HomeMy WebLinkAboutIS002_NEWPORT NORTH I5002
Interoffice Memorandum 11-1E IRVINE C PAW
s �
6 RF
ti
To: Keith Greer cc; ` p0, ",�`
F q�n tF p a
Gf is F�d �04 0
From: Mike Erickson 2 NFhpoRry �,sJB� 9
Date: February 15, 1978 o�<icpEq
oy �O
Subject: Review of Revised Newporter North Traffic Analysis N
Engineering Planning has reviewed the revised Newporter North traffic analysis and
has several concerns we believe should be discussed with- the City and their consult-
ant. It1has been stated several times in joint City/Company meetings that the sub-
ject analysis is intended strictly as a guide for determining a land use plan-and
will be supplanted by the final analysis when the project's EIR is formulated.
While recognizing this report is not intended for public distribution, we believe
that several issues and/or questions should be surfaced at this time to assure that
they are recognized. We also believe that everyone should recognize that the
computer traffic forecast currently being developed for the City could well change
some of the "ultimate" traffic conditions on which the analysis was based. Further,
the effect is expected to be particularly significant to this analysis as the trip
generation rates for neighboring Fashion Island are being substantially reduced.
The following is a list of the comments and questions we have on the subject analysis.
Page 2 - In the "Traffic Impacts" section, it would seem that the ranges of inter-
section capacity utilization for the two' intersections should be refer-
enced rather than only the maximum figures. Referencing the range of
impact would provide more pertinent information than limiting the data
presented to a "worst case."
Pages 3, As mentioned in our review of the original draft report, all references
4, 9, to "driveways" should be changed to access points. The report's current
etc. terminology is misleading as to the interface with Jamboree.
Pages 4 Both in the discussion of the "driveway configurations" (Page 4) and "Site
and 10 Access Points" (Page 10) , much of the wording seems to indicate that only
one access point on Jamboree southerly of the Santa Barbara intersection
would occur. While the report specifies in two places that both of these
access points could be utilized concurrently, it seems the report should
be consistent in its discussions regarding this situation.
Fig. 1 As discussed in the meeting to review the rough draft of this analysis, I
have serious misgivings about the "estimated" average daily traffic of
1,000 vehicles per day (vpd) on Backbay Drive. This number seems high,
particularly when compared to the existing daily volume of 4„000 vpd on
Santa Barbara Drive easterly of Jamboree as shown on the subject figure.
Keith Greer February 15, 1976
Page 2
Pg 10 in the first paragraph's discussion of the ICU calculation for the ultimate
conditions, reference is made to this calculation being done using "exist-
ing geometries." Checking the calculations in the Appendix, it seems to
indicate that "ultimate" standard geometries were used as would be expected
for ultimate conditions. This discrepancy should be resolved.
Pg 11 While the discussion concerning a potential access to Backbay Drive seems
to indicate that no widening- of the existing roadway will be required, a
definitive statement on that subject should be made, particularly in light
of the seemingly inflated existing traffic estimate for this area.
Pg 11 Internal Circulation Guidelines
General: It is our understanding that the listed guidelines were developed
by the consultant from his background and are not necessarily representa-
tive of the City of Newport Beach's development criteria. We believe it
is important to note that while these guidelines will be followed where
possible, cases may arise where the design may require use of City and/or
other appropriate jurisdictional design criteria. The following are com-
ments relating to the proposed guidelines.
Guide 1: In planning of recent developments, we have utilized a minimum
radius of 200' and believe that the results are quite acceptable.
Guide 5: We assume the guide should read, "between 80 'and" 90 degrees."
Guide 9: Although the Newport Beach standards call for a 36' roadway sec-
tion in such cases, our recent planning efforts have incorporated a cross-
'section of 32' where parking will be limited to one side. The 32' section
would then yield two 12' through lanes and an 8' parking area.
Guide lle It appears that a correction of this guideline is necessary.
It would seem (and the consultant agrees) that its intent is to provide
a project access of sufficient width to allow for egress and whose entrance
would be equal in width to the westbound through lanes of Santa Barbara
easterly of Jamboree. As the guide is currently written, the project
entrance would be much wider than practically necessary.
MGN:lab
J
f
7W IRVINE CMPAW
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach,California 92663
(714) 644-3011
February 17, 1978
Beverly D. Wood
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: NEWPORTER NORTH
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Dear Bev:
In our judgment, the preliminary traffic analysis prepared by Weston
Pringle & Associates for the most part achieves the stated objectives
of the analysis. However, the Company does have several comments and
questions which we feel should be considered in preparing the final
traffic analysis for the EIR.
The attachment provides a summary of The Irvine Company's questions
and comments on the preliminary analysis. Your consideration of
these comments and questions in preparing the final analysis for the
EIR will be appreciated. In the meantime, I would appreciate receiv-
ing three copies of the Weston Pringle analysis as accepted by the
City of Newport Beach.
The $203.05 remaining balance of The Irvine Company's deposit should
be maintained in the account for application against the anticipated
EIR expenditures.
Your cooperation and assistance are sincerely appreciated.
Very truly yours,
C. Keith Greer
Project Manager S�
Community Development AFC
Residential Division b 0e°e p`nty0
CKG:mab £` Dept.
9
Enclosure 11Z4, pPTOF 8A
cc: Mike Erickson Z, �AciFF4cy ��
N
o��g WPp�@
-k CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
G41;:0 �P
February 14, 1978
C. Keith Greer, Project Manager
Commercial Development, Residential Division
The Irvine Company •
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach , Calif. 92663
Subject: Newporter North Traffic Analysis
Dear Mr. Greer:
The revised report by Weston Pringle and Associates was submitted
for review on January 13, 1978. It is my understanding that you
and your planning personnel have some further comments on the
revised report, but that for the most part the objectives of the
study have been met, and the remaining questions have been answered
through direct communication with the consultant. It would be
helpful if you would forward your comments for our records and
future reference in reviewing the project.
To date , the City has authorized payment of $2 , 796 . 95 to Weston
Pringle and Associates for their services from the total deposit
of $3,000 . 00 . Since the contract has been completed, please
inform us as to whether you wish to keep the balance ( $203 .05)
in the account or prefer to have it refunded at this time .
Thank you for your cooperation .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
By _---
Bever D. Wood,
Env ' r nmental Coordinator
BDW/sh
cc:' Wes Pringle
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
•
P A WeAw I?VgQe and AooadaW
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
January 13, 1978 ��c`�� Fb
9 Q�Go G-Q
Oe yO��
Ms. Beverly Wood
Environmental Coordinator 19
City of Newport Beach a
3300 Newport Boulevard w N
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Ms. Wood:
We have prepared a traffic impact analysis for the proposed residential develop-
ment of Newporter North. The traffic impact analysis will contain the following
sections:
1. Findings
- Traffic Impacts
- Mitigation Measures
2. Project Description
- Location
- Proposed Development
3. Existing Traffic Conditions
- Surrounding Street System
- Existing Traffic Volumes
- Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization
4. Project Traffic
- Traffic Generation
- Traffic Distribution
- Traffic assignment
- Project Traffic Volumes
5. Future Traffic Conditions
- Existing Pius Project Traffic
- Future Intersection Capacity Utilization
- Traffic Signal Warrants
- Ultimate Traffic Conditions
2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 (714) 871-2931
• Y • . -L n
6. On-Site Traffic Considerations
- Site Access Points
- Internal Circulation
7. Other Traffic Considerations
- Public Transit Service
Appendix A - Intersection Capacity Utilization Calculations
Appendix B - Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
1. Findings
This traffic analysis has determined the traffic impacts and led to recommen-
dation of the mitigation measures discussed below,
Traffic Imuacts
The following traffic impacts will result from the proposed development.
A. The traffic generated by the proposed development will utilize
up to a maximum of 5 percent of the existing intersection capacity at San' Joa-
quin Rills Road and Jamboree assuming mitigation measure A is implemented (See
Table 1 for intersection capacity utilizations) .
B. The traffic generated by the proposed development will utilize
up to 18 percent of the existing intersection capacity at Santa Barbara and
Jamboree, assuming mitigation measure A is implemented (See Table 1 for inter-
section capacity utilization) .
C. The site has excellent public transit service which could reduce
vehicle dependence for mobility.
-3-
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are recommended:
A. An additional site access point to San Joaquin Hills Road
opposite of Park Newport is not recommended because this access will in-
crease the intersection capacity utilization at San Joaquin Hills Road and
Jamboree (See Table 1 for intersection capacity utilization) .
B. The proposed driveway on Jamboree south of Santa Barbara
should be restricted to right-turn-in, right-turn-out only operation (Dis-
cussed in Section 6) .
C. The site access point referenced in mitigation measure B
should be located approximately 1900 feet south of Santa Barbara, or between
1000 and 1100 feet south of Santa Barbara, or both (Discussed in Section 6).
D. The site access point referenced in mitigation measure B should
have a 275 foot acceleration lane and a 275 foot deceleration lane (Discussed in
Section 6) .
2 Project Description
The project location and proposed development are discussed below.
Location
The project is known as Newporter North and lies in the southwest
quadrauL of the intersection of Jamboree and San Joaquin Mlls Road in the
City of Newport Beach. The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road on the
north, Jamboree Road on the east, Back Bay Drive on the west, and the Newporter
Inn and John Wayne Tennis Club on the south. To the east is Newport Center;
and to the west is Upper Newport Bay; and to the north is Park Newport.
Proposed Development
Y The proposed development will consist of adult-only condominiums
? and single family homes as well as a local park primarily serving the Newporter
North residents. Three levels of development have been analyzed, and each level
will be referred to as an Alternate in this report. The Alternates are as
follows:
Alternate A - 704 Dwellings
Alternate B - 440 Dwellings
Alternate C - 300 Dwellings
It will be assumed for each Alternate that 50 percent are condominiums dwellings
and 50 percent are single family dwellings.
For each Alternate, two driveway Configurations are possible. The Configura-
tions are as follows:
Configuration 1 - One site driveway, on Jamboree Road opposite
Santa Barbara Drive and second driveway on Jamboree Road
south of Santa Barbara Drive.
Configuration 2 - Same as Configuration 1 plus a third driveway
on San Joaquin Hills Road opposite Park Newport.
3 Existing Traffic Conditions
The traffic conditions as they exist today are discussed below.
Surrounding Street System
The surrounding streets are Jamboree Road, San Joaquin Hills Road,
Santa Barbara Drive, and Back Bay Drive. Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills Road
are four lane divided roadways; Santa Barbara is six lane undivided; and Back
-s-
Bay Drive is a narrow two lane roadway. The intersections of Jamboree and
San Joaquin Hills Road has a five phase traffic signal with separate turn
phasing provided for northbound and southbound traffic. The intersection
of Jamboree and Santa Barbara has a three phase traffic signal with separate
turn phasing provided for southbound left turns.
Existing Traffic Volumes
AM and FM peak hour turning movement counts as well as daily traf-
fic volumes were obtained for the streets ,in the vicinity of the project site.
Appendix A shows turning movement volumes for the intersections of Jamboree
and San Joaquin Hills Road, and Jamboree and Santa Barbara Drive. The daily
two way traffic volumes on the surrounding streets are shown in Figure 1.
Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization
Using the existing traffic volumes and existing geometries, the
existing Intersection Capacity Utilizations (ICU) were calculated for critical
intersections. The calculations are shown in Appendix A, and an explanation
of ICU and how it is calculated is contained in Appendix B. Essentially, ICU
is a comprehensive measure of what part of total intersection capacity is
utilized. An ICU of 0.80 or 80 percent would mean that 80 percent of the
available capacity is utilized, and 0.20 or 20 percent excess capacity exists.
Table 1 contains the existing ICU s, and also contains existing traffic plus
project traffic ICU's which will be discussed later.
A, proiccL 'Traffic
The traffic volumes which will be generated by the project are discussed below.
To determine project traffic, a three step process is utilized. First, the
traffic volumes which will be generated by the proposed development are •deter-
mined. Second, those traffic volumes are geographically distributed to major
0 FIGURE '1 •
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
40,000
+J
ro
10,000 Estimated) 19,000
w San Joaquin
0
Hills Road
o '
0
28,000 (Estimated)
4 000
Santa Barbara
Drive
28,000
ro
A
ro v
P ro
0
ri P+
ro v
{q
N
O
CU
ro
ti
Traffic Volumes and Estimates
from City of Newport Beach
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
Table 1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
Intersection Capacity Utilization (Percent)
Alternate Intersection Peak Existing Existing + Pro ect Traffic Volume
Hour Traffic Configuration 1 Configuration 2
Volume (Two Accesses) (Three Accesses)
A San Joaquin Hills Road AM 75 79 80
and
Jamboree PM 82 87 89
704
Santa Barbara AM 48 60 58
Dwellings and
Jamboree PM 49 67 67
B San Joaquin Hills Road AM 75 77 78
and
Jamboree PM 82 84 87
440
Santa Barbara AM 48 56 58
Dwellings and
Jamboree PM 49 67 67
C San Joaquin Hills Road AM 75 77 77
and
Jamboree PM 82 82 85
300
Santa Barbara AM 48 56 58
Dwellings and
Jamboree PM 49 67 67
-6-
attractions of trips such as employment centers, commercial activities, and
recreation opportunities. Third, the trips are then assigned to specific
roadways and the project traffic volumes determined on a route by .route basis.
Traffic Generation
Trip generation is the relationship between trips made in an area
and characteristics of the area such as land use, population, employment and
other activity measures. The desired end product in trip generation analysis
is an accurate identification and quantification of trips beginning and ending.
The assumption of the stability of the relationships between trips and land
use and socio-economic variables over time is basic to forecasting, and the
significance of this assumption cannot be overemphasized. No matter how well
the estimated relationship corresponds to the observed data today, a signifi-
cant change in lifestyle, cost or availability of energy, or transit .service
will alter trip generation rates.
Numerous studies by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, CalTrans, City
of Newport Beach, ourselves, and others have provided data concerning the traf-
fic characteristics which may be expected for various classes of land use.
These traffic characteristics data are related to amounts of floor area, adre-
age, dwelling units, employment and other demographic characteristics which
would pertain to a particular project. In this particular case, the number of
dwellings allow reasonable estimates to be made of future traffic volumes.
The trip generation rates were determined for daily, AM peak hour inbound, AM
outbound, PM inbound, and PM outbound. In this study, AM peak hour is 8-9 AM
and PM peak hour is 5-6 PM. Trip generation rates represent 'trip ends", a
trip end being either the origin or destination of a journey. For example,
a trip from home-to-work will have a trip end at home and a trip end at work,
so that each trip has two trip ends. If ten vehicle trips are generated in
the day, five vehicles arrive and five vehicles depart.
Table 2
Trip Generation
Time Period Trips Trips Generated by Alternate
Generated A B O
Per
Dwelling (704' (440 (300 ,
Dwellings) Dwellings) Dwellings) .
Daily 8.0 5600 3500 2400
AM
In 0.2 140 90 60
Out 0.5 350 220 150
Total 0.7 490 310 210
PM
In 0.5 350 220 150
Out 0.3 210 130 90
Total 0.8 560 350 240
For this study a trip generation rate of 8 trips per day per dwelling is _
i
assumed, and is applied to both the single family as well as multi-family
dwellings. It is expected that there will be about 50 percent of each type
of dwelling. Normally single family dwellings generate between 8 and 13
trips per day and multi-family dwellings generate between 5 and 9 trips per
day. Trip generation in Newport Beach has usually been about equal to the
low end of these ranges. Thus, the 8 trips per dwelling is probably higher
than will actually occur. '
By multiplying the trip generation rates by the land usage quantities, the
daily AM in, AM Out, PM In, and PM Out volumes are calculated as shown in
Table 2.
Traffic Distribution
The site has only residential and local park land uses. Virtually
all home based auto trips will exit the site and go north or south on Jamboree;
east on San Joaquin Hills Road to any one of several possible roads and
destinations; or to Newport Center. The traffic distribution shown in Figure
2 is based upon an examination of employment, shopping, and recreational oppor-
tunities which will be likely to attract project residents.
Traffic Assignment
Once the traffic distribution is determined the next step is to
assign the trips to specific streets. This has been done in Figure 3 in
which the percent of inbound and outbound traffic utilizing the intersections
of Jamboree and San Joaquin 11il.ls Road, and Jamboree and Santa Barbara are
shown.
Project Traffic Volumes
Once the traffic generation, distribution, and assignment are com-
plete, calculating the project traffic is simple. This calculation is done in
FIGURE 2
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
40%
San Joaouin
Hills Road
201
Site
15%
Newport
ro
Center �'
m
5
v
n
0
ro �
N
a �
x
v +'
N
N
o
25%
h
Pacific Coast Highway
WESTON PRINGLE AND. ASSOCIATES
FIGURE 3 • III
TRIP ASSIGNMCNT
40% 40%
u L --� �---� L
25%
65 • 65°
10%
95% 101% 85%
Site Site
10
5% 15%
Inbound Outbound
Configuration 1 25� Configuration 1 25%
4031
25%
50° O/
15%
15% 10%
0
80% 10% 70/
Site Site
1
5% 15%
Inbound Outbound
Configuration 2 Configuration 2
25% 25%
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
G.
. • • -s- II
Appendix A for the 704 dwelling unit level of development. The percents of,
k project traffic which make each intersection movement are multiplied by the
9
AM and PM, In and Out trips generated by the project.
5. Future Traffic Conditions
Future traffic volumes are determined by adding project traffic volumes to
existing traffic volumes. Once future traffic volumes are determined, them
future traffic conditions can be determined.
Existing Plus Project Traffic
Appendix A shows the existing, project, and total (existing plus
project) AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes which can be expected at the
intersections of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree, and Santa Barbara and
Jamboree, assuming 704 dwellings are constructed.
Future Intersection Capacity Utilization
Future intersection capacity utilization (ICU) calculations have
been made for existing plus project traffic volumes and existing geome'trics
at the intersections of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree, and at Santa
Barbara and Jamboree. The results of these calculations are shown in Table
1 and the actual calculations for 704 dwellings are in Appendix A. For 440
and 300 dwellings the corresponding ICU's are shown in Table 1, although the
calculations do not appear in Appendix A. Appendix B contains an explanation
of what ICU is and how it is calculated. As previously stated under "Existing
Intersection Capacity Utilization", ICU is a comprehensive measure of what
part of total capacity is utilized. An ICU of 0.80 or 80 percent would mean
that 80 percent of the available capacity is utilized and 0.20 or 20 percent
excess capacity exists.
Traffic Signal Warrants
Traffic signals exist today at San Joaquin Hills Road and ,Jamboree,
and Santa Barbara and Jamboree. The only intersection which conceivably will
warrant a traffic signal as a result of this project will be the project
-9-
driveway on Jamboree located south of Santa Barbara. Traffic signal warrant
volumes were compared to those anticipated in this driveway and a signal will
not be required regardless of which Alternate is constructed.
Ultimate Traffic Conditions.
Ultimate traffic conditions at ultimate build-out of the City of
Newport Beach and surrounding areas have been the subject of several traffic
analysis. The first two of these studies were the Drachman study and the AMV
study, and both modeled daily traffic volumes on the arterial highway network.
Following these studies were the Newport Center Traffic Study and Newport
Center Traffic Study Phase II by Crommelin-Pringle and Associates. This
study modeled peak hour traffic volumes by direction and by turning movement
at ultimate development in and near Newport Center. For traffic from sources
other than Newport Center, the Drachman and AMV studies were used in making
an estimate of the "other" traffic. In the Newport Center Traffic Study, Phase
II, the Newporter North development was included as pert of 'other" traffic,
and thus the results on that study include this development's traffic contribu-
tion at ultimate build-out.
A study is now underway by Kimmel and Basmaciyan in which arterial highway two
way volumes will be modeled by computer. This study assumes Newporter North
will be 704 dwellings, each generating 11 trips per day .for a total of 7744
vehicle trips per day. This is at least 37 percent higher than will actually
be generated as determined in this study and shown in Table 2. Although this
project will make a very insignificant contribution to total traffic in the
area, it is suggested that the five above studies be referenced if the reader
wishes to examine traffic operations at ultimate build-out of all developments.
-10-
For the intersection of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree, the .best esti-
mate of ultimate traffic volumes comes from the Newport Center Traffic Study.,
Phase II, Appendix C, Intersection 1. When these volumes are used and an
ICU performed, the resulting ICU using existing geometrics is 1.390 in the
AM peak and 1.425 in the PM peak. The ICU calculation is shown in the last
part of Appendix A of this report. This ICU assumes for the subject site the
development allowed in the general plan which is approximately 704 dwellings
at 11 trips per dwelling. Adjustment to this ICU for lower trip generation
rate and lower number of dwelling units on the site in 'question will decrease
the ICU as shown in Table 3.
6. On-Site Traffic Considerations
Site Access Points
Three possible access points exist to the project site. One is
on Jamboree opposite Santa Barbara Drive; a second is on San Joaquin Hills
Road opposite of Park Newport; and a third is on Jamboree south of Santa
Barbara Drive. The access ,point on San Joaquin Hills Road opposite Park
Newport is not recommended because it actually increases the ICU at San
Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree as shown in Table 1.
These three access points were field reviewed with City of Newport Beach
Traffic Engineer, and all were found to be acceptable with the following
conditions regarding the driveway on Jamboree south of Santa Barbara:
a. Access should be restricted to right-turn-in, right-turn-out
only operation.
b. Access should be located either approximately 1900 feet south
of Santa Barbara at the southern edge of the property, or about 1000 to 1100
feet south of Santa Barbara at about the midpoint of the parcel, or two access
points can be constructed, one at each of these two points.
Table 3
ULTIMATE ICU
(San Joaquin Rills Road and Jamboree)
Alternate Dwellings Trips Ultimate
Generation ICU
per Dwelling AM PM
Peak Peak
(General Plan) 704 11 1.390 1.425
A 704 8 1.37 1.39
B 440 8 1.36 1.34
C 300 8 1.35 1.32
-11-
c. Acceleration and deceleration lanes should be provided to -mini-
mize through traffic interference. These lanes should be approximately 275
feet long. To accelerate to 45 miles per hour or slow down from 45 miles
per hour, 275 feet will be required.
In addition to the access points previously discussed in this report, one
other access point possiblity exist. There is a possiblity of serving the
50 most southern dwellings with an access road which would run westward and
connect to Back Bay Drive. If this access road should be built, the volume
would be about 400 vehicles per day and about 40 vehicles in the peak hour.
This volume of cars would not cause congestion on Back Bay Drive or the inter-
section of Jamboree and Back Bay Drive.
Internal Circulation
Although the internal circulation has not been completely defined
at the time of this writing, the following guides are offered:
1. Curve radii should be about 250 feet.
2. Maximum grades should not exceed 10 percent.
3. Cul-de-sac lengths should not exceed 500 to 700 feet.
4. Four-legged internal intersections should be avoided.
5. Intersections should be of a Tee type with the .angle of
intersection being 80 and 90 degrees.
6. Long straight sections in excess of 300 to 500 feet should
be avoided because of potential for excessive spedds.
7. Distance between intersections should be 200 feat or more,,
8. Street widths should be at least 24 feet wide to allow emer-
gency vehicle access.
9. Street widths should be at least 36 feet wide where it is
conceivable parking may occur on one or both sides.
-12-
10. Dwellings should not have direct access onto roadways with.
more than 1200 to 1500 vehicles per day.
11. For the project access road which approaches Jamboree opposite
of Santa Barbara, this road should be the same width as Santa
Barbara from Jamboree westward for at least 200 feet, after
which point it can be transitioned to a two-lane cross section
using a taper of 1 to 35 feet.
7. Other Traffic Considerations
Public Transit Service
The site is directly served by Orange County Transit District Bus
82 which connects the University of California at Irvine to Newport Boulevard
south of Pacific Coast Highway. In addition this makes excellent connections
in the vicinity of Newport Center with routes 1, 57, 61, 65, 100' 207, and
271, which include the "park-n-ride" routes. The site is well served by public
transit.
40 oY d° 4c
It has been a pleasure preparing this traffic impact analysis for you. If
there are any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do
not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted,
WESTON PRINGLB AND ASSOC:�#TBS
Weston S. Pringle, P.L.
WSP:WK:ww
#6380
APPENDIX A
Intersection Capacity Utilization Calculations
Alternate A. 04 Dwellings
Configuration 2, Three Access Points
Intersection: San Joaquin Hills and and Jamboree "
Traffic Assignment
(Percent of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NT
NR
NL
ST 140
SR 10 135
SL
ET
ER
RqRWL
10 3 2
10 20 30 70
Project Volume
AM 140 3 0
PM 350 210
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- Volume V V/C V/C
ment city ]Existing Project 'total Ratio Ratio
(C) Exis ,ina Total
AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
NT 2 3200 151 3 10 * * " *
NR 1 1600 10 101 0 0 170 0
NL 1 1600 3 140 142
ST 2 3200 58 926. 4. 10J_ 3i30 9ZQ
SR 1 1600 2 576 15 35 40 10 1038
SL 2 320 °'` " * A
ET 2 3200 8 68 2 1 *
ER 1 1600 6 53
20 X9G . .. 35.._.2D_ _21,.0. _13SL _13* _Jd?Lo 10
WI' _ 2 3�00. _19fi .___ 0 20 130 . L0�1. lD_ . 10z'
WI: 1_ 04_ __28 LQ2 1
UL 1 1600 11 1.80 3 0 1 0 +' *
Yellow
ICU 75 82 80 89
1C1i 1.y sum or <:rltl.cal muvemrnts, denuPod by asterisk ( +)
N = North, S = South, E = East, W = West
1' = Throm,11, R = Right, L = left
Alternate A, 704 Dwellings •
Configuration 1, Two Access Points
Intersection: Santa Barbara and Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(Percent of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NI'
NR
NL
ST
SR
SL
ET
ER
EL 65 230 135
WT 10
WR
WL
Project Volume
AM 140 350
PM 350 1210
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- Volume V V/C V/C
ment city lixisLing Project Total Ratio Ratio
(C) Exist in Total
x'c •it�'c�': APf PM AM PM I AM I PM AM I PM AM PM
x * 4e 211
NR 1 1600 701 70 0 1 10 10 10
NL gQ
ST �g _g 1 19 2910
SR 10 85 10 0 0 10 13
SL * 9e * 10
C
ET 2) _2 .35_ _2 10*
ER —3.5_ 9 0 0_ 10 10
f•.L ) 23 35 or 1 10
WP 0.0-_ ___U _35 4c
10
WR 1 60fl—--- b .23 _ 4 23
Wl, 190 1 +e _j_0* 12 18*
ICU 48 49 60 67
1CU is sum of critical movements, denoLed by asterisk (*)
N = North, S = South, b' = East, W = West
T = Through, R = Right, L = Left
= Number in parenthesis is future lanes
.:11* = Ruture Capacity
Alternate A, 704 Dwellings „
Configuration 2, Three Access Points
Intersection: Santa Barbara and Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(Percent of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NT
NR
NI, 25 35 90
ST 5 10 20
SR
SL
ET
ER 10 35 20
EL 50 175 105'
WT 10 15 35
WR
WL -
Pro ect Volume
AM1�0
PM 1 350 210
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Caps- Volume V V/ V/C
ment city Existing Project TotalTRatCio Ratio
(C) xistin Total
%c•;: %%r4r AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
NT 2 200 380 670 380 670 12* ' 21* ' 12* 21
NR 1 1600 70 70 70 70 10 10 10 10
NL 0 1 1 00 ______35 0 35 90 0_ , 0 10 10*
ST 2 200 ,,. 590 920 __10 _ 20_ „ 600940_ 18 _ 29_ 79 29*
SR 0 1 1600 55 160 55 160 0 0 10 10
sL 1 160032140 39Q * * " 10
—
ET ON) 3200 _ 3$ ___20_ ,._3 0 0 0 10%� 10*
ER O 1 1600 35 20 3 20 0 0 10 10
lqL _Qf __J75 IOS 0 11 10
lJl' 0 300__ _ 5 0 0 10 10
WM 1 1600 6 230 _ _ 60 .230 10 14 10 14
WL 1 1600 _19 280 190 280 12%� 18% 12% 18�'�
ICI, 48 49 58 67
ICU is sum of criLical movements, denol.ed by asterisk (*)
N = Norl.h, S = South, L = Last, W = West
T _ 'Through, I< = Might:, 1, = Left
'% = Number in parenthesis is future lanes
`% % = Future Capacity
INTERSEGT1O$4 CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICW ANALYSTS (ULTMATE)
NnRTH-SnUTH 'STREET JAMBOREE ROAD
EAST-',TEST STREET= SAN JOAQUIN -HILLS RD
STREET T40VEMENT VOLUME LANES CAPACITY VIC RATIO CRITICAL VIC DELAY$=
'AM PM 'AM PM A PM AM PM
----------------- ---------------------�:-------------------------------------------------
JAM67REE ROAD NI} THRIJ + RT 1368. 187A. 4800 . 0-. 285 0.391 0. 285 0.391 756. 971.
JA`4BORFE ROAD NB LEFT 14. 63. 1. 1300 . 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.009 10. 45.
JAIBOREE ROAD SB THRII + RT 1211.- 1420. 3. 4800. O.252 0. 296 0.000 0.000 689. 802.
JA+16*7RE'E R&AD' SB LEFT . 200'3. 1.089, 2: Z'&bi). '0.770 0.419 0.770 0.419 621. 548.
SAN JQAQUIN HILLS RDEB THRU' + RT 172. - 92. 3. 48Q0. 0.100 0. 100 0.000 0.100 111. 61.
SAN JOAOUIN- HILLS ?-DEB -LEFT 221 .. 66. 1. 1300. 0. 170 0.10-0 0.170 0.000 135. 44.
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RDWB THRU + RT 550 . 2217. 3. 4800 . 0. 115 0 .462 '0. 115 0.000 351. 100
SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RDWS LEFT 234. 605 . 1. 1300 . 0. 180 0.465 0.000 0.465 142. 2
LOST TIME 0.050 0.050
TOTAL 1.390 1 .425 2813. 3R29.
LEVEL OF SFRVICE F F
x I)ELAY IS EXPRESSED IN VEaHICLE-CYCLE LENGTHS.
IF CYCLE LENGTH IS 1+0 SECONDS , DELAY IS IN VEHICLE-MINJTES .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9HASE TIMINGS
PHASE MOVEMENT PROPORTION OF CYCLE
P IMINGS
Al NA LEFT AND S3 LEFT 0.030
A? S3 LEFT .AND SB THRU + PT 0.770
A3 NB THRU +- RT AND SB THRU + RT 0.285
31 -FR , LEFT AND SIB LEFT 0.170 •
39 148 LEFT AND WB THRU + RT 0.010
?� FI: THRU + RT AND WB THRII + 1ZT 0. 105
LCST T-T `IE 0.050
TOTAL 1 . 390
Pit TI=tINI>S
'Ni NB LEFT AND SB LEFT 0.000
ia? SR LEFT ANO SB THR?1 + RT 0.41Q
Ai. ME THPU + RT AND SB THR'J + RT 0. 391
Bi Elk LEFT AND WB LEFT 0. 100
132 JB LEFT AND WB THRU + RT 0.365
:13 PB THRU + RT AND I4B THRU + RT 0.100
LOST TIMF 0.050
TOTAL 1.425
APPENDIX B
Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections, and
less at intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continu-
ously between intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To
study intersection capacity, a technique lmown as Intersection Capacity Utiliza-
tion (ICU) has been developed. ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the
proportion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement, (b) summing
the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the total time required to the time
available. For example, if for north-south traffic the northbound traffic is
1,000 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 800 vehicles per hour, and the
capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then the north-
bound traffic is critical and requires 1,000/2,000 or 50 percent of the signal time.
If for the east-west traffic, 40 percent of the signal time is required, then it
can be seen that the ICU is 50 plus 40, or 90 percent. When left-turn phases exist,
they are incorporated into the analysis. As ICU's approach 100 percent, the quality
of traffic service approaches Level of Service E, as defined in the Highway Capacity
Manual, Special Report 87, Highway Research Board, 1965.
Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service
A to C operate quite well. Level of Service D is typically the Level of Service
for which an urban street is designed. Level of Service E is the maximum volume
a facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary
duration. Level of Service F occurs when a facility is overloaded and is char-
acterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A description
of the various levels of service appears on the following page.
The ICU calculations assume that an intersection is signalized and that the
signal is ideally timed. Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized inter-
section is not valid, the presumption is that a signal can be installed and the
calculation shows whether the geometries are capable of accommodating the ex-
pected volume. It is possible to have an ICU well below 1.0, yet have severe
traffic congestion. This would occur because one or more movements is not
getting enough time to satisfy its demand with excess time existing on other
moves.
Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lanes
have approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot lanes.
Our data indicates a typical lane, whether a through lane or left-turn lane
has a capacity of approximately 1600 vehicles per lane per hour of green time.
The Highway Capacity Manual found capacity to be about 1500 vehicles per lane
lanes and 1200 vehicles per lane per hour of green
per hour of green for through
for left-turn lanes. However, the capacity manual is based on pre-1965 data,
and recent studies and observations show higher capacities in the southern
California area. For this study a capacity of 1600 vehicles per lane has been
assumed for through traffic, and 1600 vehicles per lane for turning lanes.
kr��WpORr ,
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
U Z
�41JZ0
January 4 , 1978
C . Keith Greer
Commercial Development -
Residential Division
The Irvine Company
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach , Calif. 92663
Subject: Newporter North Traffic Analysis
Dear Mr. Greer:
Enclosed is a draft report prepared by Weston - Pringle and
Associates analyzing the potential traffic impacts associated
with the Newporter North site and its potential development.
The study has been completed in compliance with their contract
with the City and the scope of work contained in their proposal
dated November 28, 1977.
The report is being reviewed by the Department of Community
Development and by Bill Darnell . The meeting I discussed with
you yesterday has been set for Monday, January 9th at 9 : 30 A.M.
in our conference room to discuss the draft report and its
conclusions . Wes Pringle and Bill Darnell will be there to
answer questions . If you have a conflict with that time and
date , please let me know, and I ' ll reschedule the meeting .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R . V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
By U e'do,
Beverly/D . Wood ,
Envirorffnental Coordinator
BDW/sh
cc : Mike Wright w/attachments
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
f
---- -
/.
------- ---- � � S/s• gtrrir___�
-- -- - -- x - — --�`�a=' -
--- - — — �.__�%�'"____ /� s.c7. off- �-�rc.�irLw �h�Gu-c.�.c»..,%
,�- ��
���
---- -------
GUeO�O�t FtImQk ad AODn aW
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
I�
• �110
December 21, 1977
9
4-
G
3
Ms. Beverly Wood �a KIL���<• 40,
Environmental Coordinator ��S1Q oP
City of Newport Beach 4
3300 Newport Boulevard W N
Newport Beach, California 92660
Dear Ms. Wood:
We have prepared a traffic impact analysis for the proposed residential develop-
ment of Newporter North. The traffic impact analysis will contain the following
sections:
1. Findings
- Traffic Impacts
- Mitigation Measures
2. Project Description
- Location
- Proposed Development
3. Existing Traffic Conditions
- Surrounding Street System
- Existing Traffic Volumes
- Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization
4. Project Traffic
- Traffic Generation
- Traffic Distribution
- Traffic Assignment
- Project Traffic Volumes
5. Future Traffic Conditions
- Existing Plus-Project Traffic
- Future Intersection Capacity Utilization
- Traffic Signal Warrants
- Ultimate Traffic Conditions
I
4
i
2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 FULLERTON, CALIFO NIA 92631 (714) 871-�2\931
Ir
-2-
6. On-Site Traffic Considerations
- Site Access Points
7. Other Traffic Considerations
- Public Transit Service
Appendix A - Intersection Capacity Utilization Calculations
Appendix B - Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
1. Findings
This traffic analysis has determined the traffic impacts and led to recommen-
dation of the mitigation measures discussed below.
Traffic Impacts
The following traffic impacts will result from the proposed development.
A. The traffic generated by the proposed development will utilize
up to a maximum of 5 percent of the existing intersection capacity at San Joa-
quin Hills Road and Jamboree assuming mitigation measure A is implemented (See
Table 1 for intersection capacity utilizations) .
B. The traffic generated by the proposed development will utilize
up to 18 percent of the existing intersection capacity at Santa Barbara and
Jamboree, assuming mitigation measure A is implemented (See 'Table 1 for inter-
section capacity utilization).
C. The site has excellent public transit service which could reduce
vehicle dependence for mobility.
-3-
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are recommended:
A. An additional site access point to San Joaquin Hills Road
opposite of Park Newport is not recommended because this access will in-
crease the intersection capacity utilization at San Joaquin Hills Road and
Jamboree (See Table 1 for intersection capacity utilization) .
B. The proposed driveway on Jamboree south of Santa Barbara
should be restricted to right-turn-in, right-turn-out only operation (Dis-
cussed in Section 6) .
C. The driveway referenced in mitigation measure B should be
located approximately 1900 feet south of Santa Barbara, or between 1000 and
1100 feet south of Santa Barbara (Discussed in Section 6) .
D. The driveway referenced in mitigation measure B should have a
410 foot acceleration lane and a 410 foot deceleration lane (Discussed in
Section 6).
2, Project Description
The project location and proposed development are discussed below.
Location
The project is known as Newporter North and lies in the southwest
quadrant of the intersection of Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills Road in the
City of Newport- Beach. The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road on the
north, Jamboree Road on the east, Back Bay Drive on the west, and the Newporter
Inn and John Wayne Tennis Club on the south. To the east is Newport Center;
and to the west is Upper Newport Bay; and to the north is Park Newport.
• =4-
Proposed Development
The proposed development will consist of condominiums and single
family homes as well as a local park primarily serving the Newporter North
residents. Three levels of development have been analyzed, and each level
will be referred to as an Alternate in this report. The Alternates are as
follows:
Alternate A - 704 Dwellings
Alternate B - 440 Dwellings
Alternate C - 300 Dwellings
It will be assumed for each Alternate that 50 percent are condominiums dwellings
and 50 percent are single family dwellings.
For each Alternate, two driveway Configurations are possible, The Configura-
tions are as follows:
Configuration 1 - One site driveway on Jamboree Road opposite
Santa Barbara Drive and second driveway on Jamboree Road
south of Santa Barbara Drive.
Configuration 2 - Same as Configuration 1 plus a third driveway
on San Joaquin Hills Road opposite Park Newport.
3 Existing Traffic Conditions
The traffic conditions as they exist today are discussed below.
Surrounding v Street System
,
The surrounding streets are Jamboree Road, San Joaquin Hills Road,
Santa Barbara Drive, and Back Bay Drive. Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills Road
are four lane divided roadways; Santa Barbara is six lane undivided; and Back
Bay Drive is a narrow two lane roadway. The intersections of Jamboree and
San Joaquin Hills Road has a five phase traffic signal with separate turn
phasing provided for northbound and southbound traffic. The intersection
of Jamboree and Santa Barbara has a three phase traffic signal with separate
turn phasing provided for southbound left turns.
Existing Traffic Volumes
AM and FM peak hour turning movement counts as well as daily traf-
fic volumes were obtained for the streets-in the vicinity of the project site.
Appendix A shows turning movement volumes for the intersections of Jamboree
and San Joaquin Hills Road, and Jamboree and Santa Barbara Drive. The daily
two way traffic volumes on the surrounding streets are shown in Figure 1.
Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization
Using the existing traffic volumes and existing geometries, the
existing Intersection Capacity Utilizations (ICU) were calculated for critical
intersections, assuming 704 dwellings are constructed. The calculations are
shown in Appendix A, and an explanation of ICU and how it is calculated is con-
tained in Appendix B. Essentially, ICU is a comprehensive measure of what part
of total intersection capacity is utilized. An ICU of 0.80 or 80 percent would
mean that 80 percent of the available capacity is utilized, and 0.20 or 20 per,
cent excess capacity exists.
Table 1 contains the existing IOU's, and also contains existing traffic plus
project traffic ICU's which will be discussed later.
4. Project Traffic
The traffic volumes which will be generated by the project are discussed below.
To determine project traffic, a three step process is utilized. First, the
traffic volumes which will be generated by the proposed development are deter-
mined . Second, those traffic volumes are geographically distributed to major
• FIGURE '1 •
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUME'S
b 40,000
a
m
�O Estimated) 19,000'
w San Joaquin
Hills Road
0
0
C
r 28,000 (Estimated)
az)
42,000
Santa Barbara
Drive
28,000
m
. a
m o
ca m
U
u
m v
N
0
6
m
h '
Traffic Volumes and Estimates
from City of Newport Beach
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
Table 1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION
If 704 Dwellings Constructed
Intersection Capacity Utilization (Percent)
Intersection Peak Existing Existing + Project Traffic Volume
Hour Traffic Configuration 1 Configuration 2
Volume (Two Accesses) (Three Accesses)
San Joaquin Hills Road AM 75 79 80
and
Jamboree PM 82 87 89
Santa Barbara AM 48 60 58
and
Jamboree PM 49 67 67
-6-
attractions of trips such as employment centers, commercial activities, and
recreation opportunities. Third, the trips are then assigned to specific
roadways and the project traffic volumes determined on a route by route basis.
Traffic Generation
Trip generation is the relationship between trips made in an area
and characteristics of the area such as land use, population, employment and
other activity measures. The desired end product in trip generation analysis
is an accurate identification and quantification of trips beginning and ending.
The assumption of the stability of the relationships between trips and land
use and socio-economic variables over time is basic to forecasting, and the
significance of this assumption cannot be overemphasised. No matter how well
the estimated relationship corresponds to the observed data today, a signifi-
cant change in lifestyle, cost or availability of energy, or transit service
will alter trip generation rates.
Numerous studies by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Ca 1Trans, City
of Newport Beach, ourselves, and others have provided data concerning the traf-
fic characteristics which may be expected for various classes of land use.
These traffic characteristics data are related to amounts of floor area, acre-
age, dwelling units, employment and other demographic characteristics which
would pertain to a particular project. In this particular case, the number of
dwellings allow reasonable estimates to be made of future traffic volumes.
The trip generation rates were determined for daily, AM peak hour inbound, AM
outbound, PM inbound, and PM outbound. In this study, AM peak hour is 8-9 AM
and PM peak hour is 5-6 PM. Trip generation rates represent "trip ends", a
trip end being either the origin or destination of a journey. For example,
a trip from home-to-work will have a trip end at home and a trip end at work,
so that each trip has two trip ends. If ten vehicle trips are generated in
the day, five vehicles arrive and five vehicles depart.
Table 2
Trip Generation
Time Period Trips Trips Generated by Alternate
Generated A g O
Per (704' (440 (300
Dwelling Dwellings) Dwellings) Dwellings) ,
Daily 8.0 5600 3500 2400 ' '
AM
In 0.2 140 90 60
Out 0.5 350 220 150
Total 0.7 490 310 210
PM
In 0.5 350 220 150
Out 0.3 210 130 90
Total 0.8 560 350 240
• • -7-
For this study a trip generation rate of 8 trips per day per dwelling is
assumed, and is applied to both the single family as well as multi-family
dwellings. It is expected that there will be about 50 percent of each type
of dwelling. Normally single family dwellings generate between 8 and 13
trips per day and multi-family dwellings generate between 5 and 9 trips per
day. Trip generation in Newport Beach has usually been about equal to the
low end of these ranges. Thus, the 8 trips per dwelling is probably higher
than will actually occur.
By multiplying the trip generation rates by the land usage quantities, the
daily AM in, AM Out, PM In, and PM Out volumes are calculated as shown in
Table 2.
Traffic Distribution
The site has only residential and local park land uses. Virtually
all home based auto trips will exit the site and go north or south on Jamboree;
east on San Joaquin ❑ills Road to any one of several possible roads and
destinations; or to Newport Center. The traffic distribution shown in Figure
2 is based upon an examination of employment, shopping, and recreational oppor-
tunities which will be likely to attract project residents.
Traffic Assignment
Once the traffic distribution is determined the next step is to
assign the trips to specific streets. This has been done in Figure 3 in
which the percent of inbound and outbound traffic utilizing the intersections
of Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills Road, and Jamboree and Santa Barbara are
shown.
Project Traffic Volumes
Once the traffic generation, distribution, and assignment are com-
plete, calculating the project traffic is simple. This calculation is done in
FIGURE 2
TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION
407
San Joaquin
i Hills Road
20%
Site
15%
{ Newport
ro
Center P
P
m
ti
0
v PQ
0 s
a J
4
w �
v 6
0 u
TO 25%
ti
Pacific Coast Highway
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
• FIGURF- 3
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
40%
40%
L� L L� L
25%
65 65°
10%
95% 10% 85%
Site
Site
10 °
5% 15%
Inbound Outbound
Configuration 1 25% Configuration 1 25%
40% 40% .
L
°- 5%
25%
50° 0/
15% E
15% 10°�
so%t 10% %101"T
Site site 10°�
5% 15%100
Inbound Outbound
Configuration 2 Configuration 2
25% 25% i
r
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
_g_ i
Appendix A. The percents of project traffic which make each intersection
movement are multiplied by the AM and PM, In and Out trips generated by the
project.
5. Future Traffic Conditions
Future traffic volumes are determined by adding project traffic volumes to
existing traffic volumes. Once future traffic volumes are determined, then
future traffic conditions can be determined.
Existing Plus Project Traffic
Appendix A shows the existing, project, and total (existing plus
project) AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes which can be expected at the
intersections of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree, and Santa Barbara and
Jamboree.
Future Intersection Capacity Utilization
Future intersection capacity utilization (ICU) calculations have
P p Y
been made for existing plus project traffic volumes and existing geometries
at the intersections of San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree, and at Santa
Barbara and Jamboree. The results of these calculations are shown in Table
1 and the actual calculations are in Appendix A. Appendix B contains an
explanation of what ICU is and how it is calculated. As previously stated
under "Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization", ICU is' a comprehensive
measure of what part of total capacity is utilized. An ICU of 0.80 or 80
percent would mean that 80 percent of the available capacity is utilized,
and 0.20 or 20 percent excess capacity exists.
Traffic Signal Warrants
Traffic signals exist today at San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree,
and Santa Barbara and Jamboree. The only intersection which conceivably will
warrant a traffic signal as a result of this project will be the project
-9-
driveway on Jamboree located south of Santa Barbara. Traffic signal warrant,
volumes were compared to those anticipated in this driveway and a signal will
not be required regardless of which Alternate is constructed.
Ultimate Traffic Conditions.
Ultimate traffic conditions at ultimate build-out of the City of
Newport Beach and surrounding areas have been the subject of several traffic
analysis. The first two of these studies were the Drachman study and the AMV
study, and both modeled daily traffic volumes on the arterial highway network.
Following these studies were the Newport Center Traffic Study and Newport
Center Traffic Study, Phase II by Crommelin-Pringle and Associates. This
study modeled peak hour traffic volumes by direction and by turning movement
at ultimate development in and near Newport Center. For traffic from sources
other than Newport Center, the Drachman and AMV studies were used in making
an estimate of the 'other" traffic. In the Newport Center Traffic Study, Phase
II, the Newporter North development was included as part of 'other" traffic,
and thus the results on that study include this development's traffic contribu-
tion at ultimate build-out.
A study is now underway by Kimmel and Basmaciyan in which arterial highway two
way volumes will be modeled by computer. This study assumes Newporter North
will be 704 dwellings, each generating 11 trips per day for a total of 7744
vehicle trips per day. This is at least 37 percent higher than will actually
be generated as determined in this study and shown in Table 2. Although this
project will make a very insignificant contribution to total traffic in the
area, it is suggested that the five above studies be referenced if the reader
wishes to examine traffic operations at ultimate build-out of all developments.
-10-
6. On-Site Traffic Considerations
Site Access Points
Three possible access points exist to the project site. One is
on Jamboree opposite Santa Barbara Drive; a second is on San Joaquin .Hill;s,
Road opposite of Park Newport; and a third is on Jamboree south of Santa
Barbara Drive.
These three access points were field reviewed with the City of Newport Beach'
Traffic Engineer, and all were found to be acceptable with the following copdi-
tions regarding the driveway on Jamboree south of Santa Barbara:
a. Driveway should be restricted to right-turn-in, right-turn-out
only operation.
b. Driveway should be located either approximately 1900 feet south
of Santa Barbara at the southern edge of the property, or about WOO to 1100
feet south of Santa Barbara at about the midpoint of the parcel.
c. Acceleration and deceleration lanes should be provided to mini-
mize through traffic interference. . These lanes should be approximately 410
feet long. Comfortable acceleration and deceleration rates are 8 feet per
second. To accelerate to 55 miles per hour or slow down from 55 miles per hour,
410 feet will be required.
7. Other Traffic Considerations
Public Transit Service
The site is directly served by Orange County Transit District Bus
82 which connects the University of California at Irvine to Newport Boulevard
south of Pacific Coast Highway. In addition this makes excellent connections
in the vicinity of Newport Center with routes 1, 57, 61, 65, 100, 207, and
" " site 'is well served b public
271, which include the park-n-ride routes. The sit is w s y
transit.
• -11-
r qr �c 4r 'h
It has been a pleasure preparing this traffic impact analysis for you. If
there are any questions, or if we can be of further assistance, please do
not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted,
WESTON PRINGLE AND ZASSOCES
Weston S. Pringle, P.E.
WSP:WKsww
#6380
APPENDIX A
Intersection Capacity Utilization Calculations
Altnernate A, 004 Dwellings
Configuration 1, Two Access Points
Intersection: G-n 10 g1+'+ u'71g Hand And Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(Percent of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NT
NR_
NL
ST 40
SR
SL
ET
ER
EL
WT
WR
WL 25 351 90
Pro ect Volume
PM lL�
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- Volume V V/C V/C
ment city Existing Project Total Ratio Ratio
(C) Existin> Total
AM PM AM PM AM I PM AM I PM AM 1'M
NT 2 3200 9151638 140 85 1055 t25 29* 51* 33*. 54*
NR 10_
NL �Q� _ 4 0 0_
ST 2 3200 5$1-92.fL--GO
SR 1 1600 2
SL
ET 2 3200 Al —9 Q 70 10 10* 10 10*
ER
EL 200 110 13* 10 13*
WT 2 3200 106 10 110 10* 10 , 10* 10
8 2 81600 2 1022wt 1 32 18 32
WTI, 1 1600 11 180 35 90 1___ 215 10 LL* 10 13*
l
ICU 75 82 79 87
ICU is sum of critical movements, denoted by asterisk (*)
i
N = North, S = South, E = East, W = West
'r = 'Through, It = Itight, 1, = Left
Alternate A, 004 Dwellings •
Configuration 2, Three Access Points
Intersection: Ran Tnaai9n Ni11s Rnad and Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(Percent of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NT
NR
NL
ST
SR 10 1
SL
ET
ER
EL 10 35 2
WT 5 10 20
WR
WL 20 30 70
Project Vme
AM 140 olu 350
PM 350 210
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- Volume V V/C V/C
went city Existing Project Total Ratio Ratio
(C) Existin Total
AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM'
NT 2 3200 9151 38 10 65 1020 1705 9 9* S I* * *
NR 1 1600 100 101 70 40 170 140 10 10 10 10
NL 1 1600 3 140 Q_13*
ST 2J_ 3200 587 _926 _ 4 . 10 _ _63Q_
SR 1 1600 2 576 J5 35 40
SL 2 200 '` *
ET 2 3200 8 68 2 jER 1 1600 6 53RL 1 110
�OQ_ 20 _J9b_. _.. 3 __2Q_ 40- .15*
Wl' _ _2 3200- ____ _ _J Q 0 20 . 130
Wlt i_ $ _
WL 1 1600 it 180 3 O 150 2
Yellow
ICU 75 82 80 89
ICU is sum of critical movements, denoted by asterisk (*)
N = North, S South, li = bast, W = West
'r = 'Through, R = Right, L = left
Alternate A, 4PO4 Dwellings •
Configuration 1, Two Access Points
Intersection: Santa Barbara and Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(p(,rceut of Project Traffic Making Intersection Movements)
;y Move-
ment Percent Volume
$' In Out AM PM
NT
NR
NL
ST
SR
SL
CT
ER
GL 65 230 135
WT _ is 39
WIt
WL
Pro ect Volume
350
FM3 350 0 0
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- + Volume V V/C V/C
ment city ) xisting Project Total Ratio Ratio
(C) I Exist ina Total
Arl PM AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM
NTT 2 3200 38 0 * 'r is 2
0 70 10 10 10 10
NL 9-Q 0 10 10L0
ST -_59 69Q 18 29 19 29*
SR �5 10 0 0 1.0 13
SL _u 39_Q_ JA ,'r * *
7`Q 10*
BIt _35 10
rl. ) Q Il 5 * 1 10
WT _ - 35
WR _ & 23
U, 0 0 11020
'c 18* 12 18*
ICU 48 49 60 67
ICU is sum of critical movements, denoted by asterisk (*)
N = North, S = South, 1: = Bast, W = West
T = Through, R = Right, L = Left
= Number in parenthesis is future lanes
= Future Capacity
• Alternate A, 704 D wellings •
Configuration 2, Three Access Points
Intersection: Santa Barbara and Jamboree
Traffic Assignment
(I'ereent or Project 'I'rnffic Making 11ILersection Movements)
Move-
ment Percent Volume
In Out AM PM
NT
NR
NL 25 35 90
ST 5 1
SR
SL
ET
ER 1.0•_ 35 _ 20
I;;i, _ 50_ 175 _ 1.05
WT _ 10 _ 15 1 35
WIZ
WL
Project Volume
AM
PM 350 210
Ultimate Intersection Volumes and Capacity Utilization
Move- Lanes Capa- Volume V V/C V/C
ment city ( Existing Project Total Ratio Ratio
(C) Existing Total
AM PM AM Phi AM PM AM PM AM PM
NIT 2 3200 380 670 380 670 12* 21* 12* 21
YR 1 1600 I 70 70 70 70 10 10 10 10
N1, 0 1 1600_ _ 35 90 35 90 ._0_,.• ...0_ 10 1.0*
ST 2 200 590 920_ 10 _ 20 _ .600 640_ 18_.__, 29 9 29*
SR 0 1 1600 55 160 55 160 0 0 10 10
SL 3 4r * * _J
CT 0(2). 12—O _ ___ _35_ ,20 -----3�i �0 0 0 -10* 10*
ER 0 1 1600 35 20 35 20 0 0 10 10
BI, 175 1090 11 10
Wl' 0 �00 . _. _0 . 10 10
tJH 1_ 1600 __6_ _ 230 _ _ 60 .230 10 14 10 14
W11 1 1600 190 280 190 280 12?, _ 18* 12* 1 18*
ICU 48 49 58 67
ICU is sum of critical movemenLs, denoted by asterisk (*)
N = North, S = South, E = Bast, W = West
T = 'lhrougfi, Ic = Right., 1, '= Left
= Number in parenthesis is future lanes
= Future Capacity
I
APPENDIX B
Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
f- r n • •
Explanation of Intersection Capacity Utilization
The capacity of a street is nearly always greater between intersections, and
less at intersections. The reason for this is that the traffic flows continu-
ously between intersections and only part of the time at intersections. To
study intersection capacity, a technique known as Intersection Capacity Utiliza-
tion (ICU) has been developed. ICU analysis consists of (a) determining the
proportion of signal time needed to serve each conflicting movement, (b) summing
the times for the movements, and (c) comparing the total time required to the time
available. For example, if for north-south traffic the northbound traffic is
1,000 vehicles per hour, the southbound traffic is 800 vehicles per hour, and the
capacity of either approach is 2,000 vehicles per hour of green, then the north-
bound traffic is critical and requires 1,000/2,000 or 50 percent of the signal time.
If for the east-west traffic, 40 percent of the signal time is required, then it
can be seen that the ICU is 50 plus 40, or 90 percent. When left-turn phases exist,
they are incorporated into the analysis.- As ICU's approach 100 percent, the quality
of traffic service approaches Level of Service E, as defined in the Highway Capacity
Manual, Special Report 87, Highway Research Board, 1965.
Level of Service is used to describe quality of traffic flow. Levels of Service
A to C operate quite well. Level of Service D is typically the Level of Service
for which an urban street is designed. Level of Service E is the maximum volume
a facility can accommodate and will result in possible stoppages of momentary
duration. Level of Service F occurs when a facility is overloaded and is char-
acterized by stop-and-go traffic with stoppages of long duration. A description
of the various levels of service appears on the following page.
The ICU calculations assume that an intersection is signalized and that the
signal is ideally timed. Although calculating ICU for an unsignalized inter-
section is not valid, the presumption is that a signal can be installed and the
calculation shows whether the geometries are capable of accommodating the ex-
pected volume. it is possible to have an ICU well below 1.0, yet have severe
traffic congestion. This would occur because one or more movements is not
getting enough time to satisfy its demand with excess time existing on other
moves.
Capacity is often defined in terms of roadway width. However, standard lanes
have approximately the same capacity whether they are 11 foot or 14 foot lanes.
e e through Our data indicates a typical lane, whether a h lane or left-turn lane g
e time
lc per lane per hour of green aacit of approximately 1600 vehicles p p g
has a cp y PP Y
c' to be about 1500 vehicles per lane
The Hi hwa Ca acit Manual found capacity Q y p v
per hour of green for through 'lanes and 1200 vehicles per lane per hour of green
for left-turn lanes. However, the capacity manual is based on pre-1965 data,
and recent studies and observations show higher capacities in the southern
California area. For this study a capacity of 1600 vehicles per lane has been
assumed for through traffic, and 1600 vehicles per lane for turning lanes.
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS
Level of Traffic Quality Nominal Range
Service of ICU (a)
A Low volumes; high speeds; speed not restricted
by other vehicles; all signal cycles clear with 0.00 - 0.60
no vehicles waiting through more than one signal
cycle.
B Operating speeds beginning to be affected by
other traffic; between one and ten percent of 0.60 - 0.70
the signal cycles have one or more vehicles
which wait through more than one signal cycle
during peak traffic periods.
C Operating speeds and maneuverability closely
controlled by other traffic; between 11 and 30
percent of the signal cycles have one or more 0.70 - 0.80
vehicles which wait through more than one signal
cycle during peak traffic periods; recommended
ideal design standard,
D Tolerable operating speeds; 31 to 70 percent of
the signal cycles have one or more vehicles
which wait through more than one signal cycle 0.80 - 0.90
during peak traffic periods; often used as
design standard in urban areas.
E Capacity; the maximum traffic volume an ,inter-
section can accommodate; restricted speeds; 71
to 100 percent of the signal cycles have' one or 0.90 - 1.00
more vehicles which wait through more than one
signal cycle during peak traffic periods.
F Long queues of traffic; unstable flow; stoppages
of long duration; traffic volume and traffic
speed can drop to zero; traffic volume willlbe Not Meaningful
less than the volume which occurs at Level of
Service E.
(a) ICU (Intersection Capacity Utilization) at various levels of
service versus level of service E for urban arterial streets.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Spe ial Report 87,
National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C., 1965, page 320.
i
�EwP0
T I
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
-
�G/80RT��P
December 15 , 1977
C . Keith Greer
Project Manager
Commercial Development-
Residential Division
The Irvine Company
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach , Calif. 92663
Subject: Newporter North Traffic Analysis
Dear Mr. Greer,
Enclosed is a receipt for The Irvine Company ' s deposit to.
initiate the traffic analysis of the Newporter North site .
This study will be performed by Weston. Pringle and Associates
as proposed in his letter dated November 28, 1977 , and our
discussion on December 7 . The traffic analysis is being
done as part of Phase II in the development of the Environ-
mental Impact Report for the Newporter North project. Our
project number for Newporter North is EIR-063 ; however, the
account number for our bookkeeping is #02-219-16 .
I am in the process of finalizing our contract with Ides Pringle .
In the meantime , he has been given authorization to proceed •
with the work . Thank you for your cooperation on this matter .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
Beverly , . Wood,
Enviro ental Coordinator
B DW/s'h
Encl .
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
'IY OF NEWPORT BEACH� T RECEIPT t
. 75932 ' j
NEW PORT BEACH, CALIFORNIACAI,IFORNtA 92668
Uc /�2 19
P ' !
DATE
�0 pl92 Q 11iYlQ Cs—rug $ c3' /J—�. OC�
t� RECEIVED FROM
j FOR: i
a{ i
ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT
DEPARTMENT --
__ ______ ____ __ __"
w --___._. -
-tCAAS"f7 ZFV m A!t-7rAl QZI- e
. W/40rxOv ivm4tw) /21y/y7
PROJECT: Newporter North
ACCOUNT NO . : 02-219-16
CONSULTANT: Westec Services
CONTRACT: Phase I $11 ,100. 00
Phase II Time & Materials
Phase III $10 , 100 . 00 ( Est . )
Archaeological Research $34, 850. 00
DEPOSITS
I II III Arch . 5%
4/30/76 11 , 100 800 595
10/15/76 10 ,000
10 ,000
2/15/77 2 ,000 1 ,842 . 50
2/15/77 14, 850
TOTALS 11 , 100 2 ,800 - 34, 850 2 ,437 . 50
Total amount deposited in Account #02-219-16 $51 , 187 .50
-PAYMENTS
I & II Archaeology
6/24/76 3,682 .63
7/22/76 4,463.00
9/2/76 4,079 .28
10/14/76 9 ,650. 59
10/29/76 143 .61
10/29/76 8,786 . 25
10/29/76 410 .51
12/22/76 247 . 34
3/18/77 10 ,442 . 38
4/29/77 465 . 78
7/28/77 4, 881 .45 ✓
9/8/77 379 .51 ✓
9/8/77 244.04' ✓
13,026 . 37 34,850. 00
Balance
as of 11/30/77 873 .63 -0-
PROJECT: Newporter North
ACCOUNT NO . : 02-219-16
CONSULTANT: Westec Services
CONTRACT: Phase I $11 ,100 . 00
Phase II Time & Materials
Phase III $10 , 100 .00 (Est . )
Archaeological Research $34, 850. 00
DEPOSITS
I II III Arch . 5%
4/30/76 11 ,100 800 595
10/15/76 10 ,000
10 ,000
2/15/77 2,000 1 ,842 . 50
2/15/77 14,850
TOTALS 11 , 100 2 ,800 - 34, 850 2 ,437 .50
Total amount deposited in Account #02-219-16 $51 , 187 .50
PAYMENTS
I & II Archaeology
6/24/76 3, 682 . 63
7/22/76 4 ,463 .00
9/2/76 4,079 .28
10/14/76 9 ,650 . 59
10/29/76 143 .61
10/29/76 8 , 786 . 25
10/29/76 410 .51
12/22/76 247 . 34
3/18/77 10 ,442 . 38
4/29/77 465 . 78
7/28/77 4, 881 .45
9/8/77 379 .51
9/8/77 244 .04
13 ,026 . 37 34,850. 00
Balance
as of 11 /30/77 873 .63 -0-
THE IRVINE C MPAW
610 Newport Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92663
(714) 644-3011
December 8, 1977
Ms. Beverly D. Wood
Environmental Coordinator
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: NEWPORTER NORTH
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Dear Bev:
The Irvine Company respectfully submits the enclosed check number
in the amount of $3,150.00 as the deposit for the traffic analysis on the
Newporter North project.
The deposit is provided for the purpose of permitting the City of Newport
Beach to conclude the traffic analysis on the Newporter North project as
proposed in Wes Pringle's letter to Westec Services dated November 28,
1977. The completion of the traffic analysis by December 31, 1977, will
be anticipated by The Irvine Company. With this objective in mind, we
will appreciate your efforts to expedite completion of Wes Pringle's
scope of services.
The $3,150.00 deposit is submitted in accordance with your request of
December 7, 1977. The total deposit includes $3,000.00 for Wes Pringle's
scope of services and $150.00 as the City of Newport Beach administrative
fee.
For purposes of recordkeeping, we respectfully request that the City pro-
vide a deposit receipt which references a project number.
K
N �
C. Keith Greer REosm yfi
Project Manager
Community Development 1 A�
Residential Division
CKG:mab
Enclosure
_ r
ti r
AA �Sc�c ,v(T��
lug 1'ic_AA
ao
-- - - —L►yu_ trs h►t t o `f'�Q�+�s Y;,t��_
-- -- -� 57s�ntlrl��+✓'u= 1T _ Is - -A---tr.�t� sT't�oY�� � tbv?'-�--------
Avo
- � ri wt�� � t'►urvvn+�'+�
-- -- --- _�•CdRd��. _..GAY/�N_ A +'r _ITT�' �r7!v�-� w►ti.t...
-- - -- j ��r,�� _�u_v�.�._���(— rrtirr►r_�v 7'1L.1�wLsa+�?rust•�_.._.
Wes_ � .---- � -- - -- - ---- - --
-- ---- I ttc UU�S kc k ty►,4���_F_12�-, �ysc� ---
'GTIw
5 Z-i am— --7-*- � IMl'ti177urd
W,rmc
-- --- - ----- - — — _
-- - ��-ate`-�, "f'I,L �v ��►�tir cc-��rrc�__r.-u� ` iT.
' PpR�
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CgClFDRN�P
December 5 , 1977 "
Keith Greer
The Irvine Company
610 Newport Center Drive
Seventh Floor
Newport Beach , Calif. 92663
Subject: Phase II Traffic Study - Newporter North
Environmental Impact Report
Dear Mr. Greer,
Attached to this letter is a proposal from Weston Pringle and
Associates to perform the traffic study of the Newporter North
site as discussed at our meeting on November 15 , 1977 . The pro-
posal has been cleared through Westec Services , Inc . as the prime
consultant for the EIR preparation .
We are currently reviewing the proposal for completeness , and we
will be arranging a meeting with all the concerned parties some-
time this week to discuss the content of the scope of services and
to finalize the contract amount. We are forwarding a copy of .the
proposal to you to allow time for your review and comments . If
you have, any questions or wish to discuss the proposal prior to
the meeting, feel free to call me .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
By
Bever y . Wood,
Env ' onmental Coordinator
BDW/sh
Attachment ( 1 )
City Mall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
WESTEC Services,Inc.
180 East Main Street
Tustin, CA 92880
(714)830-4644
77-46OT-2073
November 29 , 1977
\Y `J64
�. R Gocc+^'��,ont
Ms. Beverly Wood
Environmental Coordinator 9 N
J
City of Newport Beach c»rsv-\
3300 Newport Boulevard c, NEwpGil /
Newport Beach, CA 92663
RE: Newporter North Traffic Analysis (0
Dear Ms. Wood:
Attached is a proposal from Weston Pringle $ Associates
in response to your request for proposal of November 21,
1977 . We have reviewed the work scope and feel that it
addresses the issues identified in the R.F.P. and that it
also will provide useful data for the eventual Environmental
Impact Report on the project. However, because the work
scope is oriented solely toward traffic engineering we do
not see WESTEC Services participating in this Phase II study
in other than as an "interested" observer. We therefore
recommend that this contract be handled directly with Weston
Pringle $ Associates. If there are any questions , please do
not hesitate to call.
i'y
t my y rs ,
e Wright
Regional Manager
MWW:mi
NEWPORTER NORTH
EIR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
I. The estimated traffic generation for three alternative residential
development proposals as follows:
A. Alternative #1 - General Plan Permitted Density at 704 du
B. Alternative #2 - Medium-Density Development at 425 du
C. Alternative #3 - Low-Density Development at 300 du
II. For each development alternative, analysis and recommendations as
follows:
A. The traffic contributions at the Jamboree & San Joaquin inter-
section and the Jamboree & Santa Barbara intersection.
B The identification of potential locations 'for full-access and
limited-access alternative intersections on Jamboree Blvd.
and San Joaquin Blvd.
C. The recommendation of proposed traffic control devices for inter-
section locations as identified in A and B above.
D. The recommendation for interior street dimensions.
T: The analysis of the feasibility of an alternative full-access or
limited-access intersection on Jamboree Blvd. adjacent to the John
Wayne Tennis Club.
i
NEWPORTER NORTH
EIR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK
,r
If The estimated traffic generation for three alternative residential
.� development proposals as follows:
A. Alternative #1 - General Plan Permitted Density at 704 du
/B. Alternative #2 - Medium-Density Development at 425 du
d�. Alternative #3 - Low-Density Development at 300 du
II. For each development alternative, analysis' and recommendations as
follows:
l�. The traffic contributions at the Jamboree & San Joaquin inter-
section and the Jamboree & Santa Barbara intersection.
B. The identification of potential locations for full-access and
limited-access alternative intersections on Jamboree Blvd.
and San Joaquin Blvd.
C. The recommendation of proposed traffic control devices for inter-
section locations as identified in A and B above.
D. The recommendation for interior street dimensions.
III. The analysis of the feasibility of an alternative full-accesDJohn
limited-access intersection on Jamboree Blvd, adjacent to th
Wayne Tennis Club.
G/'�cc«+C izc�ia
S73,6
fP4"FAi&tD e'( �l"fl1 Gcyt. �2 lL i L1-15='1
i
--rinz2tic kM—trM ---_A�t ---
�duev�r�'
- - -- - - - ---- ----------
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this '19th
day of December, 1977, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ,
a municipal corporation , hereinafter referred to as "'CITY , " and
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES , hereinafter referred to as " CONSULTANT. "
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, CITY ' S Environmental Affairs Committee has
determined that a traffic analysis is necessary in conjunction with
the Phase II Analysis of the Newporter North Site , in the City of
Newport Beach , County of Orange , State of California ; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has submitted to CITY a proposal, to
prepare said traffic analysis ; and
WHEREAS , CITY desires to accept said proposal .
NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the foregoing, the
parties hereto agree as follows :
1 . GENERAL
CONSULTANT agrees to prepare the subject traffic
analysis in accordance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph
2 of this Agreement. CITY agrees to remit to CONSULTANT the amounts
set forth in paragraph 3 of this Agreement in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in this document .
2.. SCOPE OF WORK
The subject traffic analysis will be prepared in
accordance with the CONSULTANT' S proposal dated November 28, 1977 ,
as corrected., which is attached to this Agreement marked as Exhibit
"A" and by this reference incorporated herein at this point as if
fully set forth .
- 1 -
n "
RECEIVED
Cammun(ty g
Development
t Dept.
DEG 2 81977b. �o
CITY OF
NEWpORY SEACN,
CALIK: J�
r
3. BILLING AND PAYMENT
CONSULTANT shall be paid under this Agreement on
a time and material basis and in no e-vent shall the maximum amount
of this Agreeme.nt exceed Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000 .00 ) . Partial
payments shall be made by -CITY to CONSULTANT upon CONSULTANT 'S
presentation of statements verifying the time and material costs
incurred by it in connection with this Agreement.
4 . FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall use diligent efforts to complete
this contract within twenty-one ( 21) days after execution of this
Agreement. The subject traffic study must meet the approval of the
Environmental Affairs Committee of the City. In the event additional
work is required, said additional work shall be subject to a separate
contract.
5 . TERMINATION
This Agreement is subject to termination by the CITY
at any time upon serving written notice to CONSULTANT. The CITY
shall be thereafter liable to CONSULTANT only for fees and costs
incurred as of the date CONSULTANT receives such notice of termination .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered in-to
this Agreement as of the date and year first above written .
APPROV I
On TO R CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
By r
ista i y A rney irector
C m ty Dewve opment Department
CITY'
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
By_1G`G ���
CONSULTANT
2 -
W + A
A Ar
Weal" P44t9Qe aid Ao®aciaW
ft TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
• n
RECEIVED
S Community 9 �
Development y
Dept,
November 28, 1977 p b�l� R6CEt n vD
DEC 2 819771� 10 f Deep Pent
_. CITY OF .� � 77 r'-
C NEWPORT BEACH,
1oil
Mr. Michael W. Wright �> oqY =��"
Westec Services, Inc. ti NeW�oH,�l ' ^ '
180 E. Main
Tustin, California 92680 w N
Dear Mr. Wright:
We are pleased to submit this proposal to provide pro£essional .engineering ser-
vices relative to the Newport North EIR. This proposal is based upon my dis-
cussions with you and Bill Darnell and the letter and proposed scope of work from
Beverly Wood of November 21, 1977:
The work would consist of Phase II of the EIR contract for the project. A report-
covering Phase I of the analysis was prepared in May, 1976, and identified traffic
related constraints. This phase would involve the analysis of several specific
concerns expressed both by The Irvine Company and City of Newport Beach. The re-
sults would provide guidance in the development of a plan for the site.
We would envision the following specific tasks to be required for this Phase:
TASK I - DATA REVIEW
We would assemble and review all pertinent studies and reports that have
been completed since our previous analysis. This would include our
"Newport Center Traffic Study, Phase II", traffic signal spacing studies
on Jamboree and similar data. Traffic volume data would be updated from
counts taken by the City and others. No additional field data collection
is anticipated. Discussions would be held with the consultants preparing
the City traffic model to obtain input and insure compatibility. It is
understood that a conceptual master plan for the site would be made avail-
able.
2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 9 (714) 871-2931
-z-
TASK II - TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
Estimates would be made of daily and peak hour traffic volumes from the
site for the three land use alternatives - General Plan permitted density,
medium density and low density. These would be based upon factors accept-
able to the City. The geographic distribution of these trips would be
developed to correspond to the City's traffic model. This distribution
would be utilized in developing traffic assignments for each land use
alternative.
TASK III - ACCESS ANALYSIS
The analysis of access potentials contained in the Phase I report would
be updated to reflect current conditions and policies. Consideration
would be given to the conceptual plan for the site and its relationship
to access. The potential -traffic impacts upon the intersections on
Jamboree at San Joaquin Hills and Santa Barbara would also be considered.
Potential full and limited access points would be identified.
14JCWoJW- C-,WpG{ C6 Of: AcGCL'SsS POJNT5
TASK IV - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Traffic assignments would be developed for the three alternate land use
plans with consideration to the results of Task M. Volume/capacity
comparisons would be made at the two major intersections on Jamboree as
well as others in the immediate vicinity of the site. Modification to
existing and provision of additional facilities would be developed for
each alternative. A review would be made of on-site traffic needs in-
cluding street widths. All data would be compatible with input require-
ments of the City traffic model.
TASK V - REPORT AND MEETINGS
A report would be prepared summarizing our •findings and recommendations.
The report would contain the required supportive data and be suitable
for use by the City and The Irvine Company in finalizing plans for the
-3-
• 5
site. It is not anticipated that formal presentations to the Planning
Commission or City Council would be a part of this work. We would meet
with representatives of the City'and The Irvine Company.as required dur-
ing the course of the study and to review our recommendations.
We are prepared to begin work on this study upon receipt of authorization. It is
anticipated that approximately four (4) weeks would be required to complete the
work and prepare a draft report for review.
Our fee for the work outlined in this proposal shall be based upon personnel charges
plus direct expenses as indicated in our Standard Rate Schedule, a copy of which is
attached and made a part hereto. In no case will the total fee exceed $3,000.00
without prior approval from you or your representative. Since it is not possible
at this time to estimate the time required for additional meetings and/or presenta-
tions concerning this project not mentioned in this proposal, our staff will be
available with the fee based upon our Rate Schedule in addition to the previously
stated maximum. The additional work shall be conducted when requested by you or
your representative.
This letter can serve as a memorandum of agreement and our authorization to procedd.
Please sign one copy and return it to us for our files. We are looking forward to
serving you on this most interesting project.
Respectfully submitted,
WEESSTTON PPRRINNGGLE AND ASSOCIATES
Weston S. Pringle, P.E.
CONTRACT APPROVAL
Approved by:
Title:
Firm:
Date:
WSP:ww
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE
Effective October 1, 1976
Professional Staff Hourly Rates
Firm Principal $45.00
Senior Engineer 30.00
Associate Engineer 25.00
Assistant Engineer 20.00
Support Staff
Engineering Draftsman $15.00
Field Supervisor 12.00
Secretary 10.00
Clerical, Field Enumerator 8.00
General
1. Travel, reproduction, telephone, supplies, and other non-wage
direct costs are billed at cost plus ten (10) percent.
2. Hourly rates apply to travel in addition to working time.
3; For presentations or appearances at formal hearings, depositions,
or court testimony, the following rates apply. Travel time is
included in the number of hours indicated. Preparation time is
charged at normal hourly rates.
Over 5 hours ••5 hours or less
Firm Principal $500.00 '$300.00
Senior engineer 350.00 200.00
4. Statements will be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon
completion of• work. Statements are payable within 30 days of
receipt. Any invoice unpaid after 60 days shall have service
charges added al• a rate of 1.5 percent per month on the unpaid
balance. Compensation for services performed will not be con-
tingent upon the necessity of client to receive payment- from other
parties.
5. These rates are based upon procedures and methods outlined in the
American Society of Civil Engineers ` manual on Engineering Practice
Number 45.
1146 YORBA LINDA BLVD. • PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA 92670 • (714) 993-4130
co
.Attachment #2 �
Proposal 11/28/77 ti:aca�� g
..
WILLIAM ALBERT KUNZMAN 4 _,'i 1cC1ct°n,`'b 11
1., its YO �O�aL
Registered Professional Engineer: ,kip; ail
State of California
Senior Engineer, Weston Pringle & Associates
Memberships include Member, Institute of Transportation Engineers; American
Society of Civil Engineers. Recipient of Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
Graduate Degree Fellowship. Publications include "Irradiation .and Halation,"
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MAGAZINE, December, 1968; "Accuracy of Computer Program
BMD02R, Stepwise Regression, " HIGHWAY PLANNING TECHNICAL REPORT NUMBER 17,
Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C., April, 1970; and "A Simplified
Procedure to Determine Factors for Converting Volume Counts to ADT's, " TRAFFIC
ENGINEERING MAGAZINE, October, 1976.
Mr. Kunzman's experience, both in public and private employment, includes a
wide variety of projects involving analysis and development of solutions to
traffic and transportation problems.
Transportation Planning - site and area transportation planning, urban trans- J
portation planning studies, circulation elements of general plans, central
business district traffic studies, traffic impact analysis studies, access
studies for industrial and commercial site plans, zone change -studies, and route
and schedule planning for a city bus system.
Traffic Operations - TOPICS areawide studies, pedestrian safety studies, acci-
dent investigation and surveillance studies, traffic signal system design, traf-
fic geometric design, traffic speed and delay studies, and traffic street sign
studies.
Mr. Kunzman's background includes expertise in -computer modeling of transportation
characteristics and the projection of future travel demands. ' While with the
Federal Highway Administration, he participated in the operation of their
transportation planning package. This experience carries over into a variety
of computer applications to the traffic engineering field.
Educational Qualifications:- University of California, Los Angeles, Bachelor of
Science Degree, 1967; Yale University Bureau of Highway Traffic, One Year
Graduate Studies Program in Highway Traffic Engineering, L968; Federal Highway
Administration, 18-month training program; Lecturer in Transportation and
,Traffic Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Mr. Kunzman has had a variety of experience in transportation planning and traffic
operations. He has been a Transportation Planning Engineer for the City of Irvine;
Traffic Engineer for Lampman and Associates-; Assistant Traffic Engineer for the
Riverside County Road Department; Highway Planning Engineer for the Policy Planning
Division of the Federal Highway Administration; Assistant Traffic Engineer for
Wilbur Smith and Associates; Assistant Civil Engineer for the Los Angeles County
Road Department, Traffic Section ; Associate Engineer for Crommelin-Pringle and
Associates, Inc.; and Senior Engineer for Weston Pringle and Associates.
1
PO �
CITY Off• NEWPORT BEACH
�41po �P
December 22 , 1977
Wes Pringle and Associates
2651 East Chapman Avenue, Suite 110
Fullerton, Calif. 92631
Subject: Newporter North Traffic Study
Dear Wes ,
Enclosed is the contract for the Newporter North Traffic
Study as part of Phase II of the development of the Environ-
mental Impact Report for the subject project. Please sign
the original and return it to us at your convenience . I
think it' s an interesting observation in this case that it
was quicker to do the study than to get the deposit and
process the contract!
Thanks .
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
BY
Bever Wood,
Envi nmental Coordinator
BDW/sh
Encl .
CityHall • 3300-Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
P P
AGREEMENT
THI'S AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this 19th
day of December, 1977, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ,
a municipal corporation , hereinafter referred to as " CITY , " and
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT. "
W I T N E S S E T H
WHEREAS, CITY ' S Environmental Affairs Committee has
determined that a traffic analysis is necessary in conjunction with
the Phase II Analysis of the Newporter North Site , in the City of
Newport Beach , County of Orange , State of California ; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has submitted to CITY a proposal to
prepare said traffic analysis ; and
WHEREAS , CITY desires to accept said propos.al .
NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the foregoing, the
parties hereto agree as follows :
1 . GENERAL
CONSULTANT agrees to prepare the subject traffic
analysis in accordance with the requirements set forth in Paragraph
2 of this Agreement. CITY agrees to remit to CONSULTANT the amounts
set forth in paragraph 3 of this Agreement in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in this document:
2 . SCOPE OF WORK
The subject traffic analysis will be prepared in
accordance with the CONSULTANT' S proposal dated November 28, 1977,
as corrected, which is attached to this Agreement marked as Exhibit
"A" and by this reference incorporated herein at this point as if
fully set forth .
3 . BILLING AND PAYMENT
CONSULTANT shall be paid under this Agreement on
a time and material ibasis and in no event shall the maximum amount
of this Agreement exceed Three Thousand Dollars ($3;000 .00) . Partial
payments shall be made by CITY to CONSULTANT upon CONSULTANT 'S
presentation of statements verifying the time and material costs
incurred by it in connection with this Agreement.
4 . FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall use diligent' efforts to complete
this contract within twenty-one ( 21 ) days after execution of this
Agreement. The subject traffic study must meet the approval of the
Environmental Affairs Committee of the City. In the event additional
work is required,, said additional work shall be subject to a separate
contract.
5 . TERMINATION
This Agreement is subject to termination by the CITY
at any time upon serving written notice to CONSULTANT. The CITY
shall be thereafter liable to CONSULTANT only for fees and costs
incurred as of the date CONSULTANT receives such notice of termination .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have entered into
this Agreement as of the date and year first above written .
APPROV D CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
TOQ1-
ista i y A rney erector /
CgJ•urri'ty Development Department
CITY
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES •
By_
CONSULTANT2 -
W d� • •
TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
rn
�",,1yyy CEIVED
November 28, 1977 pb RCommume�t
}' DevDept•
J ticV 3 01977 ' -12
Mr. Michael W. Wright 011 0,4�cr',
Westec Services, Inc. NEWpCp�tn j
180 E. Main
Tustin, California 92680
Dear Mr. Wright:
We are pleased to submit this propos&l to provide professional engineering ser-
vices relative to the Newport North EIR. This proposal is based upon my dis-
cussions with you and Bill Darnell and the letter and proposed scope of work from
Beverly Wood of November 21, 1977:
The work would consist of Phase II of the EIR contract for the project. A report
covering Phase I of the analysis was prepared in May, 1976, and identified traffic
related constraints. This phase would involve the analysis of several specific
concerns expressed both by The Irvine Company and City of Newport Beach. The re-
sults would provide guidance in the development of a plan for the site.
We would envision the following specific tasks to be rqquired for this Phase:
TASK I - DATA REVIEW
We would assemble and review all pertinent studies and reports that have
been completed since our previous analysis. This would include our
'Newport Center Traffic Study, Phase' II", traffic signal spacing studies
on Jamboree and similar data. Traffic volume data would be updated from
counts taken by the City and others. No additional field data collection
is anticipated. Discussions would be held with the consultants preparing
the City traffic model to obtain input and insure compatibility. It is
understood that a conceptual master plan for the site would be made avail-
able.
2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931
TASK II - TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION
Estimates would be made of daily and peak hour traffic volumes from the
site for the three land use alternatives - General Plan permitted density,
medium density and low density. These would be based upon factors accept-
able to the City. The geographic distribution of these trips would be
developed to correspond to the Cityls traffic model. This distribution
would be utilized in developing traffic assignments for each land use
alternative.
TASK III - ACCESS ANALYSIS
The analysis of access potentials contained in the Phase I report would
be updated to reflect current conditions and policies. Consideration
would be given to the conceptual plan for the site and its relationship
to access. The potential traffic impacts upon the intersections on
Jamboree at San Joaquin Hills and Santa Barbara would also be considered.
Potential full and limited access points would be identified.
TASK IV - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Traffic assignments would be developed for the three alternate land use
plans with consideration to the results of Task It. Volume/capacity
comparisons would be made at the two major intersections on Jamboree as
well as others in the immediate vicinity of the site. Moddfication to
existing and provision of additional facilities would be developed for
each alternative. A review would be made of on-site traffic needs in-
cluding street widths. All data would be compatible with input require-
ments of the City traffic model.
TASK V - REPORT AND MEETINGS
A report would be prepared summarizing our di.ndings and recommendations.
The report would contain the required supportive data dnd be suitable
for use by the City and The Irvine Company in finalizing plans for the
• • -3-
site. It is not anticipated that formal presentations to the Planning
Commission or City Council would be a part of this work. We would meet
with representatives of the City and The Irvine Company as required dur-
ing the course of the study and to review our recommendations.
We are prepared to begin work on this study upon receipt of authorization. It is
anticipated that approximately four (4) weeks would be required to complete the
work and prepare a draft report for review.
Our fee for the work outlined in this proposal shall be based upon personnel charges
plus direct expenses as indicated in our Standard Rate Schedule, a copy of which is
attached and made a part hereto. In no case will the total fee exceed $3,000.00
without prior approval from you or your representative. Since it is not possible
at this time to estimate the time required for additional meetings and/or presenta-
tions concerning this project not mentioned in this proposal, our staff will be
available with the fee basdd upon our Rate Schedule in addition to the previously
stated maximum. The additional work shall be conducted when requested by you or
your rppresentative.
This letter can serve as a memorandum of agreement and our authorization to procedd.
Please sign one copy and return it to us for our files. We are lboking, forward to
serving you on this most interesting project.
Respectfully submitted,
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
0/4 41Z
Weston S. Pringle, P.E.
CONTRACT APPROVAL
Approved by:
Title:
Firm:
Date:
WSP:ww
WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE
Effective October 1, 1976
Professional Staff Hourly Rates
Firm Principal $45.00
Senior Engineer 30.00
Associate Engineer 25.00
Assistant Engineer 20.00
Support Staff
Engineering Draftsman $15.00
Field Supervisor 12.00
Secretary 10.00
Clerical Field Enumerator 8.00
General
1. Travel, reproduction, telephone, supplies, and other non-wage
direct costs are billed at cost plus ten (10) percent.
2. Hourly rates apply to travel in addition to working time.
3. For presentations or appearances at formal hearings,, depositions,
or court testimony, the following rates apply,. Travel time is
included in the number of hours indicated. Preparation time is
charged at normal hourly rates.
Over 5 hours 5 hours or less
Firm Principal $500.00 $300.00
Senior Engineer 350.00 200.00
4. Statements will be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon
completion of work. Statements are payable within 30 days of
receipt. Any invoice unpaid after 60 days shall have service
charges added at a rate of 1.5 percent per month on the unpaid
balance. Compensation for services performed will not be con-
tingent upon the necessity of client to rec&ive payment from other
parties.
5. These rates are based upon procedures and methods outlined in the
American Society of Civil Engineers' Manual on Engineering Practice
Number 45.
1146 YORBA LINDA BLVD. • PLACENTIA, CALIFORNIA 92670 (714) 993-4130
Attachment #2
Proposal 11/28/77
S �o<•°�Q� 1� t0 I
o° 01�O � oa• �
WILLIAM ALBERT KUNZMAN G, O�G c?o4t06
Registered Professional Engineer: x�
State of California
Senior Engineer, Weston Pringle & Associates
Memberships include Member, Institute of Transportation Engineers; American
Society of Civil Engineers. Recipient of Insurance Institute for Highway Safety
Graduate Degree Fellowship. Publications include "Irradiation and Halation,"
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING MAGAZINE, December, 1968; "Accuracy of Computer Program
BMD02R, Stepwise Regression," HIGHWAY PLANNING TECHNICAL REPORT NUMBER 17,
Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C., April, 1970; and "A Simplified
Procedure to Determine Factors for Converting Volume Counts to ADT's, " TRAFFIC
ENGINEERING MAGAZINE, October, 1976.
Mr. Kunzman's experience, both in public and private employment, includes a
wide variety of projects involving analysis and development of solutions to
traffic and transportation problems.
Transportation Planning - site and area transportation planning, urban trans-
portation planning studies, circulation elements of general plans, central
business district traffic studies, traffic impact analysis studies, access
studies for industrial and commercial -site plans, zone change •studies, and route
and schedule planning for a city bus system.
Traffic Operations - TOPICS areawide studies, pedestrian safety studies, acci-
dent investigation and surveillance studies, traffic signal system design, traf-
fic geometric design, traffic speed and delay studies, and traffic street sign
studies.
Mr. Kunzman's background includes expertise in •computer modeling of transportation
characteristics and the projection of future travel demands. While with the
Federal Highway Administration, he participated in the operation of their
transportation planning package. This experience carries over into a variety
of computer applications to the traffic engineering field.
Educational Qualifications: - University of California, Los Angeles, Bachelor of
Science Degree, 1967; Yale University Bureau of Highway Traffic, One Year
Graduate Studies Program in Highway Traffic Engineering, 1968; Federal Highway
Administration, 18-month training program; Lecturer in Transportation and
Traffic Engineering, University of California, Irvine.
Mr. Kunzman has had a variety of experience in transportation planning and traffic
operations. He has been a Transportation Planning Engineer for the City of Irvine;
Traffic Engineer for Lampman and Associates; Assistant Traffic Engineer for the
Riverside County Road Department; Highway Planning Engineer for the Policy Planning
Division of the Federal Highway Administration; Assistant Traffic Engineer for
Wilbur Smith and Associates; Assistant Civil Engineer for the Los Angeles County
Road Department, Traffic Section ; Associate Engineer for Crommelin-Pringle and
Associates, Inc.; and Senior Engineer for Weston Pringle and Associates.
• ���wPoRT
5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
u s
e+c -
�C/FORN�
November 21 , 1977
Weston Pringle
Weston Pringle and Associates
2651 East Chapman Avenue
Suite 110
Fullerton , Calif. 92631
Subject : Newporter North Traffic Analysis
Dear Wes ,
The Irvine Company has requested a traffic analysis of the
Newporter North site as part of the contract for the pre-
paration of the EIR . This analysis would come under Phase
II of that contract with Westec Services , Inc .
Bill Darnell participated in a meeting with .Keith Greer,
Jim Hewicker and myself to discuss the scope of work , and
the attached outline resulted from that meeting. Since you
participated in Phase I of the project, we are requesting a
proposal from you to complete •the tasks as outlined for
Phase II . This proposal should be submitted to Mike Wright
of Westec Services as soon as possible since' The Irvine
Company is anxious to proceed .
Thank .you for your cooperation . If there are any questions
about the scope of work , please call me or Bill Darnell .
•Sincerely , '
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR
Beverly Wood,
Environmental Coordinator
BD'W/sh
Attachment
cc : Mike Wright
Keith Greer w/attachment
City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663
•
a-
MEETING WITH: Keith Greer, Jim Hewicker, Bill Darnell , Bev Wood
PROJECT: Newporter North : Traffic Analysis
Proposed Scope of Work
The Irvine Company has requested a traffic analysis of the Newporter
North site in conjunction with Phase II of the develo-pment of the
EIR on this project. The traffic study should include the following :
I . The identification of potential locations for full -access
and limited access intersections on Jamboree Road and San
Joaquin Hills Road. This would include the potential of a
full access or limited access intersection adjacent to the
John Wayne Tennis Club on Jamboree Road .
II . The estimated traffic generation for three alternative
residential development proposals as follows :
A . General Plan permitted density ( 704 'D. U. )
B . Medium Density (425 D .U . )
C. Low Density ( 300 D. U . )
III . Distribution of traffic for alternatives A, B , and C to
critical intersections : Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills and
Jamboree and Santa Barbara . Included in this step would be
recommendations for proposed traffic control devices and
recommendations for interior collector street dimensions
based on anticipated volumes .
IV . Preparation of data for input to City ' s traffic model to
determine effect on remote intersections .
The Irvine Company will supply a conceptual master plan for the site .