25 0 2 No No 12. Jamboree & Bison 62 27 0 5 No No 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff /Ford 62 32 0 0 No No 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 0 32 0 62 No No 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 6 0 0 5 Yes Yes 16. Jamboree & Coast Highway 0 5 13 31 No No 17. MacArthur & Bison 84 21 3 1 11 No No 18. MacArthur & For Canyon 86 28 0 2 No No 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 0 30 87 0 No No 20. MacArthur & San Miguel 4 0 9 0 Yes Yes F: \USERS \PLN \Shared \PA's1PAs- 2007\PA2007- 151 \200742 -11 CC \Draft Addendum- 111907.dcc 3 -37 Environmc Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update. EIR TABLE 3 (Continued) ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS .Intersection AM.Peak Hour Project Volumes Less Than 1% of, Peak Hour Volumes_ NB SB EB WB w/o Cumulative w /6umulative 21. MacArthur & Coast Highway 0 3 15 2 Yes Yes 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 14 0 32 48 No No 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 59 0 10 14 No No 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills 6 0 0 0 Yes Yes 25. Avocado & San Miguel 10 58 1 0 No No 26. Balboa /Superior & Coast Highway 0 0 8 15 Yes Yes 27. Newport & Coast Highway 0 4 1 8 15 Yes Yes 28. Riverside &.Coast Highway 0 0 13 27 Yes Yes 29. Tustin & Coast Highway 0 0 13 27 No Yes 30. Dover /Bayshore & Coast Highway 0. 1 13 37 No Yes 31. Bayside & Coast. Highway 0 0 13 37 No No 32. Newport Center & Coast Highway 0 0 7 17 Yes Yes 33. Avocado & Coast Highway 0 48 2 0 No No 34, Goldenrod & Coast. Highway 0 0 18 2 Yes Yes 35. Marguerite & Coast Highway 0 0 18 2 No Yes 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 0 0 9 9 No No 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center 9 9 0 0 No No 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa 26 15 0 0 No No 39. Newport Center & San Miguel 10 0. 16 0 No No 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center 1 9 0 0 No No Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., 2007 ICU Analysis. The results of the ICU analysis are presented in Table 4. A significant project impact is defined as an increase of 0.01 or more in the ICU value at an intersection that reaches LOS E or F. Examination of the results shows that the Project would result in a significant impact at three locations under existing -plus- approved - plus - cumulative conditions. These three locations with their respective with - project ICU values are: Intersection AM Project Increment PM. Project Increment 19. MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road 0.73 0.040. 0.93 0.027 34. Goldenrod Avenue and Coast Highway 0.91 0.006 0.85 0.005 34. Marguerite Avenue and Coast Highway 0.98 0.006. 0.92 0.006 In summary, the Project would cause three traffic study area locations to exceed the TPO standard of LOS D. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The Project would also allow for the transfer of some existing and entitled uses in Block 600 and replace it with office uses in Block 500. As part of the proposed transfer of uses, the Applicant and the City wish to reserve 72,000 sf of the office use for a possible new City Hall in Block 500. F:\ USERS \PLN\ Shared \PA's \PAS- 200TPA2007- 151\ 2007 -12 -11 CC \Draft Addendum- 111907.dm 3 -38 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR The transfer of development rights within Newport Center is allowed in accordance with the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 provided the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. A Trip Transfer Study was prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. in November 2007 to examine the conversion and transfer of the entitled uses into equivalent office uses on the basis of a PM peak hour trip generation equivalency basis. The study is summarized below and included in Appendix A. The transfer would allow for existing uses including a health club, restaurant, and office as well as remaining, but as yet unused entitlement for hotel uses in Block 600, with office use in Block 500. Existing uses in Block 600 equal 42,036 sf of office, restaurant and, health club uses. The unused entitlement in Block 600 is 195 hotel rooms. These entitled uses in Block 600 could be replaced in Block 500 with office use, 72,000 sf of which may be used for a new City Hall. The analysis is based upon use of the worst -case PM peak hour trip rates. Rates for the analysis were taken from the ITE 7h Edition Trip Generation publication. The trips generated by the uses proposed to be eliminated are presented in Table 5. As indicated, the uses included as the basis of the proposed transfer are projected to generate 339 PM peak hour trips. A potential new City Hall of 72,000 sf would generate 108 peak hour trips (based on a rate of 1.5 trips per 1,000 square feet [TSF]) leaving 231 trips, which can be allocated toward other uses. These 231 PM peak hour trips equate to 206,000± sf of office use based on a trip rate of 1.12 trips/TSF. The Project consists of 205,161 sf of office space in Block 500. Therefore, the total PM peak hour trip generation associated with the converted uses proposed for Block 500 would be 338 trips. F1USERSP'L"ham-&PNs�M- 200T PA2007 - 1512007- 12 -11=Dr M&d d.m111907.dw 3.39 Emironmf Addendum to City or Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 4 ICU SUMMARY - - - Location - = -Existing Existing+ Growth +Approved WY Existing +Growth + Approved + °project Existing +,Growth + Approved + -`. C;umulative Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1. MacArthur& Campus .50 .74 .51 .74 .51 .74 .53 .74 .53 .74 2. MacArthur & Birch .62 .75 .64 .77 .64 .77 .67 .79 .67 .79 3. MacArthur & Von Kerman .32 .74 .33 .76 .33 .76 .38 .80 .38 .81 5. Jamboree & Birch .56 .64 .58 .67 .58 .67 .60 .70 .60 .71 6. MacArthur & Jamboree .68 .76 .71 .79 .71 .80 .78 .85 .78 .86 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) .57 .66 .59 .67 .59 .67 .59 .67 .59 .67 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB) .57 .53 .58 .56 .59 .56 .59 _ .59 .60 .59 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB) .66 .67 .68. .70 .68 .71 .70 .74 .70 .75 10. Jamboree & Bayview .36 ;51 .38 .54 .39 .54 .40 .56 .41 .57 11. Jamboree & University .57 .59 .60 .63 .61 .63 .64 .69 .64 .69 12. Jamboree & Bison .50 .56 .52 .60 .53 1 .61 .57 .64 .58 .65 13. Jamboree & Ford .65 .69 .68 .73 .69 .74 .72 .80 .73 .81 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .57 .58 .60 .63 .61 .64 .64 .67 .65 .68 15. Jamboree &.Santa Barbara .49 .70 - .51 .73 .52 .73 .55 .77 .56 .77 16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .66 .69 .69 .74 .69 .75 .77 .89 .77 .89 17. MacArthur & Bison .60 .66 .61 .67 .62 .68 .64 .71 .65 .71 18. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Cyn .72 ,78 .73 .79 .74 .81 .78 .86 .78 .87 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65 .82 .67 .85 .69 .87 .71 .90 .73 .93* 20. MacArthur & San Miguel .44 .71 .44 .73 .45 .73 .47 .77 .47 .77 21. MacArthur &..Coast Hwy .71 .64 .73 .66 .74 .66 .84 .79 .85 .79. 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29 .28 .29 .28 .31 .29 .29 .28 _ .32 .30 23. Santa Rosa &San Joaquin Hills .31. .44 :32 .46 .34 .47 .35 .50 .37 .51 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills .38 .61 .38 .62 .38 .62 .40 .65 .40 .55 25. Avocado & San Miguel .48 ,76 .48 .77 .51 .78 .48 .78 .52 .79 26. Superior /Balboa & Coast Hwy .70 .72 .73 .79 .73 .79 .75 .86 .75 .86 27. Newport & Coast Hwy 77 .fib .80 .73 .80 .73 .82 3 .77 28. Riverside & Coast Hwy .73 .79 .79 .84 .79 .85 .82 .88 .62. .89 F:WSERSTLMShar.tl PA's1PAS- 200APA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 =OWtt Add.Oum- 911907.d. 3 -40 Environmental Analysis Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 4 (Continued) ICU SUMMARY F: \USERS \PLN \ShawdlPA's \PAs - 2007 \PA2007 - 15112007 -12 -11 CC\Dmft Addendum -111907 doc 3 -41 Environmental Analysis p7= Y � -' SZ �R +u Existing +Growth + `` Existing +Growth + - Existing + Growth -1 Extstmg + Growth + Approved + Approveih; ±, - Existing ±"Approved _ .Approved _- +_project Cumulative Cumulative +projact Location - - - AM Pm - AM PM, 1. AM PM AM PM - AM, - Pm 29 Tustin & Coast Hwy .73 .59 .79 .63 .80 .63 .82 .69 .83 .70 30. Dover& Coast Hwy .67 .74 .70. .79 .71 .79 .73 .84 .74 .85 31. Bayside & Coast Hwy .73 .64 .79 .72 .79 .73 .81 .76 .82 .77 32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36 .53 .37 .55 .37 .55 .46 .62 .46 .62 33. Avocado & Coast Hwy .49 .60 .50 .62 .53. .62 .60 .72 .62 .73 34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy .73 .68 .75 1 .70 .76 1 .71 .91 .87 .92* .87 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy .79 .73 .81 .75 .82 .76 .97 .91 .98 .92* 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .12 .21 .12 .21 .12 .22 .12 .21 .12 .22 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .15 .25 .15. .25 .16 .24 .16 26 .16 .26 39. Newport Center & San Miguel .22 .41 .22 .41 .22 .41 .22 .42 .23 .42 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 * Indicates significant project impact Level of service ranges:. .00 -.60 A 61 -70 B 71 - .80 C 81 - .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007. F: \USERS \PLN \ShawdlPA's \PAs - 2007 \PA2007 - 15112007 -12 -11 CC\Dmft Addendum -111907 doc 3 -41 Environmental Analysis Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR TABLE 5 CONVERTED USES In summary, the currently entitled uses in Block 600 (i.e., 195 hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of health club, retail, and office uses) proposed for transfer to Block 500 equate to 339 PM peak hour trips. These 339 trips would match the amount of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by a new 72,000 sf City Hall plus another 205,161 sf of office use. Therefore, the proposed transfer of development rights would not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exceed, Either Individually or Cumulatively, a Level of Service Standard Established By the County Congestion Management Agency for Designated Roads or Highways The General Plan EIR identifies that all Congestion Management Plan arterials in the City would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS E or better) with implementation of the 2006 General Plan. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result In A Change In Air Traffic Patterns, Including Either An Increase In Traffic Levels Or A Change In Locations That Results In Substantial Safety Risks As previously addressed in this Addendum, the four sub -areas are in the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport. The ALUC has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. Additionally, the four sub -areas are within the AELUP Height Restriction Zone. Within this zone, notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required for construction or alteration to any building more than 200 feet above ground level. Prior to construction or alteration of a building more than 200 feet above ground level a Determination of No Hazard F: \USERS \PLNN Shared \PA5 \PAS- 2007 \PA2007 - 1511200742 -11 =Dreft Addendum- 111907.d. 3 -42 Environmt PM PM Use (Entitled in Block 600) - Peak Hour Rate. Peak Trips .. Hotel (195 Rooms) — Unbuilt Entitlement 0.70 (ITE 310)' 136 Family Fitness (17,300° sf) — Existing 4.05 (ITE 492)c 70 Palm Gardens (16,447° sf) — Existing 7.49 (ITE 931)° 1.23 Eliminated Office (6,789' sf) — Existing 1.12 (ITE 710)' 8 Eliminated Office (1,500 sf) — Existing 1.1.2 (ITE 710)' 2 Total 339 Use (Proposed in Block 500) Office (205,161 sf) 1..12 (ITE 710)' 230 City Hall (72,000 sf) 1.50 (ITE 750)° 108 Total 338 a Hotel (rates applied for each occupied room) b Per building permit information c Health Club (rates per TSF) d Quality Restaurant (rates per TSF) e Trip rate per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equation to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rate based on the square footage increment (206 TSF) f Closest ITE rate (in both function and magnitude) to match the GP assumption for City Hall trip generation. Source: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2007 In summary, the currently entitled uses in Block 600 (i.e., 195 hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of health club, retail, and office uses) proposed for transfer to Block 500 equate to 339 PM peak hour trips. These 339 trips would match the amount of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by a new 72,000 sf City Hall plus another 205,161 sf of office use. Therefore, the proposed transfer of development rights would not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exceed, Either Individually or Cumulatively, a Level of Service Standard Established By the County Congestion Management Agency for Designated Roads or Highways The General Plan EIR identifies that all Congestion Management Plan arterials in the City would continue to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS E or better) with implementation of the 2006 General Plan. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result In A Change In Air Traffic Patterns, Including Either An Increase In Traffic Levels Or A Change In Locations That Results In Substantial Safety Risks As previously addressed in this Addendum, the four sub -areas are in the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport. The ALUC has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. Additionally, the four sub -areas are within the AELUP Height Restriction Zone. Within this zone, notice to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required for construction or alteration to any building more than 200 feet above ground level. Prior to construction or alteration of a building more than 200 feet above ground level a Determination of No Hazard F: \USERS \PLNN Shared \PA5 \PAS- 2007 \PA2007 - 1511200742 -11 =Dreft Addendum- 111907.d. 3 -42 Environmt Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR must be obtained from the FAA. A determination of No Hazard is the FAA's independent finding that a proposed structure will not pose a hazard to air navigation. The PC Text requires that any structure above 200 feet will be forwarded to the FAA for their independent analysis. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the seventy of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. As set forth in the General Plan EIR, impacts to John Wayne Airport operations with implementation of the 2006 General Plan are less than significant. Substantially Increase Hazards Due To A Design Feature (e.g., Sharp Curves Or Dangerous Intersections) Or Incompatible Uses (e.g., Farm Equipment) The General Plan EIR notes that site - specific projects are not addressed in the 2006 General Plan. As such, it would speculative to determine if any particular project would be designed in a manner to cause safety hazards. The General Plan EIR does identify that none of the circulation improvements identified in the EIR would introduce safety hazards and would not result in significant impacts. With respect to the four sub- areas, as currently developed areas, it is expected that future development consistent with the 2006 General Plan would use the existing roadway system and as such would not cause safety hazards. Any traffic improvements for the Project are consistent with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR, and as noted above, would not result in significant impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in Inadequate Emergency Access As previously addressed in this Addendum, the General Plan EIR notes that increased population and development could result in congested traffic conditions. The 2006 General Plan identifies policies to ensure that the city's Emergency Management Plan is regularly updated, provides for efficient and orderly citywide evacuation, and ensures that emergency service personnel are knowledgeable of the relevant response plans for the City. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that traffic impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant with mitigation. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the seventy of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result In Inadequate Parking Capacity The General Plan EIR does not identify Newport Center as an area of the City with limited parking availability. The North Newport Center Project, as with other projects in the City, would be required to comply with parking requirements identified in the City's Municipal Code. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with Adopted Policies, Plans, Or Programs Supporting Alternative Transportation (e.g., Bus Turnouts, Bicycle Racks) The 2006 General Plan Circulation Element includes policies related to transportation systems management, transportation demand management, etc. These policies encourage alternative modes of transportation. The General Plan EIR notes that implementation of the 2006 General Plan will not result in significant impacts. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions F.kUSERS \PLM& haredlPA's1PAs- 200TPA2007- 151 2007 -12 -71 CCDra M&ndum 111907.dw 3-43: : Envtronmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The following mitigation would also be required for the Project: 1. At MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road, the Applicant shall construct a third eastbound left -turn lane. The intersection would operate at LOS D with the recommended improvement. This improvement is consistent with the General Plan. Consistent with the TPO, this improvement will be completed early in the development phasing (i.e., before issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building [other than a parking structure]) constructed as part of the Project, but in no event later than 60 months from the operative date of the Development Agreement. 2. The Applicant shall work with the City on design and development of circulation enhancements in the North Newport Center area, consistent with the General Plan Circulation Element, including widening of Avocado Avenue between San Miguel Drive and San Nicolas Drive, dedication of public right -of -way and enhancement of San Miguel Drive between MacArthur Boulevard and Avocado Avenue, and installation of traffic signals on Newport Center Drive. Level of Sianificance After Mitigation At the two other impacted intersections (Goldenrod Avenue at Coast Highway and Marguerite Avenue at Coast Highway), there are no feasible improvements available, a fact which has been recognized and accepted in the 2006 General Plan and General Plan EIR which accepts LOS E at these two intersections. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that traffic impacts related to intersections, Congestion Management Plan arterials, air traffic patterns, design hazards, emergency access, and parking would be less than significant with mitigation. No feasible mitigation has been identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce impacts to freeway mainlines and ramps; this impact remains significant and unavoidable: Finding of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan ,EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the seventy of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. F: UI SERSWL"hamd%PN's1PAs- ZDOAPA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CCZmft Mdendum111907.dm 3-44 Emaronmf Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR 3.15 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR. It identifies that implementation of the proposed General Plan Update may have a significant adverse impact on utilities and service systems if it would result in any of the following: • Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of water supply or wastewater facilities, or new energy or natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts • Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new and expanded entitlements needed • Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board • Would the project be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs • Would the project fail to comply with applicable federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Utility and service system impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Require or Result in the Construction and/or Expansion of Water Supply or Wastewater Facilities, or New Energy or Natural Gas Production or Transmission Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental impacts Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available To Serve the Project from Existing Entitlements and Resources, or Are New and Expanded Entitlements Needed Water Supply and Treatment The General Plan EIR notes that buildout of the 2006 General Plan could require the construction of new and /or expanded water treatment plants or water conveyance systems, and that water demand may exceed existing water entitlements. Three sources provide water service to the City of Newport Beach: the City, Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD), and Mesa Consolidated Water District (MCWD). Water supplied by the City is purchased from two sources. Groundwater is purchased from the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and imported water is purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). The water supply assessment conducted for the General Plan EIR assumed full buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses, inclusive of Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Page 4.14 -20 of the General Plan EIR states: MWDOC, the City's provider of imported water, IRWD, and Mesa have each indicated they can accommodate the additional demand from the proposed General Plan Update in addition to future growth assumed in the respective F: WSERSIPLMShered \PA's1PAs- 200TPA2007- 7572007 -12 -11 CQCraft Addwdum- 11190.dm 3.45 Env/Nnm( L- Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. UWMPs [Urban Water Management Plans]. In addition, the implementation of conservation measures would be required on a project- specific basis and water shortage contingency plans would further reduce additional water demand. Finally, future development is required to adhere to Section 10910 of the California Water Code. Therefore, the cumulative impact to water supply would be less than significant. In addition to MWDOC, IRWD and Mesa, OCWD projects that there would be sufficient groundwater supplies to meet any future demand requirements in Newport Beach 2e The General Plan EIR concluded that there is sufficient water supply to meet the needs of the City. The General Plan EIR also addressed potential affects of new development on groundwater supplies and concluded that impacts will be less than significant due to conservation policies in the 2006 General Plan. The City's Water Supply Plan accounted for the demand associated with buildout of the 2006 General Plan land uses. The 2006 General Plan includes policies to conserve water and reduce potential impacts to groundwater supply. Citywide, projects inclusive of development in the four sub -areas are required to comply with the City's fair share requirements and with General Plan Update policies on water conservation. Compliance makes impacts less than significant. The General Plan EIR states: "...any request for service resulting from new development would be subject to a site- specific evaluation of the existing water system's capacity to service the development. if improvements to the existing water system are required or additional facilities are needed, the property developer would be required to pay its fair share of the cost of all or portions of the needed improvements "29 General Plan Update goals and policies promote water conservation and limit water consumption. As such, impacts were found to be less than significant. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR states that Additional development accommodated under the proposed General Plan Update would increase water use within the City, thus increasing the need for water treatment services... [the Metropolitan Water District] MWD can meet 100 percent of the City's imported water needs until the year 2030 ... any request for service resulting from new development would be subject to a site - specific evaluation of the existing water system's capacity to service the development. If improvements to the existing water system are required or additional facilities are needed, the property developer would be required to pay its fair share of the cost of all or portions of the needed improvements.30 Impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant because General Plan Update Policy LU 2.8 directs the City to accommodate land uses that can be adequately supported by infrastructure, including water treatment and conveyance facilities. As such, adequate water infrastructure would be provided for all development assumed in the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of the four sub - areas. The General Plan EIR finds that "._.because future development under the proposed General Plan Update would be required to adhere to existing regulations and the proposed policies identified above, no impact would result." (See 4.14 -30) The Project 28 [bid., page 4.14 -8. z Ibid., page 4.14 -17. 30 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update, July 26, 2006, page 4.14 -17. F:wseas PLNSharedkaaswns- 20a7\PA 07.151U 7 -i2 -1i COOreit nddwdu�lI 1907.doc : 3-46 Environme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR. is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Natural Gas Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) provides natural gas service for the City of Newport Beach. The General Plan EIR states: Any expansion of service necessitated by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would be in accordance with SCGC's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. Because the natural gas demand projected for the proposed General Plan Update would not exceed available or planned supply, new infrastructure would not be required to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no impact would result 31 The Project is expected not to have a significant impact on natural gas supplies because natural gas demand projected for General Plan buildout, inclusive of the four sub - areas, would not exceed available or planned supply and because new infrastructure would not be needed to serve the four sub- areas. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exceed Wastewater Treatment Requirements of the Applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Require or Result in the Construction and /or Expansion of Water Supply or Wastewater Facilities, or New Energy or Natural Gas Production or Transmission Facilities, the Construction of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Impacts Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available To Serve the Project from Existing Entitlements and Resources, or Are New and Expanded Entitlements Needed Sewer Systems Wastewater from the City's sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). The General Plan EIR identifies that a majority of the City's sewage flow is pumped to the OCSD Plant No. 2; flows from the portion of the City north of the Corona del Mar Freeway (State Rout 73) are pumped to Plant No. 1. The General Plan EIR states: ...policies under the proposed General Plan Update require the renovation of all older sewer pump stations and the installation of new plumbing according to most recent standards, and implementation of the Sewer System Management Plan and Sewer Master Plan. Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update policies requires adequate wastewater facilities and conveyance systems to be available to the City residents. Therefore, impacts to the wastewater treatment facilities associated with increased growth in the City would be less than significant 31 Ibid., page 4.14 -50:. 32 Ibid., page 4,14 -32. F: U8ERSIPLtASM . dTNs1PAS- 20071PA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 C=.ft Md nd.m111907.d. 3-47 Envftnme Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update OR Impacts from implementation of the 2006 General Plan, inclusive of the Project, are expected to have a less than significant impact to sewer systems because implementation of the Sewer System Management Plan and Sewer Master Plan, in conjunction with General Plan policies relating to sewer systems, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Would the Project be Served by a Landfill with Insufficient Permitted Capacity to Accommodate the Project's Solid Waste Disposal Needs Would the Project Fail to Comply With Applicable Federal, State, and Local Statutes and Regulations Related to Solid Waste Solid Waste Disposal As noted in the General Plan EIR, the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill serves the City, and states: The increase in solid waste generated by the development under the proposed General Plan Update would not exceed capacity of the landfill. In addition, AB 939 mandates the reduction of solid waste disposal in landfills. Consequently, this analysis assumes a worst -case scenario, as it is anticipated that at least approximately 50 percent of the estimated increase in solid waste generation could be diverted (or approximately 10,830 tons /year). Therefore, the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill would have sufficient capacity to serve the increased development within the City under the proposed General Plan Update Citywide buildout under the 2006 General Plan assumptions would not have an impact on solid waste generation or disposal at the Bowerman Landfill. However, on a cumulative basis, the General Plan EIR "without approved specific plans for substantial expansion of the landfill facilities that serve the County, solid waste generation from approved and foreseeable cumulative projects in the project area vicinity would exacerbate regional landfill capacity issues in the future. °34 Cumulative impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in Fashion Island, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that all utility and service system impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the exception of cumulative impacts to landfill capacity; this impact remains significant and unavoidable. " Ibid., page 4.14 -44. . 36 Ibid., page 4.14 -45. f:1 USEPZPLN 'ShamMPA's1PAS- 200nPA2007- 15112007 -12 -11 CCMXAAtlE.tlu 111977.tl 3-48 Environ" Addendum to City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update EIR Findina of Consistency With General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the North Newport Center Project does not propose substantial changes to the project; no substantial changes would occur which would require major revisions to the General Plan EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of the General Plan EIR. F::IUSERSIPL%Sh8aMPA'e1PA - 200TPA2007. 15112007 -12.11 Ccomf(Addendun ll 1907.do 3-49 EnWronmf APPENDIX A TRAFFIC STUDIES i FINAL City of Newport Beach NORTH NEWPORT CENTER TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared by: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2223 Wellington Avenue, Suite 300 Santa Ana, California 92701 -3161 (714) 667 -0496 November 6, 2007 I NORTH NEWPORT CENTER TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE TRAFFIC STUDY A project comprised of 430 residential dwelling units in Block 600, 205,161 square feet (sf) of office space in Block 500, and 75,000 sf of retail shopping center space in Fashion Island is proposed within Newport Center. In addition, a total of 42,036 sf of existing office, restaurant, and health club uses will be removed from Block 600. ANALYSIS A Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) traffic study was conducted for the proposed project. A total of 40 intersections within the City including five intersections on Newport Center Drive (the interior ring road around Fashion Island) were examined using the City's required TPO procedure. This procedure includes both a one percent test and, where necessary, an intersection capacity utilization (ICI) analysis. Consistent with the City's TPO analysis guidelines, the project is analyzed under short- range conditions (existing volumes plus a regional growth factor and approved projects) without and with cumulative projects (i.e., projects reasonably expected to be complete within one year after project completion which are located within the City of Newport Beach or its sphere of influence). Trip Generation Distribution and Analysis The applicable trip rates and incremental trip generation for the proposed project is presented in Table 1. The increase in traffic includes a credit for the proposed removals of existing uses. The proposed project is forecast to generate a net increase over existing of 348 trips in the AM peak hour, 311 trips in the PM peak hour, and 2,399 trips daily. For trip distribution, an internal capture rate of 10 percent was utilized for the residential and retail uses. This rate was determined based on ITE's recommended procedure (see calculations in Appendix) and is consistent with the City's General Plan traffic study, which also utilizes 10 percent for mixed use areas. For the office space, a five percent internal capture rate was utilized. North Newport Center 1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc Table 1 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY Land Use Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ADT In Out Total In Out Total TRIP RATES TE Residential DU 0.06 0.28 034 0.24 0.14 0.38 4.18 Quality Restaurant TSF 0.66 0.15 0.81 5.02 2.47 7.49 89.95 Shopping Center TSF 0.19 0.12 0.31 0.77 0.84 1.61 16.79 Office (Regression E * TSF 0.95 0.13 1.08 0.19 0.93 1.12 7.07 Health Club TSF 0.51 0.70 1.21 2.07 1.98 4.05 32.93 TRIP GENERATION Existing Uses to be Removed Block 600 Quality Restaurant 16.4 TSF 11 2 13 83 41 123 1,479 Office 8.3 TSF 8 1 9 2 8 10 59 Health Club 17.3 TSF 9 12 21 36 34 70 570 Total Credit -28 -15 43 -121 -83 -203 -2,108 Proposed Uses Block 500 Office 1205.2 TSF 1 195 27 222 39 191 230 1,451 Block 600 Residential 430DU 26 120 146 103 60 163 1,797 Fashion Island 9 Shopping Ctr 75.0 TSF 14 9 23 58 63 121 1 259 Total Proposed Trips 235 156 391 200 314 1 514 4,507 NET INCREASE 207 141 348 79 231 311 2,399 * Trip rates per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equations to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rates based on the square footage increment (206 TSF). North Newport Center 2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc A separate trip assignment was prepared for each of the three separate, uses (retail/shopping center, residential, and office) in the proposed project. These assignments, shown by individual uses in Figures A -1 through A -3 in the Appendix, are basically as follows: 1. North on MacArthur Boulevard 20 -40 percent 2. North on Jamboree Road 15 -30 percent 3. West on Coast Highway 15 -30 percent 4. East on Coast Highway 10 percent One Percent Analysis The results of the TPO One Percent Analysis are listed in Table 2. This analysis identifies the intersections where the project adds one percent or more to the background peak hour volume, in which case a more vigorous capacity analysis is performed. Opening year for the project is assumed to be 2009; therefore, the project year for this analysis is 2010. Examination of Table 2 reveals that 39 study intersections showed increases of one percent or greater of existing- plus - approved or existing -plus- approved- plus - cumulative volumes during the AM or PM peak hour. As a result, further analysis is required and a peak hour ICU analysis was conducted for the 39 locations. ICU Analysis The results of the ICU analysis are presented in Table 3. A significant project impact is defined as an increase of .01 or more in the ICU value at an intersection that reaches LOS "E" or "F ". Examination of the results shows that the project causes a significant impact at three locations under existing- plus - approved- plus - cumulative conditions. These three locations with their respective with - project ICU values are: Intersection AM Project Increment PM Project Increment 19. MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road .73 .040 .93 .027 34. Goldenrod Avenue and Coast Highway .91 .006 .85 .005 34. Marguerite Avenue and Coast Highway .98 .006 .92 .006 North Newport Center 3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing ordinance Traffic Study 0170801po.doc I Table 2 SUMMARY OF ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS Intersection AM Peak Hour Project Volumes Less Than 1% of Peak Hour Volumes NB SB EB WB w/o Cumulative w /Cumulative 1. MacArthur & Campus 8 20 0 0 No No 2. MacArthur & Birch 8 20 20 0 No No 3. MacArthur & Von Karman 8 20 0 0 No No 4. Jamboree & Campus 8 20 0 0 Yes Yes 5. Jamboree & Birch 8 20 0 0 Yes Yes 6. MacArthur &Jamboree 8 20 8 20 No No 7. Bayview &Bristol South B 0 0 32 0 No No 8. Jamboree & Bristol North 29 20 0 0 No No 9. Jamboree & Bristol South B 26 20 31 0 No No 10. Jamboree & Bayview 30 52 0 0 No No 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff)University 35 52 0 0 No No 12. Jamboree & Bison 42 53 0 1 No No 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Fotd 42 54 0 0 No No 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 0 54 0 42 No No 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 1 0 0 17 No No 16. Jamboree & Coast Highway 0 17 30 15 No No 17. MacArthur & Bison 33 61 6 21 No No 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon 39 80 0 0 No No 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 0 82 40 0 No No 20. MacArthur & San Miguel 1 0 11 7 No No 21. MacArthur & Coast Highway 0 11 2 19 No No 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 35 0 54 7 No _ No 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 36 0 49 4 No No 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills 0 9 0 0 No No 25. Avocado & San Miguel 49 8 10 9 No No 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highway 0 0 11 18 No No 27. Newport & Coast Highway 0 10 11 18 No No 28. Riverside & Coast Highway 0 0 22 26 No No 29. Tustin & Coast Highway 0 0 22 26 No No 30. DoverBa shore & Coast Highway 0 9 22 32 No No 31. Ba side & Coast Highway 0 0 31 32 No No 32. Newport Center & Coast Highway 0 9 29 1 No ' No 33. Avocado & Coast Highway 0 7 28 18 No No 34. Goldenrod& Coast Highway 0 0 14 19 No No 35. Marguerite & Coast Highway 0 0 14 19 No No 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 0 0 2 1 No No 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center 1 2 0 0 No No 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa 6 30 0 0 No N0 39. Newport Center & San Miguel 3 17 2 0 ' No No 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center 0 1 0 10 No No North Newport Center 4 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study.. Cont. Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 017080tpo.doc Table 2 (Cont.) SUMMARY OF ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS Intersection PM Peak Hour Project Volumes Less Than 1% of Peak Hour Volumes NB SB EB WB w/o Cumulative w /Cumulative 1. MacArthur & Campus 21 6 0 0 No No 2. MacArthur & Birch 21 6 0 0 No No 3. MacArthur & Von Karman 21 6 0 0 No No 4. Jamboree & Campus 21 6 0 0 Yes Yes 5. Jamboree & Birch 21 6 0 0 No No 6. MacArthur & Jamboree 21 6 21 6 No No 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) 0 0 18 0 Yes Yes 8. Jamboree & Bristol North 58 6 0 0 No No 9. Jamboree & Bristol South B 28 6 15 0 No No 10. Jamboree & Bayview 57 25 0 0 No No 11. Jamboree & EastblufFjUniversity 59 25 0 2 No No 12. Jamboree & Bison 62 27 0 5 No No 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford 62 32 0 0 No No 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 0 32 0 62 No No 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 6 0 0 5 Yes Yes 16. Jamboree & Coast Highway 0 5 13 31 No No 17. MacArthur & Bison 84 21 3 11 No No 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon 86 28 0 2 No No 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 0 30 87 0 No No 20. MacArthur & San Miguel 4 0 9 0 Yes Yes 21. MacArthur & Coast Highway 0 3 15 2 Yes Yes 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 14 0 32 48 No No 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 59 0 10 14 No No 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills 6 0 0 0 Yes Yes 25. Avocado & San Miguel 10 58 1 0 No No 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Highwav 0 0 8 15 Yes Yes 27. Newport & Coast Highway 0 4 8 15 Yes Yes 28. Riverside & Coast Highway 0 0 13 27 Yes Yes 29. Tustin & Coast Highway 0 0 13 27 No Yes 30. DoverBa shore & Coast Highway 0 1 13 37 No Yes 31. Ba side & Coast Highway 0 0 13 37 No No 32. Newport Center & Coast Highway 0 0 7 17 Yes Yes 33. Avocado & Coast Highway 0 48 2 0 No No 34. Goldenrod & Coast Highway 0 0 18 2 Yes Yes 35. Marguerite & Coast Highway 0 0 18 2 No Yes 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 0 0 9 9 No No 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center 9 9 0 0 No No 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa 26 15 0 0 No No 39. Newport Center & San Miguel 10 0 16 0 No No 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center 1 9 0 0 No No North Newport Center 5 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc Table 3 ICU SUMMARY Location Existin Existing + Growth + Approved Existing + Growth + Approved + Project Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative Existing + Growth + Approved+ Cumulative + Project AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1. MacArthur & Campus .50 .74 .51 .74 .51 .74 .53 .74 .53 .74 2. MacArthur & Birch .62 .75 .64 .77 .64 .77 .67 .79 .67 .79 3. MacArthur & Von Karman .32 .74 .33 .76 .33 .76 .38 .80 .38 .81 5. Jamboree & Birch .56 .64 .58 .67 .58 .67 .60 .70 .60 .71 6. MacArthur & Jamboree .68 .76 .71 .79 .71 .80 .78 .85 .78 .86 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) .57 .66 .59 .67 .59 .67 .59 .67 .59 .67 8. Jamboree & Bristol North B .57 .53 .58 .56 .59 .56 ^ .59 .59 .60 .59 9. Jamboree & Bristol South (EB) .66 .67 .68 .70 .68 .71 .70 .74 .70 .75 10. Jamboree & Ba iew .36 .51 .38 .54 .39 .54 .40 .56 .41 .57 11. Jamboree & University .57 .59 .60 .63 .61 .63 .64 .69 .64 .69 12. Jamboree & Bison .50 .56 .52 .60 .53 .61 .57 .64 .58 .65 13. Jamboree & Ford .65 .69 .68 .73 .69 .74 .72 .80 .73 .81 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .57 .58 .60 .63 .61 .64 .64 .67 .65 .68 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .49 .70 .51 .73 .52 .73 .55 .77 .56 .77 16. Jamboree & Coast H .66 .69 .69 .74 .69 .75 .77 .89 .77 .89 17. MacArthur & Bison .60 .66 .61 .67 .62 .68 .64 .71 .65 .71 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Cyn .72 .78 .73 .79 .74 .81 .78 .86 .78 .87 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65 .82 .67 .85 .69 .87 .71 .90 .73 .93* 20. MacArthur & San Miguel .44 .71 .44 .73 .45 .73 .47 .77 .47 .77 21. MacArthur & Coast H .71 .64 .73 .66 .74 .66 .84 .79 .85 .79 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29 .28 .29 .28 .31 .29 .29 .28 .32 .30 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .31 .44 .32 .46 .34 .47 .35 .50 .37 .51 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills .38 .61 .38 .62 .38 .62 .40 .65 .40 .65 25. Avocado & San Miguel .48 .76 .48 .77 .51 .78 .48 .78 .52 .79 26. Superior/Balboa & Coast H .70 .72 .73 .79 .73 .79 .75 .86 .75 .86 27. Newport & Coast H .77 .68 .80 .73 .80 .73 .82 .77 .83 .77 28. Riverside & Coast H .73 .79 .79 .84 .79 .85 .82 .88 .82 .89 29. Tustin & Coast H .73 .59 .79 .63 .80 .63 .82 .69 .83 .70 North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study Cont. . 6 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 017080tpo.doc Table 3 (cont) ICU SUMMARY Location Existin Existing + Growth + Approved Existing + Growth + Approved + Project Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative +Project AM PM AM PM AM _PM AM PM AM PM 30. Dover & Coast H .67 .74 .70 .79 .71 .79 .73 .84 .74 .85 31. Ba side & Coast H .73 .64 .79 .72 .79 .73 .81 .76 .82, .77 32. Newport Center & Coast H .36 .53 .37 .55 .37 .55 .46 .62 .46 _62 33. Avocado & Coast H .49 .60 .50 .62 .53 .62 .60 .72 .62 .73 34. Goldenrod & Coast H .73 .68 .75 .70 .76 .71 .91 .87 .92* .87 35. Marguerite & Coast H .79 .73 .81 .75 .82 .76 .97 .91 .98 .92* 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 .14 .23 37. Santa Cmz & Newport Center .12 .21 .12 .21 .12 .22 .12 .21 .12 .22 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .15 .25 .15 .25 .16 .24 .16 .26 .16 .26 39. Newport Center & San Miguel .22 .41 .22 .41 22 .41 .22 .42 .23 .42 40. Fashion Island & Newport Center .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 .22 .43 * Indicates significant project impact Level of service ranges: .00-.60 A .61-30 B .71-.80 C .81-.90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F North Newport Center Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 7 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 017080tpo.doc CONCLUSION In summary, it is concluded that the project causes three study locations to exceed the TPO standard of LOS "D ". At MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road, the addition of a third eastbound left -turn lane is recommended as mitigation. The intersection will operate at LOS "D" with the recommended improvement. This improvement is consistent with the General Plan. At the two other impacted intersections (Goldenrod Avenue at Coast Highway and Marguerite Avenue at Coast Highway), there are no feasible improvements available, a fact which has been recognized and accepted in the General Plan which accepts LOS "E" at these two intersections. The intersections along Newport Center Drive currently operate at LOS "A" during the AM and PM peak hours. With the addition of project traffic, these intersections will continue to operate at LOS "A,. North Newport Center 8 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing OrdinanceTraffc Study 017080tpo.doc APPENDIX A North Newport Center A -1 Austin -Foust Associates, loc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc Table A -1 APPROVED AND CUMULATIVE PROJECTS SUMMARY Approved Projects Fashion Island Expansion Newport Lexus Tem lebat Yahm Expansion Birch Medical Office Complex Ford Redevelopment Saafar Fine Indian Cuisine CIOSA — Irvine Project St. Mark Presbyterian Church Newport Dunes St. Andrews Presbyterian Church 1401 Dove Street Corporate Plaza West 494/496 Old Newport Boulevard Mariner's Mile Gateway 401 Old Newport Boulevard Land Rover NB Service Center N ort Technolo Center OL A Church Expansion 1901 Westchff Sur 'cal Center 2300 Newport Boulevard Hoag Hospital Phase IB Cumulative PrAieets Mariners Church Ne ort Ride Exodus Communi Center and Tarbut V'Torah Ex anion Hoa Health Center Newport Coast North Newport Center A -2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpo.doc Figure A -1 GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION - RESIDENTIAL Newport Center Development A -3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpoFigA -l.dwg Figure A -2 GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION - RETAIL Newport Center Development A-4 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 017080tpoFigA -2.dwg Figure A -3 GENERAL PROJECT DISTRIBUTION - OFFICE Newport Center Development A -5 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Phasing Ordinance Traffic Study 0170SOtpoFigA -3.dwg 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than f % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1361 54 30 0 1445 Southbound 1905 76 26 0. 2007 Eastbound 993 0 5 0 998. Westbound 1367 0 6 0 1373 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak t Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-6 14 21 20 6 10 0 14 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Intersection: 1. MacArthur & Campus Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional. Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1000 40 16 0 1056 11 8 Southbound 1478 59 25 0 1562 16 20 Eastbound 1323 0 10 0 1333 13 0. Westbound 368 0 2 0 370. 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than f % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1361 54 30 0 1445 Southbound 1905 76 26 0. 2007 Eastbound 993 0 5 0 998. Westbound 1367 0 6 0 1373 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak t Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-6 14 21 20 6 10 0 14 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis A -7 Intersection: 2. MacArthur 8 Birch Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average WinterlSpring 2007 Peak f Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach - Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1892 57 11 0 1960 20 6 Southbound 1094 33 26 0 1153 12 20 Eastbound 554. 0 7 0 561 6 0 Westbound 232 0 0 0 232 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak I Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1318 40 17 0 1375 14 21 Southbound 2306 69 28 0 2403 24 6 Eastbound 525 0 14 0 539 5 0 Westbound 937 0 2 0 939 9 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. = =s Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -7 I %o Traffic Volume Analysis A -8 Intersection: 3. MacArthur & Von Kaman Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Direction Volume. Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1903 76 9 0 1988 20 8 Southbound 627 25 14 0 666 7 20 Eastbound 155 0 5 0 160 2 0 Westbound 302 0 3 0 305 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. => Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1014 41 16 0 1071 11 21 Southbound 1097 44 18 0 1159 12 6 Eastbound 640 0 15 0 655 7 0 Westbound 899 0 8 0 907 9 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. => Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -8 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Eastbound Intersection: 4. Jamboree & Campus 0 2 0 1088 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Westbound 769 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 774 8 0 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1520 61 26 0 1607 16 8 Southbound 2134 85 46 0 2265 23 20 Eastbound 290 0 4 0 294 3 0 Westbound 845 0 3 0 848 8 0 _> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2025 61 45 0 2151 22 21 Southbound 2413 97 42 0 2552 26 6 Eastbound 1086 0 2 0 1088 11 0 Westbound 769 0 5 0 774 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be Jess than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -9 1% Traffic Volume Analysis A -10 Intersection: 5. Jamboree & Birch Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected. Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1648 66 28 0 1742 17 8 Southbound 2051 82 57 0 2190 22 20 Eastbound 194 0 0 0. 194 2 0 Westbound ` 7 0 0 0 7 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound is" 74. 52 0 .1970. 20 21 Southbound 2346 94 45 0 2485 25 6 Eastbound 509 0 1 0 510 5 0 Westbound 14 0 0 0 14 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -10 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -11 Intersection: 6. MacArthur & Jamboree Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 7 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1648 49 28 0 1725 17 8 Southbound 2051 62 42 0 2155 22 20 Eastbound 194 6 35 0 235 2 8 Westbound 7 0 56 0 63. 1 20. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. �> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1844 55 36 0 1935 19 21 Southbound 2346 70 77 0 2493 25 6 Eastbound 509 15 47 0 571 6 21 Westbound 140 45 0 59 16 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analos is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -11 A -12 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 ' Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 9 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 480 0 0 0 460 5 0 Southbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound. 3107. 0 78 0 3165 32 32 Westbound 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 641 0 0 0 641 ' 6 0 Southbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound 3057 0 80 0 3137 31 .18 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be lass than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -12 PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2849 114 70 0 3033 30 58 Southbound 1971 79 54 0 2104 21 6 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -13 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB) Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Psak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound ` 3370 135 52 0 3557 36 29 Southbound 1050 42 51 0 1143 11 20 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be I% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2849 114 70 0 3033 30 58 Southbound 1971 79 54 0 2104 21 6 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume.. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -13 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound Intersection: 9. Jamboree R Bristol South (EB) 8 20 .Eastbound. 2831 0 78 0 .2909 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak t Hour Growth Peak t Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak f Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 22 28 Southbound_. 1241 50 52 0 1343 13 AM PEAK PERIOD Eastbound 3273 0 80 0 3353 34 Northbound 2187 87 75 0 2349 23 26 Southbound 675 27 51 0 753 8 20 .Eastbound. 2831 0 78 0 .2909 29 31 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be l %or greater of Projected AM Peak l Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK. PERIOD Northbound 1958 78 118 0 2154 22 28 Southbound_. 1241 50 52 0 1343 13 6 Eastbound 3273 0 80 0 3353 34 15 Westiwund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -14 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -15 Intersection: 10. Jamboree & Bayview Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1935 58 75 0 2068 21 30 Southbound 2006 60 51 0 2117 21 52 Eastbound 88 0 0 0 88 1 0 Westbound 100 0 0 0 100 1 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 1758 53 118 0 1929 19 57 Southbound 2383 71 52 0 2506 25 25 Eastbound $99 0 0 0 .399 4 0 Westbound 170 0 0 0 170 2 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -15 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff /University Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average WintedSpring 2007 Peak 1 Hour < Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1718 52 70 0. 1840 18 35 Southbound 1669 50 113 0 1832 18 52 Eastbound 534 0 1 0 535 5 0. Westbound 618 0 5 0 623 6 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated . to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak t Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 1678 50 123 0 1851 19 59 Southbound 2477 74 109 0 2660 27 25 Eastbound 351 0 0 0 351 40 Westbound 438 0 10 0 448 4 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than .1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -16 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 1807 54. 108 0 1969 Southbound 2302 69 107 0 2478 Eastbound 102 Intersection: 12. Jamboree 8 Bison 1 0 103 Westbound 464 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 470 Peak l Hour Approved Cumulabve Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1547 46 60 0 1653 17 42 Southbound 1993 60 105 0 2158 22 53 Eastbound 187 0 0 0 187 2 0 Westbound 319 0 5 0 324 3 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 1807 54. 108 0 1969 Southbound 2302 69 107 0 2478 Eastbound 102 0 1 0 103 Westbound 464 0 60 470 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -17 20 62. 25 27 1 0 5 5 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 i A -t8 Intersection: 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff /Ford Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved .Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1762 53 70 0 1885 19 42 Southbound 1769 53 105 0 1927 19 54 .Eastbound. 742 0< 9 0 751 8 0 Westbound 522 0. 12 0 534 5 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. i Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2355 71. 125 0 2551 26 62 Southbound 2225 67 94 0 2386 24 32 Eastbound 533 0 4 0 537 5 0 i Westbound 373 0 4 0 377 4 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. - Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 i A -t8 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 14. Jamboree 8 San. Joaquin Hills 1929 58 275 0 2262 23 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 350. 0 0 0. 350 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 . Westbound Existing Regional. Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach - Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 7 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume. .Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Southbound 1929 58 275 0 2262 23 54 .Eastbound. 350. 0 0 0. 350 4 0 . Westbound 182 0 38 0 220 2 42 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated . to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1800 54 243 0 2097 21 0 Southbound 2415 72 255 0 2742 27 32 Eastbound 253 0 12 0 265 3 ` 0 Westbound 295 0 98 0 393 4 62 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -19 1 %o Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 974 0 8 0 982 10 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -20 Intersection: 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peakt Hour Approved Cumulative - Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peaks Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1554 47 53 0 1654 17 1 Southbound 1392 42 123 0 1557 16 0 Eastbound 73 0. 6 0 79 1. 0 Westbound 146. 0. 6 0 152 2 17 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1246 37 81 0 1374 14 6 Southbound 2100 63 88 0. 2251 23 0 Eastbound 38 0 3 0 41 0 0 Westbound 974 0 8 0 982 10 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -20 .Eastbound 3049 I% Traffic Volume Analysis 89 0 3229 32 Westbound Intersection: 16. Jamboree & Coast Hwy 38 33 0 1323 13 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average WintedSpdng 2007 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Peak .1 Hour Approved Cumulative Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 488 15 1 0 504 5 0 Southbound 1101 33 106 0 1240 12 17 .Eastbound 3049 91 89 0 3229 32 Westbound 1252 38 33 0 1323 13 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Northbound 398 PM PEAK PERIOD 12 3 0 413 30 15 4 0 Southbound. 2060 62 85 0 2207 22 5 Eastbound 2438 73 121 0 2632 26 13 Westbound 2323 70 63 0 2456 25 31 Project PM Tragic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -21 Westbound 770 0 1 0. 771 8 11 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -22 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 17. MacArthur & Bison Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2817 85 2 0 2904 29 33 Southbound 2357 71 5 0 2433 24 61 Eastbound 604 0 7 0 611 6 6 Westbound 694 0 2 0 696 7 21 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be t % or greater of Projected AM Peak t Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2829 85 19 0 2933 29 84 Southbound 3252 98 28 0 3378 34 i 21 Eastbound 597 0 8 0 605 6 3 Westbound 770 0 1 0. 771 8 11 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -22 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -23 Intersection: 18. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2108 63 8 0 2179 22 39 Southbound 2465 74 11 0 2550 26 80 Eastbound. 426 0 4 0 430 4 0. Westbound 1775 0 10 0 1785. 18 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2877 86 33 0 2996 30 86 Southbound 3151 95 23 0 3269 33 28 Eastbound 387 0 2 0 389 4 0 Westbound 992 0 12 0 1004 10 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. __> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -23 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -24 Intersection: 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average WintedSpring 2007 Peak1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume .Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1652 50 19 0 1721 17 0 Southbound 2520 76 43 0 2639 26 82 .Eastbound 591 0 8 0 599 6 40 .Westbound 750_ 0. 8 0 758 8 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Anaysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2016 ` 60 46 0 2122 21 0 Southbound 2628 79 54 0. 2761 28 30 Eastbound 1062 0 55 0 1117 11 87 Westbound" 878 0 8 0 886 9 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -24 .Eastbound 190 0 < 5 0 195 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis 11 Westbound 426 0 1 0 427. 4 7 Intersection: 20. MacArthur & San Miguel Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. AM PEAK PERIOD PROJECT: Northbound 1883 56 8 0 1947 19 1 Southbound 1765 53 7 0 1825 18 0 .Eastbound 190 0 < 5 0 195 2 11 Westbound 426 0 1 0 427. 4 7 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1376 41 11 0 1428 14 4 Southbound 2017 61 11 0 2089 21 0 Eastbound 1535 0 29 0 1564 16 9 Westbound 4780 12 0 490 5 0 __> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be lass than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -25 PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. Southbound 1832 55 4 0 1891 19 3 Eastbound 1864 56 13 0 1933 19 15 Westbound 1929 58 10 0 1997 20 2 __> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -26 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour-. Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 908 27 3 0 938 9 11 Eastbound 1842 55 10 0 1907 19 2 Westbound ` 1986. ` 60 ` 12 0 2058 21 19 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. - Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. Southbound 1832 55 4 0 1891 19 3 Eastbound 1864 56 13 0 1933 19 15 Westbound 1929 58 10 0 1997 20 2 __> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -26 I% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -27 Intersection: 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 72 0 4 0 76 1 35'. Southbound 55 0 2 0 57 1 0' Eastbound 748 0 2 0 750 8 54 Westbound 495 0 2 0 497 5 7. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of. Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 469 0 0 0 469 5 14 i Southbound 72 0 2 0 74 1 0 Eastbound 578 0 2 0 580 6 32 Westbound 586 0 2 0 588 6 48 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -27 4% Traffic Volume Analysis Eastbound 428 0 20 0 448 4 49 Westbound 1032 0 26 0 1058 - 11 4 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Intersection: 23. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills Northbound 567 0. 67 0 634 6 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 98 '0 0 0 98. 1 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 729 0 26 0 755 8 10. Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak t Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: Northbound 108 0 26 0 134 1 36 Southbound 115 0 0 0 115 1 0 Eastbound 428 0 20 0 448 4 49 Westbound 1032 0 26 0 1058 - 11 4 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. A -28 PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 567 0. 67 0 634 6 59 Southbound 98 '0 0 0 98. 1 0 Eastbound 729 0 26 0 755 8 10. Westbound 580 b 64 0 644 6 14 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak t Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -28 1 %Traffic Volume Analysis Eastbound 729 0 2 0 731 7 0 Westbound 936. 0. 4 0 940 9 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Intersection: 24. San Miguel &San Joaquin Hills Northbound 720 0 28 0 748 7 6 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 0 Eastbound 959 0 0 0 959 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 Westbound 1115 ' 0 16 0 1131 ' 11 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 % of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour`Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 322 0 0 0 322 3 0. Southbound 485 0 0 0 485 5 9 Eastbound 729 0 2 0 731 7 0 Westbound 936. 0. 4 0 940 9 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -29 PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 720 0 28 0 748 7 6 Southbound 423 0 15 0 4384 0 Eastbound 959 0 0 0 959 10 0 Westbound 1115 ' 0 16 0 1131 ' 11 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -29 Westbound 1089. 0 0 0 1089 11 9 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 891 0 0 0 891 9 10 Southbound 372 0 0 0 372 4 58 Eastbound 724 0 22 0 746 7 1 Westbound 742 0 16 0 758 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -30 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 25. Avocado & San Miguel 118 0 0 0 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2003 Eastbound 208 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 208 2 10 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project .Approach Peak 1 Hour .Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 392 0. 0 0 392 4 49 Westbound 1089. 0 0 0 1089 11 9 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 891 0 0 0 891 9 10 Southbound 372 0 0 0 372 4 58 Eastbound 724 0 22 0 746 7 1 Westbound 742 0 16 0 758 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -30 Southbound 118 0 0 0 118 1' 8 Eastbound 208 0 0 0 208 2 10 Westbound 1089. 0 0 0 1089 11 9 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 891 0 0 0 891 9 10 Southbound 372 0 0 0 372 4 58 Eastbound 724 0 22 0 746 7 1 Westbound 742 0 16 0 758 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -30 1`Yo Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 849 34 28 0 911 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 535 0 10 0 545 Southbound 1138 0 162 0 1300 Eastbound 1649 66 73 0 1788 Westbound 2446 98 62 0 2606 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 9 18 5 0 13 0 18 8 26 15' PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -31 Intersection: 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Psak l Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 618 0 31 0 649 6 0 Southbound 479 0 26 0 505 5 0 Eastbound. 3468 139 168 0 3775 38 11 Westbound 849 34 28 0 911 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 535 0 10 0 545 Southbound 1138 0 162 0 1300 Eastbound 1649 66 73 0 1788 Westbound 2446 98 62 0 2606 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 9 18 5 0 13 0 18 8 26 15' PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -31 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -32 Intersection: 27. Newport & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average WintedSpring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 653 20 49 0 722 7 10 .Eastbound 2562 77 7 0 2646 26 11 Westbound 1098. 33 27 0 1158 12 18. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be t% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 0 0. 0 0 0.. 0 0... Southbound .1087 33 118 0 1238. 12 4 Eastbound 1534 46 77 0 1657 17 8 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -32 A -33 1% Traffic, Volume Analysis Intersection: 28. Riverside & Coast Hwy Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 % of Projected Project Approach - Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour -Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour .Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 Southbound 401 0 2 0 403 4 0 Eastbound 2392 96 94 0 2582 26 22 Westbound 1309 52 130 0 1491 15 26 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 47 0 0 0 47 0 0 Southbound. 524 0 2 0 526 5: 0 Eastbound 1817 73 181 0 2071 21 13 Westbound 2523 101 134 0 2756 28 27 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -33 1 %Traffic Volume Analysis Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-34 Intersection: 29. Tustin & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved. Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak i Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 52 0 0 0 52 1 0 .Eastbound. 2268 91 86 0. 2445 24 22 Westbound 1276 51 55 0 1382 14 26 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> .Project AM Traffic is estimated to be I% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 7 0 0 0 7 0 0 Southbound 85 0 0 0 85 1 0 Eastbound 1587 63 91 0 1741 17 13 Westbound 2509 100 103 0 2712 27 27 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-34 Westbound 1720 52 61 0 1833 18 32 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound ' 119 0 0 0 119 1 0 Southbound Eastbound Westbound 1310 0 1630 49 3341 100 41 0 1351 118 0 1797 92 0 3533 14 1 18 13 35 37 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. . Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -35 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 30. Dover /Bayshore & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 7 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 74 0 0 0 74 1 0 Southbound 976 0 24 0 1000 10 9 Eastbound 2421. 73 81 0 2575 26 22 Westbound 1720 52 61 0 1833 18 32 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound ' 119 0 0 0 119 1 0 Southbound Eastbound Westbound 1310 0 1630 49 3341 100 41 0 1351 118 0 1797 92 0 3533 14 1 18 13 35 37 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. . Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -35 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Eastbound 3170 127 71. 0 3368 34 31 Westbound 1483 59 39 0 1581 Intersection: 31. Bayside & Coast Hwy Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. Peak1 Hour Approved Cumulative PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peakt Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO AM PEAK PERIOD 2010 Northbound 446 0 4 0 450 5 0 Southbound 46 0 62 0 108 1 0 Eastbound 3170 127 71. 0 3368 34 31 Westbound 1483 59 39 0 1581 16 32 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 523 0 5 0 528 5 0 Southbound 68 0 100 0 .168 2.. 0 Eastbound 2419 97 91 0 2607. 26 13 Westbound 3129 125 56 0 3310 33 37 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -36 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy Eastbound 1905 57 10 0 1972 20 29 Westbound 1447 43 16 0. 1506 15 1. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be l % or greater of Projected AM Peak I Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average WintedSpdrig 2007 Northbound ` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 7. 0 Eastbound 1874 56 26 0 1956. Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 128 0 9 0 137 1 9 Eastbound 1905 57 10 0 1972 20 29 Westbound 1447 43 16 0. 1506 15 1. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be l % or greater of Projected AM Peak I Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -37 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound ` 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 680 0 34 0 T14 7. 0 Eastbound 1874 56 26 0 1956. 20 7 Westbound 2041 61 13 0 2115 21 17 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -37 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 I % Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound 143 0 0 0 143 1 7 Eastbound 1480 59 6 0 1545 < 15 28 Westbound 1398 56. 15 0 1469. 15 18 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Intersection: 33. Avocado & Coast Hwy 0 0 0 ` 362 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Southbound 705 0 Psak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 706 7 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 7 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 17 0 AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 305 0 0 0 305 3 0 Southbound 143 0 0 0 143 1 7 Eastbound 1480 59 6 0 1545 < 15 28 Westbound 1398 56. 15 0 1469. 15 18 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 362 0 0 0 ` 362 4 0 Southbound 705 0 1 0 706 7 48 Eastbound 1684 67 11 0 1762 18 2 Westbound 1603 64 7 0 1674 17 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -38 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -39 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Psak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 133 0 0 0 133 1 0 Southbound 59 0 1 0 60 1 0 Eastbound 1187 47 6 0 1240 12 14. Westbound 1990. 80 10 0 2080 21 19 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound' 135 0 0 0 135 1 0 Southbound 75 0 0 0 75 1 0 Eastbound 1782 71 8 0 1861 19" 18 Westbound 1742 70 7 0 1819 16 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -39 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Eastbound 1233 49 5 0 1267 13 18 Westbound 1821 73 10 0 1904 19 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour TrafflcVolume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD. Northbound 241 0 0 0 241 2 0 Southbound 254 0 0 0 254 3 0 Eastbound 1799 72 7 0 1878 19 14 Westbound 1460 58 7 0 1525 15 19 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. _ => Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-40 1% Traffic Volume Analysis. Intersection: 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2006 Peak.1 Hour Approved. Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 249 0 0 0 249 2 0 Southbound 243 0 0 0 243 2 0 Eastbound 1233 49 5 0 1267 13 18 Westbound 1821 73 10 0 1904 19 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour TrafflcVolume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD. Northbound 241 0 0 0 241 2 0 Southbound 254 0 0 0 254 3 0 Eastbound 1799 72 7 0 1878 19 14 Westbound 1460 58 7 0 1525 15 19 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. _ => Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-40 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 223 Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 223 Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1 %of Projected Project . Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour -Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume PEAK PERIOD Northbound 223 0 0 0 223 2 0 Southbound 126 0 0 0 126 1 0 Eastbound 227 0 0 0 227 2 2. Westbound ` 13 0 0 0 13 0 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. => Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Ut(liution (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 291 0 0 0 291 3 0. Southbound 289 0 0 0 289 3 0 Eastbound 267 0 0 0 267 3 9 Westbound 91 0 0 0 91 1 9' Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -41 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A-42 Intersection: 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 69 0 0 0 69. 1 1. Southbound 166 0 0 0 166 2 2 Eastbound 117 0 0 0 117 1 ,0 Westbound 181. 0 0 0 181 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 274 0 0 0 274 3 9 Southbound 255 0 0 0 255 3 9 Eastbound 235 0 0 0 235. 2 0 Westbound 299 0 0 0 299 3 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. __> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-42 1% Traffic Volume Analysis A-43 Intersection: 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume `AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 122 0 0 0 122 1 6 Southbound 313 0 0 0 313 3 30 .Eastbound 85 0 0 0 85 1 0 Westbound 274 0 0 0 274 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 278 0. 0 0 278 ` 3 26.' Southbound 392 0 0 0 392 4 15 Eastbound 214 0 0 0 214 2 0 Westbound 298 0 0 0 298 3 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-43 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic .Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 376 0 0 0 376 Southbound. Eastbound Westbound 388 0 Intersection: 39. Newport Center& San Miguel 0 388 390 0 0 Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 685 0 0 0 Peak Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 322 0 0 0 322 3 3 Southbound 130 0 0 0 130 1 17 .Eastbound 69 0 0 0 69 1 2 Westbound 377 0 0 0 377 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic .Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 376 0 0 0 376 Southbound. Eastbound Westbound 388 0 0 0 388 390 0 0 0 390 685 0 0 0 ' 685 4 10 4 0 4 16 7 0.. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 ;E:; I% Traffic Volume Analysis A -45 Intersection: 40. Newport Center/Fashion Island & Newport Center Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour. Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 501 0 0 0 501 5 0 Southbound 15 0 0 0 15 0 1 Eastbound 229 0 0 0 229 2 0. Westbound 121 0 0 0 121 1 10 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be I % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 431 0 0 0 431 4 1 Southbound 156 0 0 0 156 2... 9 Eastbound 342 0 0 0 342 3 0 Westbound 511 0. 0 0 511 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -45 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Intersection: 1. MacArthur & Campus 40 16 150 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 8 Southbound Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 59 25 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1000 40 16 150 1206 12 8 Southbound 1478 59 25 58 1620 16 20 Eastbound 1323 0 10 0 1333 13 0 Westbound 368 0 2 0. 370 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estmated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak. t Hour Traffic, Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1361 54 30 101 1546 15 21 Southbound .1905 76 26 155 2162 22. 6 Eastbound 993 0 5 0 998 10 0 Westbound 1367 0 6 0 1373 14 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-46 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 2. MacArthur& Birch Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 I Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1892 57 11 150 2110 21 8 Southbound 1094 33 26 58 1211 12 20 Eastbound 554 0 7 0 561 6 , 0 Westbound 232 0 0 0 232 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1318 40 17 101 1476 15 21 Southbound 2306 69 28 155 2558 26 6 Eastbound 525 0 14 0 539 5 0 Westbound 937 0 2 0 939 9 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-47 1% Traffic Volume Analysis AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Intersection: 3. MacArthur& Von Karmen 76 9 168 2156 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Southbound 627 25 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 58 724 7 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak I Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume .Volume Volume Volume. Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1903 76 9 168 2156 22 8 Southbound 627 25 14 58 724 7 20 Eastbound. 155. 0 5 0 160 2 0 Westbound 302. 0 3 25 330 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Northbound 1014 PM PEAT( PERIOD 41 16 125 1196 12 21 Southbound 1097 44 18 155 1314. 13 6 Eastbound 640 0 15 0 655 7 0 Westbound 899 0 8 21 928 9 0 i Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. I PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-48 I % Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 845 0 3 0 848 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 8 0 Intersection: 4. Jamboree & Campus PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 45 119 2270 `. 23 21 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 2413 97 42 179 2731 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1520 61 26 173 1780 18 8 Southbound 2134 85 46 71 2336 23 20 Eastbound. 290 0 4 0 294 8 0 Westbound 845 0 3 0 848 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A49 PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 2025 81 45 119 2270 `. 23 21 Southbound 2413 97 42 179 2731 27 6 Eastbound 1086 0 2 0 1088 11 0 Westbound 769 0 5 0 774 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A49 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound 2051 82 57 71 2261 Intersection: 5. Jamboree & Birch 20 Eastbound. 194 0 0 0. 194 2 0 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2008 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Eastbound 509 0 1 0 510 AM PEAK PERIOD 0 Westbound 14 0 0 0 14 Northbound 1648 66 28 173 1915 19 8 Southbound 2051 82 57 71 2261 23 20 Eastbound. 194 0 0 0. 194 2 0 Westbound 7 0 0 0 7 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1844 74 52' 119 2089 21 21 Southbound 2346 94 45 '179 2664 27 6 Eastbound 509 0 1 0 510 5 0 Westbound 14 0 0 0 14 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 HourTraf6c Volume. _> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -50 1% Traffic Volume Analysis AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Intersection: 6. MacArthur & Jamboree 49 28 166 1891 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Southbound 2051 62 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 82 2237 22 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1648 49 28 166 1891 19 8 Southbound 2051 62 42 82 2237 22 20 Eastbound 194 6 35 174 409 4 8 Westbound 7. 0. 56 71 134 1 20. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic, Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1844 55 36 138 2073 21 21 Southbound 2346 70 77 176 2669 27 6 Eastbound 509 15 47 106 677 7 21 Westbound 14 0 45 179 238 2. 6 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -51 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -52 Intersection: 7. Bayview & Bristol South (EB) Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 480 0 0 0 480 5 0. Southbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound 3107 0 78 0 3185 32 32 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. _Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 641 0 0 0 641 6 0 Southbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound 3057 0 80 0 3137 31 18 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -52 1% Traffic Volume Analysis .Eastbound. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2849 114. 70 107 3140 31 58 Southbound 1971 79. 54 177 2281 23 6 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic . is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -53 Intersection: 8. Jamboree & Bristol North (WB) Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved .Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume .Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 3370 135 52 173 3730 37 29 Southbound 1050 42 51 51 1194 12 20 .Eastbound. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2849 114. 70 107 3140 31 58 Southbound 1971 79. 54 177 2281 23 6 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic . is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -53 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1958 7B. 118 107 2261. ` 23 28 Southbound 1241 50 52 177 1520 15... 6 Eastbound Westbound __> 3273 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 3353 34 15 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -54 Intersection: 9. Jamboree 8 Bristol South (EB) Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2187 87 75 173 2522 25 26 Southbound 675 27 51 51 804 8 20 .Eastbound 2831. 0 78 0 2909 29 31 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1958 7B. 118 107 2261. ` 23 28 Southbound 1241 50 52 177 1520 15... 6 Eastbound Westbound __> 3273 0 80 0 0 0 0 0 3353 34 15 0 0 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -54 Northbound 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 58 75 173 Intersection: 10. Jamboree & Bayview 22 30 Southbound Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 51 51 Peakl Hour Approved Cumulative 22 52 Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak l Hour Direction Volume. Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 0 100 1 0. AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1935 58 75 173 2241 22 30 Southbound 2006 60 51 51 2168 22 52 .Eastbound. 88 0 0 0 88 1 0. Westbound 100 0 0 0 100 1 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of. Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1758 53 118 107 2036 20 57 Southbound 2383 71 52 177 2683. 27 25 Eastbound 399 0 0 0 399 Westbound 170 0 0 0 170. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be Was than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 4 0 2 0 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -55 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -56 Intersection: 11. Jamboree & Eastbluff /University Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peakl Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional. Projects Projects .Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour - Growth. Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1718 52 70 248 2088 21 35 Southbound 1669 50 113 51 1883 19 52 Eastbound 534. 0 1 0 535 5 0. Westbound 618 0 5 ` 22 645 6 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. _ => Project AM Traffic is estimated to be I % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1678 50 123 1552006 20 59 Southbound 2477 74 109 177 2837 28 25 Eastbound 351 0 0 0 351 4 0 Westbound 438 0 10 80 528 5 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required: PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -56 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 319. 0. 5 37 361 Project AM Trafflc is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated . to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1807 54. 108 132 2101 Southbound 2302 69 107 257 2735 Eastbound 102 Intersection: 12. Jamboree & Bison 1 0 103 Westbound 464 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 23 493 Peak Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Psak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1547 46 60 2112 3765 38 42 Southbound 1993 60 105 73 2231 22 53 Eastbound 187 0 0 0 187 2 0 Westbound 319. 0. 5 37 361 Project AM Trafflc is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated . to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1807 54. 108 132 2101 Southbound 2302 69 107 257 2735 Eastbound 102 0 1 0 103 Westbound 464 0 6 23 493 4 1 21 62 27 27 1 0 5 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be Jess than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -57 1% Traffic Volume Analysis .Eastbound 742 0 9 18 769 8 0. Westbound 522 0 12 117 651 Intersection: 13. Jamboree & Eastbluff/Ford 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring ` 2007 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. . Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative PM PEAK PERIOD Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. AM PEAK PERIOD Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Northbound 1762 53 70 212 2097 21 42 Southbound 1769 53 105 62 1989 20 54 .Eastbound 742 0 9 18 769 8 0. Westbound 522 0 12 117 651 7 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. _> .Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. . PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2355 71 125 168 2719 27 62 Southbound 2225 67 94 .220 2606 26 32 Eastbound 533 0 4 63 600 6 0 Westbound 373 0 4 71 ' 448 4 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO i A -58 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -59 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Intersection: 14. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak .1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1313 39 163 178 1693 17 0 Southbound 1929 58 275 103 2365 24 54 .Eastbound 350 0 0 0 350 4 0 Westbound 182 0 38 34 254 3 42 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. - Project AM Traffic is estimated . to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1800 54 243 148 2245 22 0. Southbound 2415 72 255 232 2974 30 32 Eastbound 253 0 12 0 265 3 0 Westbound 295 0 98 20 413 4 62 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. i Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -59 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 15. Jamboree & Santa Barbara Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak t Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1554 47 53 17B 1832 18 1 Southbound 1392 42 123 94 1651 17 0 Eastbound 73 0 6 0 79 1 0 Westbound 146 0 6 0 152 2 17. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated . to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 1246 37. 91 148 1522 15 6 Southbound 2100 63 88 194 2445 24 0 Eastbound 38 0 3 0 41 0 0 Westbound 974 0 8 0 982 10 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A_60 1 %Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -61 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Intersection: 16. Jamboree R Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak l Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 468 15 1 0 504 5 0 Southbound 1101 33 106 94 1334 : 13 17 Eastbound 3049 91 89 120 3349 33 30 Westbound 1252. 38 33 471 1794 18 15. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 398 12. 3 0 : 413 4 0 Southbound 2060 62 85 '194 2401 24 5 Eastbound 2438 73 121 390 3022 30 13 Westbound 2323 70 63 317 2773 28 31 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -61 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -62 Intersection: 17. MacArthur& Bison Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume. Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2817 85 2 151 3055 31 33 Southbound 2357 71 5 49 2482 25 61 Eastbound. 604 0 7 11 622 6 6 Westbound 694 0 2 52 748 7 21 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2829 85 19 93 .3026. 30 84 Southbound 3252 98 28 170 3548 35 21 Eastbound 597 0 8 37 642 6 3 Westbound 770 0 1 - 32 803 8 11 Project PM Tragic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -62 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2877 86 33 145 3141 Southbound 3151 95 23 155 3424 Eastbound 387 0 2 54 443 Westbound 992 0 12 169. 1173 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 HourTrafic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO 31 86 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 28 4 0 12 2 Intersection: 18. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach - Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2108 63 8 183 2362 24 39 Southbound. 2465 74 11 45 2595 26 80 Eastbound 426 0 4 15 445 4 0. Westbound 1775. 0 10 222 2007 20 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2877 86 33 145 3141 Southbound 3151 95 23 155 3424 Eastbound 387 0 2 54 443 Westbound 992 0 12 169. 1173 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 HourTrafic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO 31 86 34 28 4 0 12 2 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 I A -63 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 750 0 8 191 949. 9 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2016 60 46 183 2305 23 0 Southbound. 2628 79 54 190 2951 30 30 Eastbound 1062 0 55 100 1217 12 Westbound 878 0 8 139 1025 10 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be I% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-64 87 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Intersection: 19. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak f Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak l Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1652 50 19 145 1866 19 0 Southbound 2520 76 43 99 2738 27 82 Eastbound 591 0 8 46 645 6 40 Westbound 750 0 8 191 949. 9 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2016 60 46 183 2305 23 0 Southbound. 2628 79 54 190 2951 30 30 Eastbound 1062 0 55 100 1217 12 Westbound 878 0 8 139 1025 10 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be I% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-64 87 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -65 Intersection: 20. MacArthur & San Miguel Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 % of Projected Project - Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 .Hour Peak Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1883 56 8 182 2129 21 1 Southbound 1765 53 7 142 1967 20 0 Eastbound 190 0 5 12 207 : 2 11 Westbound 426 0 1 0 427 4 7 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than t% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD :Northbound 1376 41 11 205 : 1633 16 : 4 Southbound 2017 61 11 182 2271 23 : 0 Eastbound 1535 0 29 37 1601 16 9 Westbound 478 0 12 0 490 5 0 =_> Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -65 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 21. MacArthur & Coast Hwy 0 Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 0 Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1%of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth. Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour -Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 908 27 3 152 1090 11 11 Eastbound 1842 55 10 145 2052 21 2 Westbound 1986 60 12 474 2532 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 25 19 PM PEAK PERIOD :Northbound 0: 0 0 0 0. 0 0 Southbound 1832 55 4 220 2111 21 3 Eastbound 1864 56 13 456 2389 24 15 Westbound 1929 58 10 286 2283 23 2 => Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A•66 Westbound 566 0 2 30 618. 6 48 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-67 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills'. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peakt Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peakt Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 72 0 4 0 76 1 35 Southbound 55 0 2 10 67 1 0 Eastbound 748 0 2 9 759 8 54. .Westbound 495. 0 2 41 538 5 7 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 469 0 0 0 469 5 14 Southbound 72 0 2 9 B3 1 0 i Eastbound 578 0 2 38 618 6 32 Westbound 566 0 2 30 618. 6 48 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A-67 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Eastbound 428 0 20 19 467 Intersection: 23. Same Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 49 Westbound 1032 0 26 91 1149. 11 4 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Wirder /Spring 2007 .Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Westbound 580 0 64 69 713 AM PEAK PERIOD 14 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Northbound 10B 0 26 11 145 1 36 Southbound 115 0 0 15 130 1 0 Eastbound 428 0 20 19 467 5 49 Westbound 1032 0 26 91 1149. 11 4 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 567 0. ` 67 42 676 ' 7 59 Southbound 98 0 0 12 110. 1 0 Eastbound 729 0 26 47 802 8 10 Westbound 580 0 64 69 713 7 14 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -68 Westbound 936 0 4 191 1131 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection: 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of. Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 PM PEAK PERIOD Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative 720 0 28 0 748 7 6 Southbound Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 % of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 322 0 0 0 322 3 0 Southbound 485 0 0 0 485 5 9 Eastbound 729 0 2 63 794 8 0 Westbound 936 0 4 191 1131 11 0. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of. Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 720 0 28 0 748 7 6 Southbound 423 0 15 0 438 4 0 Eastbound 959 0 0 216 1175 12 0 Westbound 1115 0 16 137 1268 ' 13 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A-69 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -70 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 25. Avocado & San Miguel Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2003 Peak.1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 392 0 0 0 392 4 49 Southbound 118 0 0 0 118 1 8 Eastbound 208 0 0 12 220 2 10 Westbound 1089 0 0 37 1126. 11 9 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. =_> .Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 891 0 0 0 891 9 10 Southbound 3720 0 0 372 4 58 Eastbound 724 0 22 37 783. 8 1 Westbound 742 0 16 22 780 8 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -70 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis A -71 Intersection: 26. Balboa/Superior & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 618 0 31 14 663 7 0 Southbound 479 0 26 52 557 6 0 Eastbound 3468. 139 168 102 3877 39 11 Westbound 849 34 28 231 1142 11 18 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. .. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD - Northbound 535 0 10. 15 ' 560 6 0 Southbound 1138 0 162 221 1521 15 0 Eastbound 1649 66 73 219 2007 20 8 Westbound 2446 98 62 142 2748 27 15 Project PM Traffic . is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. i Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -71 Eastbound 2562 77 7 67. 2713 1 %Traffic Volume Analysis 11 Westbound 1098 33 27 235 1393. 14 18 Intersection: 27. Newport & Coast Hwy Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1. Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. AM PEAK PERIOD PROJECT: Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 653 20 49 17 739 7 10 Eastbound 2562 77 7 67. 2713 27 11 Westbound 1098 33 27 235 1393. 14 18 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 00 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1087 33 118 85 1323 13 4 Eastbound 1534 46 77 238 1895 19 8 Westbound 241.1 72 14 145 2642 26 15 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 10/6 of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -72 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Westbound 2523 101 134 195 2953 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 30 27 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -73 Intersection: 28. Riverside 8 Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 Southbound 401 0 2 5 408 4 0 Eastbound 2392 96 94 89 2671 27 22 Westbound 1309 52 130 281 1772 18 26. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 47 0 0 D 47 0 0 Southbound 524 0 2 4 530 5 0 Eastbound 1817 73 181 327 2398 24 13 Westbound 2523 101 134 195 2953 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 30 27 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -73 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 29. Tustin & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 52 0 0 0 52 1 0 Eastbound. 2268. 91 86. 94 2539 25 22 Westbound 1276 51 55 280. 1662 17 26. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 7 0 0 0 7. 0 0 Southbound 85 0 0 0 85 1 0 Eastbound 1587 63 91 332 2073 21 13 Westbound 2509 100 103 197. 2909 29 27 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -74 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -75 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 Intersection: 30. Dover /Bayshore & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour - Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 74 0 0 0 74 1 0 Southbound 976 0 24 28 1028 10 9 Eastbound 2421 73 81 94. 2669 27 22 Westbound 1720 52 61 360 2193 22 32. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 %or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound - 119 0 0 0 119 1 0 Southbound 1310 0 41 83 1434 14 1 Eastbound 1630 49 118 332 2129 21 13 Westbound 3341 100 92 248 3781 38 37 => Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. i i i PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -75 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -76 Intersection: 31. Bayside & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour 'Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak9 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 446 0 4 0 450 5 0 Southbound 46 0 62 5 113 1 0 Eastbound 3170 127 71 116 3484 35 31 Westbound 1483 59 39 351 1932 19 32. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 523 0 5 0 528. 5 0 Southbound 68 0 100 4 172 2 0 Eastbound 2419 97 91 385. 2992 30 13 Westbound 3129 125 56 238 3548 35 37 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -76 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 32. Newport Center & Coast Hwy Existing. Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter/Spring 2007 .Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak I Hour Peak 1 Hour' Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume .Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 Southbound 128 0 9 0 137 1 9 .Eastbound 1905 57 10 156 2128 21 29 Westbound 1447. 43 16 469 1975 20 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 680 0. 34 0 714 7 0 Eastbound 1874 56 26 513 2469 25 7 Westbound 2041 61 13 317 2432 24 17 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -77 Eastbound 1480 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 6 156 .1701 17 Intersection: 33. Avocado & Coast Hwy Westbound 1398. 56 15 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 19 18 Peak1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 305 0 0 0 305 3 0 Southbound 143 0 0 0 143 1 7 Eastbound 1480 59 6 156 .1701 17 28. Westbound 1398. 56 15 469 1938 19 18 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 HourTraffic Volume. _ => Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 362 0. 0 0 362 4 0 Southbound 705 0 1 0 706 7 48 Eastbound 1684 67 11 513 2275 Westbound 1603 64 7 317 1991 - Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 23 2 20 0 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -78 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound. 75 p 0 0 75 Eastbound 1782 71 8 527 2388 Westbound 1742 70 7 317 2136 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 1 0 24 18 21 2 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -79 Intersection: 34. Goldenrod & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour _ Peak1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 133 0 0 0 133 1 0 Southbound 59 0 1 0 60 1 0 Eastbound 1187 47 6 159 1399 14 14 Westbound 1990 80 10 502 2582 26 19. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % a greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 135 0 0 0 135 1 0 Southbound. 75 p 0 0 75 Eastbound 1782 71 8 527 2388 Westbound 1742 70 7 317 2136 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 1 0 24 18 21 2 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -79 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2006 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peakt Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 249 0 0 0 249 2 0 Southbound 243 0 0 3 246 2 0 Eastbound 1233 49 5 159 1446 14 14 Westbound 1821 73 10 515 2419 2419 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. __> Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 241 0 0 0 241 2 0 Southbound 254 0 0 13 267 3 0 Eastbound 1799 72 7 527 2405. 24 18 Westbound 1460 58 7 324 1849 18 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection. Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -80 Southbound 126 0 0 0 126 Eastbound 227 0 0 0 227 Westbound 13 0. 0 0 13 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 291 0 0 0 291 Southbound 289 0 0 0 289. Eastbound 267 0 0 0 267 Westbound 91 0 0 0 91 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %, of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 1 0 2 2 0 1 3 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 3 0 3 9 Intersection: 36. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 9 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 223 0 0 0 223 2 0 Southbound 126 0 0 0 126 Eastbound 227 0 0 0 227 Westbound 13 0. 0 0 13 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 291 0 0 0 291 Southbound 289 0 0 0 289. Eastbound 267 0 0 0 267 Westbound 91 0 0 0 91 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 %, of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. 1 0 2 2 0 1 3 0 3 0 3 9 1 9 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -81 o oun Southbound 255 0 0 0 255 3 9 Eastbound 235 0 0 0 235 2 0 Westbound 299 0 - 0 0 299 3 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be Jess than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -82 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 37. Santa Cruz & Newport Center Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 Peakl Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects .Projected 1 % of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour -. Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 69 0 0 0 69 1 1 Southbound 166 0 0 0 166 2 2 Eastbound 117 0 0 0 117 1 0 Westbound 181 0 0 0 181 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. __> Project AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic. Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD N dhb d 274 0 0 0 274 3 9 o oun Southbound 255 0 0 0 255 3 9 Eastbound 235 0 0 0 235 2 0 Westbound 299 0 - 0 0 299 3 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be Jess than 1 % of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -82 Northbound 278 0 0 0 278 3 26 Southbound 392 0 0 0 392 4 15 Eastbound 214 0 0 0 214 Westbound 298 0 0 0 298 Project PM Traffic . is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -83 2 0 3 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2003 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Etdsting Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 122 0 0 0 122 1 6 Southbound 313 0 0 0 313 3 30 Eastbound. 85 0 0 0 85 1 0 Westbound 274 0 0 0 274 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 278 0 0 0 278 3 26 Southbound 392 0 0 0 392 4 15 Eastbound 214 0 0 0 214 Westbound 298 0 0 0 298 Project PM Traffic . is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO A -83 2 0 3 0 FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound 130 Intersection: 39. Newport Center & San Miguel 0 0 .130 1 17 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 0 0 0 69 Peakl Hour Approved Cumulative 2 376. 0 0 0 376 4 10 Southbound Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 322 0 0 0 322 3 3 Southbound 130 0 0 0 .130 1 17 Eastbound. 69 0 0 0 69 1 2 Westbound 377. 0 0 0 377 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Pmject AM. Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required.. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 376. 0 0 0 376 4 10 Southbound 388 0 0 0 388 4 0 Eastbound 390 0 0 0 390 4 16 Westbound 685 0 0 0 685 ' 7 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 A -84 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Southbound 156 0 0 0 Eastbound Intersection: 40. Newport Center /Fashion Island & Newport Center 0 0 0 Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2007 511 0 0 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects .Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 501 0 0 0 501 5 0 Southbound 15 0 0 0 15 0 1 Eastbound 229 0 0 0 229 2 0 Westbound 121_ 0. 0 0 121 1 10 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD .Northbound 431 0 0 0 431 4 1 Southbound 156 0 0 0 Eastbound 342 0 0 0 Westbound 511 0 0 0. 156 342 511 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. PROJECT: North Newport Center TPO FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2010 2 9 3 0 5 0 A -85 1. MacArthur 6 Campus Existing AM PK AM PKHOUR HOUR PM IN HOUR LANES LANES. CAPACITY VOL AMPKHOUR VOL PM PE HOUR 1 1600 55 LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C 955 .149* NBL 1 1600 53 .033 155 ..097* 37 .023 NBT 4 6400 897. .140* 1171 .183 SBT 4 NBR 1 1600 50 .031 35 .022 1600 301 S13L. 1 1600 261 .163* 131 .082 .144 338 SBT 4 6400 .918 .143 1108 .173* .141 ERR SBR '1 . 1600 . 299 ..181 666 .416 2 3200 EEL 2 3200 458 .143 336 .105* 227 .047 EST 3 4800.. 778 .180* 455 .137 .156. Right Turn Adjustment EBR 0 0 87 .153* 202 NBL 2 3200 43 .013* 132 .041 WBT 3 4800 225 .047 1080 .225* WBR. f 100 155 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .164* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .496 .7f Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK AM PKHOUR HOUR PM IN HOUR LANES LANES. CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 55 .034 157 .098* NBT 4 6400 955 .149* 1265 .198 NBR 1 1600 50 .031 37 .023 SBL 1 1600 261 .163* 131 .082 SBT 4 6400 998 .156 1181 ..185* SBR 1 1600 301 .188 669 .418 EBL 2 3200 461 .144 338 .106* EST 3 4800 782 .181* 475 .141 ERR 0 0 89 204. 204 WBL WBL 2 3200 44 .014* 135 .042 WBT 3 4800 227 .047 1082 .225* WBR f 100 100 156 .156. Right Turn Adjustment Right Turn Adjustment SBR SBR .153* [OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .507 .7f A -86 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK AM PH HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 55 .034 157 .098* NBT 4 6400. 947 ..148* 1345 1244 .194 NBR 1 1600 50 .031 37 .023 SBL 1 1600 261 .163* 131 .082 SBT 4 6400 978 .153 1175. .184* SIR 1 1600 301 .188 669 .418 BBL 2 3200 461 .144 338 .106* EBT 3 4800 782 .181* 475 .141 EBR. 0 0 89 204. 204 WBL WBL 2 3200 44 .014* 135 .042 WBT 3 4800 227 .047 1082 .225* WBR f 100 100 156 156 Right Turn Adjustment Right Turn Adjustment SBR SIR .154* Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C ' VOL - V/C NBli 1 1600 55 .034 157 ,098* NBT 4 6400 1097 .171* 1345 ,210 NBR 1 1600 50 .031 37 .023 SBL 1 1600 261 .163* 131. .082 SBT 4 6400 1036 .162 1330 .208* SBR 1. 1600 301 .188 669. .418 .EBL 2 3200. 461 .144 338 .106* EST 3 4800 782 .181 *. 475 .141 - EBR 0. 0 89 204. WBL 2 3200 44 .014* 135 .042 WBT 3 4800 227 .047 1082 .225* WBR f 100 156 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .130* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 .767 1. MacArthur 6 campus Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAKES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 55 .034 157 .098* NBT 4 6400 1105 .173* 1366 .213 NBR 1 1600 50 .031 37 .023 SBL 1 1600 261 .163* 131 .082 SBT 4 6400 1056 .165 1336 .209* SBR 1 1600 301 .188 669 .418 EBL 2 3200 461 .144 338 .106* EBT 3 4800 782 .181* 475 .141 ERR 0 0 89 204 WBL 2 3200 44 .014* 135 .042 NET 3 4800 227 .047 1082 .225* WBR f 100 156 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .129* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .531 .767 A -B7 2. MacArthur 6 Birch Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES. CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 47 .029 113 ..071* NBT 3 4800 1741 .363* 1183 .246 NBR f 104 22 SBL 1 1600 146 ..091* 69. .043 SET 4 6400 .771 .148. 2067.350* SBR 0 0 177 170 EEL 0 0 123 294 EBT 3 4800. 372 .115* 207 .109* EBR 0 0 59 24 WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064 EBT 2 3200 164 .051* 694 .217* WBR f 47 140 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing .TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .620 .767 Existing + Growth+ Approved + Project AM. PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071* NET 3 4800 1811 .377* 1256 .262. NBR f 104 22 SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043 SBT 4 6400 835 .159. 2156 .365* SHE 0 0 182 177 EBL 0 0 128 306 EBT 3 , 4800 372 .117* 208 .113* SBR 0 0 61 26 WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064 WET 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218* WBR f 47 140 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing YTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..636 .767 A -88 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 ..071* NBT , 3 4800. 1803 ..376* 1235. .257. NBR f 104 22 SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043 SBT. 4 6400 815 .156 2150 .364* SEE 0 0 ' 182 177 EBL 0 0 128 306 EBT 3 4800 372 .117 * 208 ..113* EBR 0 0 61. 26 MEL 1 1600 21 .013 . 103 .064 WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218* WBR f 47 140 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .635 766 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cuoulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071* NUT 3 4800 1953 .407* 1336 .278 NBR f 104 22 SBL 1 1600 146 .091* 69 .043 SBT 4 6400 873 .165 2305 ..388* SBR 0 0. 182 177 EBL 0 0. 128 306. EBT 3 4800 372. .117* 208 :113* EBR 0 0 61. 26. WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 .064 WBT 2 3200 164 .051* 696 .218* WBR f 47 140 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..666 .79 2. MacArthur 6 Birch Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PH PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 113 .071* NET 3 4800 1961 .409* 1357 .283 11 HER f 104 22 SBL 1 1600 146 ,091* 69 .043 SET 4 6400 893 .168 2311 .389* SBR 0. 0 182 177 EEL 0 0 128 306 EBT 3 4800. 372 .'.117* 208. .113 *. EBR 0 0,.. 61 26 WBL 1 1600 21 .013 103 ..064. WET 2 .3200 164 .051* 696 ..218 *. WBR f 47 140 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .668 .791 A -89 3, MacArthur & Von Farman. Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 129 ..081 71 .044* NET 3 4800 974 _203* 789. .164 NBR f 801 800 155 155 SBL SBL 1 1600 36 .023* 34 .021 SBT 3 4800 394 .082 962 .200* HER f 199 197 105 101 EEL EEL 1 1600 35.022 144 137.086 EBT EBT 2 3200 84 .026* 222 .069* EBR f 36 36 283 281 WEL WBL 1 1600 102 .064* 682 .426* WET 2 3200 184 .058 152 .048 WBR f 16 16 65 65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .316 .739 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM IN HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 130. .081 75 .047* NET 3 4800 1029 .,214* 853. .178 NBR f .801 155 SBL 1 1600 36 .023* 34 .021 SBT 3 4800 441 .092 1020 .213* SBR f 199 105 EBL 1 1600 38 .024 144 .090 EBT 2 3200 86 .027* 228 .071+ EBR. f 36 283 WBL 1 ` 1600 104 .065* 686 .429* WET 2 3200 185 .058 156 .049 WBR f 16 65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .329 .760 A -90 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 130 .081 75 .047* NBT 3 4800 1021. .213* B32 .173` NBR f 801 155 SBL 1 1600 36 .023* 34 .021 SBT 3 4800 421 .088 1014 .211* SBR f 199 105 EEL 1 1600 38 .024 144 .090 EBT 2 3200 86 .027 *' 228 .071* ERR. f 36 283 WEL 1 1600 104 ..065* 686 .429 *. WET 2 3200 185 ..058. 156 .049. WBR f 16 65 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .328 .758 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cosulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR. LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V /C. NBL 1 1600. 130 .081 75 .047* NBT 3 4800 1171 .244* 933 .194 NBR f 819 179 SBL 1 1600 36 .023* 34 .021 SBT 3 4800 479 .100 1169 .244* SBR f 199 105 EEL 1 1600 38 .024 144 .090 EBT ` 2 3200 86 .027* 228 .071* EBR f 36. 283 WBL 1 1600 129 ` .081* 707 .442* WET 2 3200 185 .058 156 .049 WBR f 16 65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .375 : :.804 3. bacArt4nu a von Kaman Existing + GrovtA + Approved + Cumulative + Project AMPK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 130 .081 75 .047* NBT 3 4800 1179 .246* 954 .199 NBR f 819 179 SBL 1 1600 36 .023* 34 .021 SBT 3 4800 499 .104. 1175 .245* SBR f 199 105 EBL 1 1600 38 .024 144 .090 EBT 2 3200 86 .027* 228 .071* EBR f 36 283 WBL 1 1600 129 ..081* 707 .442* WBT 2 .3200 185 .058 156 ..049 WBR f 16 65 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .377 .805 A -91 S. Jamboree A Birch.. Existing I AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 ..135* MBT 3 4800 1372. .286 ,1625 .339 MBR 0 0 1 SRI 3 1600 SBL. 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004 SBT 3 4800 1589 .331* 1857 .387* SBR f 483 458 EBL 483 0 EBL 0 0 148 EBT 349 3200 EBT 2 ' 3200. 5 '.048* EBR 6 .111* ERR f.. 155 41. WBL 154 0 WBL 0 0 1 WBT 0 1600 WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009* WBR 0 0 4 Note: Assumes E/W Split 0 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .555 .642 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project I AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135* NBT 3 4800 1463 .305 1763 .368 NBR 0 0 1 3 SRI 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004 SBT 3 4800 1729 .360* 1982 .413* SBR f 459 483 EBL 0 0 148 349 EBT 2 3200 5 .048* 6 .111* EBR f 41 155 WBL 0 0 1 0 WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009* WBR 0 0 4 0 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing Existing + Regional Growth + Approve! AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135* NBT 3 4800 .1455 .303 1742 .364 NBR 0 0 1 3 SBL 1 1600 4. .003 6 .004 SBT 3 4800 1709 .358* 1976. .412* SBR f 459 483 BBL 0 0 148 349 EBT 2 3200 5 .048 *6:111* ERR. f 41 ..155 WBL 0 0 1 0 WBT 1 1600 2 ..004 *. 14 .009* WBR 0 0 4 0 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATIO4 .580 .667 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135* NBT 3 4800 1628 .339 1861 ;388 NBR 0 0 1 3 SBL 1 1600 4 .003 6 .004 SBT 3. 4800 1780 .371* 2155 .449* SBR f 459 483 EBL 0 0 148 349 EBT 2 3200 5. .048* 6 .111* EBR f. 41 155. WBL 0 0 1 0 WBT 1 1600 2 .004* 14 .009* WBR 0 0 4 0 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .584 ..668 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .595 A -92 .704 5. Jamboree s Bircb Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 275 .172* 216 .135* NBT 3 9800 1636. .391 1882 .393 NBR 0 0 1 3 SBL 1 1600 9 .003 6 .009 SBT 3 9800 1800 .375* 2161 .950* SBR f 959 ' 983 EBL 0 0 198 399 EBT 2 3200 5 '.098* 6 .111* EBR f 91 155 WBL 0 0 1 0 WBT 1 1600 2 .009* 19 .009* WBR 0 0 9 0 Nate: Assumes E/W Split Phasing AL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .599 6. MacArthur & Jamboree Existing AMPKHOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 214 .067 250 .078* NUT 3 4800 1689 .352* 539 .112 NBR 1 1600 482 .301 333 .208 SBL. 2 3200 85 .027* 208. .065 SBT 3 4800 304 .063 1479 .308* SBR f 97 256 EBL 2 3200 432 .135 199 .062 EBT 3 4800 989 .206* 864 .180* ERR f 215 51 i WBL 2 3200 313 .098* 612 .191* WBT 3 4800 632 .132 1026 .214 WBR f 183 103 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 222 .069 262 ..082* NBT 3. 4800. 1759 .366* 579 .121 NBR 1 1600 483 .302 333 .208 SBL 2 3200 93. .029 *. 230 .072 SBT 3 4800 334 .070 1557. :324* .SBR f 110 276 EBL 2 3200 446 .139 216 .068 EBT 3 4800 1039 .216* 920 .192* EBR f 215 51 WBL 2 3200 313 .098* 613 .192* WBT 3 4800 693 .144 :1092 .228 WBR. f 197 113. DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .683 .757 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .709 .79 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 222. .069 262 .082* NBT 3 4800 1767 .368* 600 .125 NBR 1 1600 483 .302 333 .208 i SBL 2 3200 93 .029* 230 .072 SBT 3 4800 354 .074 1563 .326* SBR f 110 276 EBL 2 3200 446 .139 216 .068 EBT 3 4800 1047 .218* 941 .196* ERR f 215 51 WBL 2. 3200 313 .098* 613 ..192* WBT 3 4800 713 .149 1098 .229 WBR f 197 113 DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .713 .796 A -94 Existing + Growth+ Approved+ Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL: V/C VOL, V/C NBL 2 .3200 222 .069 262 .082* NET 3 4800 1907 .397* 693 .144 NBR 1 1600 501 .313 357 .223. SBL 2 3200 93 .029* 230 .072 SBT 3 4800 410 .085 1715. .357* SBR f. 116 294 EBL 2 3200 465 .145 227 .071 EBT 3 4800. 1194 .249* 1015 .211* ERR f 215 51 WBL 2 3200 338 .106* 634 ' .198* WBT 3 4800 739 .154 1250 .260 WBR f 197 113 'OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .781 .84 6. MacArthur 6 Jamboree. TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .789 .855 A -95 7. Bayview A Bristol South(EB) Existing AM PH HOUR PM PH HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 4 6400 2709 .423* 2913 .455* EBR 1 1600 .398 .249 144 .090 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment HER .150* NBR .200* ORAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .573 .655 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200 I SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0 0 SHE 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0. 0 EBT 4 6400 2819 ,440* 3012 .471* EBR 1 .1600 .398 .249 144 ..090 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0. Right Turn Adjustment NBR ...150* .NBR .200* OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .590 A -96 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0. 0. 0 0 NBR 2 3200 480 .150 641 .200 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0 0 SHE 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 4 6400 2787 .435 *. 2994. .468* ERR 1 1600 398 .249. 144. .090` WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 0 HER 0 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment HER .150* NBR .200* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .585 .668 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 <. 0 0 NBR 2 3200. 480 .150 .641 .200 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 4 6400 2787. .435* 2994 .968* EBR 1 1600 398 .249 144 .090 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 0 HER 0 0 0 0 Right. Turn Adjustment NBR .150* NBR .200* 7. Bayview 6 Bristol South (EB) Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PH HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 2 3200 880 .150 691 .200 SBL 0 , 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR 0.. 0 0 0 EBL 0 0 0 0 EST 9 6800 2819 .890* 3012 .871* HER 1 1600 398 .299 199 .090 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment HER .150* HER .200* TGTAL CBPACITy GTILIEATION .590 .671 A -97 B. Jamboree 6 Bristol North (1B) Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C - NBL 2 3200 1287 ..402* 723 .226* NBT 2 3200 1391 .435 1293 .404 NBR f 692 833 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 2.5 6400 645 .164* 1216 .308* SBR 1.5 405 755 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST. 0. 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR. 0 0 0 0. PAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .566 .534 Existing .+ Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 1304 .408* 745 .233* NBT 2 3200 1491 .466 1414 .442 NBR f 713 870 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 2.5 6400 741 .179* 1323 .325* SBR 1.5— 406 757 i EBL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 PAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .587 .558 A -98 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 1304 .408* 745 .233* NIT 2 3200 1483 .463 1393 .435 NBR f 692 833 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 2.5 6400 721 :.178* 1317 .324* SBR 1.5 406 757 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0. 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .584 .557 Existing + Growth + Approved+ Cumulative AMPKHOUR PH PK HOUR LANES :CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 1304 .408* 745 .233* NBT 2 3200 1656 .518 1500 .469 NBR f 692 833 SBL 0 0 0 0 SBT 2.5 6400 772 .184* 1494 .352* SBR 1.5 406 757 EBL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 TAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .592 .585 B. Jamboree 6 Bristol North (NB) Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative+ Project AMPK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 1304 .408* 745 .233* NBT 2 3200 1664 .520 1521 .475 NBR f 713 870 SBL 0 0 0 0 SET 2.5 6400 792 .187* 1500 .353* SBR 1.5 406 757 EBL. 0 0 0 0 EBT 0 0 0. 0 EBR 0, 0, 0 0 NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 L CAPACITY UTILIZATION. .595 .586 A -99 9. Jamboree 6 Bristol South (EB) Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY- VOL 4/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 5 8000 2127 .273* 1043 .245 NBR 0 0 60 115 SBL 0 , 0 0 0 SET 3 : 4800 :675 .141. ..1241 .259* SBR 0, 0, 0 0 EEL 1.5 1229 .384* 973 {:4141* EST 1.5 4000 : 434 .271 1015. .414. EBR 2 3200 1160 .365 1285 .402.. NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 MAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .657 .671 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C MEL 0 0 0 : 0 MET 5 0000 2313 .297* 2063 .272 NBR 0 0 60 115 SBL 0 0 0 0 SET 3 4800 773 :.161 1349 .281* SBR 0 0 0 0 EEL 1.5 1232 .385* 981 1.4171* EST 1..5 4800 443 .277 1020 .417 EBR 2 3200 1265 .395 1368 .428 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .011* Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET - 5 8000 2287 .293* 2035 .269 NBR 0 0 60 115 SBL 0 0 0 0 SET 3. 4800 753 .157 1343 .280* SBR 0 0 0 0 EEL 1.5 1232 .305* 981 EST 1.5 .4800 444 .270 :1023 .418* EBR 2 :.3200 1233 .305 1350 .422 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0. 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .004* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .670 .702 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 5 8000 2460 .315* 2142 .282 NBR 0 0. 60 .115 SBL 0 0 0 0 SET 3 4000 804 .168 1520 .317* SBR 0 0 0 -0 EEL 1.5 1232 .385* 981 EST 1.5 4000 444 .278 3023 .418* HER 2 3200 1233 .385 1350. .422. WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 0 0 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .004* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..682 .709 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .700 A -100 .739 9. Jamboree 4 Bristol South (EB) Existing + Growth +.Approved + Cumulative + Project AM RE HOUR PM PH HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0. NBT 5 8000 2486 .318* 2170 .286 NBR 0 0 60 115 SBL 0 0 0 0 SET 3 4800 824 .172 1526 ..316* SBR 0 0 0 0 EBL 1.5 1232 .385* 981 {,417)* EBT 1.5 4800. 443 277 1020 417 EBR 2 3200 WBL 0 0 WET 0 0 NBR 0 0 Right Turn Adjustment TOTAL CAPACITY UTILI7J 1265 .395 1368 .428 0 0 0 0 0 0 EBR .011* LTION .703 .796 A -101 10. Jamboree 6 Bayview Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NEI, 1 1600 .119 ,.074 57 .036 NET : 4 6400 1760 .284* 1650 .266* NBR 0 0 56 51 1 SBL 1 1600 79 .049* 191 .119* SET 4 6400 1658 .259 2111 .330 SBR 1 1600 269 .168 81 .051 EBL 2 3200 34 .011 162 .051* .EBT: 1 1600. 12 .008* 11 .007 :. EBR 1 1600 42 .026 226 .141 WBL 1 1600 17 .011* 37 .023 WBT 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002* WBR 1 1600 79 .049 130 .081 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .004* EBR .070* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .356 .508 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Project. AM PK HOUR P14 PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL: 1 1600 119 .074* 57 .036 NBT 4 :6400 1918 .308 1875 .301* HER 0 '0 56 51 SBL 1 1600 79 .049 191 .119* SET 4 6400 1876 .293* 2316 .362 SBR 1 1600 269 .168 81 .051 EEL 2 3200 34 .011 162 .051* EBT 1 1600 12 .008* 11 .007 EBR 1 1600 42 .026. 226 .141 WBL 1 1600 17 .011* 37 .023 NET 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002* WBR 1 1600 79 .049 130 .081 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .067* Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 119 .074* 57 .036 NET 4 6400 1888 .304 1818 .292* NBR 0 0 56 51 SBL 1 1600 79 .049 191 .119* SET 4 6400 1824 .285* 2291. .358 SBR 1 1600 269 .168 81 .051 EEL 2 3200 34 .011 162 .051* EBT 1 .1600 12 .008* 11 .007 ERR: _ 1 :. 1600. 42 .026 .226 .141 WBL 1 1600 17 .011* ' 37 .023 WET 1 1600 4 ..003. 3 .002* WBR 1 1600 79 .049 130 .081 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .071* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .378 .535 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR' PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C ' VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 119: .074 57 .036 NBT 4 6400 2061 .331* 1925 .309* NBR 0 0. 56 51 SBL 1 1600 79 .049* 191 .119* SET 4 6400 1875 .293 2468 .386 - SBR 1 1600 269 .168 81 .051 EEL 2 3200 34 .011 162 .051* EBT 1 1600 12 .008* 11 .007 EBR. 1 1600 42 .026 226 .141 WBL 1 1600 17 .011* 37 .023 NET 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002* WBR 1 1600 79 .049 130 .081 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .004 *: EBR .079* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .386 .540 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .403 .560 A -102 10. Jamboree a Rayviev Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 119 .074. 57 .036 NET 4 6400 2091 .335* 1982 .318* NBR 0 0 56 51 SBL 1 1600 79 .049* 191 .119* SBT 4 6400 1927 .301 2493 .390 SBR 1 1600 269 .168 81 .051 EEL 2 3200 34 .011 162 .051* EBT 1 1600 12 .008* 11 .007 '. EBR 1 1600 42. .026 226 .141 WBL 1. 1600. 17 .011* 37 .023 WBT 1 1600. 4 .003 3 .002* WBR 1 1600 79 .049 130 .081 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .004* EBR .076 * . avc*w unrewaa: uiaLar vaa�m .yui .aoo I A -103 11. Jamboree 4 University Existing AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR LANES. CAPACITY. VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 71 '.099 38 .029* NET 3 9800 1957 .309* 1386 .289 NBR 1 1600 190 .119 259 .159 SBL 2 3200 61 .019* 155 .098 SET 3 9800 1295 .270 1896 .395* SBR 1 1600 313 .196 926 .266 EEL 1.5 393 223 EBT 0.5 3200 108 .157* 102 .102* EBR f 33 26 NEI, 1.5 295 216 WBT 1.5 9800 158 .099* 129 .072* WBR f 165 93 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .574 .593 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 71 ..099* 38 .029* NBT 3 9800 1600 .333 1601 .339 HER 1 . 1600 196 .123 263. .169 `SBL 2 3200 61 .019 157 .099 SBT 3 9800 1499 .312* 2085. .939* . SBR 1 1600 313 .196 926 .266.. EEL 1.5 393 223 EBT 0.5 3200 109 .157* 102 ..102 *. EBR f 33 26 WBL 1.5 296 226 WBT 1.5 9800 159 .095* 129 .079* WBR f 169 95 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .608 .634 A -104 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR. LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 71 .099.. 38 .029* NBT 3 9800 1570. .327* 1599- .322 NBR 1 1600 191 .119 ` 261 .163 SBL 2 3200 61 .019* 157 .099 SET 3 9800 1997 .301 2060 :929* SBR 1 1600 313 ..196 926 .266 EEL 1.5 393 223 EBT 0.5 3200 109 .157* 102 „102* EBR f 33 26 WBL 1.5 296 229 NET 1.5 9800 159 .095 *. 129 .079* WBR f 169 , 95 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .598 ..629 Existing + Growth +.Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 71 .099 38 .029* NET 3 9800 1793 .363* 1651 .399 NBR 1 1600 266 .166 309 .193 SBL 2 3200 61 .019* 157 .099 SET 3 9800 1998 .312 2237 ..966* SBR 1 1600 313 .196 926 .266 EEL 1.5 393 223 EBT 0.5 3200 109 .157* 102 .102* EBR. f 33 26. WBL 1.5 318 .099 309 .095* NET 1.5 9800 159 .099* 129 .081 WBR f 169 95 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .638 .687 11. Jamboree a University Existing + Growth + Approved + Comolative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL B/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 71 .099 38 .029* NET 3 4800 1773. .369* ,1708 ..356 NBR 1 1600 271 .169 311 .199 SBL 2 3200 61 ..019* 157 .099 SET 3 9800 1550 .323 2262 ..971* SBR 1 1600 313 .196 926 .266 EEL 1.5 393 223 EST 0.5. 3200. 109 .157* 102 .102* EBR f. 33 26 WBL 1..5 318 .099 306 .096* WET 1.5 .9800 159 .099* 129 .081 WBR f 169 95 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing )PAL CAPACITY UTILIEATION. ...644 .693 A -105.. 12. Jamboree 6 Bison Existing AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL - 0 0 0 3 0 1480 NBT 3 4800 1346, .322* 1669 .376* NBA 0 0 201 2 138 ` 200 ` SBL. 2. 3200. 196 ..061* 181 .057* SBT 3 4800 1601 .334 , 2003 ..417 SBR 1 1600 196 .123 118 .074 EBL 1 1600 116 .073* 67 .042 EBT 0 0 0 f 0 71 EBR f 35 71 2 35_ 146 WBL 2 3200 144 .045 273 .085* WHY 0 0 0 2 0 179 WBR 2 3200 175 .055 191 .060 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .009* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .465 .518 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Project AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBT 3 4800 1480 .352* 1883 .422* NBR 0 0 208 202 144 141 SBL 2 3200 ` 200 ` .063* 196 .061* SBT 3 4800 1803 ,.376. 2182 .455 SBR 1 1600 196 .123 118 ..074 EBL 1 1600 116 .073* 67 .042 EBT 0 0 0 0 1 1 PER f f. 71 71 35 35 WBL 2 3200 146 .046 281 .088* NET 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBR 2 2 179 .056 194 .061 Right Turn Adjustment Turn Adjustment WBR ,009* Existing + Regional. Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 , 0 0 NBT 3 4800 1444- .343* 1824, .409* NBR 0 0 202 141 SBL 2 3200 200 .063* 196 .061* SBT 3 4800 1750 .365 2155. .449 SHE 1 1600 196 .123 118 .074 EBL 1 1600 116 .073* 67 .042 EBT 0 0 0. 1 EBR. f 71 35 WBL 2 3200 145 .045 276 .086* WBT 0. 0 0 0 WBR 2 3200 179 ..056 194 .061 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .009 *' TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .488 .556 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 3 4800 1656 '.387* 1956 .437* NBR 0 0 202 141 SBL 2 3200 211 ` .066* 233 .073* SBT 3 4800 1812 .378 2375 .495 SBR - 1. 1600. 196 .123 118 .074 EBL 1 1600 .116. .073* 67 .042 EBT 0 0 0 1 ERR f. 71 35 WBL 2 3200 145 .045 276 .086* WHY 0 0 0 0 WBR 2 3200 216 .068.. 217 .068 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .018 *. TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .497 .571 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..544 .596 A -106 12. Jamboree 6 Bison TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .553 .611 A -107 13. Jamboree 6 Ford Existing AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 .364 ..114* 362 .113* NBT 3 4800 1300 .291 .1785 .415 NBR 0 0 90 SBL 200 1600 SBL 1 1600 61 .038 44 .020 SBT 3 .4800 1541 .321* 2132 .444* SBR 1. 1600. 167 .104 49 .031 EBL 1.5 66 232 EST 66 .041 EBT. 1..5 4800 239 '.098* 212 .066* EBR f 259 271 WBL 255 .111 WBL 1..5 185 131 .082 181 4800 WBT 1.5 4800 358 .112* 157 .070* WBR 1 1600 33 .021 35 .022 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 367 .115* 366 .114* NBT 3 4800. 1405 .313 1955 .452 NBR 0 0 99 213 1 SBL 1 1600 61. .038 45 .028 SBT. 3. 4800 1691 ..352* ,518* 2289 .477* SBR 1 1600 168 ..105 49 .031 EBL 1.5 233 .041 66 .041 EST 1.5 4800 244 .099* 212 :066* EBR f 274. 259 1.5 WBL 1.5 .111 133 ..083 185 1.5 WBT 1.5 4800 368 .115* 157 .071* WBR 1 1600 34 .021 35 :022 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .645 .693 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .681 .728 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LADIES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 367 .115* 366 .114* NBT 3 4800 1447 .322 2017 ..465 HER 0 0 99 213 SBL 1 1600 61 .038 45 .028 SBT 3 4000 1745 .364* 2321 .484* SBR 1 1600 160 .105 49 .031 EBL 1.5 233 66 .041 EBT 1.5 4800 244 .099* 212 .066* EBR f 274 259 WBL 1.5 133 .083 185 WBT 1.5 4800 368 .115* 157 .071* HER 1 1600 34 '.021 35 .022 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .693 .735 I:15I1F= Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative. AM PK HOUR PM RE HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C Vol V/C NBL 2 3200 376 .110* 371 .116* NBT 3 4800 1595 .356 2074 .486 NBR 0 0. 112 257 SBL 1 1600 67 .042 67 .042 SBT 3 4800 1747 .364* 2487 ,518* SBR 1. 1600. 168 ..105 49. .031. .EBL 1.5 233 66 .041 EST 1.5 4800 259 .103 *, 266 .083* EBR f 277 268 WBL 1.5 177 .111 210 WBT 1.5 4800 419 .131* 190 .083* WBR 1 1600 56 .035 48 .030 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ...716 .800 13. Jamboree BPord' TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .727 .807 A -109 14. Jamboree 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..636 ..672 A -110 AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 .1600 41 .026 67 .042 NET 3 4800 1143 .238* 1598 .333* NBR f 145 129 SBL 135 3200 SBL 2 3200 665 .208* 443. .138* SBT 3 4800 1227 .256 1855 .386 SBR f 117 37 EBL 117 258 EBL 1.5 163 258 .081* 162 .051* EST 1..5 4800 33 .021 34 .021 EBR f 59 WBL 57 144 WBL 1.5 205 128 :040* 189 .059* WBT 1.5 4800 12 _008 39 .024 WBR 1 1600 42 .026 67 .042 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing DOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .567 .581 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..636 ..672 A -110 AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043 NBT 3 4800 1253 .261* 1760 .367* NBR 'f 134 134 .145 145 SBL SBL 2 3200 724 .226* 504 .158* SBT 3 .4800 1407 .293 2012 .419 SBR f 37 37 117 117 EBL EBL 1.5 258 258. .081* 163 .051* EBT 1.5 4800 33 .021 39 .024 EBR f 59 5957 57. WBL WBL 1.5 144 144 .045* 205 .064* WBT 1.5 4800 12 .008 39 .024 WBR 1 1600 96 .060 174 .109 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .613 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C i. NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043 NBT 3 4800 1253 .261* 1760 .367* HER f 134 145 SBL 2 3200 670 .209* 472 .148* SBT. 3 4800 1407 .293 2012 .419. SBR f 37 117 EBL 1.5 258 .081* 163 .051* EBT 1.5 4800. 33 .021 39 .024 EBR f 59 57 WBL 1.5 144 .045* 205 .064 *. WET 1.5 4800 12 ..008 39 .024 WBR 1 1600 54 .034 112 .070 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY GTILIBATION .596 .638 Existing + Growth . +Approved + Cumulative TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..636 ..672 A -110 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043 NBT 3 4800 1431 .298* 1908 .398 *. NBR f 134 .145 SBL 2 3200 679 .212* 510 .159* SBT 3. 4800 1501 .313 2206 .460 SBR f 37 117 EBL 1.5 258 .081* .163 .051* EBT 1.5 4800 33 .021 39 .024 EBR f 59 57. WBL 1.5 144 .045* 205 .064* WBT 1.5 4800 12 .008 39 .024 WBR 1 1600 88 .055 132 .083 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing .640 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..636 ..672 A -110 16. Jamboree 6 San Joaquin Bills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative+ Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 41 .026 68 .043 NBT 3 4800 1431 .298* 1908 .398* NBR f 134 145 SBL 2 3200 733 .229* 542 .169* SBT 3 4800 1501 .313 2206 .460 SBR f 37 117 EBL 1.5 258 .081* 163 .051* EST 1.5 4800 33 .021 39 .024 EBR f,. 59.. 57 WBL 1.5 144 .045* 205 ..064* NET 1.5 .4800 12 .008 39 .024 WBR 1 1600 130 .081 194 .121 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .653 .682 A -111. 15. Jasboree 6 Santa Barbara. Existing AMPKHOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 .1600 6 .004 9 ..006 *. NBT 3 4800 1225 ,255* 1118 .233 NBR 1 1600 323 .202 119 .074 SBL. 2 3200 560 ..175* 291. .091. SBT 3 .4800 809 .169 1781 .371* SBR 1 1600. 23 .014 28 .018 EEL 1 1600 62 .039* 26 .016* EBT 1 1600 3 .007 8 .008 ERR 0 0 8 4 WBL 1..5 51 307 WBT 0.5 3200 2 .017* 5 .098 *. WBR 1 1600 93 .058 662 .414 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .208* Note: Assumes IN Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .486 .699 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Project. AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006* NET 3 4800 1315 .274* ' 1242. .259 NBR 1 1600 324 .203 126 .079 - SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 295 .092 SBT 3 4800 941 .196 1911 .398* SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021 EBL. 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018* EST 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008 ERR 0 0 8 4 WBL 1.5 69 313 WET. 0.5 3200 2 .022* ' 6. .100* WBR 1 1600. 98 .061 669 .418.' Right Turn Adjustment WBR .209* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing, TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .518 .731. A -112 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006* NBT. 3 4800. 1315 .274* 1242 .259 NBR 1 1600 323 .202 120 .075 SBL 2 3200 574 .179 *. 295 .092 SET 3 4800 941 .196 1911 .398* SBR 1 1600 24 ..015 34 .021 EEL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 .018* EBT 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008 ERR 0. 0 8 4. WBL 1.5 52 308 WBT 0.5 3200 2 .017* 6 .098* WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .211* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..513 .731 Existing +. Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 6 .004 9 .006* NBT 3 4800 1493 .311* 1390 .290 NBR 1 1600 323. .202 120 .075 SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 295 .092. SBT - 3. 4800. 1035 .216 2105 .439* SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021 EEL 1 1600 68 .043 *. 28 .018* EST 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008. ERR 0 0 8 4 WBL 1.5 52 308 WET 0.5 .3200 2 .017* 6 .098* WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669. ..418 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .204* Note: Assumes E /W. Split Phasing ...TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..550 165 15. Jamboree A Santa Barbara Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 6. _004 9 .006 *. NBT 3 4800 1493. .311* 4390 .290 NBR 1 1600 324 .203 126 .079 SBL. 2. 3200 574 .179* 295 .092. SBT 3 4800 1035 .216 2105 ..439* SBR 1 1600 24 .015 34 .021 EBL 1 1600 68 .043* 28 ..018* EST 1 1600 3 .007 9 .008 EBR 0 0 8 4 WBL 1.5 69 313 WBT 0.5 .3200 2 .022* 6 .100* WBR 1 1600 98 .061 669 .418 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .202* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY OTILIEATION. .555 .765 A -113 16. Jamboree 6 Coast Ewy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 20 .013 37 .023 NIT 2 3200 .374. .146* 265.113* 94 NBR 0 0 94 1 96 147 SBL. 1. 1600 : 137 .086* 176 .110* SET : 2 :3200 :206 .064: 431 '.135 SBR f 758 3 1453. 1315 EBL 3 4800 1228 .256* 778 ` .162* EBT 4 6400 1808 :.285 1635:..259 14 EBR 0 0 13. 2 : 25 94 WBL 2 3200 94. .029 . 202 .063 WBT 4 6400 1069 .167* 1952 .305* WBR f 89 169 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .655 .690 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600. 20 .013 38 .024 NBT 2 3200 375 .147* 266 .114* NBR 0 0 94 98 SBL 1 1600 147 .092* 189 .118* SET. 2 3200 207 .065 434 .136 SBR f .897 1576 EBL 3 4800 1315 .274* 893 .186* EBT 4 6400 1929 .304 1726 .274 EBR 0 0 14 : 25 WBL 2 3200 94 .029 205 .064 WBT 4 6400 1149 .180* 2099 .328* WBR f 89 173 DIAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .693 .746 A -114 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 20 .013 38 .024 NET 2 3200 375 .147* 266 .114* NBR 0 0 94 98 SBL 1 1600 147 .092* 189 .118* SET 2 3200 207 .065 434 .136. SBR f 880 1571 EBL 3 4800 1314 ` .274* 887 .185* EBT 4 6400 1900 ..299 1719 .273 EBR 0 ` 0 : 14 : 25 WBL 2 3200 94 .029 205 .064 NET 4 6400 1134 .177* 2068 .323* WBR f 89 173 DTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .690 .740 Existing + Growth + Approved + CimalBtive AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES :CAPACITY : VOL V/C VOL. V/C NBL. 1 1600 20 .013 38 .024. NET 2 3200 375 .147* 266 .114* NBR 0 0 .94 98 SBL. 1 1600 197. .123* 358 .224* SET 2 3200 207 .065 434 .136 SBR f 924 1596 EBL 3 4800 1327 .276* 931 .194* EBT . 4 6400 2007 .316 2065 .327 EBR 0 0 14 25 WBL 2 3200 94 .029 205 .064 WET 4 6400 1440 .225* 2281 .356* WBR f 254 277 'OPAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .771 .888 16. Jamboree 6 Coast Hwy TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .774 .894 'A -115 17. MacArthur 6 Bison Existing AM PE HOUR AM IN HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PE HOUR PM PE HOUR VOL -` LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C - NBL 2 3200 197 .062 192 .060* NET 4 6400 2466 .385* 2454 .383 HER f 205 154 SBL 183 3200 SBL 2 3200 76 .024* 224 .070 , SET 4 6400 2018 .315 2707 .423* SBR 1 1600 263 .164 321 .201 EEL 2 3200 224 .070 192 .060 EBT 2 3200 .218 .068* 191 .060* EBR f 216 162 WBL 214 3200 WBL 2 3200 383 .120* 363 .113* WBT 2 3200 217 .068 266 .083 WBR 1 1600 94 .059 141 .088 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .597 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 198 .062 196 .061* NET 4 6400 2542 .391* 2542 .397 !, HER f 154 184 SBL 2 3200 76 .024* 224 .070 SET 4 6400 2081 .325 2802 .438* SBR 1 1600 266 .166 335 .209 EEL 2 3200 229 .072 198 .062 EBT 2 .3200 219 .068* 191 .060* ERR f 163 216 WBL 2 3200 384 .120* 363 .113* WET 2. 3200 218 .068 267 ..083 WBR 1. 1600. 95 .059 141 .088 .656 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .609 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PE HOUR AM IN HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL -` V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 198 .062 196 .061* NET 4 6400 2567 .401* 2605 .407 HER f 162 205 SBL 2 3200 76 .024* 224 .070 SET 4 6400 2142 .335 2823 .441* SBR 1 1600 266 ,.166. 335 .209 EEL 2 3200 229 .072 198 .062 EBT 2 3200 225 .070* 194. .061* ERR f 163 216 WBL 2 3200 404 ..126* 369 .115* NET 2 3200 219 .068 272 .085 WBR 1 1600 95 .059 141 .088 672 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PE HOUR PAS PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V /C VOL, V/C NBL 2 3200 198 .062 196 .061* NET 4 6400 2693 .421* 2635 .412 NBR f 154 184 SBL 2 3200 80 .025* 239 .075 SET 4 6400 2126 .332 2957 .462* SBR 1 1600 266 ..166 335 .209 EEL 2 3200 229 .072 198 .062 EBT 2 3200 230 .072* 228 .011* ERR f 163. 216 WBL 2 3200 ' 384 .120* 363' .113* NET 2 3200 255 .080 290 .091 WBR 1 1600 110 .069 150 .094 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .621 .678 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .638 ..707 A -116 17.: MacArthur & Bison Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project. AM PH HOUR PH PH HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 198 .062 196 .061* NET 4 6400 2718 .425* 2698 .422 HER f 162 205 SBL 2 3200 80 .025* 239 .075 SET <. 4 6400 2187 .342 2978 .465* SBR 1 1600 266 ,.166 335 .209 EEL 2 3200 229 .072 198 .062 EST 2 3200 236 .074* 231 .072* EBR f 163 216 WBL 2 3200 404 .126* 369 .115* WBT 2 3200 256 .080 295 .092 WBR 1 - 1600 110 .069 150 .094 3TAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .650 .71 A -117 18. MacArthur S Ford/Bonita Canyon Existing AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 107 .033 61 .019 NBT 4 6400 1918 .300* 2348 .367* NBR f 87 83 481 468 SBL SBL 2 3200. 529 .165* 774. .242* SBT 4 6400 1923 .300 2328 ..364 SBR f 13 13 50 49 EBL EBL 2 3200 39 .012 27 .008 EST 2 3200 266. .083* .299 .093* ERR 1 1600 121. ..076 61 ..038 NBL 2 3200 552 .173* 232 .073* ` NET 2 3200 .323 ..101. 280 .088 WBR f 901 900 480 480 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .721 .775 Existing+ Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200. 108 .034 63 .020 NBT 4 6400 2013 .315* 2520 .394* NBR f 92 483 SBL 2 3200 529 .165* 775 .242* SBT 4 6400 2072 .324 2448 .383 SBR f 13 50 EBL 2 3200 40 .013 27 .008 EBT 2 3200 267. .083* 300. .094* ERR. 1. 1600 123 .077 62 .039 WBL 2 3200 561 ..175* 245 .077* WET 2 3200 323 .101 281 .088 NBR f 901 480 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 108 .034 63 .020. NET 4 6400 1979 .309* 2436. .381* NBR f 556 87 SBL 481 3200 SBL 2 3200 529. .165 *. 775 .242* SBT 4 6400 1992 ..311 SBR 2420 .378 SBR f 50 13 EBL 50 3200 EBL 2 3200 40 .013 27 .008 EST 2 3200 267 .083* 300 .094* ERR.. 1 1600 123 .077 62. ..039 NRL 2 3200 561 .175* 243 .076* NET 2 3200 323 .101 281 .088 WBR f 503 901 480 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .732 .793 Existing+ Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V /C. VOL V/C NBL 2 3200. .108 ..034 63 .020 NET 4 6400 2090 .327* 2506 .392* NBR f 159 556 SBL 2 3200 540 .169* 815 .255* SBT 4 6400 2026 .317 2535 .396 SBR f 13 50 EBL 2 3200 40 .013 27 .008 EST 2 3200 282 .088* 354 .111* ERR 1 1600 123 .077 62 .039 WBL ' 2 3200 625 .195* 318 .099 *. WET 2 3200 441 .138 352 .110 WBR f 941 503 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .738 .807 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION. .779 ..857 A -118 18. MacArthur i Ford/Bonita Canyon TOTAL CAPACITY OTILIEATION .784 .871 I I A -119 19. MacArthur a San Joaquin Hills Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 .3200 .133 .042* 111 .035 NET 3 4800 1327 .276 1879 .391* NBR 1 1600 192 .120 26 .016 SBL 2 3200 272 .085 498 .156* SBT 3 4800 1761 .367* 1882 .392 SBR f 487 248 EEL ` 2 ` 3200 449 .140* 551 .172* EST 3 4800 105 .030 348 .106 EBR 0 0 37 163 WBL 1 1600 9 .006 47 .029 EST 2 3200 322 .101* 306 .096* WBR f 419 525 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .650 .815 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V /C' NBL 2 3200 143 .045* .122 .038 NET 3 4800 1376 .287 1965 .409* NBR 1. 1600. 192 .120 26 .016 SBL 2 3200 275 .086 503 .157* SET 3 4800 1843 .384* 1954 .407 SBR f 576 293 EEL 2 3200 493 .154* 666 .208* EST 3 4800 108. .030 350 .107 EBR. 0 0 37 163 WBL 1 1600 9 .006 47 .029 WBT 2 3200 329 .103* 313 .098* WBR f 419 525 )PAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .686 .8' Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 143 .045* 122 .038 NET 3. 4800. 1376 .287 1965 .409* NBR 1 1600 192 .120 26 .016 SBL 2 3200 275 .086 503 .157* SET 3 4800 1843 ..384* 1954. .407 ,SBR f 494 263 EEL 2 3200 453 .142* 579 .181* EST 3 4800 108 .030 350 .107. EBR 0 0 37 163 WBL 1 1600 9 .006 47 .029 NET 2 3200 329 .103* 313 .098* WBR f 419 525. TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .676 .845 Existing + Growth + Approved+ Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 .3200 143 .045* 122 .038. NET 3 4800 1492 .311 2046 .426* NBR 1'. 1600 221 .138 128 .080. SBL 2 3200 291 .091 549. .172* SET 3 4800 1897 .395* 2068 .431 SBR f 523 293 EEL 2 3200 481 .150* fill .191* SET 3 .4800 126 .034 418 .121 EBR 0 0 37 163 WBL 1 1600. 97 .061 115 .072 WET 2 3200 392 .123* 353 .110* WBR f 459 556 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .713 .89 A -120 19. MacArthur 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project + Growth + Appr + Cumul + Project w/gitigation AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 143 .045* 122 .038 NET 3 4800 1492 .311 2046 .426* NBR 1 1600 221 .138 128 .080 SBL. 2 3200 , 291 .091 549 .172* SBT 3 4800 1897 .395* 2068 .431 SBR f SBR 605 323 EBL 2 3200 521 .163* 698 .218* EST 3 4800 126 .034 418 .121. EBR 0 0 37 0 163 WBL 1 1600 97 .061 115 .072 NET 2 3200 392 .123* 353 .110* WBR f WBR 459 556 Exist + Growth + Appr + Cumul + Project w/gitigation AM PE HOUR PM PN HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 143 .045* 122 .038 NBT 3 4800 1492 .311 2046, .426! NBR 1 1600 221 .138 128 .080 SBL 2 3200 291 .091 549 .172* SET 3 4800 1897 .395* 2068 .431 SBR f 605 323 '. EBL 3 4800 521 .109* 698 .145* EST 3 4800 126 .034 418 ..121 EBR 0 0 37 .163 WBL 1 1600 97 .061 115 .072 WBT 2 3200 392 .123* 353 .110* WBR f 459 556 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .726 .926 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .672 .853 A -121 20. MacArthur .4 San Miguel Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 87 .027 98 .031* NUT 3 4800 1514 .315* 1000 .208 NBR 1 1600 282 .176 278 .174 SBL 2 3200 7 .002* 9 .003 SBT 3 4800 1209 .252 1500 .313* SBR 1 1600 549 .343 508 .318 `EEL 2 3200 86 .027 909 .284* EBT 2 3200 73 .033* 472 .196 EBR 0 0 31. 154 WBL 2.... 3200 224 .070* 217 .068 WET 2 , 3200. 164 .063 232 .082* WBR 0 0 38 29'. Right Turn Adjustment SBR .023* Existing + Regional Growth +.Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK. HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2. 3200 87 ..027 100 ` .031* NBT 3 4800 1567 .326* 1039 .216 NBR 1 1600 282 .176 '278 .174 SBL 2 3200 9 .003* 13 .004 SBT 3 4800< 1247 .260 1549 .323* SBR 1 1600 551 .344 .511 .319 EEL 2 3200 88 .028 916 ` .286* EBT 2 3200 75 .033* 484 .203 EBR 0 0 31 164 WBL 2 3200 224 .070* 217 .068 NET 2 3200 165 .063 244 .085* WBR. 0 0 38 29 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .012* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .443 .710 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .444 .725 Existing + Growth + Approved +Project AM PH HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 88. .028 104 .033* NBT 3 4800 1567 .326* 1039 ..216 HER 1 1600 282 .176 278. .174 SHE 2 3200 9 .003* 13. .004 SBT 3 .4800 1247 .260 1549 ..323'. SBR 1 1600 551 .344 511 .319' EBL 2 3200 88 .028 916 .286* EBT 2 3200 75 .037* 490 .205 EBR 0 0 42 167 WBL 2 3200 224 .070* 217 .068 NAT 2 3200 172 .066 237 .083* WBR 0 0 38 29 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .012* TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .448 .725 A -122 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative. AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 124 .039 122 .038* NBT 3 4800 1712 .357* 1222 .255'. NBR 1 1600 282 .176 278 .174 SHE 2 3200 9 .003* 13 .004 SBT 3 4800 1389 .289 1731 .361* SBR 1 1600 551 .344 511. .319 EBL 2 3200 88 .028 916 .286* EBT 2 3200 75 .037* 484 .214 EBR 0 0 43 201 WBL 2 3200 224 .070* 217. .068 WBT 2 3200 165 .063 244 .085* WBR 0 0 38 29 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .467 .770 20. MacArthur a Ban Niguel Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 .125 .039 126 ..039* NET 3 4800 1712 .357* 1222 .255 NBR 1 1600 282 .176 278 .174 SBL 2 3200 9 ,003* 13 .004 SET 3 4800 1389 .289 1731 .361* SBR 1 1600 551 .344. 511 .319 EEL 2 3200 88 .028 916 .286* EST 2 3200 75 .040* 490 .217 EBR 0 0 54 204 NBL 2 3200 224 .070* 217 .068 NET 2 3200 172 .066 237 ..083* NBR 0 0 38 29 TAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .470 .1 A -123 21. NacArthur6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES. CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 HER 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 571 .178* 829 .259* SBT 0 0 0 0 HER f 337 1003 EEL 2 3200 954 .298* 515 .161* EBT 3 4800 888 .185 1349 .281 ERR 0 0 0 0 li WBL 0 0 0 0 NET 3 4800 1099 .229* 1058 .220* WBR f 887 871 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .705 .640 Existing + Growth + Approved .+ Project AM PK HOUR PM PK. HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 601 .188* 861 .269* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 348 1033 EBL 2 3200 988 .309* 535 .167* EBT 3 4800 923 .192 1412 .294 ERR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0... 0. 0 0 WBT 3 4800 1159 .241* 1094 .228* WBR f 918 904 OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .738 .664 A -124 Existing + Regional. Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0. 0 '0. 0 NBT _..0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 590. .184* 858 .268* SBT 0. 0 0 0 SBR f 348 1033 EEL 2 3200 988 .309* 535 .167* EST 3 4800 921 .192. 1397 .291 ERR ,..0 0. 0 0. WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 4800 1141 .238 *. 1096 .228* WBR f 917 900 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILISATION ..731 .663 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative `AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 640 .200* 992 .310* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 450 1119 EBL 2 3200 1036 .324* 654 .204* EST 3 4800 1029 .214 1791 .373 ERR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 4800 1508 .314* 1327 .276* WBR f 1052 986 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .838 ..790 21. MacArthur& Coast Euy. Existing + Growth +.Approved + Cumulative+ Project AM PH HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL VIC NBL.. 0.. 0.. 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 651 .203* 995 .311* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 450 1119 EBL 2 3200 1036 .324* 654 .204* EST 3 4800 1031 .215 1806 .376 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 4800 1526 .318* 1325 .276* WBR f 1053 990 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .845 .791 A -125 22. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills Existing Project AM PK AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK .HOUR LANES LANES .CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2 3200 60 .019* .413 .129* NET 1 1600 2 .008 12 .035 NBR 0 0 10 44 44 SBL SBL 1 1600 21 .013 22 .014 SET 2 3200 11 .007* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 23 .014 45 .028 EBL 1 1600 30 .019 55 .034* EST 3 4800 494 .150* 324 .101 EBR 0 0 224 222 199 .124 WBL 1 1600 181 .113* 54 .034 WBT 3 4800 286 .065 495 .111* WBR 0 0 28 37 37 .TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .289 .277 Busting + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK. HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2 3200 96 .030* 427 .133* HIT 1. 1600. 2 ..008 12 .035 NBR 0 0 11 44 44 SBL SBL 1 1600 21 .013 23 .014 SET 2 3200 12 .008* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 23 .014 45 .028 EBL 1 1600 30 .019 55 .034* EST 3 4800 544 .161* 334 .104 EBR 0 0 229 200 222 .139 WBL 1 ` 1600 182 .114* 54 .034 WBT 3 4800 293 .067 544 .121* HER 0 0 28 37 37 l'OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .313 .291 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL. VIC NBL 2 .3200 61 .019* 413 ..129* NET 1 .1600 2 .008 -12. ..035 NBR 0 0 11 44 SBL 1 1600 21 .013 23 ..014 SET 2 3200 12 .008 * 5. .003* SBR 0 0 23 ` .014 ` 45 .028 EBL 1 1600 30 .019 55 .034* EST 3 4800 ,495. .150* 324 .101 EBR 0 0. 224 200 .125 WBL 1 1600 182 .114* 54 .034 WET 3 4800 286 .065 496 .111* WBR 0 0 28 37 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .291 .277. Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2 3200 61 .019* 413 .129* NET 1 1600 2 .008 12 .035 NBR. 0 0 11 44 SBL 1 1600 31 .019 32 .020 SET 2 3200 12 .008* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 23 .014 45 .028 EBL 1 1600 30 .019 55 .034* BHT 3 4800 504 ..152* 362 .113 EBR 0 0 224 200 .125 WBL 1 1600 182 .114* 54 ' .034 WET 3 4800 320 .074 516 .117* WBR 0 0 35 47 .TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .293 .281 A -126 22. Santa Crum& San Joaquin Hills TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .315 .297 I A -127 23. Santa Rosa 6 San Joaquin Bills Existing AM PH HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 .1600 35 .022 167 ..104* NBT 1 1600 6 .004* 28 .018 HER 1 1600 67 .042 372 .233 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 67 .042 SET 1 1600 13 .008 7 .009* SBR 1 1600. 36 .023 24 .015 EEL 1 1600 33 .021 36 .023 EBT 3 4800. 253 .079* 597 .144* EBR 0 0 142 .089 96 3200 WBL 2 3200 531 .166* 250 .078* WBT 3 4800 445 .104 244 .069 HER 0 0 56 Right 86 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .113* NBR .108* TOTAL: CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .438 Existing + Growth +Approved +Project AM PK HOUR PM PE HOUR LANES. CAPACITY VOL ' V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 53 .033 223 .139* NBT 1. 1600 6 .004* 28 .018 NBR 1 1600 99 .062 409 .256 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 67. .042 SET 1 1600 13 ..008 7 .004* HER 1 1600 36 .023 24 ..015 EBL 1 1600 34 .021 36 .023 EST 3 4800 258 .081* 602 .150* EBR 0 0 198 .124. 116 WBL 2 3200 542 .169* 288 .090* WBT 3 4800 463 .108 269 .074 WBR 0 0 56 86 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .015* NBR .087* TOTAL.. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .310 .470 A -128 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PH HOUR PM PK HOUR - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 46 .029 175 .109* NET 1 1600 -6 .004* 28 .018 NBR 1 1600 70 .044 398 .249 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 67 .042 SET 1 1600 13 ..008 7 .004* SBR 1 1600 36 ..023 24 .015 EEL. 1 1600 34 .021 36 .023 EBT 3 4800 258 :081 *' 602 :148* ERR 0. 0 149 .093 .106 WBL ` 2 3200 538 .168* 274 .086* WBT 3 4800 463 .108 269 ..074 WBR 0 0 56 86. Right Turn Adjustment NBR .113* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .294 .460 Existing +Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PH HOUR PM PH HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 46 .029 175 ..109* NET 1 1600 6 .004 *. 28 .018 .NBR 1 1600 81 .051 440 .275 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 79 .049 SET 1 1600 13 .008 7 .004* SBR 1 1600 36 .023 24 .015 EEL 1 1600 34 .021 36 .023 EST 3 4800 277 .087 *. 649 .157* EBR 0 0 149 .093 106 WBL 2 3200 577 .180* 299 .093* WET 3 4800 504 .119 299 .083 HER 0 0 67 100 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .141* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .322 .504 23.. Santa Rosa a San Joaquin Bills TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..326 .514 'A -129 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills Existing Project. AM PK HOUR ,AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 2 ,.001 11 .007 NET 2 3200 229 .100* 499 .222* NBR 0 0 91 SBL 210 1600 SBL 1 1600 67 .042* 85 .053* SET 2 .3200 .316 .131 241 .106 SBR 0... 0 102 EBL 97 3200 EEL 2 3200 214 .067 514 .161* EST 3 4800 492 .107* 431 .093 ERR 0 - 0 23 WBL 14 1600 WBL 1 1600 213 .133* 264 .165. WET 3 4800 663 ..151 784 ..177* WBR 0 0 60 67 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .382 .613 Existing + Growth + Approved .+ Project. AM PK HOUR ,AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL - V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 2 .001 11 .007 NBT 2 3200 229 .100* 514 .228* HER 0 0 90 218 215 SBL SBL 1 1600 67 .042* 85 .053* SET 2 3200 325 .133 248 .108 SBR 0 0 102 97 97 EEL EBL 2 3200 214 .067 514 .161* EST 3 4800 493 .108* 431 .093 EBR 0 0 23 14 14 WEI. WBL 1 1600 213 .133* 266 .166 NET 3 4800 663 .151 784 .177* WBR 0 0 60 67 67 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .383 .619 A -130 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 2 ..001 11 .007 NET 2 3200 229 .100* 505 .226* NBR 0 0 91 218 SBL 1 1600 67. .042 *. 85 M3* SET 2 3200 316 .131 244 aOB SBR 0 0 102 97 EEL 2 3200 214 .067 514 .161* EST 3 4800 .493 .108* 431 .093 .EBR 0 0. 23. 14 WBL 1 1600 215 .134* 272 .170 WET 3 4800 663 .151 784 ..177* WBR 0 0 60 67 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .384 .617 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 2 .001 11 .007 NET 2 3200 229 .100* 505 .226* NBR 0 0 91 218 SBL 1 1600 67 .042* 85 I .053* SET. 2 3200` 316 .131 249 .108 SEE. 0 0 102 97 EEL 2 3200 214 .067* 514 .161* EST 3 4800 556 .121 - 647 .138 EBR 0 0 23 14 WEI. 1 1600 215 .134 272 .170 . WHY 3 4800 854 .190* 921 .206* WBR 0 0 60 67 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .399 .646 24. San Miguel & San Joaquin Hills TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .399 .648 i A -131 25. Avocado 8 San Miguel Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 123 .077 176 .110' NBT 1 1600 148 .093* 60 .038 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 655 .409 SBL. 1 1600 51 .032* 222 .139 SBT 1 1600 51 .032 129 .081* ' SBR 1 1600 16 .010 21 ..013 EBL 1 1600 7 .004 182 .114* SET 2 3200. 148 .063* .444 .169 EBR 0 0 53 98 98 WBL WBL 1 1600 467 .292* 174 .109 WET 2 3200 435 .194 492 .178* WBR 0 0 187 76 76 Right Right Turn Adjustment .271* NBR NBR .265* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .480 .146 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 123 .077 176 .110* NET 1 '1600 197 .123* 70 .044 HER . '1 1600 121 .076 655. .409 SBL 1 1600 52 .033* 232 .145 SBT 1 1600 58 .036 177 .111* SUR 1 - 1600 - 16 .010 21 .013 EBL 1 1600 7 .004 182 .114* EST 2 3200 158 .066* 467 .177 EBR 0 0 53 98 WBL 1 1600 467 .292* 174 .109 NET 2 3200 434 .197 502 .181* WBR 0 0 197 78 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .244* DOM CAPACITY UTILIZATION .514 .760 A -132 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR CAPACITY LANES .CAPACITY VOL. VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 123 .077 176 .110* NBT 1 1600 148 .093* 60 .038 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 655 .409 SBL 1 1600 51 .032* 222 .139 SBT 1 1600 51 .032 129 .081* SIR 1 1600 16 .010 21 .013 BBL 1 1600 7 .004 182 .114* EBT 2 3200 148 :063 * 466 .176 _ERR 0 0 _ ,53.. 98 1 WBL ` 1 1600 467 ..292* 174 .109 WET 2 3200 435 .194. 508 .183* WBR 0 0: 187 76 Turn Adjustment Right Turn Adjustment NBR .271* NBR .266* Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 123 .077 176 .110* NBT 1 1600 148 .093* 60 .038 NBR' 1 1600 121 .076 655 .409 SBL 1 1600 51 .032* 222 .139 SBT 1 1600 51 .032 129 .081* SBR 1 1600 16 .010 21 .013 EBL 1 1600 l .004 182 ,114* EST 2 3200 160 .067* 503 .188 ERR. 0 0. 53 98. WBL 1 1600 467 .292* 174 .109 WBT 2 3200 472 .206 530 .189* WBR 0 0 .187. 76 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .271* MAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .484 .765 25. Avocado & San Miguel Existing + Growth +.Approved + Cumulative + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .518 .770 i A -133 26. Superior /Balboa 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V /C. VOL VIC NBL 1.5 .202 261 NET 1.5 4800 327. .129* 209 .111* HER 0 89 65 SBL. 1.5 170 163 SET 1.5 .4800 122 .061* 237 ..083* SBR 2 3200 187 .058 738 .231. EEL 2 3200 988 .309 255 .080* EBT 3 4800 2242 .467* 1169 .244 EBR 1 1600 238 .149 225 .141 WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092 WET 4 6400 582 .121 2165 .359* WBR 0 0 206 .129 134 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .088* Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing rOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .695 .721 Existing + Growth +Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM. PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1..5 203 261 NET 1.5 4800 357 .135* 218 .114* NBR 0 89 66 SBL 1.5 170 163 SET 1.5 4800 128 .062* 269 .090* SBR 2 3200 207 .065 868 .271 EEL 2 3200 1111 .347 293'. .092* EBT 3 4800 2388 .498* 1256 ..262 EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143 WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092 WET 4 6400 651 .134 2329 .385* WEE: 0 0 206 134 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112* Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .733 .793 A -134 Existing + Regional Groatb + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1..5 203 261 NET 1.5 4800 357 .135* 218 .114* NBR 0 89 66 SBL 1.5 170 163 SET 1.5 4800 128 .062* 269 .090* SBR 2 3200 207 .065 868 .271 EBL 2 3200 1111 .347 293 .092* EBT 3 4800 2377 .495* 1248 .260 REP. 1 1600 238 .149 .228 .143. WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092 WET 4 6400 633 .131 2314 .383* WBR 0 0 206 134 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112* Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .730 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative. AM PH HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1.5 203 261 NET 1.5 4800. 371 .138* 233 .117* HER 0 89 66 SBL 1.5 193 242 SET. 1.5 4800 134 .068* 297 .112* SEP. 2 3200 230 .072 982 .307 EEL 2 3200 1167 .365 354 .111* EBT 3 4800< 2423 .505* 1406 .293 EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143 WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092 NET 4 6400 788 .164 2409 .405* WBR 0. 0 282 .176 181 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112* Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .749 .857 Rusting + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AMPKHOUR PM PK HOUR LANES. CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1.5 203 261 NET 1.5 4800 .371 .138* 233 .117* NBR 0 89 66 SBL 1.5 193 242. SBT 1.5 4800 .134 .06B* 297 .112* SBR 2 3200 230 .072 982 ..307 EBL 2 3200 1167 .365 354 .111* EST 3 4800. 2434 .507* 1414 .295 EBR 1 1600 238 .149 228 .143. WBL 1 1600 61 .038* 147 .092 WET 4 .6400 806 .168 2424 .407* WBR 0 0 .282 .176 181 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .112* Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .751 .859 A -135 27. Newport a Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C Vol V/C NBI 0 0 0 0 0 NET NET 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0' SBL. 2 3200. 389 ..120* 617 .193* SBT 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 SBR 1 1600. 269 .168 ' 970 .299 EEL 0 0 0 510 0 EBL .EBT. 2 3200... 2075 ..698* 1267 .396* PER f.. 2 987 2151 267 1383 WBL 0 0 0 506 0 282. WBT. 3 9800 .979 ..209 1898 .385 WBR f 0 370 WBT 563 9800 Right Turn Adjustment .219 1932 SBR .093* .682 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES. CAPACITY. VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 0 NET NET 0 0 0 0 0 NBR NBR 0 0 0 0' 0 SBL SBL 2 3200919 .133* .131* 732 .229* SBT 0 0 0 0 0 SBR SBR 1 1600 313, .196 510 .319 EBL 0 0 0 0 0 EBT EBT 2 3200 2151 .672* 1383 .932* EBR f 506 506 282. 282 WBL WBL 0 0 0 0 0 WBT WBT 3 9800 1053 .219 1932 .903 WBR f 385 381 .589 580 Right Turn Adjustment .Right Turn Adjustment SBR SBR .068* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .803 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C - VOL V/C NBL 0 0. 0 0 NET 0 0 0. 0 — NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 909 .128* 726 .228* SET 0 0 0 0 SEE 1 ' 1600 313 .196 510 .319 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 2 3200 2190 .669* 1375 .930* EBR f 506. _2B2 WBL ` 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 9800 1035 .216 1917 .399 WBR f 381 580 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .068* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .797 .726 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C ' VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0' SBL 2 3200 926 .133* 813. .259* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR 1 1600 313 .196 510 , .319 EBL 0 0 0 0 EBT 2 3200 2207 .690* 1613 .509* EBR. f 506 282. WBL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 9800 1266 .269 2058 .929 WBR f 385 .589 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .009* ..729 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .823 .767 A -136 27. Newport s Coast Hwy TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .829 .770 A -137 28. Riverside 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR NBL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 2 (.001)* 0 0 26 14 NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029* NBR 0 0 0 SBR 14 301 .188 SBL 0 0 85 280 .175 84 (.052)* .168* SBT 1 1600 15 .063* 7 .057 SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271 EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168* EST 2 3200 2094 .660* 1528 .484 EBR 0 0 18 .554* 21 1 1600 WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018 WBT 3 4800 1232 .257 2430 .506* WBR 1 1600 68 .043 65 .041 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .038* Note Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .730 .793 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 2 (.001)* 26 2 (.0011* NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029* NBR 0 0 0 14 NBR SBL 0 0 87 86 (.054)* SBL SBT 1 1600 15 .064* 7 .058 SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271 EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168* EBT 2 3200 2294 .723* 1783 .564 EBR 0 0 18 21 EBT WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018 WBT 3 4800 1436 .299 2685 .559* WBR 1 1600 69 .043 68 .043 Right Turn Adjustment WBT SBR .036* Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR .554* Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 2 (.0011* 26 26 NBT NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029* NBR 0 0 0 14 14 SBL SBL 0 0 87 90 (.056)* 86 (.0541* SBT SBT 1 1600 15 .064* 7 .058 SBR ' 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271 EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168* EBT 2 3200 2272 :716 * 1770 .560 EBR 0 0 ` 18 21 21 WBL WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018 WBT 3 4800 1410 .294 2658 .554* WBR 1 1600 69 .043 68 .043 Right Turn Adjustment SBR SBR .036* Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .787 .841 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 2 (.001)* 26 NBT 1 1600 6 .005 7 .029* NBR 0 0 0 14 SBL 0 0 92 90 (.056)* SBT 1 1600 15 .067* 7 .061 SBR 1 1600 301 .188 433 .271 EBL 1 1600 280 .175 268 .168* EBT 2 3200 2361 .743* 2097 .662 EBR 0 0 18 21 WBL 1 1600 9 .006* 28 .018 WBT 3 4800 1687 .351 2849 .594* WBR 1 1600 73 .046 72 .045 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .034* Note: Assumes Right -Turn Overlap for SBR TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .794 .646 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .817 .881 A -138 28. Riverside & Coast Hwy TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .824 .886 i I i A -139 29. Tustin 6 Coast. Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 1 1.0011* 0 NBT 1 1600 0 .000 0 .004 NBR 0 0 0 0 6 36 SBL 0 0 , 36 1 45 0 SBT 1 1600 0 .033* 0 .053* SBR 0 0 16 1 40 27 j EBL 1 1600 27 .017 32 .020* EBT 2 3200 2241 .700* 1548 .486 EBR 0 0 0 1 7 1 WBL 1 1600 1 .001* 0 .000 NET 3 4800. 1236 _258 2462 .513* WBR 1 1600 39 .024 47 .029 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .734 .587 Existing+ Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 (.0011* NET 1 1600 0 .000 0 .004 NBR < 0 0 0 6 SBL 0 0 36 45 SBT 1 1600 0 .033* 0 .053* SBR 0 0 16 40' EBL 1 1600 27 .017 32 .020* ERT 2 3200 2439 .762* 1714 .538 EBR. 0 0 0 7 WBL 1 1600 1 .001* 0 .000 WBT 3 4800 1366 .285 2690 .560* WBR 1 1600 39 .024 47 .029 MAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION _ .796 .634 A -140 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 (.0011* NET 1 1600` 0 .000 0 .004 NBR 0 0 0 6 SBL 0 0 36. 45 SBT 1 1600 0 .033* 0. .053* SBR 0 0 16 40' EBL 1 1600 27 .017 32 .020* EST 2 3200 2417 .755* 1701 :534 EBR 0 0 0 7 WBL 1 1600 1 .001* 0 .000 NET 3 4800. 1340 .279 2663 .555* WBR 1 1600 39 .024 47 .029 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .789 .629. Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM RE HOUR PM HE HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C .NBL 0 0 0 1 (.0011* NET 1 1600 0. .000 0 .004 NBR. 0 0 0 6 SBL. 0 0 36 45 SBT 1 1600 0 .033* 0 ` .053* SHE 0 0 16 40 EBL 1 1600 27 .017 32 .020 EBT 2 3200 2511 .785* 2033 .638* EBR 0 0 0 7 WBL 1 1600 1 .001* 0' .000 WBT 3 4800 1620 .338 2860 .596 WBR 1 1600 39 .024 47 .029 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .819 ..692 29.: Tustin s Coast 9vy TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .826 .696 I A -141 30. Dover 6 Coast Hwy Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .728 .844 A -142 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAMES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 15 .009 36 ..023 NET 2 3200 38 ,018* 49 .026* NBR 0 0 21 34 SBL. 3. 4800. 821 ,171* 1058. .220* SBT 1 1600 31 .019 77 .048 SBR 1... 1600 124 .078 175 ..109 EEL 2 3200 143 .045 133 .042* BHT 3 4800 2251 _.475* 1457 .312 EBR 0 0 27. 40 WBL 1 1600 16 .010* 55 .034. WBT 3 4800 1207 .251. 2178 .454* WBR f 497 1108 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .674 .742 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 15 .009 36 .023 NET 2 3200 38 .018* 49 .026* NBR 0 0 21 34 SBL 3 4800 835 .174* 1072 .223* SET. 1 1600 31 .019 77 .048 SBR 1 1600 142 ..089 203 .127 EEL 2 3200 157 .049 170 .053* EST 3 4800 .2408. .507* 1595 .341 ERR 0 0 27 40 WBL 1 1600 16 ..010* 55 .034 NET 3 4800 1321 .275 2352 .490* WBR f 512 1128 .TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .709 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 15 .009 36 .023 NET 2 3200 38 .018* 49 .026* NBR 0 0 21 34 SBL 3 4800 826 .172* 1071 .223* SET 1. 1600 31 ..019 77 .048 SBR 1 1600 142 .089 203 .127 EEL 2 3200 157 .049 170 .053* EBT 3 4800 2386 .503 *' .1582 ..338 EBR.. 0 0. 27 40_ WBL 1 1600 16 _010 *. 55 .034 WBT 3 4800 1295 .270. 2325 .484* WBR f 506 1118 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .703 .786 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL. - V /C NBL 1 .1600. 15 .009 36 .023 NET 2 3200 38 .018* 49 :026* NBR 0 0 21 34. SBL 3 4800 854 .178* 1154 .240* SET 1 1600 31 .019 77 .048 SBR 1 1600 142 .089 203 .127 EEL 2 3200 157 .049 170 :053* SET 3 4800 2480 .522* 1914 .407 ERR 0 0 27 40 WBL 1 1600 16 .010* 55 .034 NET 3 4800 1575 .328 2522 .525* WBR f 586 1169 .792 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .728 .844 A -142 30. Dover a Coast Hwy Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 15 ..009 36 .023 NET 2 3200 38. .018* 99 .026* NBR 0 0 21 39 SBL 3 9800 863 .180* 1155 .291* SET 1 1600 31 .019 77 .098 SBR 1. 1600 192 ..089. 203 .127 EEL 2 3200 157 .099 170 .053* EBT 3 9800 2502 .527* 1927 .910 EBR 0 0 27 90. WBL 1 1600 16 .010* 55 .039 WBT 3 9800 1601 .339 2599 .531* WBR f 592 1179 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .735 1 A -143 31. Bayside 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2.5 394 477 NBT ,0.5 4800 17,,093* 17 ..109* NBR 0 35 29 SBL 1 1600 19 .012 27. .017 , SET 1 1600 9 .017* 11 ..026* SBR 0 0 18 30 EBL 1 1600 26 .016 48 .030* EBT. 3 4800. 2800 _ .583* 1947. .406 ERR 1. 1600... 344....215 424 .265 WBL 1 1600 62 :039* 74 ..046 WET 4 6400 1407 .222 3026..477 *. WBR 0 0 14 29 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .732 .642 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2.5 397 482 NET 0.5 4800 17 .094* 17 .110* NBR 0 36 29 SBL. 1 1600 63 .039* 98 .061* SAT 1 1600 9 .028 11 .044 SBR 0 0 36 59 EBL 1 1600 61. .038 74 .046* EST 3 4800 2977 ,620* 2096 .437 EBR 1 1600 346 .216 431 .269 ML 1 1600 62 .039* 74 .046 WBT 4 6400 1534 .242 3240 .511* WBR 0 0. 14 29. Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .792 ..728 A -144 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL. VIC NBL 2.5 397 482 NBT 0.5 4800 17 .094* 17 .110* NBR 0 36 29 SBL 1 1600 63. .039 *. 98 .061* SET 1 1600 9 ..028 11. .044 SBR 0 0 36 59 EBL 1 1600 61 .038 74 .046* EST 3 .4800 2946 .614* 2083 .434 ERR 1 1600 .346 .216 431 .269 WBL 1 1600 62 .039* 74 .046 NIT 4. 6400 1502 .237 3203 ..505* WBR 0 0 14 29 Note: Assumes NIS .Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .786 .722 Existing + Growth .+ Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 2.5. 397 482 NET 0.5 4800 17 .094* 17 :110* NBR 0 36 29 SBL 1 1600 68 .043* 102 .064* SET 1 1600 9 .028 11 .044. SBR. 0 0 36 59, .EBL 1 1600. 61 .038 74 .046* EST 3 4800 3062 .638 *. 2468 .514 ESE 1 1600 346 .216 431 .269 WBL 1 1600 62 .039* 74 .046 WBT 4 6400 1849 .292 3437 .542* WBR 0 0 18. 33 Note:. Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .814 .762 i 31.: Bayside 6 Coast Hwy TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .820 .768 i i I A -145 32. Newport Center 6 Coast Hay Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES. CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 46 .014* 141 .044* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 82 539 EBL 2 3200 263 .082 307 .096* SET 3 4800. 1642 .342* 1567 .326 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WIT 3 4800 1222 _255 1881 .392* WBR f ` 225 160 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .356 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C HAL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 46 .019* 144 .045* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 91 570 EEL 2 3200 268 .084 320 .100* BHT 3 4600 1697 .354* 1627 .339 EBR A 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 NET 3 4800 1274 ..265 1944 .405* WBR f 226 166 .532 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .368 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PMPKHOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 44 .014* 135 .042* SET 0 0 0 0 SBR f 102 572 EBL 2 3200 268 .084 321 .100* EST 3 4800 1726 .360* 1633 .340 EBR 0 0 0 0 WRL 0 0 0 0 WBT 3 4800 1278 .266 1973 .411* WBR f 223 154 YTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .374 .550 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C HAL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL. 2 3200 46. .014* 144 .045* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 91 570 i EBL 2 3200 268 .084* 320 .100* EST 3 4800. 1853. .386 2140 ..446 EBR 0 0 0 0 WEI. 0 0 0 0 NET 3 4800 1743 .363* 2261 .471* WBR £ 226 166 .553 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .461 .61 A -146 32. Newport Center. 6 Coast Hwy I TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .462 .619 A -147 33. Avocado 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 78 .049 109 ..068 *. NBT 1 1600 106 .066* 90 .056 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 163 .102 SBL 1.5 319 50 SBT 300 3200 SBT 0.5 3200 43 .029* 130 .134* SBR f 305 50 EEL 275 1600 EEL 1 1600 199 .124* 120 .075 EBT 3 4800. 1233...267 EBR 1494 .326* EBR 0. 0 48 WBL 70. 1600 WBL 1 1600 95 .059 119 ..074* NET 3 .4800 1126 .271* 1365 .309. WBR 0 0 177 .Nate: 119 NIS Split Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing MAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .490 .602 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 78 .049 109 .068* NBT 1 1600 306 .066* 90 .056 NBR 1 1600 121 ..076 163 .102 SBL 1.5 53 319 SBT 0.5 3200 43 .030* 130 .140* SBR f 54, 305 EEL 1 1600 228. .143* 126. .079 EBT 3 4800 1287 .278 1560. .340* EBR 0 0 48 71 WBL 1 1600 95 .059 119 .074* WET 3 4800 1184 .288* 1421 .322 WBR 0 0 197 123 .Nate: Assumes NIS Split Phasing NYTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .527 .622 A -148 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. VIC VOL WC NBL 1 1600 78 .049 109 .068* NET 1 1600 106 .066* 90 .056 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 163 .102 SBL 1.5 50 300 SBT 0.5 3200 43 .029* 130. .134* SHE f 50 276' EBL 1 1600 199 .124* 120 .075 EST 3 4800 1288 .278 1564 ..341* EBR 0 0 48 71 WBL 1 1600 95 .059 119 .074* NET 3 4800 1186 .284* 1427 .322 WBR 0 0 177 119 Note: Assumes NIS .Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .503 ..617 Existing + Growth +Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 78 .049 109 .068* NET 1 1600 106 .066* 90 .056 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 163 .102 SBL 1.5 50 300 SBT 0.5 3200 43 .029* 130 .134* SBR f. 50 276 EEL 1 1600 199 .124* 120 .075 EBT 3 4800 1444 .311 2077 .448* EBR. 0 0 48 71. WBL _ 1 1600 95 .059 119 .074* WET 3 4800` 1655 .382* 1744 .388 WBR 0 0 .177 119 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing WAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .601 .724 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 78 .049 109 .068* NET 1 1600 106. .066* 90 .056 NBR 1 1600 121 .076 163 .102. SBL 1.5 53 319 SET 0.5 3200 43 .030* 130 .140* SBR f 54 305 EEL 1 1600 228 .143* 126 .079 EBT 3 4800 1443 .311 2073 .447* EBR 0 0 48 71 WBL 1 1600 95 .059 119 .074* WBT 3 4800 1653 .385* 1738 .388 WBR 0 0 197 123 Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing PAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .624 .1 A -149 34. Goldenrod 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR .CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V /C. NBL 0 0 106 110 110 {.0691* NUT 1 1600 0 .083* 0 .084 NBR 0 0 27 27 25 SBL 0 0 40 1.0251* 0 47 SBT 1 1600 5 .037 5 .047* SBR 0 0 14 SBR 23 EBL 1 1600 16 .010* 39 .024 EBT 2 3200 1132 .366 1717 .545* EBR 0 0 39 .382 26 WBL 1 1600 44 .028 26 .016* WBT 2 3200 1935 .608* 1703 .536 WBR 0 0 11 2 13 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .726 .677 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C .NBL 0 0. 106 110 1.0691* NBT 1 1600 0 .083* 0 .084 NBR 0 0 27 25 SBL 0 0 41 1.0261* 47 SBT 1 1600 5 .038 5. .047* SBR 0 0 14 23 EBL 1 1600 16 .010* 39 .024 EBT 2 3200 1197. .386 1812 .574* EBR 0 0 39 26 WBL 1 1600 44 .028 26 .016* WBT 2 3200 2041 .641* 1780 .560 WBR 0 0 11 13 RAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .760 .706 A -150 Existing + Regional Growth + Approval AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0. 0 106 110 1.0691* NBT 1. 1600 0 ..083* 0 .084 NBR 0 0 27 25 SBL 0 0 41.1.0261* 47 SBT 1 1600 5 .038 5 .047* SBR 0 0. 14 23 EBL 1 1600 16 .010* 39 ` .024 EBT 2 3200 1183 .382 1794 .569* ERR 0 0 39 26 NBL 1 1600 44 .028 26 .016* WBT 2 3200 2022 .635* 1778 .560 WBR. 0 0 11 13 1TALCAPACITY UTILIZATION .754 .701 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0. 0. .106 110 1.0691* NBT 1 1600 0 .083* 0 .084 NBR 0. 0 27 25 SBL 0 0 41. 1.0261* 47. SBT 1 1600 5 .038 5 .047* SBR 0 0. 14 23 EBL 1 1600 16 .010* 39 .024 EBT 2 3200. 1342 .432 2321 .733* EBR 0 0 39 26 WBL 1 1600 44 .028 26 .016* WBT 2 3200 2524 .792* 2095 .659 WBR 0 0 11 13 YfAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .911 .81 34. Goldenrod 6 Coast Hwy Existing + Growth +.Approved + Comllative + Project AMPS HOUR PM PE HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 .106 110 1.0691* NBT 1 1600 0 .083* 0..089 NBR 0 0 27 25 SBL 0 0 91 {,026)* 97. SBT 1 1600 5 .038 5 .097* SBR 0 0 19 23 EBL 1 1600 16 .010* 39 .029 EST 2 3200 1356 .936 2339 .739* EBR 0 0 39 26 WBL 1 1600 99 .028 26 .016* WBT 2 3200 2593 .798* 2097 .659 WBR 0 0 11 13 TOTAL CAPACITY OTILI moN .917 .871 A -151 35. Marguerite & Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 120 .075* 94 .059* NBT 1 1600 73 .081 71 .092 NBR 0 0 56 76 76 SBL SBL 1, 1600. 49 ,.031 92. .058 SBT 1 1600 67.121* 84 84 .101* SBR 0. 0. 127 78 78 EBL EBL 1 1600 48 .030* 55 .034 .EST 2 3200. 1104 '.345 1687 .527* _ERR 1.. 1600.. 81 ..051 57. .036 WBL 1 1600. 24 .015 63 ..039* WBT 2 .3200 1764 .562* 1366 .437 WBR 0 0 33 31 31 MTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .788 .72E Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 120 .075* 94 .059* NBT 1 1600 73 .081 71 .092 NBR 0 0 56 76 SBL 1 1600 49 .031 92 .058 SBT 1 1600 67 .121* 84 .101* SBR 0 0 .127 78 EBL 1 1600 48 .030* 55 .034 BHT 2 3200 .1167 .365 1779 .556* ERR 1 1600 81 .051 57 .036 WBL 1 1600 24' .015. 63 .039* WBT 2 3200 1864 .593* 1430 .457 WBR 0 0 33 31 MTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .819 .75! A -152 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C -. VOL. V/C NBL 1 1600 120 .075* 94 .059* NBT 1 1600 73 .081- 71- .092. NBR 0 0 56 76 1 SBL 1 1600 49 .031 92 .058 SBT 1 1600 67 .121* 84 .101* SBR 0 0 127 78 1 EBL 1 1600 48 .030* 55 .034 EBT 2 .3200 1153 .360 .1761 .550* ERR 1 1600. 81 .051 57 .036 ''. WBL 1 1600 24 .015 63 .039* WBT 2. 3200 1845 .587* 1428 .456. WBR 0 0 33 31 TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .813 .749. Existing .+ Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PH HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V /C' VOL 'V /C NBL 1 1600 120 .075* 94 .059* NBT 1 1600 73 .081 71 .092 NBR 0 0 56 76 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 105. .066 SBT 1 1600 67 .121* ` 84 .101* SBR 0 0 127 78 EBL 1 1600 48 .030* 55 .034 EBT. 2 3200 1312 .410 2288 .715* ERR 1 1600 81 .051 57 .036 WBL 1 1600 24 .015 63 .039 *. WBT 2 3200 2347 .748* 1745 .557 WBR 0 0 46 38 MTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .974 ..914 35. Marguerite S Coast Amp TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .980 .920 I i I A -153 36. Newport Center 6 Santa Barbara Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR - LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C - NBL 1 .1600 75 .047* 155 .097 *. NET 2 3200 134 .042 102 .032 NBR 1 1600 14 .009 34 .021 SBL 1 1600 11 .007 42 .026 SET 2 3200 76 .024* 180 .056* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 67 .042 EEL 1 1600 34 .021* 38 .024 EST 2 3200 28 .018 97 .061* EBR 0 0 165 .103 132 .083 WBL 0 0 2 WET 23 1.0141* NET 2 3200 5 ..004* 44 .028 WBR 0 0 6 .004 24 EBR Right Turn Adjustment EBR .044* Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 75 .047* 155 ..097* NBT 2. 3200 134 .042 102 .032 NBR 1 1600 14 .009 34 .021 SBL 1 1600 11. .007 42 .026 SET 2 3200 76 ..024* 180 .056* SBR 1 1600.. 39 ..024. 67 .042 EEL 1 1600 34 .021* 38 .024 EST 2 3200 28 .018 97 .061* EBR 0 0 165 .103 132 _ ,.083 WBL 0 0 2 23 {.0141 *. WET 2 3200 5 .004* 44 .028. WBR 0 0 6 .004 24 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .044* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .140 .228 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .140 .228 Existing + Growth +Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 75 .047 *. 155 .097* NET 2 3200 134 .042 102 .032 NBR 1 1600 14 ..009 34 .021 SBL 1 1600 11 .007 42 .026 SBT 2 .3200 76 .024* 180 ..056* SBR 1 .1600 39. .024 67 .042 EBL 1 1600 34 .021* 38 .024 EST. 2 3200 30 ..019 106 .066* EBR 0 0 165 .103 132 .083 BBL 0 0 2 23 {,0141* WBT 2 3200 6 .004* 53 .031 WBR 0 0 6 24 .Right Turn Adjustment. EBR .044* Existing + Growth . +Approved + Cucalative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 75 .047* 155 ;097* NET 2 3200 134 .042 102 .032 NBR 1 1600. 14 .009 34 .021 SBL 1 1600 11 .007 42. .026 SBT 2 3200 76 .024* 180 .056* SBR 1. 1600 39 .024 67, .042. EBL 1 1600 34 .021* 38 .024 EST 2 3200 28 .018 97 .061* EBR 0 0 165 .103 132. .083 WBL 0 0 2 23 1.0141* WET 2 3200 5 .004* 44 .028 WBR 0 0 6. .004.. 24 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .044 *. TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .140 .233 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..140 A -154 .228 36. Newport Center Santa Barbara TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION. .140 .233 A -155 37. Santa Crux 6 Newport Center Existing AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C - VOL V/C NBL 0 0 10 1.0061* 32 .022 50 1.0311* .086 NBT 2 3200 32 .022 144 .086 NBR 0 0 27 .020 80 1 SBL 1 1600 25 .016 32 .020 SBT 1 1600 85 .053* 120 .075* SBR 1 1600 56 .035. 103 .064 EBL 1 1600 35 .022 91 .057 EBT 2 3200 60 ..019* 102 .032* EBR 1. _1600. 22 .014 42 .026. NBL 1 1600 63 .039* 116 .073* WBT 2 3200 84 .026 102 .032 WBR 1 1600 34 .021 81 .051 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .117 .211 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 10 {,0061* 50 {;0311* NBT 2 3200 33 .022 153 .088 NBR 0 0 27 80 SBL 1 1600 25 .016 32 .020 SBT 1 1600 87 .054* 129 .081* SBR 1 1600 56 .035 103 .064 EBL 1 1600 35 .022 91 .057 EBT 2 3200 60 .019* 102 .032* EBR 1 1600 22 .014 42 .026 WBL 1. 1600 63 .039* 116 .073* WBT 2 3200 84 .026 102 .032 WBR 1 1600 34 .021 81 .051 OTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .118 .217 A -156 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0. 0 10 1.0061*. - 50 1.0311* NBT NBT 2 3200 32 .022 144, .086 NBR 0 0 27 80 SBL SBL 1 1600 25 .016. 32 .020 SBT. 1 1600 85 .053* 120. .075* SBR 1 1600 56 .035 103 .064 EBL 1 1600 35 .022 91 .057 EBT 2 3200 60 .019* 102 .032* EBR. 1 1600 22 .014.... 42....026 WBL NBL 1 1600 63 .039 *.` 116 .073* WBT 2 3200 84 .026. 102 ..032 WBR 1 1600 34 .021 81 .051 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION ..117 .211 Existing .+ Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0. 101.0061* 50 1.0311* NBT 2 3200 32 .022 144 .086 NBR 0 0 27 80 SBL 1 1600 25. .016 32 .020 SBT 1 1600 85 .053* 120 .075* SBR 1 1600 56 ..035 103 .064 EBL 1 1600 35 .022 91 .057 EBT 2 3200 60 .019* 102 ,032* PER 1 1600 22 .014 42 .026 WBL 1 1600 63 .039* 116 .073* WBT 2 3200 84 .026 102 .032 WBR 1 1600 34 .021 81 .051 OTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .117 .211 37. Santa Cruz 5 Newport Centel I TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .118 .217 A -157 38. Newport Center & Santa Rosa Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY- VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 .1600 31 .019 38 .024 NBT 2 3200 69 .022* 204 .064* NBR 1 1600 22 .014 36 .023 SBL 1 1600 87 .054* 80. .050* SBT 2 3200 183 .057 228 .071 SBR 1 1600 43 .027 84 .053. EBL 0 0 20 84 EBT 2 3200 39 .027* 67. .067* !! EBR 0 0 26 63 WBL 0.5 42 33 WBT 2 4000 87 ..032* 302 .034* OR , 1 ` 1600 .145 .091. 163 .102 Right Turn Adjustment WBR ,018* WBR .030* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 31 .019* 38 .024 NBT '2 3200 75_023 230 .072* NBR 1 1600 22 .014 36 .023 SBL 1 .1600 87 .054 80 .050* SBT 2 3200 213 .067* 243 .076 SBR 1 1600 43 .027 84 .053 EEL 0 0 20 84 EST 2 3200 34 .025* 42 .053* EBR 0 0 26 63 .039 WBL 0.5 42 33' NET 2 4000 76 .030* 60. . 023* WBR 1 1600 .145 .091 163 .102. Right Turn Adjustment WBR :014* WBR .041* Note: Assumes BIN Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .155 .239 A -158 Existing + Regional Growth + Approved AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 31 .019 38 :.024 NBT , 2. 3200. 69 .022* 204 .064* NBR 1 1600 22 .014 36 .023 SBL 1 1600 87 .054* 80 :050* SET 2 3200 183 ..057 228. .071 SBR 1 1600 43 .027. 84' .053 EBL 0 0` 20 84 BHT 2 3200 39 .027* 67 ..067* EBR 0 ` 0 26. 63 WBL ` 0.5 42 33 WBT 2 4000 87 .032* 102 .034* WBR 1 1600 145 .091 163 .102 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .018* WBR .030* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .153 .245 Existing +. Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 31 .019 38 .024 NET 2 3200. 69 .022 *. .204 .064* HER 1 1600 22 .014 - 36 .023 SBL 1 1600 87 ..054* 80 ..050* SET 2. 3200 183 ..057 228 .071 SBR 1 1600 43 .027 84 .053 EBL 0 0 20 84 EST 2 3200 50 .030* 109 :080* EBR 0 0 26 63 WBL 0.5 ` 42 33 WBT 2 .4000 126 .042* 127 .040* WBR 1 1600 145 .091 163 -.102 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .008* WBR .024* Note: Assumes B/W Split Phasing ! TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .156 .258 38.; Newport Center >6 Santa Rosa Nristing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PE HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NEL 1 1600 31 .019* 38 .024 NBT 2 3200 75. .023 230 .072* NBR 1 1600 22 .014 36 .023 SBL 1 1600 87 .054 80 .050* SBT 2 .3200 .213 .067* 243 .076 SBR 1 1600 43 ..027 84 .053 EBL 0 0 20 84 EST 2 3200 45 .028* —84. .072* EBR 0 0 26 63. ML 0..5 42 33 WBT 2 4000 115 _039* 85 .030* WBR 1 1600 .145 .091 163 .102 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .005* WBR .034* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .158 .25E A -159 39. Newport Center 6 San Niguel Existing AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR VOL LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 .1600 48 .030 98 .061* NET 2 3200 147 .086* 98 .061 NBR 0 0 127 0 180 .113 SBL 0 0 55 1.0341* 3200 104 .041 SET 2 3200 54 .041 174 .121* SBR 0 0 21 1600 110 .008 EBL 1 1600 13 .008 42 .026 EBT 2 3200 39 .012* 248. .078 *. ERR 1 1600 17 .011 .100 .063... NBL 1. 1600 132 ..083* 3200 243 .152* WBT 2 3200 .138 ..043 282 .088 WBR 1 1600 .107 .067 160 .100 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .215 .412 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 98 .061* NET 2 3200 150 .087* 108 .068 NBR 0 0 '127 180 ,.113. SBL 0 0 62 {.0391* 84 SET 2 3200 64 .046 167 .113* SBR 0 0 21 110 EEL 1 1600 13 .008 42 .026 EBT 2 3200 41 .013* 264 .083* EBR 1 1600 17 .011 100 .063',. WBL 1 1600 132 ..083* 243 .152* MT 2 3200 142 .044 296 .093 WBR 1 1600 101 .063 134 .084 DOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .222 .40 A_160 Existing + Eegional Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 .030 98 .061* NET 2. 3200 147 .086* 98 .061. HER 0 0 127 180 .113 SBL 0 0 55 1.0341* 104 SET 2 3200 54 .041 174 .121* SBR 0 0 21 110' EEL 1 1600 13 .008 42 .026 EBT 2 3200 39 .012* 248 .078* ERR 1 1600. 17 .011 100....063 WBL 1 1600 132 .083 *. 243 .152* NET 2 3200 138 .043 282 .088 WBR 1 1600 107 .067 160 .100 OTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION ..215 .412 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL. V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 48 ..030 98 .061* NET 2 3200 147 .086* 98 .061 HER 0 0 127 180 .113 SBL. 0 0 55 1.0341* 104 SET 2 3200 54 .041 174 .121* SBR 0 0 21 110 EEL 1 1600 13 .008 42 .026 EBT 2 3200 51 .016* 285 ,089* EBR 1 1600 17 .011 100 .063 WBL 1 1600 132 .083* 243 .152* WBT 2 3200 175 .055 304 .095 WBR 1 1600 107 .067 160 .100 OTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .219 .423 39.: Newport Center s San Niquel .TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .226 .420 i :.. A -161 40. Newport Center /Fashion Island 4 Newport Center Existing Project AM PK HOUR - AM PK HOUR PM PK AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY- VOL VIC VOL VIC - NBL 1 .1600 .167 .104* 143 .089 *. NET 2 3200 58. .018 169 .053 NBR 1 1600 276 .173 119 .074 SBL 1 1600 4 .003 41. .026 SET 2 3200 10 .003* 112 .036* SBR 0 0 1 3 3 EEL EEL 1 1600 6 .004 22 .014 EBT 2 3200 98 .031* 105 .033* EBR 1 1600 125 .078 215 .134.. WBL 1. 1600 68 ..043* 376 .235* WBT 2 3200 41 _013 83 .026 WBR 1 .1600 12 .008 52 .033 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .037* ERR .034* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .218 .427 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR - AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY. VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 167 .104 *. 143 .089* NET 2 3200 60 .019 178 ' .056 NBR 1 1600 274 .171 111 .069 SBL 1 1600 4 .003 41 .026 SET 2 3200 11 .004* 121 .039* SBR 0 0 1 3 3 EEL EEL 1 1600 6 .004 22 .014 EBT 2 3200 98 .031* 105 .033* EBR 1 1600 125 .078 215 .134 WBL 1 1600 78 .049* 369 .231* WET 2 3200 41 .013 83 .026 WBR 1 1600 12 .008 52 .033 .Right Turn Adjustment NBR ..029* .EBR .034* Existing + Regional. Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES .CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL. VIC NEL 1 1600 167 .104* 143 ..089* NET , 2 3200 58 .018 169 .053. NBR 1 1600 276 .173 119 .074 EEL 1 1600 4 .003 41 .026 SET 2 3200 10 ..003* 112. .036* SEE, 0 0 1 3.... EEL 1 1600 6 .004 22 .014 EBT 2 3200 98 .031* 105 .033* ERR 1 1600 _ 125 .078 215 .134 WBL 1 1600 fib .043* 376 .235 *. NET 2 3200 41 .013 83 .026. WBR 1 1600 12 .008 52 .033 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .037* ERR .034* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .218 .427 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR - PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 167 .104* 143 .089* NET 2 3200 58 .018 169 .053 NBR 1 1600 276 .173 119 .074 EEL 1 1600 4 .003 41 .026 SET 2 3200 10 .003* 112 .036* SBR 0 0 1 3 EEL 1 1600. 6 .004 22 .014. EBT 2 3200 98 .031 *, 105 .033* EBR. 1 1600 125 .078 215 .134 WBL 1 1600 68 .043* 376 .235* NET 2 3200 41 .013 83 .026 WBR 1 1600 12 .008 52 .033 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .037* EBR .034* TOTAL. CAPACITY UTILIZATION .217 ..426 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .218 .427 MM 40. Newport Center /Fashion Island 6 Newport Centex TOTAL CAPACITY UTILISATION .217 .426 FINAL City of Newport Beach NEWPORT CENTER TRIP TRANSFER TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared by: Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. 2223 Wellington Avenue, Suite 300 Santa Ana, California 92701 -3161 (714) 667 -0496 November 7, 2007 City of Newport Beach NEWPORT CENTER TRIP TRANSFER TRAFFIC STUDY As part of the proposed North Newport Center Project, The Irvine Company is proposing to remove some existing and entitled uses in Block 600 and replace them with office uses in Block 500. As part of the proposed transfer of uses, The Irvine Company and the City wish to reserve 72,000 square feet of the converted uses for a new City Hall building in Block 500. The transfer of development rights within Newport Center is allowed in accordance with the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 provided the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. (AFA) examined the conversion and transfer of the entitled uses into equivalent office uses on the basis of a PM peak hour trip generation equivalency basis. ANALYSIS The transfer involves existing uses including a health club, restaurant, and office as well as remaining, but as yet unused entitlement for hotel uses in Block 600, which will be replaced by office use in Block 500. The existing uses in Block 600 amount to 42,036 square feet (sf) of office, restaurant and health club uses. The unused entitlement in Block 600 is 195 hotel rooms. These entitled uses in Block 600 are to be replaced in Block 500 with office use, 72,000 sf of which may be used for a new City Hall. The analysis is based upon use of the worst case PM peak hour trip rates. Rates for the analysis were taken from ITE's 7* Edition Trip Generation publication. The trips generated by the uses proposed to be eliminated are calculated in Table 1. As indicated, the uses included as the basis of the proposed transfer are projected to generate 339 PM peak hour trips. A potential new City Hall of 72,000 sf would generate 108 peak hour trips (based on a rate of 1.5 trips per thousand square feet) leaving 231 trips, which can be allocated toward other uses. These 231 PM peak hour trips equate to 206,000± sf of office use based on a trip rate of 1. 12 trips/TSF. The proposed project consists of 205,161 sf of office space in Block 500. Therefore, the total PM peak hour trip generation associated with the converted uses proposed for Block 500 would be 338 trips. Newport Center Trip Tmosfer 1 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Study 0170SOrpt.doc Table 1 CONVERTED USES Use (Entitled in Block 600 PM Peak Hour Rate PM Peak Trips Hotel 195 Rooms — Unbuilt Entitlement 0.70 (ITE 310 ' 136 Family Fitness 17,300* s —Existing 4.05 ITE 492)' 70 Palm Gardens 16,447* s —Existing 7.49 (ITE 931 ' 123 Eliminated Office 6,789* s — Existing 1.12 (ITE 710 4 8 Eliminated Office 1,500 s — Existing 1.12 (ITE 710 4 2 TOTAL 339 Use (Proposed in Block 500 Office 205,161 s 1.12 (ITE 710 )4 230 City Hall 72,000 s 1.50 ITE 750 )4 108 TOTAL 338 Per building permit information. Hotel (rates applied for each occupied room) 3 Health Club (rates per TSF) 3 Quality Restaurant (rates per TSF) 4 Trip rate per TSF determined from applying the ITE office regression equation to the existing (408 TSF) and proposed future (614 TSF) office use, and calculating the rate based on the square footage increment (206 TSF) I Closest ITE rate (in both function and magnitude) to match the GP assumption for City Hall trip generation. Newport Center Trip Transfer 2 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Study 017080rpt.doc CONCLUSION In summary, it is concluded that the currently entitled uses in Block 600 Newport Center (i.e., 195 hotel rooms and 42,036 sf of health club, retail; and office uses) proposed for transfer to Block 500 equate to 339 PM peak hour trips. These 339 trips would match the amount of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by a new 72,000 sf City Hall plus another 205,161 sf of office use. Therefore, the proposed transfer of development rights will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. Newport Center Trip Transfer 3 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Traffic Study 017080rptdoc STATE OF CALIFORNIA J COUNTY OF ORANGE } as. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, LaVonne M. Harkless; City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2007 -79 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 11th day of December 2007, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Henn, Curry, Rosansky, Webb, Daigle, Gardner, Mayor Selich Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 12th day of December 2007. yg" City Clerk A tkEwpb Newport Beach, California NFFNIA QJ (Seal) i