Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTPO020_CIVIC PLAZA PC- TPP APRIL 1980_VOL I *NEW FILE* CIVIC PLAZA PC - TPP APRIL ' � eeo� JN � 5 �7 FULE COPY ]DO'NOT REMOVE VOLUME I CIVIC PLAZA - PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN APRIL, 1980 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS City Council Minutes February 11 , 1980 January 7, 1980 March 12, 1979 Planning Commission Minutes December 20, 1979 March 22, 1979 ' City Council Staff Reports February 11 , 1980 ' March 12, 1979 IPlanning Commission Staff Reports December 20, 1979 1 December 6, 1979 October 18, 1979 October 4, 1979 ' September 20, 1979 - August 16, 1979 ' August 9, 1979 ' Traffic Reports - Weston Pringle & Associates November 30, 1979 (approved plan) 1 November 20, 1979 1 . September 15, 1979 1 ' August 14, 1979 July 5, 1979 February 12, 1979 January 17, 1979 1 . File Copy Only Table of Contents - 2. Letters from The Irvine Company ' October 18, 1979 July 10, 1979 February 21 , 1979_ - January 25, 1979 Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Plan ' Position Paper - "Vesting" 1 1 l ' _ �p r 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCILMEN MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Place : Council Chambers Time : 7 : 30 P .M. —ROLL CALL Date: February 11 1980 INDEX ' Present x x x x x A. Roll Call. Motion x I B. The r of the Minutes of the Adjourned Ayes x x x x x x Meeting of Jan 21, 1980 was waived, and the ' Abstain x Minutes were approved a �ordinancesoan red filed. Motion x C. The reading in full of al olu- ' All Ayes tions under consideration was waived, and the City Clerk was directed to- read by titles only. D. HEARINGS: ' 1. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing and City Newport Council review regarding a request of The Irvine Center ' Company, Newport Beach, todeve consider a Phasing Civic Plaza Plan for the remaining lopment in the Civic (94) Plaza Plannned Community District, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document. Property ' generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive, and Jamboree Road in Newport Center; zoned P-C. ' A report was presented from the Planning Department ' Dick Cannon, representing The Irvine Company, addressed the Council and asked for approval and that the Planning Commission be sustained. ' Motion x The public hearing was closed after it was deter- All Ayes mined that no one else desired to be heard. ' Motion x Councilman Strauss made a motion to accept the Environmental Document, to approve the Traffic Phasing 'Plan subject to the five findings and the conditions recommended by the Planning ' Commission and to add Condition No. 8 as recommended by staff, as follows: "That prior to•the issuance of any building permit authorized ' by the approval of this Traffic Phasing Plan, the applicant shall deposit with the City Finance Director $44,530.00 to be used for the construc- tion of a wall on the westerly side of Jamboree ' Road between Eastbluff Drive and Ford Road." Mayor Ryckoff asked that the motion be amended to change Condition No. 7 to read as follows: "The applicant shall contribute an amount equal to what would be the City's share of the cost of the free right-turn lane on Jamboree Road behind the Texaco 1 Station ($90,000.00) to a Circulation and Transit Fund to be used at the discretion of the City for circulation and transit purposes in the Newport Center area," which amendment was accepted by the maker of the motion. A vote was taken on Councilman Strauss' motion, A11 Ayes which motion carried,and the Traffic Phasing Plan_ iwas approved as amended. i Volume 34 - Page 30 j I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH l COUNCILMEN MINUTES ROLL CALL 93p� y�N February 11, 1980 INDEX - 2. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding., Harbor Vw Hills P-C (a) A request of The Irvine Company, Newport District Beach, to consider a Traffic Study for the (94) proposed construction of sixty-eight apartment ' units on 10.6 gross acres; located at 1601 San Miguel Drive, on the northeasterly side of San Joaquin Hills Road, between MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive in Harbor View Hills (Baywood Apartments); zoned P-C, AND (b) Planning Commission Amendment No. 536, a request of The Irvine Company, Newport Beach, to amend the Planned Community Develop- ment Plan for Harbor View Hills to permit the expansion of Area No, 8 (Haywood Apartments) of the Planned Community for additional multi- family residential units, and the acceptance , of an Environmental Document. Property located at 1601 San Miguel Drive. AND (c) esubdiviaion No. 637, a request of The ne Company, Newport Beach, to combine one pa eel and a portion of Blocks 92 and 93 of Iry ne's subdivision into one building site to pe t the expansion of the Baywood Apartment ' compl on the property located at 1601 San Miguel rive, on the northeasterly side of San Joe in Hills Road, between MacArthur Boulevar and gat Miguel Drive in Harbor View Hill (Baywood Apartments); zoned P-C. A report was pres nted from the Planning ' Department. Joe Sarnecky of The rvine Company addressed the Council. ' Motion x The hearing was closed ter it was determined that All Ayes no one else desired to be heard. Motion x The recommended actions of he Planning Commission All Ayes were sustained and the Traff c Study for the proposed construction of sixt -eight apartment units on 10.6 gross acres was proved; Resolution R-9721 No. 9721, amending the Planned mmunity Develop- ment Plan for Harbor View Hills permit the expansion of Area No. 8 (Baywood A artments) of the Planned Community for additiona multi-family residential units, and the acceptant of an Environmental Document, was adopted; nd Resub- division No. 637 was approved. �? 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing gardipg Condemnation ' - t e condemenat ono a of-"'scant lot on Tuati Avenue Tustin Av I opposite Avon Street to gain access to a Ci y Vacant Lot parking lot. (73) i Volume 34 - Page 31 i III , I CITY OF .NEWPORT BEACH COUNCILMEN MINUTES C. F OLL CALL ��'� pss s January 7 1980 INDEX _ The following people addressed the Council and ' opposed the ordinance as proposed: Richard H. Spooner, Ninfa Jarvis, David Shores and Farel I Walker. ' Motion x he following ordinance was introduced and passed All Ayes to nd reading on February 110 1980: Ordinan�e . 5, being, AN ORDINANCE OF 0-1835 THE CIEWPORT BEACH' AMENDING ' SECTION 1.25.020 OF HE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING SECTION (D) THERETO DEFINING "POLITKAL ACTION COMMITTEE" AND ADDING SECTI 1.25.065 THROUGH 1.25.069 REGARDING THE DISQUALIFICATION'OF CITY COUNCIL MEMB FROM VOTING ON MATTERS AFFECTING MAJOR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS AND MAKING' ' TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING CHANGES IN CONFORMANCE THEREWITH. J. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS: ' Motion x 1. The Traffic PhasingPlan for Civic Plaza was set for Npt Center Ayes x x x x x public hea"�'"aring on February 112 1980. Civic Plaza Noes x x (68) ' Motion ~ x r 2. Mayor Ryckoff made a motion to set General Plan General Amendment No. 80-1 for public hearing on Plan ' February 252 1980. (45) Motion x Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to set' tAyes x x z x General Plan Amendment ' No. 80-1 for public Noes x x x hearing on March 10, 1980, which motion carried. The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 1 5 p.m. tto 7:30 p.m. on January 21, 1980. !r • i r i I i Volume 34 - Page 17 i • I f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ATTACHMENT NO. 3 r LOUN(.I I,M f.N MINUTES \1`ae., KPl ; CALL( \d' P March 12, 1979 INDEX _ nt.inn proposed nrrds Ln Indiattr dogrrr of permm�ence mcet�'hr trst. The regular order of the Agena was resumed. ' I 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding Newport Planning Commission AmepdmGpt,_Ko.. 527, a request Center initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned„Community Plaza ' Development Plan to require the preparation of a (2285) traffic Phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked ' that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that the project be considered on a 30%/70X approach. Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined ' ' All Ayos that no one else desired to be heard. Motion x Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied to 100Y, of the Civic Plaza project. Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by ' 100% development review instead of 30%, I think ; that it is beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." Motlnn x I Councilman Hart matte a substitute motion Lo continue the item to March 26. ' Mutton I x Councilman McInnis made a.substitute•substitute Ayes x� x x x motion to adopt -Resolution No. 917 5 amending the R-9517 Noes x ix x Planned Community Development Plan for•Civic Plaza revising iiieallowable development plan, an_d ' ac¢ept3ng—a'n`eno'ironmentul-document, which motion carded: ' i F. CONTINUED BUSINESS: ' 1. Previously considered. .,2. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Plac - ent Department regarding Planning Commission Planned • self with._r_egai to a request of Fmlcay Develop- Community mant and ty Company for the approval of a (1275) _ '�;:� .. i t ••••��....��,,,,,, ' I { Volume 33 - Page 1• . 1 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 ' COUNCILMEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES \ I 2� � N hnl 1 CAI I ;s 'y March 12, 1979 INDEX j I I available for potential office building. Addition j I ally, The Irvine Company requests that 4,156 sq. I I ft. of space be reallocated from Pacific Coast ' I Highway East and West, and 1,511 sq. ft. of apace i from either Block 500 or Block 700, at their option, be reallocated to Block 800 in Newport Center to allow for the construction of a 10,000 sq. £t. restaurant which would contain a maximum of ' 5,667 sq. ft. of net public area. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. ' Harry Bubb, President, and Steven Gavin, Vice President Corporate Relation Officer, of Pacific Mutual Life Insurance addressed the Council. Mr. Gavin stated that they were reducing the elevation ' by three floors and would be willing to continue or not more than six weeks, if necessary; that t y would be willing to eliminate the high-rise con miniums, but tbat they would continue to be Comm tad to all .it required for the two ' ten-st y buildings, traffic and otherwise, and h all ote conditions. Robert Shel m of The Irvine Company, addressed the Council a stated that the condominiums were ' included in the nvironmental Impact Report because of a pre ous direction of the Council. Donald Gralneck, rep senting Pacific Mutual Insurance, addressed a Council and asked if the I ordinance were changed delete reference to the residential development, that would require a revision to the ordinance n t time to come back for reintroduction, or if it ould be enacted at ' that time. The City Attorney stated that the ction would lower the density of the project an could'be considered on April 23, if continued\wasa, e, ' without reintroduction. Gary Schamberg, President of Eastblus Association, addressed the Council re ' necessity for developers to institutn- nation factors along Jamboree Road, adto submit a letter with suggestions p Association. ' Mot ion I x I pu The blic hearing was continued Lo A it pril 23. with All Ayes the applicant stipulating concurrence to con[inuation.�y ' The_Council unanimously agreed to take Agenda Item F-1 out oC-order and consider it at this time. A report was presented from the Community Development Department regarding the Planning•Commission's recom- mendations concerning the definition of the term ' I "reasonableness" as applied to a traffic phasing plan For "excepted" Planned Community Districts, I I I Volume 33 - Page 58 I Ijl 1 C:I I Y Ut- NEWPORT BEACH COUNCII•MEN MINUTES G�V c F s [It t CALL �`r T.`p"p . March 12, 1979 INDEX III I Cordon West, President of the Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce, and Michael C. Gering addressed ! ' the Council, but were ruled out of order by the Mayor for not addressing the subject under consideration. ' I I The information to be submitted by the developer, as , recomnnended by"the Planning Cm__iision in'connecCion with t eIi test o£-reaso`na)ileness for appricable planned communities_ was modified tochange the percentage ' Th+tion x of increase in item3 from 5% to 2%, to revise item 2 Ayeq x x x x a;d Co add items 7 and 8.: The list was'approLed"as , Nneq x x x follows. (a) Each project subject to the phasing requirement , of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of development remaining to be completed. (b) Information shall be submitted indicating the ' amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. ' (c) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determin what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those ' improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated From the project increase the traffic for any leg of the intersection Burin the peak two and one-half hour period by 2% or more. (d) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be ' shown prior to making any projections. (a) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu- tion to completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. (f) The developer is also to take into consideration ' in the preparation of his plan characteristics I in the design of his development which either I I reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto I less impacted arterials or through intersections ' I in the least congested direction. (g) Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project Cor approval. I i ! I Volume 33 - Page 59 ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 6pI1N(.ILMf.N MINUTES I!(ILL CAL.L� Nd' •�� March 12, 1979 INDEX I (I1) MLLigation proposed needs to indleate dogrpe of pprmanence in order to meet. the test. ! ! I The regular order of the Agena was resumed. I i I I 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding Newport Planning Commission Ais_grBlme,nt..No. 527, a request Center initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned.Community Plaza ' Development Plan to require the preparation of a (2285) treffic phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. ' Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked ' that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that the project be considered on a 30%/70% approach. Motion I x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Aves that no one else desired to be heard. ' I Motion x Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic Plana project. Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by ' 1001 development review instead of 301, I think ; that it is beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- _ inate against this project." ' Nut[on I xl Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to continue the item to March 26. ' LlurLoIt i I x Councilman McInnis made a•substitute substitute Ayes I X1 x x x motion to adopt Resolution No. 9517 amending the R-9517 Notts Ix •x x Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza revising the 'allowable development plan, and ! accepting un enviioiim fi6l: document, which motion ' I carfi6d:.. ...,.......,.....�.�.����.�.�............. I P. CONTINUED BUSINESS: ,...� iI 1. Previously considered. i I i 2. A report was presented f rtic Community Develop- Newport Place ing most Departme nt Planning Commission Planned action.w aegard to a reeluest of 15nkay Develop- Community I I Y-'•mpnt'.5'n'dRealty Company for the approval of a I (1275) i I I 1 i ' Volume 33 - Page 60 � � II ! I . I ' ll COMMISSIONERS Regular Planning Commission Meeting MINUTES Place : City Council Chambers Time: 7: 30 P .M. " x 1979 ATTK-l"AiI MV 00. � r w Date: December 20 , o 40 N N N City of Newport Beach ROI L CALL INDEX Present xx x x x U ' EX-OFIFICIO MEMBERS Hugh Coffrin , City Attorney ' STAFF MEMBERS James Hewicker, P.l,anning Director ' Fred Talarico ; Envi%rRonmental Coordinator Don Webb , Assistant City Engineer Glenna Gipe , Secretary Minutes Written By: Glenna Gip Motion Motion was made to approve the minutes' of, the re- Ayes YX x x .gular Planning Commission meeting of December 6 , Abstain x x 1979 , with the addition of an added conditian, on Page 11 . " Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remain- , Item #1 ing development in the Civic Plaza Planned Commu- nity District, and the acceptance of an Environ- PHASING mental Document. PLAN ' LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic APPROVED Plaza , generally bounded by San CONDI- ' Joaquin Hills Road , Santa Cruz TIONALLY 'Drive , San Clemente Drive , Santa Barbara Drive , and Jamboree Road , in Newport Center. ' ZONE: P-C ' APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as Applicant ' Don Webb , Assistant City Engineer, commented that the ICU analysis indicates that if a left turn ' lane were added on Jamboree Road in both direc- tions , the ICU at Jamboree Road and MacArthur ' -i- Ic COMMISSIONERS MINUTES ' = December 20 , 1979 W � ' Cit of New ort Beach W (pp Y N J fl� JC 41 ROIL CALL INDEX oulevard could be reduced to . 8725. ' ommissioner Haidinger posed a question , to which r. Webb replied that they are in the process of attempting to implement several of these minor , irculation systems improvements . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Cokas , Mr. Webb replied that a restriping job would range from $2,000 to $5,000 and that the ' most expensive aspect of it is the sandblasting and traffic control during the period of time in which they are trying to implement the project. ' Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that one year ago when the traffic phasing analysis was ' begun, they found it to be the case universally that a developer would come before the Planning Commission with a project and an additional right turn only lane was on Campus Drive and Bristol ' Street and it reduced traffic immensely and it was suggested that the City undergo those projects themselves . ' , Mr. Webb commented that Pacific Mutual is the firs to attempt to implement some of these improvements relative to minor widening projects , and that they have been waiting for the developer to come up with the money, rather than doing it with the City' s public funds . ' Commissioner Beek suggested a highway action team to find the problems and enact changes. Mr. Webb responded that most of the improvements mentioned are presently in the process of trying to be implemented, but that the City does not ' have the finances to finance the project and col- it from the developer later. ' Commissioner Balalis suggested that these inter- ' sections be analyzed. Mr. Webb commented that they have been working ' with the MacArthur Place Development for The Ir- vine Company in the preparation and processing of plans , which company has already applied for an -2- ' COMMISSIONERS MINUTES 9: December 20 , 1979 n x o 5 o W D N N City, of Newport, Beach ROLL CALL INDEX ' encroachment permit for the additional widening of Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard, and a ' signal modification project has to be implemented , which is CalTrans ' responsibility. In response to a comment from Commissioner Haidin- ' ger, Mr. Webb replied that various . different traffic studies over the last few months have been analyzed and' for the necessary improvements , more is required than merely changing the striping•. ' He further commented that the ICU analyses put together were for the 1979 year with no recommen- dation as to what additional traffic would be added ,for the various different areas in the up- coming year. , Commissioner Thomas suggested a list o.f 10 inter- ' sections with a task list and budget for each . In response to a question posed by Commissioner •' Thomas , Fred Talarico , Environmental Coordinator, responded that under the Ford-Aeronutronic Traf- fic Phasing Plan and overall environmental pack- age, they were required to maintain certain levels of carpooling and an investigation of other items . Commissioner Thomas suggested that one of the ele- ments of the Phasing Plan includes the beginning of construction of the Park-n-Ride on Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard or acquisition of another right-of-way lane in Newport Center so that future problems would be miti,gated. Commissioner Beek replied that the City Council in interpreting the Traffic Phasing Ordinance has specified that only verifiable improvements could be counted as mitigation measures . ' Commissioner Balalis stated his preference that the improvements come to the street and inter- section locations until they are taken care of, -3- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES' � December 20 , 1979 x 3 , 02 WX C >- City of New ort ' Beach ROLL CALL INDEX and then if there is no intersection improvement because of an external force such as regional traffic, then future projects should consider other means , other than fiscal improvements . Commissioner Thomas commented that in order to undergo a large project of a transit type facility , It will require the co-operation of all jurisdic- tions , and provisions should be made for future implementation over and above short-term striping, ' then a problem will be solved. Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that , there was a requirement of Corporate Plaza I and, II of an OCTD facility. ' The Public Hearing was opened regarding this item and Ron Hendrickson , Irvine Company, appeared be- fore the Planning Commission and stated that the ' shuttle service was a condition of approval. for Corporate Plaza and an additional requirement that they provide $300,000 to fund the shuttle system ' and donate the 3 acre site for the terminal faci- lities , said system of which would not be imple- mented until approximately 1984, predicated on a density increase of Newport Center. ' Commissioner Thomas expressed his feeling that OCTD has been less than aggressive in certain area and that their bus strategy is based on high-den- , sity priority population, such as the elderly and handicapped, and he stated his desire that they be - come more aggressive by providing right-of-way land and perhaps funding for construction. , Mr. Hendrickson stated that .there is another site t which The Irvine Company has agreed to donate which is north of the Santa Ana Freeway, north of the golden triangle Irvine Center area . Commissioner Thomas stated his understanding that the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor will be funded in part by transit capabilities , and as it becomes a major transit corridor, the location adjacent to The Irvine Industrial Complex 1 -4- J ' COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20 , 1979 ' 0 3 City of Newport Beach N xa7 RUl L CALL INDEX is excellent , and he expressed his feeling that ' efforts should be concentrated in that area and linking high employment centers to that area . ' Mr. Hendrickson again appeared before the Planning Commission and explained that the City Council action on General Plan Amendment 79-1 has 1•eft ' Civic Plaza as a part of Newport Center square .footage to the degree that they have noted that the 234,706 sq . ft. could be built in Civic Plaza ' and the fact that this was done with a Negative Declaration is indicative of a lack of concern that there isn ' t a serious traffic problem by ' virtue of this project. He then described the characteristics and aesthetics of the proposed project, stating that there were 16 intersections ' which needed to be analyzed , the results of which verified that there is only one intersection with which the impact of the 70% would go beyond . 90 ICU , and that they have proposed mitigation mea- sures at that intersection' which would bring the t ICU down below the . 90 ICU . He explained that these figures' do not include the other 30%, so that in fact these intersections are being im- proved beyond the' reduction in ICU that is shown in the traffic report and that the intent of the test of reasonableness is that for those review- ing the project, it is a judgement call . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Haidinger, Weston Pringle., The Irvine Company ,' ' replied that they concerned themselves only with the intersections above . 90 ICU . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas regarding distribution , Mr. Pringle replied ' that the distribution for this project was based upon SCAAG population distributions for Orange ' County and that this distribution is similar to the Plaza distribution. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Hiadinger, Mr. Webb replied- that a second left turn � lane• was added in each direction and The Irvine Company had not considered it because they ' felt that there was not sufficient right-of-way a C.UMMISSIONLNS MINU,I LS » ' December 6, 1979 � � y- i w TlkCity of Newport Beach ROl L'CALL INDEX now and that it might require moving a curb and gutter over 10 feet and possibly a median loca- tion. In response to a question posed by Commissioner ' Balalis , Mr. Webb replied that some of the inter- sections have gone beyond . 90 since their latest studies in July, so that they were not aware of the serious problem until this summer, so that ' they have not yet implemented any changes. In response to a question posed by Commissioner ' Beek, Mr. Pringle replied that the information indicated that there was some concern regarding adequate right-of-way on the Irvine side of the intersection, which was why they had not incorpor- ated it. Commissioner Beek stated his understanding that. , if there are any intersections left with an TCU of more than . 90, that technically the project is susceptible of being rejected because the criteria established by the Planning Commission and City ' Council state that an intersection must be below .90 if their traffic increases by 2% or more. Commissioner Haidinger stated his understanding ' that the Traffic Phasing Ordinance does not apply to this project and what does apply is the test of reasonableness and that the Planning Commission ' , has discretion. Mr. Pringle responded to Commissioner Beek' s com- ment, stating that if they have an intersection above . 90, they make the best effort they can to reduce it. In response to a question posed by Commissioner ' Balalis , Mr. Pringle replied that the eventual extension of the freeway will mitigate the pro- ' blem and expressed his feeling that it would not be practical to go into a major reconstruction, because it would not solve the problem which would be solved eventually by the freeway extension. 1 -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20 , 1979 0 co City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis , Mr. Webb replied that there might be room to put a left-turn lane , though that would t not bring the ICU down below . 90, but would bring it down from . 97 to . 92, that the state would not agree to approve this improvement at this- time, as this area is projected as a 1981-1982 area , and that 'the extension' will probably be completed in 4 years . ' Commissioner Balalis suggested a triple right turn lane , to which Mr. Webb expressed his doubt that it could be implemented so that it would ' function and that right now there is- back-up on Bristol Street at the red light, as the inter- sections are very close and traffic has difficult merging into the right turn lane to get onto the freeway, so that Birch Street has become more im- pacted. ' Commissioner Allen posed a question , to which Mr. Webb replied that there are two through lanes southboUnd on Jamboree Road and is designated a major arterial which would have 3 lanes in each . ' direction , so that there would be an additional through lane added to Jamboree Road when the Master Plan is built out, which is the, same situa- tion at San Joaquin Hills Road. He further ex- plained that northerly of San Joaquin Hills Road the pavement section is completed. .and southerly of San Joaquin Hills Road, Jamboree Road will be ' widened to Coast Highway to add . the third lane . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas , Mr. Webb replied that there are numerous ' road-widening projects around the City and $17 ,000 ,000- •20,000 ,000 would be necessary to complete these master plan road sections'. ' Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission make the findings as indicated in Exhibit "A" of the ' Staff Report and approve the Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community, subject to the conditions as indicated in Exhibit "A" of the Staff Report, with the im- provement that a left turn lane be added on Jam- -7- L1 � • COMMISSIONERS MINUTES' ' g December 20 , 1979 3 5 F l ( I City of Newport Beach ROIL CALL INDEX boree Road in both directions with figures in- dicating what this would entail . ' Commissioner Allen suggested that the option be left open that the company can come back to the ' Planning Commission before the next meeting if there is a problem. .Commissioner Allen expressed her feeling that this ' is a very major project and suggested an added condition. Motion x Amendment to the Motion was made that a condition ' be added that this project to mitigate the traffic that it cannot mitigate at the intersection which requires the building of the Corona del Mar Free- ' way that it include the improvement to the right hand turn lane at the San Joaquin Hills Road/ Jamboree Road intersection. ' Mr. Hendrickson again appeared before the Planning Commission and reminded them that The Irvine Com- pany provided the land for that free right turn ' lane with the condition that the City would build the free right turn lane, and that regarding the previous discussion of the Jamboree Road/MacArthur ' Boulevard intersection , there is a possibility that the cost of doing what they want to do there due to the signalization changes may run as much as $200 ,000, and he expressed his feeling that , the payment of the free right turn lane at Jam-' boree Road isn' t going to improve traffic where it needs to be improved. ' Motion x Amendment to the Motion was made that the City reimbursement funds received be put toward a ' transit fund. Mr. Webb stated that the funds that would be uti- lized for constructing this project would be 50% ' Ci.ty gas tax funds and 50% HFP funds , so that if the County funds were not used, they would not come to the City. Commissioner Thomas stated his understanding that ' if it is a reimbursement, the gas tax funds would be spent for the purposes intended or the reim- bursement be considered a donation to the transit -B COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December '20 , 1979 0 0 City of Newport Beach ROIL CALL INDEX fund for The Irvine Company' s best interest. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Haidinger, Mr. Webb replied that. the estimates ' for the project were between $160 ,000 and $190 ,000 for the right turn lane on Jamboree Road. ' Commissioner Allen commented that her Amendment was made as a suggested tradeoff for the fact that they still have an intersection that is ' over . 90 about which they can do nothing and about which nothing will be done until the com- pletion of the Corona del Mar Freeway . ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin regarding the Amendment, Commissioner Allen further commented that the project is just adjacent to the intersection, making it prac- tically an on-site road improvement and that according to "Table 3" , most of the peak hour traffic that it generates goes through that intersection and she suggested that they solve the problem before they have one , since they cannot solve a problem they already have in ' any reasonable fashion. Commissioner Balalis• expressed his opposition to the Amendment, stating regarding the inter- section that cannot be made to go below . 90 , that as the figures show that as of the present time, in 1981 without the project the ICU will go up to 1. 21 and with the project the ICU goes up to 1. 22 , but with the mitigation that is being done , the ICU goes back down to . 97 and that, as he stated his understanding ac-cording to the "Test of Reasonableness" , if a project does not make worse , but improves an intersection , this should be taken into con- sideration . Commissioner Allen drew attention to "Item 1" that states that no project-related improve- -9- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20 , 1979 xHw > 1 N � N � City of Newport Beach � ROIL CALL INDEX ments are considered in the calculation when ' it gets to 1 .2186 ; however, that intersection, because of where it is located that 1. 2186 would presume no project at all that impact ' that intersection will do any improvement to that intersection. Ayes x x x Commissioner Allen ' s Amendment to the Motion , Noes K x x was then voted on , which MOTION FAILED. Ayes x x xx Commissioner Thomas ' Amendment to the Motion , Noes NX X was then voted on , which MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding ' that the intent of Commissioner Thomas ' Amend- ment was that The Irvine Company will pay the City' s share of the funds for improving the ' right turn lane on Jamboree Road, and those funds will be placed in a City Transit Fund. Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that if a transit system is not set up, The ' Irvine Company would not be required to pay the funds , to which Commissioner Thomas , agreed. Mr. Webb expressed his concern that if The Ir- vine Company reimburses the City, there is a ' question about the ability for us to maintain the same gas tax funds , and suggested that The Irvine Company deposit the fund directly ' into a transit fund. -10- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20 , 1979 ' 0Ca0 9'2 W M = City of Newport Beach KOI.L CALL INDEX •, Mr. Webb suggested identifying the meaning of a "Transit Fund" and determining what uses to which a "Transit Fund" could be put. Motion x Motion was made to reconsider the Amendment. Ayes x x x x x Noes Amendment to the Motion was made that The Irvine Motion K Company contribute an amount equal to what would ' Ayes K x xx x be the city' s share of- the cost of the free right Noes x x turn lane on Jamboree Road behind the Texaco sta- tion to a "Transit Fund" to be used at the dis- cretion of the City for transit purposes in the Newport Center area , to be introduced as a con- dition . ' Commissioner Beek stated his opposition to the Motion, expressing his feeling that the City Coun- cil had established 12 years ago that the City ' was not going to continue with major developments , if the City 'did not have an adequate circulation system to support them. Commissioner Thomas stated that he shared Com- missioner Beek ' s sentiments ; however, that the City is taking a positive step toward' establish- ing solutions in the form of transit. ' Ayes XK x x x Motion was then voted on , which •MOTION CARRIED. Request to consider revocation of Use Permit No . Item #2 ' 288 that�ermits the operation of a res and coc taurant kth\il lounge in the C-1 District, located USE VER- at 3444 Eas�Coast Highway in Corona del Mar. MIT NO. ' The purpose o the hearing will determine if said �8— permit should be evoked for failure to obtain the necessary appr ovals for live entertainment REVOCA- now existing in the 'hestaurant facility known as TION ' the Jazz Pot. PROCEED- INGS INITIATED BY: The City of fy�ewport Beach ' TERMI- NATED Hugh Coffin , City Attorney, commented regarding this item, stating that the Plannin`g�IlCommission ' had received a letter concerning the 8,a zz Pot, • h a + -11- ' COMMISSIONERS MINUTES` � December 20, 1979• _ 5 W ; � City of Newport Beach ROIL CALL INDEX E. stating that they had agreed to terminate their ' live entertainment, which was the cause for the hearing on this Use Permit revocation. In response to a question posed by Commissioner , Beek, Mr. Coffin replied that the new owner of the property and/or the business would be 'the succes- sor to the Use Permit for the restaurant opera- ' tion, which does not include the right of live entertainment, the issue in this case. Motion K Motion was made that the revocation proceedings ' All Ayes for Use Permit No. 288 be terminated. Req st to amend a previously approved use pe'rmit Item #3 ' that ermitted the establishment of a restaurant faci1i with on-sale wine in the C-] District, USE PER so as t add a cocktail lounge to the restaurant MIT N use. 1783 MENDE LOCATION: Parcel 1 , Parcel Ma 79-50 (Re- subdivision No . 493� , located at APPROVE 114 McFadden Place, on the north- CONDI- sterly side of McFadden Place be- TIONALLIN t en .Court Avenue and West Balboa Bo evard on McFadden Square. ZONE: C-1 ' APPLICANT: Livio B igni , Westminster OWNER: Raymond W. mith , NeWport ,Beach ' James Hewicker, Planning Dire or, stated that ' 17 in-lieu parking spaces woul be adequate for the remodeled restaurant facili , rather than 20, since no live entertainment dancing is ' proposed. Commissioner Haidinger suggested tha the in-lieu ' parking not be required. Mr. Hewicker explained that the reason f the in- formal arrangement of the 12 spaces in th even- ' -12- , r _ c FESOLUTION .70. ' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING THE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CIVIC PLAZA REVISING THE ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHING A PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND ACCEPTING AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT (AMENDMENT NO. 527) ' WHEREAS, Section 20.51,045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to a Planned Community, ' Development Plan shall be approved by a resolution of the City Council setting forth full particulars of the amendments; ' and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 8, 1979, at which time it considered amend- ments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza; ' and � WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission 'adopted its Resolution No. 1032 recommending to the City Council ' that certain amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted as follows: ' 1. The allowed development for the Office Park area is reduced by 85,294 square feet, and the Civic Cultural by ' 16,000 square feet as indicated in the following table: Total Allowable ' Land Use (Ex1e`_1:c P-C) RV-; 3ed 'I o t,i , Office Park 320,300 sc. f 234,706 Art Museum 30,0.00 so. ft. 30,000 Library 30,000 so. ft. 14,000 Theater 20,000 sq. ft. 20,000 Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. 8,000 ' 408,000 sq. ft. 306,706 2. A Phasing of Development Plan for Civic Plaza be ' adopted to read as follows: "PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT 34;000 sq. ft. of developmentwal 019stiRg79. ,fhr. or under construction as of January additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 272,706 sq. ft. Any ' further development subsequent to Januar 1, 1979, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable development, being 81,812 sq. ft. , shall be ' approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation ' of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. in the review of this phasing plan, a test of reasonableness should be applied, rather than the criteria of the ' Traffic Phasing Ordinance." 3. The Revised Site Plan, attached hereto and by ' this reference made a part hereof, be adopted; and WHEREAS, the city Council finds and determines that said amendments to the Planned community Development Plan for ' Civic Plaza as set forth above are desirable and necessary; and WHEREAS, the city Council has conducted a public hearing on said proposed amendments in accordance with all provisions of law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves the proposed ' amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza as set forth hereinabove. ' BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental document is hereby accepted. ' ADOPTED this 12th day of March ,, 1979. ' Mayor ' ATTEST: City Clerk ' DDO/kb 3/8/79 i 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES � I (.DIINCILM" O\h� 1 Ht1l.L �d' March 12, 1979 CALL, INDEX 114i&,Ition proposed needs to indicate degree of 1 permanenc--a 3Troedcr eo meet the test. The regular order of the AS .. was resume . I 3. Mayor Rycko£f opened the public hearing regarding Newport Planning Commission 527, a request Center ' initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned Community Plaza Development Ylan tp require the preparation R (2285) traffic phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an 1 Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. 1 A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed ' the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and•that the project be considered on a 30%/70`/, approach. ' Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. Motion x I Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of 1 reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic Plaza project. Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project ' which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by 100% development review instead of 30%, I think that it is beyond the scope of this Council to 1 I make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." Motion xI Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to :. 1 continue the item to March 26. I x Councilman made a substitute substitute Motion Ayes x� x x x motion to adopt Resolution No 17. 95 amending the R-9517 1 Noes x ix x Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . i I revising the allowable development plan, ands accepting An-enviro_n=ental document, which motion I i carried.P. CONTINUED B -- d d - _ y USINESS: 1. Previously considered. ---. Ir ,..r ' 2, A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Place ^ ment Department regarding,Planning Commission Planned action with regard to a•request of Emkay Develop- Community ment and ReaLty'Company for the approval of a (1275) I _ � Volume 33 - Page 60 IJ�I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES rat y9n "s`� 2\ d.\ Man`h 17, 1974 INDEX I I I •� I available for potential offiuv building. Addition i I ally. The Irvine Company requests that 4,156 sq. ' ft, of space be reallocated from Pacific Coast j I ' ulghway Eant and West, and 1,611 sq. ft. of spare from either Dlock 500 or block 700, at their optio . he reallocated to Block 800 in Newport Center to allow for the construction of a 10,000 sq. ft. restaurant which would contain a maximum of ,667 sq. ft. of net public area. j A part was presented from the Community Develop- ! I men Department. Ilnrry ubb, President, and Steven Gavin, Vice Presid ,t Corporate Relation Officer, of Pacific Mutual L is Insurance addressed the Council. Mr. Gavin are ad that they were reducing the elevation ' by three oars and would be willing to continue for not nor than six weeks, if necessary; that they would b willing to eliminate the high-rise condominiums, or that they would continue to be committed to a mitigation required for the two ' ten-story build gs, traffic and otherwise, and all other condit ns. Robert Sheltom of a Irvine Company, addressed ' I I the Council and star d that the condominiums were included in the Envir mental Impact Report because of n previous raction of the Council. Donald Gralneck, repress ing Pacific Mutual Insurance, addressed the until and asked if the ' ordinance were changed to lete reference to the residential developnent, if hat would require a I j revision to the ordinance nex time to come back j 1 for reintroduction, or if it w old be enacted at that time. The City Attorney stated that the ction would lower the density or the project a could be considered on April 23, if continue to that date, without reintroduction. ' Gary Schamberg, President of £astbluff omeowncrs Association, addressed the Council regar ing the I necessity for developers to institute sou d atten- ! I uation factors along Jamboree Road, and wa asked to submit a letter with suggestions propose by th ' I Association. I , The public hearing was continued to April_23, th UI Avv� ' j I the applicant stipulating concurrence to ' I continuation. The Council unanimously agreed to takr Agenda Item F-1 nut-of order anA runs Wier it ;Cthis tine. A report was presented Eton the Community Development j Department regarding the Planning Commission's recom- mendatlons concerning the definition of the term i I I "rvasunableness" as applied to a traffic phasing plan 1 1 I j for "excepted" Planned Community Districts. i Volume 31 - Page 58 I � I it CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH m, e•NNurf^> I :l"At/•rr,t•L,•,r tt •� "vi''•p•p , Han h 1:. 19/y _ INDEX r.•lydun I,.•vt, i'residenr of tit. ,.r•po•rr ILl1 L,•r Ar,a I I i I Clnmhnr nl' Commerce, and tlirbnrl C. rdernIl mi ,'•d i tlu• Cnnr ril, bat were rnlvd ottt nP nrvl¢r 6y the hc Mnynr fur not nddressin6 the subject under cans-lderat inn. 1 the Snfnnmatinn to be submltcod by the developer, na I I I rernm me by the Planning Commission in witheie'- £r ' Iil,nssfar applicable planned testeasonae • I communities, was modified io change the percentage of n Sncease in item 3 from 5% to 2%, to revise item 2 , Ix x x anti Co'add items 7 And-V.-"The list was approvnd'as ...... i fix, x x follows: , ' (a) S.teh project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall Le examined as to the extent of existing development and the I I amount of development remaining to be completed. (b) Information shall be submitted indicating the ' I amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. (c) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determin what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increase the traffic for any leg of the intersection durin t I the peak two and one-half hour period by 2% or more. (d) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. (a) The developer may include in his proposed I I I traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu- tion to completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cos[ of these improvements. I (f) The developer is also to take into consideration t I j In the preparation of his plan characteristics I - I in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generatlon or guide traffic onto Less impacted arterials or through intersections I in [he least congested direction. upon recel,, .,f -he p:or, o-,: fnfcre,c.an, cM I I C,r,1951.0, w::1 d]tCrtl_ae waC:hor reasonable car- In.:lati iacwe.a projected crafEic zrd i i I I i i ac time of projectt completioe ids ing they re affected intersections in considering the project I I I i for approval. ' I Volume 11 - page 59 I ' 1 j CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH r„:ra It MI N MINUTES (^ yo i "na it P March 12, 1979 IN DE% I I I (IQ Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of 1 permanence in order to meet the tent. 1 IAe regular order of the Agenu wis resumed. 7. Mayor RyckofE opened She public hearing cegarJiny, Newport i Planning Csvraission 7>nlenflment_.Ho. 527, a request Center initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza.Planned Community Plaza Development Plan to require the preparation of a (2285) tra i�ng plan and reduction in allowable I intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San 1 Joaquin Hills Road„ Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the'Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked 1 that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that the project be considered on a 3DX/70% approach. H„tlon I x The hearing was closed after It was determined ' 1 All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. I tl„tins xI I Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic Plaza project. I 1 Councilman Heather made a statement for the + record, an follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has bad its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by 1 lOOX development review instead of 30%, I think jthat it in beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally. that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." 1 y„tfar, xl Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to continue the item to March 26. `Iet run x Councilman McInnis made a substitute substitute - 1 •tvev I xl x x x I motion to adopt Resolution.No. 9517 amending the R-9517 Y,�,•v Ix, Ix x I Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza revising[lie nTlowable development plan, and i I I accept ng an envionmental document, which motion carrled:' 1 I I j i I P. CONTINUED BUSINESS: I 1. Previously considered. 7. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Place 1 I 1 ment Department regarding Planning Co•+mmission Planned I action with regard to a request,of FWU; Develop- Community r I I meat and Realty Company for the approval of n I (1275) I Volume 77 - Page 60 1 1 if r• R������������T u�,� _`�� �� THE IRVINE COMR*JY 550 Newport Center Drive �. Newport Beach, California 92663 (714) 644.3011 1 JuLy 10, 1979 ��� RECEIVED �`•Z y Community PLanniug Commission t Deveellopment Cityof Newport: Beach p 3 ' 3300 Newport Boulevard 6 lUL1 1979m` 'Y Newport Beach California CiTv6F I > NEWPCAL BEACH, 92663 ' CALIF. ' S 5UII,IIiC'L': Civic PLaza 'Traffic Phasing Plan Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission-. ' In order to proceed with full development of the Civic Plaza site in accordance with Lho City's P.C. district regulations, we are submitting attached Traffic Phasing Plan ' for your approval. City Council Resolution No. 9472 sets forth guidelines for the "test of reasonableness" to be used in evaluating such projects. It is our• belief• that the attached Traffic Phasing Plan has been prepared in compliance with all applicable City regulations and, in fact,meets the criteria established for the test ' of reasonableness. The Traffic Phoning, Plan was prepared assuming Lhat developmcnL .currently in process ' undor the 30`L exception rule would be fully occupied in 1980. The additional 70 of future allowed development, according to our Traffic Phasing Plan, is scheduled to be developed and occupied in 1981. The attached traffic study and responses identify the traffic impacts associated with the proposed development. ' Our proposed site development phasing plan is summarized as follows: 1980 - Occupancy of existing plus development in process .under the 30% rule. ('Phis includes 34,000 sq. ft. for• the art museum and library, plus approximately 81,000 sq. ft-. additional) . ' 1981 - Occupancy- of remainder of allowed development, subject to the 70% phasing requirement. (This includes approximately 1,90,000 square feet consisting of office/restaurant/theater uses, and an addition ' to the art museum. ) Within Lho traffic IimLti.ng parameters, it is highly desirable from our point of- ' view to complete the Civic Plaza deveLopmeut at the earliest feasible date. This would minimize aesthetic impacts due to,grading and construction, and would allow the must effective implementation of erosion control measures. ' Responses to the City's guidelines for Traffic Phasing approval are attached. ' July 9, 1979 y Page Wv hoer, t'h:tL this letter, nlop}; Willi Liw nUm-hed Tram Plan will answer ynur questions aml conecro:: relaLecl to traffic impacts due to Lhe develop- ment of the CLvic Plaza P.C. Should you have any additional questions or ' comments, please feel free to contact me. or our Traffic Consultant. Yours very truly, ' Ronald W. Ilondricicson Director, Design/Construction Commerical/Industrial Division ' Ulf:llc encls. 1 1 l h CIVIC PLAZA TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN Item 1 Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and'the amount of development remaining to be completed. ' The Civic Plaza Planned Community provides for five separate land uses on the site. Upon completion of the entire project, the PC provides for the following identified land use developments: Art museum - 30,000 sf Library 14,000 sf ' Restaurant 8,000 sf Offices 234,706 sf Theater 20,000 sf* ' The only presently developed land use on the site is the Newport Beach Art Museum .with 20,000 square feet. Additional land uses for the site which for traffic ' analysis purposes are under construction or in the process of development are the City of Newport Beach Library and 81,812 square feet of offices under the 30% rule. Those portions of the planned community which would remain to be developed upon approval of the Traffic Phasing Plan are the restaurant, 152,894 square feet ' of offices, the 650 seat theater, and 10,000 additional square feet for the museum. Item 2 Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. - Based on the appropriate traffic generation rates as identified in the Newport Center Phase II Traffic Study, the total traffic- to be generated by the site is ' as follows. ' July 1979 p.m. Peak Hour ADT In out Lxi.sting - Occupied = Art museum - 20,000 sf 840 20 20 Under Development - 1980 Occupancy Library - 14,000 sf 588 10 10 ' offices - 81,812 sf 1,064 49 140 Sub-total 1,652 59 150 ' Future Development - 1981 Occupancy Art museum - 10,000 sf 420 10 10 ' Restaurant 400 40 20 offices - 152,894 sf 1,988 91 260 Theater 975 n/a n/a ' Sub-total 3,783 141 290 ' Total PC 6,275 220 460 The amount of traffic to be' generated by the completion of all remaining develop- ment in the peak hour is shown on Table 2 0£ the attached report. The existing ' portion of the art museum was not included in that analysis as it was an existing land use and included in existing traffic volume data. ' Item 3 An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determine what improvements remain to be completed, with particular ' consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving traffid generated by the project. The area to• be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the- project increases the traffic for ' any leg of the intersection during the peak 2� hour period by 2% or- more: Table 3 of the attached report summarizes the analysis for critical intersection ' identification, with the backup calculation sheets included in Appendix A. Identifying critical intersections was based on the intersections to be examined by the procedures of the'Traffic Phasing Ordinance for the area in which Civic Plaza is identified, and further examination is included for any intersection ' for which the project would increase traffic by 2% or more duririg the 231 hour period. ' The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive. All roadway improvements adjacent to the site have been previously improved and completed by the owner. -2- ' Item 4 ' uxisting traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. Existing traffic volumes for all identified critical intersections are shown in Appendix B, Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis. ' Item 5 The developer may include in his proposed Traffic Phasing Plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed improvements consistent with the level of ' traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. As previously identified, the landowner has already made the identified ultimate ' General Plan improvements on the roadways adjacent to the site. Due to this previous contribution by the landowner to completion of the roadway system, no deficiencies on the existing circulation have been identified adjacent to the site. ' Table 5 identifies a summary of circulation system improvements included in future period ICU calculations. All of these improvements are required as a part of approved projects or are planned as' government projects. Of the projects identified, the landowner has committed over $152,000 in the improve- ment of the Ford/MacArthur intersection'. Item 6 The developer is also to take into consideration in the preparation of his plan ' characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersec- tions in the least congested direction. ' The proposed land use plan reflects a reduction in traffic generated over the original approved PC for the site. The proposed land use plan reflects a 26.6% reduction in office use of that initially approved with the existing PC being amended in April 1979. The current PC also includes a mix of land uses which have beneficial traffic urs, such as the proposed theater, library and generation impacts in the peak ho museum. Although of a higher generation rate, a restaurant at this site will potentially serve to divert some trips from the surrounding area in the peak hours. -3 1 n 6 (continued) ' Full access to the site is to be taken from San Clemente and Santa Rosa, with a restricted right turn onlyiacccss from San Joaquin Hills Road. San Clemente and Santa Rosa were identified ir, the Newport Center Traffic Study as roadways with a less degree of utilization than other roadways in the vicinity of the site. The internal circulation system of the site is oriented towards encour- aging vehicles to utilize these roadways for ingress/egress from the Civic Plaza site and Newport Center area. The orientation of traffic to Santa Rosa and San Joaquin Hills Road intersection and Santa Barbara/Jamboree intersection are intended to encourage traffic to divert to non-critical movements at the San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree intersection. Item 7 Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether ' there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at the time of project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. ' The attached traffic study had identified two intersections that will have ICU's that exceed .90 in 1982 after full project completion; these are the intersec- tions of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, .and the intersection of Jamboree ' Road and MacArthur Boulevard, with projected ICU's of .9279 and .9496, respectively, For the Bristol Street North and Campus intersection, with or without approval ' of the project, the intersection has a projected ICU value of .9279. This is due to the project generated traffic being added to a non-critical movement through the intersection. Thus, approval or denial of the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at this intersection. ' For the Jamboree and MacArthur intersection, the project increases the ICU analysis value by .0227 in 1982. The traffic consultant has indicated in his report that drivers utilizing this intersection would not perceive this increase, ' and in his opinion, the intersection would operate satisfactorily. He has also identified that the construction of the Corona del Mar Freeway would also result in improved conditions at this intersection. Item 8 Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence in order to meet the test. ' Tile land use reductions made in the April 1979 PC amendment reflect a perman- ent reduction 'in land use intensity and traffic generation for this site. The roadway improvements identified as necessary for the approval of other ' projects are considered as permanent fixed facility improvements although additional modifications such as re-stripping, construction to ultimate (where appropriate) and signal operations modifications, may also occur in the future. -4- . ATTACHMENT 'NO. 6 iN NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Develowportpment Beach Department ' 1400 Tenth Street City of Larramento, CA 95814, 33UO Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Clerk of the Board of ' Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 Santa Ana--CA 9?702 ' NAME OF PROJECT_ aq� o arca0y ' PROJECT LOCATION: t PROJECT DESCRIPTION: aS\ FOIL CHL fz-CMG\,� � 07_vr\C.C—� />N(� c4TC( e,U�� ' FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project ' and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. ' - MITIGATION MEASURES: 1 ' EINITIALY PREPARED BY:Y AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA . ' DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: Environmental Coordinator ' Date: MITIGATION MEASURES '__7 1 . The fallowing disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases ' or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. tDisclosure Statement The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: ' a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; . ' c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; ' d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet are service at the -Orange County Airport. 2. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. The project be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph G, Division ' T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4. ' 4. Should any resources be •uncovered during construction, that a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist evaluate the site prior to completion of construction activities, and in accordance with City Policies K-6 & K-7. 5. Final design of the project should provide for the incorporation of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using ' facilities. ' ' 6. The final design of the project should ,provide for the-sortir,r; of recyclable material from other solid waste. ' JI '7. The development on the site should be in accordance with City policies on traffic. j: OMMiSSIONESS MINUTES *City of Newport Atach v March 22, 1979 ROLL CALL INDEX �otion x Motio was made that the Planning Commission ap- prove Re bdivision No . 622 , subject to the find- ings and co itions as set forth in the Staff Report . Commissioner McLaug l ' n stated that until City Council has adopted aominium Ordinance , she ' would necessarily vote "n "" on n a condominium con- version . yes x x Motion was then voted on , which M ON FAILED . oes x x bsent x x x iotion x Motion was then made that the public heari g,,,�e re- yes x x x opened and that Resubdivision No . 622 be contliwed oes x to the regular Planning Commission Meeting of A ft-il Absent x x x 5 , 1979 , which MOTION CARRIED. ' Request for the approval of a Phasing Plan for the Item #8 remaining• development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community. PHASING ' PLAN , Location: Property bounded by Santa Barbara Gf"F°IC Drive , San Clemente Drive , Santa PETZA Cruz Drive , San Joaquin Hills. Road , P'C7CM1`ED ' and Jamboree Road, adjacent to New- OMMUN- port Center. KA ' Applicant : The Irvine Company, Newport Beach - REMOVED FROM TH The Planning Commission removed Item No. 8 from the CALEND ' calendar as per the applicant' s request , to allow the applicant time to provide the additional in- formation required by the City Council . Request to amend a previously approved use permit Item #9 ' that permitted the establishment of a restaurant �acility with on-sale alcoholic beverages on the USE PER sl't The proposed development includes live en- MIT NO. ' tertain t and the expansion of the dining areas 1053 within the e s�ting Le Biarritz restaurant use. A AMEND- modification to th• Ze _ oningg Code is also requested , DF— since a portion of th'b--e< anded structure, a trash enclosure , and a portion o d on-site CONTIN- UED TO APRIL ' 1979 -10- City Council Meeting February 11 , 1980 rAgenda Item No . D-1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH r February 6, 1980 r rTO : City Council FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Public hearing and City Council review regarding a request of The Irvine Company, Newport Beach , to consider a Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community District, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document. r LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive , San Clemente Drive , Santa Barbara Drive , and Jamboree Road, in Newport Center rZONE: P-C Suggested Action ' Hold hearing ; close hearing; if desired, accept the Environmental Docu- ment and sustain, modify or overrule the decision of the Planning Com- mission. rRequest The Irvine Company has requested approval of a Phasing Plan to comply with Resolution No . 9517 of the Newport Beach City Council , and Amend- ment No. 527 as they pertain to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza. Additionally, they have requested the acceptance of an Environmental Document. Planning Commission Recommendation ' At the December 20, 1979 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Com- mission accepted the Environmental Document and approved the Phasing Plan (6 Ayes , 1 No) with the Finding and subject to the Conditions r indicated in Exhibit "A" attached. Conformance with the General Plan t The Newport Beach General Plan permits 234 , 706 sq .ft. of development in Civic Plaza so long as the total expansion of office development in Newport Center does not exceed 686,518 sq . ft. 1 r ' TO : City Council - 2. Environmental Significance ' The City of Newport Beach Environmental Affairs Committee has re- viewed the project and determined that it will not have significant environmental effect. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached. ' Phasing Plan The applicants have indicated that development in the Civic Plaza Plan- ned Community , if the Phasing Plan is approved, would occur as follows : PHASING SCHEDULE ' EXISTING DEVELOPMENT Art Museum 20 ,000 sq . ft. ' 1980 OCCUPANCY ' Library 14,000 sq .ft. Offices 81 ,812 sq . ft. 1981 OCCUPANCY ' Art Museum 10 ,000 sq . ft. Restaurant 8,000 sq . ft. ' Offices 152,894 sq .ft. Theater 20 ,000 sq . ft. ' Resolution No. 9517 Attached for the City Council ' s consideration is a copy of the appli- cants ' response to the guidelines for reviewing the Phasing Plan. Additionally , a copy of Resolution No . 9517 and the City Council minutes for March 12 , 1979 are attached. ' Traffic Report A Traffic Report was prepared for the applicant by Weston Pringle ' and Associates . The Traffic Report examined the seventeen inter- sections identified for analysis in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance . It is summarized on the following page : 1 I� t I 1 ' TO : City Council - 3. ' Table 4 ICU SUMMARY CIVIC PLAZA 1 I EXISTING EXISTING +(1) EXISTING+(1) EXISTING+(2) ' REGIONAL + REGIONAL+ REGIONAL+ COMMITTED COMMITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT INTERSECTION 1981 1981 1982 ' Bristol St.N. & Campus Dr. 0.9262 0.8950 0.8950 0.8968 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0.7650 0.6669 0.6694 0.6781 Coast Highway & Dover Dr. 0.9510 0.6788 0.6854 0.7017 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr. 0.8540 0.7753 0.7820 0.7982 ' Coast Highway & Jamboree Rd. 0.9140 0.8337 0.8381 0.8497 Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. 0.7957 0.8531 0.8572 0.8691 ' Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.5745 0.6341 0.6404 0.6543 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.7375 0.6966 0.6981 0.7012 Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 0.9128 0.7877 0.7971 0.8191 ' Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.6381 0.7446 0.7547 0.7792 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St.N. 0.8781 0.8298 0.8378 0.8563 ' Jamboree Rd. & MacArthur Blvd. 0.9934 1.1051 1 .1095 1 .0003 MacArthur Blvd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.7664 0.8333 0.8457 0.8757 MacArthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 1 .1631 0.8947 0.9047 0.8103 Bristol St.N. & Birch St. 0.8569 1 .2186 1 .2257 0.9751 ' �1) No Project Related Improvements are Considered in Calculations (2) Project Related Improvements are Included ' The Traffic Report found that Project Traffic is entimated to be less than 2% of projected two and one-half hour traffic volume only at the inter- sections of: 1 ) Coast Highway/'Newport Center Drive , and 2) Coast High- way/MacArthur Boulevard. Therefore, ICU calculations were made for the ' remaining fifteen intersections as noted above. The applicant's consul - tant has indicated that only two intersections , Bristol Street North/ Birch Street and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard, will be operating ' upon completion of the project at 0 .9000 or greater. ' T0: City Council - 4. ' At the December 20, 1979 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission conditioned the approval of the Phasing Plan so as to ' require improvements beyond those suggested by the applicant at the intersection of Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard (see Exhibit "A" ) . The effect of these improvements would be to reduce the ICU at this intersection to below .90. tA summary of the applicant' s Traffic Consultant' s comments on the intersection that will be operating upon completion of the project ' at 0 . 9000 or greater is given below: "Bristol Street North and Birch Street. Review of Table 4 and the related streets in Appendices B and C indicates that the ' recommended project related improvements would reduce the ICU value at this intersection from 1 .2199 to 0 .9751 in 1982. It also indicates that the ICU value in 1981 would be 1 .2186 . ' The project and its related improvements would improve the operation of this intersection although it would exceed 0 .90. " Noise Attenuation on Jamboree Road ' It has been the policy of the City on previous project approvals which would add traffic to Jamboree Road to require a deposit to be posted with the City Finance Director for the future construction of a wall along the westerly side of Jamboree Road, which would serve to reduce the impact of highway associated noise from existing homes between Eastbluff Drive and Ford Road. To date Pacific Mutual has committed ' $13,000 and the Daon Corporation has agreed to a deposit of $27,993. Based upon the remaining traffic that would be added to Jamboree Road by the Civic Plaza Project, The Irvine Company' s deposit in this case ' would be $44 ,530. Subject to concurrence by the City Council , the staff would suggest the following condition be added to the approval of this project: ' 8. That prior to the issuance of any building permit authorized by the approval of this Traffic Phasing Plan, the applicant shall deposit with the City ' Finance Director, $44,530.00 to be used for the construction of a wall on the westerly side of Jamboree Road between Eastbluff Drive and Ford Road. ' Respectfully submitted, ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D .JHWIC ER ,Dii'reector by FRED�T L I A/ Environmental Coordinator 1 FT/kk TO: City Council - 5 . Attachments for City Council only: Exhibits "A" and "B" ' 1 ) Planning Commission Minutes - December 20, 1979 2) Resolution No . 9517 3) City Council Minutes - March 12, 1979 - " Civic Plaza" ' 4) City Council Minutes - March 12 , 1979 - "Test of Reasonableness " 5) Narrative on Planning Commission - "Test of Reasonableness " July, 1979 6) Negative Declaration 7) Report Planning Department - "Contributions for Jamboree Road t Noise Attenuation Wall " 8) Traffic Report - November 20 , 1979 ' Additional Information ' The proposed project was originally before the Planning Commission in August, 1979 . Since that time the project has been continued at the request of the applicant and Planning Commission. The following infor- mation was submitted to the Planning Commission for its consideration in review of this project but has not been forwarded to the City Council as it is not reflective of the present project. ' 1 ) Planning Commission Minutes - August 9 , 1979 2,) Planning Commission Minutes - September 20, 1979 3) Planning Commission Minutes - October 4, 1979 4 Planning Commission Minutes - October 18, 1979 5 Staff Report - August 9 , 1979 a) Letter - The Irvine Company, July 10, 1979 b) Traffic Report prepared by Weston Pringle and Associates ' dated July 5, 1979 , for the applicants 6 ) Staff Report - August 16 , 1979 a ) Corrections to Traffic Report - Weston Pringle & ' Associates - August 14 , 1979 ' Should any member of the City Council wish a copy of any of the above information , please contact the Planning Department at 640-2197. All ' of the above information and all attachments to this report are avail - able for public review and inspection at the City of Newport Beach , Planning Department, 3300 West Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 1 EXHIBIT "A" Findings and Conditions of Approval as Recommended ' by the Planning Commission - December 20, 1979 ' Approval FINDINGS : 1 . That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and ' City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. 2 . That based on the information contained in the Initial Study ' and Negative Declaration , the project will not result in significant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . ' 4 . That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information sub- mitted therewith, there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of completion and the capacity of affected intersections . ' 5 . That the applicant has taken into consideration in the prepara- tion of his plan characteristics in the design of his develop- ment which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersections in the least congested direction . ' CONDITIONS : 1 . That prior to the occupancy of any buildings on the site beyond the existing development and 95,812 sq . ft. of new construction , the circulation system improvements contained in the Traffic Report, dated November 20 , 1979 , Table 5 , Pages 7 through 9 , ' and Planning Commission Minutes of December 20, 1979 , shall have been constructed, (unless subsequent project approval require modification thereto . The circulation systems ' improvements ' shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer) . 2. That prior to the issuance of any building permits , the appli - cants shall indicate to the Director of the Planning Department, ' in writing, that they understand and agree to Condition 1 above . 3. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach ' s ' policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants , Conditions , and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. ■' - 2 - Disclosure Statement ' The Lessee herein, his heirs , successors and assigns acknow- ledge that: ' a ) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service ; ' b) When an alternate air facility is available , a complete phase-out of jet service may occur at- the Orange County Airport; ' c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; d) Lessee, his heirs , successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase-out or limit jet service ' at the Orange County Airport. 4. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the ' Newport Beach Municipal Code . 5 . Final design of the project shall provide for the incorpora- tion of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other ' water-using facilities . 6 . The final design of the project shall provide for the sorting ' of recyclable material from other solid waste . 7. The applicant shall contribute an amount equal to what would be the City ' s share of the cost of the free right-turn lane ' on Jamboree Road behind the Texaco Station to a "Transit Fund" to be used at the discretion of the City for transit purposes in the Newport Center area . t EXHIBIT "B" ' Recommended Findings and Conditions of Denial ' FINDINGS: 1 . That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been pre- pared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been ' considered in the decision on this project. 2 . That based on the information contained in the Initial Study ' and Negative Declaration, the project will not result in significant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach ' General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . ' 4 . That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information submitted therewith , there is not a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of completion and the capacity of the intersection of Bristol Street North/Birch Street. I t Regular Planning Commission Meeting I COMMISSIONERS Place: City Council Chambers MINUTES Time: 7 :30 P.M.' 1979 pTTP�N��NT >Jo. l-� w Date : December 20 , s N l City of Newport Beach ROI t CALL I I I I I I INDEX Present x x x x x ' EX- ICIO MEMBERS Hugh Co n , City Attorney STAFF MEMBER James Hewicker, anning Director Fred Talarico, Env onmental Coordinator Don Webb, Assistant ty Engineer Glenna Gipe, Secretary Minutes Written By: Glenna Gip Motion Motion was made to approve the minutes the re- Ayes > x x < x gular Planning Commission meeting of Dece er 6, Abstain x x 1979 , with the addition of an added conditihN.1on Page 11 . ' Wk+stYamm..�n'xs�eww+n.wawrwu.wwrco.o..o r.:w.m.. ' Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remain- Item #1 ' ing development in the Civic Plaza Planned Commu- nity District, and the acceptance of an Environ- PHASING mental Document. PLAN ' LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic APPROVED Plaza , generally bounded by San CONDI- Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz TIONALLY Drive, San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive , and Jamboree Road, in Newport Center. ZONE: P-C APPLbCANT: The Irvine Company , Newport Beach ' OWNER: Same as Applicant ' Don Webb , Assistant City Engineer, commented that the ICU analysis indicates that if a left turn lane were added on Jamboree Road in both direc- tions , the ICU at Jamboree Road and MacArthur ' -1- 11r COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20, 1979 n = 1 0 5- 0 ZU City of Newport Beach RUI i. CAR INDEX oulevard could be reduced to .8725 . 1 ommissioner Haidinger posed a question , to which r. Webb replied that they are in the process of 1 ttempting to implement several of these minor irculation systems improvements . In response to a question posed by Commissioner 1 Cokas , Mr. Webb replied that a restriping job would range from $2,000 to $5,000 and that the most expensive aspect of it is the sandblasting and traffic control during the period of time . in 1 which they are trying to implement the project. Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that one year ago when the traffic phasing analysis was 1 begun, they found it to be the case universally that a developer would come before ,the Planning, Commission with a project and an additional right 1 turn only lane was on Campus Drive and Bristol Street and it reduced traffic immensely and it was suggested that the City undergo those projects themselves . 1 Mr. Webb commented that Pacific Mutual is the firs to attempt to implement some of these improvements relative to minor widening projects , and that they III 1 have been waiting for the developer to come up with the money , rather than doing it with the City' s public funds . 1 Commissioner Beek suggested a highway action team to find the problems and enact changes . 1 Mr. Webb responded that most of the improvements mentioned are presently in the process of trying to be implemented, but that the City does not have the finances to finance the project and col - lect it from the developer later. ' Commissioner Balalis suggested that these inter- ', 1 sections be analyzed. Mr. Webb commented that they have been working with the MacArthur Place Development for The Ir- vine Company in the preparation and processing of plans , which company has already applied for an 1 1 -2- 1 'I I COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20, 1979 W � a X City of Newport Beach ROIL GALL INDEX ' encroachment permit for the additional widening of Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard, and a signal modification project has to be implemented, ' which is CalTrans ' responsibility. In response to a comment from Commissioner Haidin- ' ger, Mr. Webb replied that various different traffic studies over the last few months have been analyzed and for the necessary improvements , more is required than merely changing the striping. ' He further commented that the ICU analyses put together were for the 1979 year with no recommen- dation as to what additional traffic would be added for the various different areas in the up- coming year. Commissioner Thomas suggested a list of 10 inter- ' sections with a task list and budget for each . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas , Fred Talarico , Environmental Coordinator, ' responded that under the Ford-Aeronutronic Traf- fic Phasing Plan and overall environmental pack- age, they were required to maintain certain levels of carpooling and an investigation of other items. ' Commissioner Thomas suggested that one of the ele- ments of the Phasing Plan includes the beginning of construction of the Park-n-Ride on Jamboree ' Road and MacArthur Boulevard or acquisition of another right-of-way lane in Newport Center so . that future problems would be mitigated. ' Commissioner Beek replied that the City Council in interpreting the Traffic Phasing Ordinance has specified that only verifiable improvements could ' be counted as mitigation measures. Commissioner Balalis stated his preference that ' the improvements come to the street and inter- section locations until they are taken care of, -3- 1 COMMISSIONERS ' \ � December 20, 1979 MINUTES 3 d � � � City of New ort Beach KOLL CALL INDEX and then if there is' no intersection improvement ' because of an external force such as regional traffic, then future projects should consider other means , other than fiscal improvements . ' Commissioner Thomas commented that in order to undergo a large project of a transit type facility , it will require the co-operation of all jurisdic- tions , and provisions should be made for future implementation over and above short-term striping, then a problem will be solved. ' Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding that there was a requirement of Corporate Plaza I and; II of an OCTD facility. ' The Public Hearing was opened regarding this item and Ron Hendrickson, Irvine Company, appeared be- fore the Planning Commission and stated that the ' shuttle service was 4 condition of approval. for Corporate Plaza and an additional requirement that they provide $300,000 to fund the shuttle system and donate the 3 acre site for the terminal faci - lities , said system of which would not be imple- mented until approximately 1984, predicated on a density increase of Newport Center. ' Commissioner Thomas expressed his feeling that: OCTD has been less than aggressive in certain area and that their bus strategy is based on high-den- sity priority population , such as the elderly and handicapped, and he stated his desire that they be - come more aggressive by providing right-of-way land and perhaps funding for construction. Mr. Hendrickson stated that .there is another site which The Irvine Company has agreed to donate which is north of the Santa Ana Freeway, north of thegolden triangle Irvine Center area. Commissioner Thomas stated his understanding that ' the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor will be funded in part by transit capabilities and as it becomes a major transit corridor, the location adjacent to The Irvine Industrial Complex -4- ' 1 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES _ December 20, 1979 F 03 R iFCity of Newport Beach ' KOII. (:ALL INDEX is excellent, and he expressed his feeling that efforts should be concentrated in that area and linking high employment centers to that area . Mr. Hendrickson again appeared before the Planning Commission and explained that the City Council action on General Plan Amendment 79-1 has left Civic Plaza as a part of Newport Center square footage to the degree that they have noted that the 234,706 sq . ft. could be built in Civic Plaza and the fact that this was done with a Negative ' Declaration is indicative of a lack of concern that there isn ' t a serious traffic problem by virtue of this project. He then described the characteristics and aesthetics of the proposed project, stating that there were 16 intersections which needed to be analyzed, the results of which verified that -there is only one intersection with which the impact of the 70% would go beyond . 90 ICU, and that they have proposed mitigation mea- sures at that intersection which would bring the ICU down below the . 90 ICU. He explained that these figures do not include the other 30%, so that in fact these intersections are being im- proved beyond the' reduction in ICU that is shown ' in the traffic report and that the intent of the test of reasonableness is that for those review- ing the project, it is a judgement call . In response to a question posed by Commissioner Haidinger, Weston Pringle , The Irvine Company, replied that they concerned themselves only with ' the intersections above .90 ICU . In response to a question posed by Commissioner' Thomas regarding distribution , Mr. Pringle replied ' ' that the distribution for this project was based upon SCAAG population distributions for Orange County and that this distribution is similar to the Plaza distribution. ' In response to a question posed by -Commissioner Hiadinger, Mr. Webb replied- that a second left ' turn lane was added in each direction and The Irvine Company had not considered it because they felt that there was not sufficient right-of-way -5- C.OMMb5 IONtKS MINU I tJ '\ December 6 , 1979 x F Co City of Newport Beach ' ROI L CAL L INDEX now and that it might require moving a curb and ' gutter over 10 feet and possibly a median loca- tion. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis , Mr. Webb replied that some of the inter- sections have gone beyond . 90 since their latest studies in July, so that they were not aware of the serious problem until this summer, so that they have not yet implemented any changes. In response to a question posed by Commissioner ' Beek, Mr. Pringle replied that the information indicated that there was some concern regarding adequate right-of-way on the Irvine side of the ' intersection, which was why they had not incorpor- ated it. Commissioner Beek stated his understanding that. ' if there are any intersections left with an ICU ' of more than . 90, that technically the project is susceptible of being rejected because the criteria established by the Planning Commission and City ' Council state that an intersection must be below .90 if their traffic increases by 2% or more. ' Commissioner Haidinger stated his understanding that the Traffic Phasing Ordinance does not apply to this project and what does apply is the test of reasonableness and that the Planning Commission ' has discretion. Mr. Pringle responded to Commissioner Beek ' s com- ment, stating that if they have an intersection ' above . 90, they make the best effort they can to reduce it. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis , Mr. Pringle replied that the eventual extension of the freeway will mitigate the pro- blem and expressed his feeling that it would not ' be practical to go into a major reconstruction, because it would not solve the problem which would be solved eventually by the freeway extension. -6- 1 ' ' COMMISSIONERS MINUTES K December 20 , 1979 ' � 0a 9 � o m � n S 5 0 N City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX In response to a question posed by Commissioner Balalis , Mr. Webb replied that there might be room to put a left-turn lane, though that would ' not bring the ICU down below . 90, but would bring it down from .97 to . 92, that the state would not agree to approve this improvement at this time, as this area is projected as a 1981-1982 area, ' and that the extension will probably be completed in 4 years . ' Commissioner Balalis suggested a triple right turn lane , to which Mr. Webb expressed his doubt that it could be implemented so that it would function and that right now there is back-up ' on Bristol Street at the red light, as the inter- sections are very close and traffic has difficult merging into the right turn lane to get onto the freeway, so that Birch Street has become more im- pacted. Commissioner Allen posed a question , to which Mr. ' Webb replied that there are two through lanes southbound on Jamboree Road and is designated a major arterial which would have 3 lanes in each direction, so that there would be an additional ' through lane added to Jamboree Road when the Master Plan is built out, which is the same situa- tion at San Joaquin Hills Road. He further ex- plained that northerly of San Joaquin Hills Road ' the pavement section is completed and southerly of San Joaquin Hills Road, Jamboree Road will be widened to Coast Highway to add the third lane. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Thomas , Mr. Webb replied that there are numerous road-widening projects around the City and ' $17,000 ,000-g20,000 ,000 would be necessary to complete these ma'st'er plan road sections'. Motion x Motion was made that the Planning Commission make ' the findings as indicated in Exhibit "A" of the Staff Report and approve the Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned t Community, subject to the conditions as indicated in Exhibit "A" of the Staff Report, with the im- provement that a left turn lane be added on Jam- . 1 -7- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES' December 20, 1979 ' 0 3 '250WTL- City of Newport Beach ' ROIL CALL INDEX boree Road in both directions with figures in- dicating what this would entail . Commissioner Allen suggested that the option be ' left open that the company can come back to the Planning Commission before the next meeting if there is a problem. ' Commissioner Allen expressed her feeling that this is a very major project and suggested an added condition. ' Motion x Amendment to the Motion was made that a condition be added that this project to mitigate the traffic that it cannot mitigate at the intersection which ' requires the building of the Corona del Mar Free- way that it include the improvement to the right hand turn lane at the San Joaquin Hills Road/ Jamboree Road intersection. ' Mr. Hendrickson again appeared before the Planning Commission and reminded them that The Irvine Com- pany provided the land for that free right turn ' lane with the condition that the City would build the free right turn lane, and that regarding the previous discussion of the Jamboree Road/MacArthur ' Boulevard intersection , there is a possibility that the cost of doing what they want to do there due to the signalization changes may run as much as $200,000, and he expressed his ,feeling that ' the payment of the free right turn lane at Jam- boree Road isn' t going to improve traffic where it needs to be improved. ' Motion x Amendment to the Motion was made that the City reimbursement funds received be put toward a transit fund. ' Mr. Webb stated that the funds that would be uti- lized for constructing this project would be 50% City gas tax funds and 50% HFP funds , so that if the County funds were not used, they would not come to the City. Commissioner Thomas stated his understanding that ' if it is a reimbursement, the gas tax funds would be spent for the purposes intended or the reim- bursement be considered a donation to the transit -8- 1 COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20, 1979 � wL5- Q wiFCity of Newport Beach ' ROIL (:ALL INDEX fund for The Irvine Company 's best interest. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner Haidinger, Mr. Webb replied that. the estimates ' for the project were between $$160 ,000 and $190,000 for the right turn lane on Jamboree Road. ' Commissioner Allen commented that her Amendment was made as a suggested tradeoff for the fact that they still have an intersection that is over .90 about which they can do nothing and ' about which nothing will be done until the com- pletion of the Corona del Mar Freeway. ' In response to a question posed by Commissioner McLaughlin regarding the Amendment, Commissioner Allen further commented that the project is just adjacent to the intersection, making it prac- tically an on-site road improvement and that according to "Table 3" , most of the peak hour traffic that it generates goes through that intersection and she suggested that they solve ' the problem before they have one , since they cannot solve a problem they already have in any reasonable fashion . ' Commissioner Balalis expressed his opposition to the Amendment, stating regarding the inter- section that cannot be made to go below . 90, ' that as the figures show that as of the present time, in 1981 without the project the ICU will go up to 1 . 21 and with the project the ICU goes up to 1. 22, but with the mitigation that is being done , the ICU goes back down to . 97 and that, as he stated his understanding ac- cording to the "Test of Reasonableness" , if a ' project does not make worse , but improves an intersection, this should be taken into con- sideration. ' Commissioner Allen drew attention to "Item 1" that states that no project-related improve- -9- COMMISSIONERS December 20, 1979 MINUTES 3 s coca D City of Newport Beach ' ROIL CALL INDEX ' ments are considered in the calculation when it gets to 1.2186; however, that intersection, because of where it is located that 1. 2186 ' would presume no .project at all that impact that intersection will do any improvement to that intersection. ' Ayes x x x Commissioner Alben ' s Amendment to the Motion Noes K x x K was then voted on, which MOTION FAILED. tAyes x x x Commissioner Thomas ' Amendment to the Motion Noes NX x was then voted on, which MOTION CARRIED. .Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding ' that the intent of Commissioner Thomas ' Amend- ment was that The Irvine Company will pay the City ' s share of the funds for improving the. right turn 'lane on Jamboree Road, and those ' funds will be placed in a City Transit Fund. Commissioner Balalis stated his understanding ' that if a transit system is not set up, The Irvine Company would not be required to pay the funds , to which Commissioner Thomas agreed. ' Mr. Webb expressed his concern that if The Ir- vine Company reimburses the City, there is a ' question about the ability for us to maintain the same gas tax funds , and suggested that The Irvine Company deposit the fund directly into a transit fund. 1 1 1 -10- ' COMMISSIONERS MINUTES December 20 , 1979 i 0 w w F City of Newport Beach ROI L CALLINDEX ' Mr. Webb suggested identifying the meaning of a "Transit Fund" and determining what uses to which a ''Transit Fund" could be put. ' Motion x Motion was made to reconsider the Amendment. Ayes x x x x x Noes x Amendment to the Motion was made that The Irvine Motion K Company contribute an amount equal to what would ' Ayes K x xx x be the City' s share of the cost of the free right Noes x x turn lane on Jamboree Road behind the Texaco sta- tion to a "Transit Fund" to be used at the dis- cretion of the City for transit purposes in the Newport Center area, to be introduced as a con- dition. ' Commissioner Beek stated his opposition to the Motion, expressing his feeling that the City Coun- cil had established 1k years ago that the City was not going to continue with major developments ' if the City 'did not have an adequate circulation system to support them. ' Commissioner Thomas stated that he shared Com- missioner Beek ' s sentiments ; however, that the City is taking a positive step toward establish- ing solutions in the form of transit. Ayes yx x x x Motion was then voted on , which .MOTION CARRIED. ' Reque to consider revocation of Use Permit No. Item #2 288 tha ermits the operation of a •restaurant ' and cockt ' 1 lounge in the C-1 District, located USE PER- at 3444 Eas Coast Highway in Corona del Mar. MIT No. The purpose o the hearing will determine if said �— permit should be evoked for failure to obtain ' the necessary appr als for live entertainment REVOCA- now existing in the staurant facility, known as TION the Jazz Pot. PROCEED- INGS ' INITIATED BY: The City of ewport Beach TERMI- NATED Hugh Coffin , City Attorney, comme ed regarding ' this item, stating that the Plannin ,Commission had received a letter concerning the Jazz Pot, ' G ATTACH NME.7JT � O V I.ESOLUTIO:; :70. ' A IZE''SOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCT_h OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH A14ESDING THE PL:tlSED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CIVIC PLAZA REVISING THE ALLOWABLE DEVELOP:ENT ESTABLISHING ' A PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND ACCEPTING AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUD'_-',T (A.'1END?CNT NO. 527) ' WHEREAS, Section 20.51.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to a Planned Community ' Development Plan shall be approved by a resolution of the City Council setting forth full particulars of the amendments; and ' WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 9, 1979, at which time it considered amend- ments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza; and ' WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 1032 recommending to the City Council ' that certain amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted as follows: 1. The allowed development for the Office Park area ' is reduced by 85,294 square feet, and the Civic Cultural by 16,000 square feet as indicated in the following table: ' Total Allowable Ldnd Us" ' Office Park 320,:L: sr. -tr. 23C,7C6 Art Museum 30,::� sq. _ 30,000 Library 30,000 za. .c. 14,000 Theater 20,000 sq. it. 20,000 ' Restaurant 8,0,00 sq. ft. 8,000 408,000 sq. ft. 306,706 2. A Phasing of Development Plan for Civic Plaza he ' adopted to read as follows: 1 "PHASING OF DEVRLO?MENT 1 34;000 sq. ft. O` development was existing or under construction a5 of January 1, !J%9. '1'tir additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 272,706 sq. ft. Any 1 further development subsequent to Januar 1, 1979, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable ' development, being 81,812 sq. ft., shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. In the review of this phasing plan, a test of reasonableness should be applied, rather than the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance." �1 3. The Revised Site Plan, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, be adopted; and 1 WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that said amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for 1 Civic Plaza as set forth above are desirable and necessary; and WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing on said proposed amendments in accordance with all �1 provisions of law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council 1 of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves the proposed amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic 1 Plaza as set forth hereinabove. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental document 1 is hereby accepted. , ADOPTED this 12th day of March ,, 1979. 1 Mayor ' 1 AT'Cf•S'C: ' 1 City Clerk DDO/kb 1 3/8/79 i -2- 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ATTACHMENT NO. 3 CbI1N(.IL MI I MINUTES ` Not; CALI. \d� March 12. 1979 INDEX - ation proposed needq to indienty degree of ma pernence inept Ihu test. � The regular order of the AFeno was resumed. ' I 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding Newport "Ian Commis Eton gnLendment3lc....527> a request Center initiated by the City of Newport each to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic P1 aza Planned C.ommuni ty Plaza ' Development Plan to•require the preparation of a (2285) [ra€fit phasing plan and reduction in allowable ' I intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked ' that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that the project be considered on a 30%/70% approach. Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined ' All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. Motion x Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic Plaza project. 1 Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by ' 100% development review instead of 30%, I think ; that it is beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." Mnt inn d Councilman dart made a substitute motion to continue the item to March 26. Motion I x Councilman McInnis made a substitute substitute ' Ayes I xI x x x motion to adopt iesolution.Na. 9517 amending the R-9517 Noes x ix x Planned Community Development Plan for•Civic Plaza revising t)ie ullowa6le n development plan, and ' I accep3ng an cnv3conmeneiil document, wliich motion cnrrilleil. " i F. CONTINUED BUSINESS: ' 1. Previously considered. report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Plac ""••-a`nt Department regarding Planning Commission Planned ' acts -with_regard to a,request, of Fmkay Develop- Community meat nod"'R7,ty Company for the. approval of a (1275) I Volume 33 - Page 6 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNCII.MIN MINUTES SC L\�ii ,t C\ < 'p Will I c.AI I \ ;d' 'y March 12, 1979 INDEX available for potential office building. Addition I I i ally, The Irvine Company requests that 4,156 sq. £t. of space be reallocated from Pacific Coast ' I Highway East and West, and 1,511'sq. ft. of space from either Block 500 or Block 700, at their option, be reallocated to Block 800 in Newport Center to allow for the construction of a 10,000 sq. ft. restaurant which would contain a maximum of 5,667 sq. ft. of net public area. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. t Harry Bubb, President, and Steven Gavin, Vice President Corporate Relation Officer, of Pacific Mutual Life Insurance addressed the Council. Mr. Gavin stated that they were reducing the elevation ' by three floors and would be willing to continue or not more than six weeks, if necessary; that t y would be willing to eliminate the high-rise con miniums, but that they would continue to be comm ted to all mitigation required for the two ' ten-st y buildings, traffic and otherwise, and all othe conditions. Robert Shel n.o£ The Irvine Company, addressed the Council a stated that the condominiums were included in the nvironmental impact Report because of a pre ous direction of the Council. Donald Gralneck, rep senting Pacific Mutual ' I Insurance, addressed a Council and asked if the { ordinance were changed delete reference to the residential development, that would require a revision to the ordinance n t time to come back for reintroduction, or if it ould be enacted at ' that time. The City Attorney stated that the ction would lower the density of the project an could be ' considered on April 23. if continued o that date, without reintroduction. Gary Schamberg, President of Eastbluff He owners Association, addressed the Council regardin the ' necessity for developers to institute sound a an- nation factors along Jamboree Road, and was ask d to submit a letter with suggestions proposed by Association. Inn I x I The public hearing was_ontinued to•April 23� with All Ayes •the applicant stipulating concurrence to continuation.- ' The Council unanimously agreed to take Agenda Item F-1 out�oC order and consider it at-this,6ime. A report wns presented from Lhe Community Development Department regarding the Planning•Commission's recom-mendations concerning the definition of the term ' "reasonableness" as applied to a traffic phasing plan for "excepted" Planned Community Districts. I I I I Volume 33 - Page 58 I I I CI I Y OF NEWPORT BEACH ' COUNCIL M L.N MINUTES rn_C_CAL.L� ?'ip `9�P March 12, 1979 INDEX ' I I Gordon West, President of the Newport Harbor Area Chamber of Commerce, and Michael C. Caring addressed i the Council, but were ruled out of order by the Mayor for not addressing the subject under consideration. The information to be submitted by the developer, as recommended by the Planning Commission 3n'connecflon with the test,of reasonabYeness"for appricabTe planned communities_was modifiedtochange the percentage Notion x of increase in d.tem�3•from "5% to 2%, to revise item 2 Ayos x x x x and' to add items 7 and*R.' 'The list was'approvdd_as , Noes x x x follows. (a) Each project subject to the phasing requirement , ' of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of development remaining to be completed. ' (b) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. (c) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determin what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those ' improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increase the traffic for any leg of the intersection durin ' the peak two and one-half hour period by 2% or more. (d) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be ' shown prior to making any projections. (a) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu- tion to completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. ' (f) The developer is also to take into consideration i in the preparation of his plan characteristics i in the design of his development which either I I i reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersections ' in the least congested direction. , (g) Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether there is a ' I reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. i I I I Volume 33 - Page 59 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' f.(111NGI1.Mf N MINUTES VOL L CALL March 12, 1979 INDEX (h) Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of i permanence in order to mceL the test. i The regular order of the Agenn was resumed. I I 3. Mayor Ryckof£ opened the public hearing regarding Newport Planning Commission Alger>_�IgIeDY.l1o, 52,7, a request Center initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned Community Plaza ' Development Plan'to require the preparation of a (2285) trr fie phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked ' that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that the project be considered on a 30%J70% approach. Motion I x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. ' I Ph,Lton x I Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied- to 100% of the Civic Plana project. ' Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by t 1111 development review instead of 301, I think that it is beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." ' ' Mor I on x I Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to I continue the item to March 26. ' Nn L lon I x Councilman McInnis made a•substitute substitute Ayes I �x x x x mi motion to op adt,Resolution No. 9517 amending the R-9517 No Ix x xl Planned Conunity Development Plan for Civic Plaza revising the u�lowa�6le development plan, and ' accept ng an environienhhl:document, which�mofion .W ariiicd:. .... ...�......«....� - ' i F. CONTINUED BUSINESS: -•^ 1. Previously considered. i 2. A report was presented f . _*E�Community Develop- Newport. Place ment Department ing Planning Commission Planned { I action[` gard to a request of•Fmkay Develop- Community ' I I .gz_t"Snd Realty Company for the approval of a I (1275) I i ' I I Volume 33 - Page 60 i j l l l l 1 -THE IRVINE COMP"( 5b0 P:cnvpor I Center Drive Newport Reach, Caldornia 92663 ' (714) 644.3011 July 10, 1979 RECEIVED ray Community Pl.nmin7; Couunisslo❑ (�'/, PevaloPmant \I city of Newport Beach ' 1100 Newport Boulevard I--1 JUL101979�- 1 Newport 1ledeh, California 6 1� CiTv It 926G1 NEW RI BLACK CALIF. ' sufi.II:CT: Civic Plaza Traff is Phasing Plan Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission: In order Lo proceed with full development of the Civic Plaza site in accordance with the City's P.C. district regulations, we are submitting attached Traffic Phasing Plan for your approval. City Council Resolution No. 9472 sets forth guidelines for the ' "test of reasonableness" to be used in evaluating such projects. It is our. belief that the attached Traffic Phasing Plan has been prepared in compliance with a] ] applicable City regulations and, in fact,meets the criteria established for the test ' of reasonableness. The 'Traffic Phasing Plan was prepared assuming that devclopmonL .onrrentJy in process under Lhc :10 exeepLion rule would be fully occupied in 1980. The additional 70Z of future allowed development, according to our 'Traffic Phasing Plan, is scheduled to bo developed and occuptell in 1981. The attached traffic study and responses identify the traffic impacts associated with the proposed developmenL. ' Our proposed site development phasing plan is summarized as hollows: 198Q - occupancy of existing plus development in process under the 30% rule. ' (This includes 34,000 sq. ft. for. the art museum and library, plus approximately 81,000 sq. ft-. addit•ional). 1981 - Occupancy of remainder of allowed development, subject- to the 70% ' phasing requirement. (This includes approximately 190,000 square feet consisting of office/restaurani/theater uses, and an addition to the art. nwsuunt.) Within the traffic lintiting parameters, it is highly devirable from our point. of viow to complete the Civic Plaza development. nt the earliest fepsiblo date. This would mfnfniire aesthetic impacts clue to•grading and construction, and would alJow the most effective implementation of erosion control measures. Rvsponsys Lo the City';: guidelines for Traffic Phasing approval are attached. 1 f ' 1979 t•1 • 'm{'�• that rhi:• Ioltr•r, along. with the attachod 'I'raffLi- flan will answer v"or quest ion:: and concern:: re la Led to tral I is it11pauts clue to the devulop- m vlt of the Civic Plaza P.C. Should you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to Contact me• or our 'Traffic Consultant. t fours very truly, IF Itunnld W. Hendrickson ' Uircctor, Iles i,l;n/Constructioil ConunoricaL/Tnduafrtal Division Nil nds.e ends. ' .1 1 1 Ili ' CIVIC PLAZA TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN ' Item 1 Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and'the amount of development remaining to be completed. ' The Civic Plaza Planned Community provides for five separate land uses on the site. Upon completion of the entire project, the PC provides for the following identified land use developments: ' Art museum 30,000 sf Library 14,000 sf ' Restaurant 8,000 sf Offices 234,706 sf Theater - 20,000 sf* ' The only presently developed land use on the site is the Newport Beach Art Museum with 20,000 square feet. Additional land uses for the site which for traffic analysis purposes are under construction or in the process of development are the ' City of Newport Beach Library and 81,812 square feet of offices under the 30% rule. Those portions of the planned community which would remain to be developed upon approval of the Traffic Phasing Plan are the restaurant, 152,894 square feet of offices, the 650 seat theater, and 10,000 additional square feet for the museum. Item 2 Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated ' by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. ' Based on the appropriate traffic generation rates as identified in the Newport Center Phase II Traffic Study, the total traffic- to be generated by the site is as follows. ' July 1979 i I p.m. Doak Hour AnT III Out Exi.st.inq - Occupied ' Art museum - 20,000 sf 840 20 20 ' Ruder. Duvelopment - 1980 Occupancy Library - 14,000 sf 588 10 10 ' Offices - 81,812 s£ 1,064 49 140 Sub-total 1,652 59 150 ' F'uture Development - 1981 Occupancy Art museum - 10,000 sf 420 10 10 ' Restaurant 400 40 20 Offices - 152,894 sf 1,988 91 260 Theater 975 n/a n/a Sub-total 3,783 141 290 Total PC 6,275 220 460 ' The amount of traffic to be' generated by the completion of all remaining develop- ment in the peak hour is shown on Table 2 of the attached report. The existing portion of the art museum was not included in that analysis as it was an existing ' land use and included in existing traffic volume data. Item 3 ' An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determine what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving ' traffic generated by the project. The area to- be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated From the. project increases the traffic for any log of the intersection during the peak 2� hour period by 2% or- more: ' Table 3 of the attached report summarizes the analysis for critical intersection identification, with the backup calculation sheets included in Appendix A. Identifying critical intersections was based on the intersections to be examined by the procedures of the•Traffic Phasing ordinance for the area in which Civic Plaza is identified, and further examination is included for any intersection for which the project would increase traffic by 2% or more during the 2� hour period. ' The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive. All roadway improvements adjacent to the site ' havo been previously improved and completed by the owner. -2- Item 8 ' Lxisting traffic-at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. ' Existing traffic volumes for all identified critical intersections are shown in Appendix B, Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis. ' Item 5 The developer may include in his proposed Traffic Phasing Plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed improvements consistent with the level of ' traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. As previously identified, the landowner has already made the identified ultimate General Plan improvements on the roadways adjacent to the site. Due to this ' previous contribution by the landowner to completion of the roadway system, no deficiencies on the existing circulation have been identified adjacent to the site. ' Table 5 identifies a summary of circulation system improvements included in future period ICU calculations. All of these improvements are required as a part of approved projects or are planned as'government projects. of the projects identified, the landowner has committed over $152,000 in the improve- ment of the Ford/MacArthur intersection'. ' Item 6 The developer is also to take into consideration in the preparation of his plan characteristics in the design of his development which either redube traffic ' generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or -through intersec- tions in the least congested direction. The proposed land use plan reflects a reduction in traffic generated over the ' original approved PC for the site. The proposed land use plan reflects a 26.6% reduction in office use of that initially approved with the existing PC being , amended in April 1979. ' The current PC also includes a mix of land uses which have beneficial traffic generation impacts in ttie peak hours, such as 'the proposed theater, library and museum. Although of a higher generation rate, a restaurant at this site will ' potentially serve to divert some trips from the surrounding area in the peak hours. -3- 1t. m (, (cont.iuucd) PuLl access to tile. mLt'u it; to be Laken from San Clemente and Santa Rosa, with a restricted right turn only'-access from San Joaquin Hills Road. San Clemente an-1 Santa Rosa were identified it. the Newport Center Traffic Study as roadways I' with a less degree of utilization than other roadways in tile vicinity of the site. The internal circulation system of the site is oriented towards encour- aging vehicles to utilize these roadways for ingress/egress from the Civic Plaza site and Newport Center area. The orientation of traffic to Santa Rosa and San Joaquin Hills Road intersection and Santa Barbara/Jamboree intersection j' are intended to encourage traffic to divert to non-critical movements at the San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree intersection. Item 7 , Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at the time of f' project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. ' The attached traffic study had identified two intersections that will have ICU's that exceed .90 in 1982 after full project completion; these are the intersec- tions 'of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, .and the intersection of Jamboree ' Road and MacArthur Boulevard, with projected ICU's of .9279 and .9496, respectively. For the Bristol Street North and Campus intersection, with or without approval of the project, the intersection has a projected ICU value of .9279. This is due to the project generated traffic being added to a non-critical movement ' through the intersection. Thus, approval or denial of the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at this intersection. ' For the Jamboree and MacArthur intersection, the project increases the ICU analysis value by .0227 in 1982. The traffic consultant has indicated in his report that drivers utilizing this intersection would not perceive this increase, ' and in his opinion, the intersection would operate satisfactorily. He has also F identified that the construction of the Corona del Mar Freeway would also result in improved conditions at this intersection. ' Item 8 Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence in order to meet the test. The land use reductions made in the April 1979 PC amendment reflect a perman- ent reduction 'in land use intensity and traffic generation for this site. ' 'fh.. roadway i,mi,rovom,:nU; Ldentified as necessary for the approval of other projects are considered as permanent fixed facility improvements although ' additional modifications such as re-stripping, construction to ultimate (where appropriate) and signai operations modifications, may also occur in the future. -4 . 1� ATTACHMENT NO. 6 ,1 } 1 NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Department 1400 Tenth Street City of Newport Beach ,`,acramento, CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 it Clerk of the Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 Santa Ana- CA 92702 NAME OF PROJECT: • ` ��Q „ �� �aM PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: e gcce�ucac c ofhasp Fog eN6 iz6rnc. NS� oFF.c.C-� P'"CUM (>n,(��cuxc! FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect 1 on the environment. it MITIGATION MEASURES: ScC: � 1 II } INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: nl_:�Y� �� F C�`hc, 1- 1 4 ''�• 1 INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA ' 1 DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: 1 Environmental Coordinator Date: 1 • MITIGATION MEASURES ' I . 'fhe following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases ' or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. ' Disclosure Statement The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: ' a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; ' b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; ' c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; ' d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet are service at the Orange County Airport. ' 2. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 1 3. The project be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph G, Division T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4. 4. Should any resources be uncovered during construction, that a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist evaluate' the site prior to completion of construction activities, and in accordance with City Policies K-6 & K-7. ' 5. Final design of the project should provide for the incorporation of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using facilities. ' 6. The final design of the project sGJUia provide Tor + c'scra Gf recyc: big material from other solid ;•caste. 7. The development on the site should be in accordance with City policies on traffic. t City Council Meeting March 12 , 1979 ' Agenda Item No . F-1 ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH March 6 , 1979 ' TO: City Council ' FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Definition of the term "reasonableness " as applied to a traffic phasing plan for "excepted" Planned Community Districts ' Suggested Action ' If desired, approve or modify , and approve the test of reasonableness for applicable planned communities . ' Background At its meeting of November 27, 1978, the City Council adopted Reso- lution No . 9472 amending Planned Community Development Standards of the Corporate Plaza, North Ford, Emkay Development, Koll Center Newport, and Aeronutronic-Ford P-C Districts to require preparation of phasing ' plans consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan . A copy of the Resolution is attached. Each of the enumerated P-C Districts previously had been found by the ' Council to be exempt from the requirements of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance . In addition to approving Resolution No. 9472, the Council directed the Planning Commission to provide a definition of the "test of reason- ableness " which the Planning Commission had indicated it would use i•n ' making determinations regarding the acceptability of proposed traffic phasing plans . On January 8, 1979 , the Council considered a report from the Planning ' Commission concerning the application of the " test of reasonableness " but postponed consideration of the item with direction to the staff to prepare examples and amplify the proposed definition . The report ' of the Planning Commission and the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of December 21 , 1979, approving the definition of the term "reasonableness", are attached. ' The Planning Commission required that the developer, in submitting the traffic phasing plan , include the following information : 1 it TO: City Council - 2 . ' 1 ) Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council ' Resolution No . 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of development remain- ing to be completed . ' 2) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development and that projected for remaining development. 3) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determine what improve- ments remain to be completed, with particular consider- ation being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where ' traffic generated from the project increases the traffic for any leg of the intersection during the peak two and one- half hour period by 5% or more. 4) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections . 5) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed improvements consistent with the level of traffic ' generation and a reasonable proportion of the cast of these improvements . 6 ) The developer is also to take into consideration in the ' preparation of his plan characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through ' intersections in the least congested direction . _Upon receiving the plan and the information, the Commission decided that it will use the data to "determine whether, in its collective ' judgment and considering the rights of owners to use and develop their property, the application should be approved. " - ' Emkay has submitted a traffic phasing plan which was approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting of February 8, 1979 . The proposed plan will be considered by the Council as a later item on this agenda. It presents a clear demonstration of the results of guidelines estab- lished by the Planning Commission in its report on the test of reason- ableness . From this example the Council will be able to judge the results and determine whether changes requiring additional information ' are necessary . Respectfully submitted, ' DEP E T OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V . N, ector RVH/kk ' A chments : 1 ) Resolution No . 9472 2) Staff report and minutes of Planning Commission Meeting 12/21/78 •W / ae e is e� -ant oI O Nov gp 7978n t'q 6 NEWP ny OF 7 RESOLUTION NO. 9 4 0CAl�p EACH, � S A RESOLUTION'OF THE CITY CO[NCIL OF TitE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING PLANNED CObLNUNITY DEVELOPMENT_STANDARDS OF THE CORPOPATE-PLAZA, I NORTH FORD, EMKAY DEVELOPMENT, KOLL CENTER NEWPORT, AND AERON6TRDNI C-FORD PLANNED COMMUC]ITY DISTRICTS TO REQUIRE PREPARATION OF PHASING P>;AIJS CONSISTENT'WTTH' THE CIRCULA- ._.__._ .... TION ELEM__E_NT��OF THE GENERAL PLAN (AGIEtJD�t7fi NO.57:4j. ' WHEREAS, Section 20.51.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to a Planned Community ' Development Plan shall be approved by a resolution of the City Council setting forth full particulars of the amendments; and ' WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 5, 1978, at which time it considered amend- ments to the Planned Community Development Plans for Corporate J Plaza, North Ford, Emkay-Newport Place, Koll.Center Newport, and Aeronutronic-Ford; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 101B, recommending to _ the City Council that certain amendments to the Planned Community Development Plans for Corporate Plaza, North Ford, Emkay-Newport Place, Koll Center Newport, and Aeronutronic- Ford be adopted as follows: A. CORPORATE PLAZA Section 1, Statistical Analysis, paragraph 6, at page 2: "6. PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT. 1-2,644 sq. ft. of ' development was existing or under construction as of October 1, 1978. The additional allow.=bte development in ' the total approved development plan is 287,356 sq. ft. ;ny fdrther development subsequent. to October. 1, 1978, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable development, 'being 86,206 sq. ft. , shall be approved only after it can be demonostrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by ' the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the pre- sentation of a phasing plan consistent with the CircuZ lation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan." B. NORTH FORD ' Section 1, Statistical Analysis, at page, 2, by adding paragraph entitled "Phasing of Development": "PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT. 129,260 sq. ft. of development was existing or under construction as of \ October 1, 1978. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 770,740 sq. ft. Any further development subsequent to October 1, 1978, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable ' development, being 231,222 sq. ft. , shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by ' the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan." C. EMKAY-NEWPORT PLACE Amending General Notes at page 1, by adding I paragraph 7, to read: "7. PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT. 1,799,941 sq. ft. ' of development was existing or under construction as of October 1, 1978. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 566,423 sq. £t. -2- I Any further development subsequent to October 1, 1978, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable development, being 169,927 sq. ft. , shall be approved only after it 'J can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities I will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the pre- sentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circu- lation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan." • D. ROLL CENTER NEWPORT Amending Development Considerations, at page 4, by adding paragraph 6, to read: "6. PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT. 1,651,757 sq. ft. of development was existing or under construction as of October 1, 1978. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 1,058,863 sq. ft. Any further development subsequent to October 1, 1978, in excess of 30% of.the additional allowable development, being 317,658 sq.-ft. , shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities ' will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings ' involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presen- tation of 'a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation ' Element of the Newport Beach General Plan." E. AERONUTRONIC-FORD Use Permit No. 419 and subsequent approvals adopted prior to May 8, 1978, which Use Permits constitute the development plan for the Aeronutroric-Ford Planned Community are amended by adding the following language: W "PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT. 962,400 sq. ft. of ' ' development was existing or under construction as of ' -3 ' October 1, 1978. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 1,691,000 sq. ft. Any further development subsequent to October 1, 1977, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable ' development, being 507,300 sq. ft. , shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic ' generated by the project at the time of.occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation Element of the Newport Beach General Plan"; and ' WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that said amendments to the Planned Community Development Plans for ' Corporate Plaza, North Ford, Emkay-Newport Place, Koll Center Newport, and Aeronutronic-Ford 'as set forth above are desirable and necessary; and WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing I on said proposed amendments in accordance with all provisions of law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council ' hereby approves the proposed amendments to the Planned Community Development Plans for Corporate Plaza, North Ford, Emkay-Newport ' Place, Koll Center Newport, and Aeronutronic-Ford as set forth hereinabove. ADOPTED this a14'�' day of V-n e- , 1978. , Mayor ' ATTEST: ' City Clerk HRC/kb 11/13/78 -4- Planning Commission Study Session December 21 , 1978 Study Session Item No . ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH December 13, 1978 ' TO: Planning Commission ' FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Definition of "Reasonableness" The Planning Commission, at its last meeting ( December 7 , 1978) , ' considered the criteria to be used in applying the "test of reasonable- ness" and suggested some changes which should be made in the informa- tion required of a developer in submitting his traffic phasing plan . We have amended the list of information to be prepared by the devel - oper in accordance with the comments of the Commission as follows : 1 ) Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of development remain- ing to be completed. 2) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of• traffic being generated by existing development and that projected for remaining development. ' 3) An examination shall be made of the circulation system - in the vicinity of the project to determine what improve- ments remain to be completed, with particular consider- ation being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where ' traffic generated from the project increases the traffic at the intersection during the peak two and one-half hour period by 5% or more . ' 4) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections . ' 5) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed , improvements consistent with the level of traffic ' generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements . t , � ' TO : Planning Commission - 2 . ' 6 ) The developer is also to take into consideration in the preparation of his plan characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic ' generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersections in the least conjested direction . DEPARTM T OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' N , ector ' RVH/ kk 1 COMMISSIONERS qqss�� $ pip p�p�} Beach ( MINUTES City ®Y Newport L 1®�6Jd�itl 9 o � °2 �Z December 21 , 1978 INDEX OLL CALL 3. Prior to the, issuance of building permits , the applicant shall indicate to the Director of Community Development in writing that he under stands and agrees to conditions nos . 1 and 2 above. ' There was more discussion between the Commissioners egarding the question of occupancy . It was their ' ling that another condition should be applied. Mr. eek asked permission to include the following remar in the record: ' "Commi Toner Beek indicated that in voting for the mote he did not wish to set a precedent of making 'me of occupancy a condition of ' approval . T is an unsatisfactory condition which should no generally be used and is only justified by the ique circumstances of this case . L He also indicated that h was voting in favor of the motion- because he fo d by analyzing the traffic report that 70% o the extra capac- ity created by the proposed str t improvement is sufficient to enable the projec to pass th .90 ICU test. ' He also . indicated that he was voting in or of the motion because the best traffic figu s available from the County concerning the inte ' section of Irvine Avenue and Mesa Drive show that the project will pass the .90 ICU test at that intersection. " ADDITIONAL BUSINESS ADDI- TIONAL ' The Planning Commission discussed the definition of BUSINESS " reasonableness" and suggested changes in wording. op es o a proposed closing statement were dis- tributed and also discussed. ' Concerns of the Commissioners covered the following: ' 1 . balancing the inconvenience to the property owner if an application is rejected against the -7 1 MINUTES COFAMISSIONERS mFm�o�� a11 City ®$ �'1e�9�®9'� ����� v,r 9° °z z December 21 , 1978 INDEX �011 CALL ' inconvenience to the City if it is approved; ' 2. approving phasing plans for entire projects rather than individual buildings . Staff stated that in cases of large developments , this would involve finding out the plans of owners of parcels of undeveloped property as well as the plans for expansion of buildings already developed. otion X Motion was made to approve the staff report on the yes X X X ( X definition of "reasonableness" with modifications , Absent X to read as follows : ' The PI-anning Commission at its last meeting (Decem- ber 21 , 1978) considered the information needed to apply the "test of reasonableness" and suggested ' some changes which should be made in the informatio required of a developer in- submitting his phasing plan for a Planned Community or project. ' We have amended the list of information to be pre- pared by the developer in accordance with the com- ments of the Commission as follows : ' 1 ) Each project subject to- the phasing require- ment of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing develop- ment and the amount of development remaining to be completed. ' 2) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development and that projected for remaining ' development. 3) An examination shall be made of the circulatio system in the vicinity of the project to deter ' mine what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The ' area to be- examined shall extend to those inte - sections where traffic generated from the proj- ect increases the traffic at the intersection ✓ ' during the peak two and one-half hour period by 5% or more. I i I -8 ' COMMISSIONERS (�My�' pAq p� Beach MINUTES 9cm p� F�°off P�v�o V7ay ®f Newp®Y I��'%A�atl Y o � ��----�� °t ti December 21 , 1978 OLI CALL INDEX III 4) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections . ' 5) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu ' tion to, completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements . 6) The developer is also to take into considera- tion in the preparation of his plan character- istics in the design of his development which . either reduce traffic generation or guide traf fic onto less impacted arterials or through intersections in the least conjested direction The Commission will use the above data to determine whether, in its collective judgment and considering the rights of owners to use and develop their prop- erty, the application should be approved. 'Motion X An amendment was moved that the figure "5V in Ayes paragraph (3y be changed to 111%" so that the same Noes X X X X data will be available to the Commission as is 'Absent X X available in -making analyses under the Traffic Phas- ing Ordinance. The Commission will be able to dis- regard this data if it chooses, but should •have the information before it. Motion failed. - 'Motion X Planning Commission re-adopted Resolution No . 1025 Ree1025 Ayes X X XK X setting a public hearing for January 18, 1979, 'Absent X X the purpose of amending the Civic Plaza P. o require a Traffic Phasing Plan as had n done for other P .C. Developments which had n excepted fro the Traffic Phasing Ordinanc '�tion X Motion was made excuse Mr. Cokas from the meetin Ayes X X X X of January 1979. 'Absent X X 1 ' -9- Planning Commission Meeting December 20 , 1979 ' Agenda Item No . 1 . ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' December 13, 1979 TO : Planning Commission ' FROM: Planning Department ' SUBJECT: Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community District, and the acce tance of an Environmental Document Continued Discussion LOCATION : The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , 'generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road , Santa Cruz Drive , San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive, and Jamboree Road, in Newport Center. ' ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach ' OWNER: Same as Applicant Background The proposed project .was originally before the Planning Commission ' in August, ' 1979 . Since that time , the project has been continued at the request of the applicant and Planning Commission . The , following information has been previously submitted to the Planning ' Commission for their consideration in review of this ' project: _ 1 . Planning Commission Minutes August 9 , 1979---` 2 . Planning Commission Minutes - September 20, 1979 ' 3. Planning Commission Minutes _ October 4 , 1979 4. Planning Commission Minutes October 18 , 1979 5 . Sta'ff Report - August 9 , 1979 a ) Resolution No . 9517 b) City Council Minutes - March 12, 1979 -"Civic Plaza" c ) City Council Minutes- March 12 , 1979 -"Test of Reasonabiness" t d) Letter - The Irvine Company, July 10 , 1979 e ) Narrative on Planning Commission -"Test of Reasonableness"- July, 1979 ' f) Traffic Report prepared- by Weston Pringle and Associates , dated July 5 , 1979, for the applicants g ) Negative Declaration ' 6 . Staff Report - August 16 , 1979 a ) Corrections to Traffic Report-Weston Pringle & Associates- August 14 , 1979 - 1 - T0 : Planning Commission - 2 . 7 . • Staff Report - September 20, 1979 (recycled August 9 , 1979 , report) . 8 . Staff Report - October 4, 1979 a) Staff Report - August 16 , 1979 ' 9 . Staff Report - October 18, 1979 10. Letter from The Irvine Company - October 18, 1979 11 . Staff Report - December 6, 1979 ' Should any member of the Planning Commission require an additional copy of the above listed information, please contact the Planning Department ' at ( 714) 640-2197. General Plan Amendment (79-1 ) ' At the October 18, 1979 Planning Commission meeting, the. Planning Commission at the request .of The Irvine Company, continued discussion of this item to its December 6 , 1979 meeting. The purpose of ' this continuance was to allow information generated by the City Council ' s review of Newport Center in the General Plan Amendment (G.P.A. 79-1 ) to be used by the Planning Commission in their consideration of the Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Plan . ' At the November 26 , 1979 City Council meeting , the City Council continued all items related to Newport Center to its meeting of December 10, 1979 . Based on that continuance, the project was continued from the :December ' 6 , 1979 meeting to the Planning Commission meeting of December 20, 1979 . The following summarized City Council actions on General Plan Amendment ' 79-1 as they relate to Civic Plaza and the total allowed office development in Newport Center: _ "Future Allowable Development" "Previous "Existing General General Plan" • Proposed l " Remaining "Area" Use Plan" G. .P.A. 79-1 Project Development 'i;A.Z. 64 Block 800 Retail 18,000 sq.ft. 18,000 sq.ft. 8,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. Theatre 1 ,350 seats 1 ,350 seats 1 ,350 seats (20,000 sq.ft.) (20,000 sq.ft.) (20,000 sq.ft.) -0- Civic/ Cultural 10,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. 10,000 sq.ft. -0- Residential 245 DU's 245 DU's 245 DU's Office ' -Civic Plaza 234,706 sq.ft. 234,706 sq.ft. 234,706 sq.ft. -0- •Pacific Mutual 350,000 sq.ft. 245,000 sq.ft. - 245,000 sq.ft. ''Block 700 Office ' -Pacific - Mutual 9,404 sq.ft. 9,404 sq.ft. 9,404 sq.ft. TQ: Planning Commission 3. "Future Allo able Development" "Previous 'Existing General General Plan Proposed 1 . Remaining "Area" Use Plan" G.P.A. 79-1 Project Development Total IT.A.Z. 64 Office 594>110 sq.ft. 489,110 234,706 sq.ft. 254,404 sq.ft. Total Newport ` Center Office 1 ,447,019 686,518 sq.ft. 234,706 sq.ft. 451 ,812 sq.ft. ' With respect to office use within Newport Center, the prope.rty, owner has the option of utilizing the maximum square footage for each 1 .A.,Z. However, total ' office development in Newport Center may not exceed 686•,518 sq . ft.. 1 • Traffic Analysis also included the 14,000 sq . ft. library. Revised Traffic Report/Phasing Plan The Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Plan was submitted to the City for its consideration on July 10 , 1979 . The project has been continuea' at the request ' of the applicant and Planning Commission for five (5) months ( December 6 , 1979 ) . The original Traffic Report on the Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Plan was developed and based upon Winter/Spring 78 Traffic Volumes . A wevised Traffic Report based on Winter/Spring 79 Traffic Volumes is attached . This report was required of The Irvine Company so as to provide the Planning 'Commission with the most current data upon which to base their decisions . A copy of the revised Traffic Report is attached (Weston ' Pringle & As-sociates - November 30 , 1979) . The new report is summarized on the following page: • To Planning Commission - 4. T-f*:I--- 4 1CO SU11"NAlly CIVIC PLAZA LX'ISTOG E.Yi ,'-T11,f; + .1-0) Ely. S*1 + INE.G.10NA1. -1 IREIGIW'Al. + Cr IZ-N il I A IT r E,i' 307 111:01.11:t.'r ........... ris-ol St . N. & Campus Dr. 0.9262 0.8950 U.89tiU 0.89". rj,,Lol St. & CLm,pus Dr. 0.7650 0.6669 0.GO!) 0.67811. (:.; St lli^llwzay Z. Dover 1Jr. 0.9510 0.6788 0.6854 0.7017 is.t fligh"-,my & Bayside Dr, 0.8540 0.7753 0. 7ZI.20 0.791i2 lo:tst Highway & Jamboree Rd . .0.9140 0.8337 0. 838] 0.F:."7 oa,,;L )Uj,1,way'& Margarite Ave. 0.7Y57 0.8531 0.1"5 7 2 0.86:1 1 :.,')orctt Rd . & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.5745 0.6341. 0.G 0.6541 ftnborce Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.7375 0.6966 0.6981 0.7012 Jalllhorer- Rd. & Ford Rd. 0.9128 0.7877 0.79711 0.81.91 Iatibaree R.-I. & Bristol St. 0.6381 0.7446 0.7547 0.7792 J,ai(.Iboreu Rd. & Bristol St. 14. 0.8781 0.8298 0.8378 0.8563 attiboreL Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd. 0.9934 1.1051 1.1095 1.0003 Mae Arthur Blvd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.7664 0.8333 0.8457 0.,8757 tac Arthur Bls)d. & Ford Rd. 1.1631 0.8947 0.9047 0. 8103 ristol St. N. & Birch St. 0.8569 1.2180 1 .2257 0.9751 - 1) No Project Related Improvements are Considered in CalctilaLiolls.. �2) Project Related ImprovemenLs are Included. I 1The Traffic Report found .that Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 2% of projected 2 1/2 hour traffic volume only at the intersections of: 1 ) Coast Highway/Newport Center Drive, and 2) Coast Highway/MacArthur Boulevard. Therefore, ICU calculations were made for the remaining ' 15 intersections -as Inoted above. The applicant ' s consultant has indicated that only two inter- sections , Bristol Street North/Birch Street and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard will be operating upon completion of the project at 0. 9000 or 'greater. 1 ' TO: Planning Commission - 5 . ' A summary of the applicants traffic consultants comments on the two intersections that will be operating upon completion of the project at 0. 9000 or greater is given below: ' "Bristol Street North and Birch Street. Review of Table 4 and the related streets in Appendices B and C indicates that 'the recommended ' project related improvements would reduce the ICU value at this , intersection from 1 . 2199 to 0. 9751 in 1982 . It also indicates 'that the ICU value in 1981 would be 1 . 2186. The project and its related improvements would improve the operation of this intersection although it would exceed 0. 90. " "Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard . The ICU values at this ' intersection increase 0. 0044 in 1981 as a result of this project. This increase would not be perceptable to drivers utilizing the intersection . Improvement of the intersection by the addition of a third southbound ' through lane has been proposed in order to reduce these ICU values . This improvement results in an ICU value of 1 . 0003 with the full project in 1982 . While this value is greater than • 0. 90, it is - less ' than the ICU value of 1 . 1095' that would occur without this project related improvement. This indicates that conditions would improve with the proposed improvements and project. " tAlternative Courses of Action If the Planning Commission desires to approve or modify and approve the ' project, staff would suggest that the Planning Commission accept the Negative Declaration and approve or modify and approve the Phasing Plan with the findings and subject to the conditions set forth, in Exhibit "A . " OR If the Planning Commission desires to deny the Phasing Plan , findings for denial are suggested in Exhibit "B" for consideration. - - PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER , DIRECTOR By Z z. ' red TaIarico Environmental Coordinator ' FT/dt ' Attachments : Exhibits "A" and "B" Traffic Report - November 20, 1979 • EXHIBIT A Recommended Findings and Conditions of Approval ' Approval FINDINGS: ' 1 . That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. 2 . That based on. the information contained in the Initial Study and ' Negative Declaration , the project will not result in significant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan 'and the Planned Community Development Plah for Civic Plaza . ' 4. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information sub- mitted therewith, there is a reasonable correlation between ' projected traffic at time of completion and the capacity of affected" intersections. 5 . That the applicant has taken into consideration in the preparation ' of his plan characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impact arterials .or through intersections in the least congested direction . CONDITIONS : ' 1 . That prior to the occupancy of any buildings on the site beyond the existing development and 95,8T2 sq. ft. of new construction , the circulation system. improvements contained in the Traffic Report , dated November 20, 1979, Table 5, Pages 7 through 9, shall have ' been constructed , (unless subsequent project approval require . modification thereto . The circulation systems -improvements- shall be subject to the approval of the City Traffic Engineer) . 2. That prior to the issuance of any building permits , the applicants shall indicate to .the Director of Planning Department in writing that they understand and agree to condition 1 above . 3. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach ' s ' policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions , and Restrictions which may ' be recorded against the property. Disclosure Statement The Lessee herein , his heirs , successors and assigns acknowledge that : a ) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; EXHIBIT B Recommended Findings and Conditions of Denial ' FINDINGS : 1 . - That an Initial Study and N-egative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. ' 2 . That based on the information contained in the Initial Study and Negative Declaration , the project will not result in significant environmental impacts . ' 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . ' 4 . That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information submitted therewith, there is not a' reasonable correlation between 'projected ' traffic at time of completion and• the capacity of the 'intersections of Bristol Street North/Birch Street , and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard. V. ' b ) When an alternate air facility is available , a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial are service expansions at the Orange County Airport; d ) Lessee , his heirs , successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet service at the Orange County Airport. 4. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code . ' 5 . Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water- using facilities . 6 . The final design of the project shall provide for the sorting of ' recyclable material from other solid waste. i 1 Planning Commission Meeting December 6 , 1979 Agenda Item No . 4 1 CITY OF NEW-PORT BEACH 1 November 29 , 1979 TO- Planning Commission 1 FROM: Department of Community Development 1 SUBJECT : Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community District, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document Continued Discussion) . 1 LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road , Santa Cruz Drive , 1 San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive and Jam- boree Road in Newport Center. 1 ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach 1 OWNER: Same as Applicant 1 At the October 18, 1979 Planning Commission meeting , the Planning Commission at the request of The Irvine Company continued discus- sion of this item to its December 6 , 1979 meeting . The purpose of 1 that continuance was to allow information generated by the City Council ' s review of GPA 79-1 to be used by the Planning Commission in its consideration of this A tem. Final City Council action related 1 to GPA 79-1 is now anticipated for December 10 , 1979 . Further , staff has requeste° additional traffic analysis to be accomplished ; therefore , the staff requests this item be continued to the December 20 , 1979 Planning Commission meeting . 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT JAMES HEWICKER, DIRECTOR 1 - 1 By Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator 1 FT/gg 1 1 1 ' Planning Carmission Meeting October 18, 1979 Agenda Item No. 1 CITY OF NE-11PORT BEACH October 12, 1979 ' TO : Planning Commission ' FROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Reauest to consider a Phasing Plan for the ' remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned C-ommunity District, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document Continued Discussion ' LOCATION : The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive , Santa Barbara Drive , and Jamboree Road, in Newport Center . ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach ' OWNER: Same as Applicant ' The agenda material's for this item was initially distributed to the Planning Commission for the meeting of August 9 , 1979 and redistributed ' for the meeting of September 20 , 1979. Please bring these materials with you for the meeting on October 18th . DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ' R . V. HOGAN , DIRECTOR ' BY Pao James D . Hewicker ' Assistant Director-Planning JDH/dlt Planning Commission Meeting October 4 , 1979 1 Agenda Item No . 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' September 27 , 1979 TO: Planning Commission FROM : Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remaining development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community 1 District, and the acce tance of an Environmental Document Continued Discussion . 1 LOCATION : The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive , San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive , and 1 Jamboree Road, in Newport Center . ZONE : P-C 1 APPLICANT: The Irvine Company , Newport Beach OWNER: Same as Applicant 1 Attached for Planning Commi.ssi6n •review is a copy of the 1 "Supplemental Information Report" for the Planning Commission meeting of August 16 , 1979 . This report contains corrections to the staff report of August 9 , 1979 which was recycled for the meeting of September 20 , 1979 . ' DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 R. V . HOGAN , DIRECTOR 1 BY 44 Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator 1 FT/dt ' Attachments : Staff Report dated August 16 , 1979 1 1 1 Scpsanlocr ►q-19 Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Item No. A� 9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH August 1 , 1979 TO: Planning Commission rFROM: Department of Community Development SUBJECT: Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remain- ing development in the Civic Plaza Planned Commun- it Distr ict, and the-acceptance of an Environmen- tal Document. Discussion ' LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road , Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, Santa Barbara Drive , and Jam- boree Road, in Newport Center. ZONE: P-C ' APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as 'Applicant Background Information ' The Irvine Company has requested approval of a Phasing Plan to comply with Resolution No. 9742 of the Newport Beach City Council ' and Amendment No. 514 as it pertains to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . Attached for the Planning Com- mission ' s consideration in regard to this request are : ' a) Resolution No. 9517 b) City Council Minutes-March 12 , 1979-"Civic Plaza" c) City Council Minutes-March 12 , 1979-"Test of Reason- ableness" ' d) Letter-The Irvine Company-July 10 , 1979 e) Narrative on Planning Commission-"Test of Reasonable- ness"-July 1979 ' f) Traffic Report prepared by Weston Pringle and Assoc- iates , dated July 5, 1979 , for the applicants g) Negative Declaration Environmental Significance The City of Newport Beach Environmental Affairs Committee has re- viewed the project and determined that it will not have signifi- cant environmental effect. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached. 1 TO: Planning Commission - 2 ' Phasing Plan ' The applicants have indicated that development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community, if the Phasing Plan is approved, would occur as follows : PHASING SCHEDULE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ' Art Museum 20,000 sq. ft. 1980 OCCUPANCY ' Library 14,000 sq . ft. ' Offices 81 ,812 sq . ft. 1981 OCCUPANCY Art Museum 10 ,000 sq . ft. , Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. Offices 152,894 sq. ft. ' Theater 20,000 sq . ft. Resolution No. 9517 _ Attached for the Planning Commission' s consideration is a copy of ' the applicant' s response to the Planning Commission guidelines for reviewing the Phasing Plan, as modified by the City Council ' (Attachment "E" ) . Additionally, a copy of Resolution No. 9517 and the City Council Minutes for March 12, 1979 are attached. _ Traffic Report ' A Traffic Report was prepared for the applicant by Weston Pringle and Associates . The Traffic Report examined the 16 intersections ' identified for analysis in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. It is summarized on the following page: TO: Planning Commission -- 3 T.CU St^LIARY ' Civic Plaza (I) (1) (1) EXISTING EXISTING + EXISTING + EXISTING + INTERSECTION REGIONAL + REGIONAL + REGIONAL + COMMITTED COMMITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT 1981 1981 1982 Bristol N. & Campus'Dr. 0.9898 0.9256 0.9256 0.9279 ' Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0.72 0.6467 0.6498 0.6613 coast Highway & Dover Dr. 0.99 0.6556 0.6623 0.6788 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr, 0.89 0.8051 0.8118 0.8282 ' Coast Highway & Jamboree Rd. 0.83 0,7644 0.7644 0.7650 Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. 0.68 0.7425 0.7466 0.7560 ' Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.53 0.6171 0.6233 0.6373 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin •llills Rd. 0.64 0,6473 0.6487 0.6522 ' Jamboree Rd-. & Ford Rd. 0.83 0.7449 0.7517 0.7739 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.54 0,7944 0.8032 0.8247 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N. 0.72 0,8219 0,8298 0.8489 ' Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd, 0.85 0.9269 0.9338 0.9496 Mae Arthur Blvd. & San Joaquin Ilills lid. 0.72 0.7945 0,8070 0.8368 ' Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford lid. 1.01 0,8653 0.8753 0.8997 ' (1) No Project Related Improvements are Considered in Calculations. ' The Traffic Report found that Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 2% of projected 22 hour traffic volume only at the inter- sections of: 1) Coast Hwy./Newport Center Dr. , and 2) Coast Hwy./ MacArthur Blvd. Therefore, ICU calculations were made for the re- maining 14 intersections as noted above. The applicant' s consul - tant has indicated that two intersections , Bristol Street North/ I Campus Drive and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Blvd. , will be operating upon completion of the project at 0.9000 or greater. r . r TO: Planning Commission - 4 ' ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION ' Suggested Action If desired , accept the Negative Declaration and approve the Phas- ing Plan with the findings and subject to the conditions , as fol - lows : FINDINGS: ' 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been pre- pared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3 , and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this J ro 'ect. P 2. That based on the information contained in the Initial Study , and Negative Declaration , the project will not result in sig- nificant 9 p j environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach ' General Plan and the Planned Community Development ment Plan for Civic Plaza. 4. T d ,That base on the Phasing Plan and supporting information P submitted therewith , there is a reasonable correlation be- tween projected traffic at time of completion and the capa- city of affected intersections . , 5. That the applicant has taken into consideration in the prepar- ation of his plan characteristics in the design of his devel - opment ' which either reduce traffic generation or guide traf- fic onto less impact arterials or through intersections in the least congested direction. , CONDITIONS: 1. That prior to the occupancy of any buildings on the site be- ' yond the existing development and 95,812 sq . ft. of new con- struction that the circulation system improvements contained in the Traffic Report in Table 5 , Pages 7 through 9 , and ' listed below shall have been constructed. INTERSECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS A. Bristol Street North/ Add southbound through lane Campus Drive B. Bristol Street/Campus Drive Add southbound through lane C. Coast Highway/Dover Drive Add southbound left turn lane Add southbound right turn lane Add eastbound left turn lane Y ' TO: Planning Commission •• 5 ' Add eastbound optional through or right turn lane Add westbound right turn lane D. Coast Highway/Bayside Drive Add eastbound through lane Add westbound optional through or right turn lane E. Coast Highway/Jamboree Road Add westbound through and west- bound left turn lanes F. Jamboree Road/Santa Barbara Add northbound through lane Drive Add southbound left turn lane Add westbound lane ' G. Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Add northbound through lane Hills Road and convert right turn lane t to optional through or right Convert westbound left turn lane to optional through plus left. ' H. Jamboree Road/EastbluPf Drive- Convert northbound and south- Ford Road bound right turn lanes to op- tional through plus right Add eastbound through lane Convert westbound through lane to left turn lane ' I . Bristol Street/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane to northbound left turn lane tJ. Bristol Street North/Jamboree Convert northbound through Road lane to northbound left turn t lane K. Jamboree Road/MacArthur Add northbound right turn Boulevard lane Convert eastbound right turn lane to optional through or right. ' L. MacArthur Boulevard/Ford Add northbound left and right Road turn lanes , southbound left turn lane and eastbound left ' turn lane 2. That no further development beyond that allowed by the Phasing Plan shall be allowed on this site. TO: Planning Commission - 6 , 3. That prior to the issuance of any building permits , the ap- plicants shall indicate to the Director of Community De- ' velopment in writing that they understand and agree to con- ditions 1 and 2 above. OR ' If the Planning Commission desires to deny the Phasing Plan , the following findings are suggested for consideration: ' FINDINGS : 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been pre- pared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. ' 2. That based on the information contained in the Initial Study and Negative Declaration , the project will not result in sig- nificant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for , Koll Center Newport. 4. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information ' submitted therewith, there is not a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of completion and the capa- city of the intersections of Bristol Street North/ Campus Dr. and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R.LHFr)eT4alarico OGAN, DIRECTO ' By Environmental Coordinator FT/gg Attachments : 1. Negative Declaration 2 . Letter-The Irvine Company-July 10, 1979 3. Response to "Test of Reasonableness Guide- lines"-July 1979 4. Traffic Report-July 5, 1979 5 . Resolution No. 9517 6 . City Council Minutes r r 1 1 1+T�laCt4MENT414 10 � J� EESOLUTION NO. ��• ` fit' /� ' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING THE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CIVIC PLAZA REVISING THE, ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHING ' A PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND ACCEPTING AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT (AMENDMENT NO. 527) ' WHEREAS, Section 20.51.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to a Planned Community ' Development Plan shall be approved by a resolution of the City Council setting forth full particulars of the amendments; ' and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public ' hearing on February 8, 1979, at which time it considered amend- ments to the Planned' Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission 'adopted its Resolution No. 1032 recommending to the City Council ' that certain amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted as follows: ' 1. The allowed development for the Office Park area is reduced by 85,294 square feet, and the Civic Cultural by ' 16,000 square feet as indicated in the following table: Total Allowable ' Land Use (Existing P-C) Revised 'Total Office Park 320,000 sq. ft. 234,706 Art Museum 30,000 sq. ft. 30,000 ' Library 30,000 sq. ft. 14,000 Theater 20,000 sq. ft. 20,000 Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. 8,000 408,000 sq. ft. 306,706 ' 2. A Phasing of Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted to read as follows: "PRASIDIG OF DEVELOPMENT 34,000 sq. ft. of development was existing or under construction as of January 1, 1979. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 272,706 sq. ft. Any ' further development subsequent to Januar 1, 1979, in excess of 30% of the additional allowable development, being 81,812 sq. ft., shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that ' adequate traffic facilities will be available to handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation ' Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. In the review of this phasing plan, a test of reasonableness should be applied, rather than the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance." ' 3. The Revised Site Plan, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, be adopted; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that ' said amendments to the Planned Community ❑evelopment Plan for Civic Plaza as set forth above are desirable and necessary; and ' WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing on said proposed amendments in accordance with all provisions of law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves the proposed amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic ' Plaza as set forth hereinabove. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental document is hereby accepted. , ADOPTED this 12th day of March ,. 1979. ' Mayor , ATTEST: City Clerk , DDO/kb 3/8/79 L / ' . - P 1TACHNEPr ' (3" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH (.0UNCI`-MF-N MINUTES ' ROI' CALL` �d'� 9 March 12, 1979 INDEX I a�ttion proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence�.lroa o meet the test. The regular order of the Agena was resumed. i 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding Newport , Planning Commission Amendment No. 527, a request Center ' initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned Community Plaza Development Plar to zequire the preparatio-n o a (2285) traffic phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an ' I Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. ' A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department, Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed ' the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and'that the project be considered on a 30%/70% approach. ' Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. Motion x Councilman Huamiel made a motion that the test of ' reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic Plaza project. r Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project ' which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by 100% development review instead of 30%, I think that it is beyond the scope of this Council to make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, ' that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." Motion xl Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to ' continue the item to March 26. Mution I x Councilman McInnis made a substitute substitute Ayes xl x x x motion to adopt Resolution No. 9517 amending the R-9517 ' Noes x Ix x Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza revising the allowable development plan, and accepting an environmental`doeumentt, which motion car -tied. ' P. CONTINUED BUSINESS: 1. Previously considered. �. i 2. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Place ' ment Department regarding_Plnnning Commission Planned action with regard, to a request of Emkay Develop- Community j_ ment�lty Coompany for the approval of a (1275) I I ii ',_ Volume 33 - Page 60 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH f0 �:•„a MI N MINUTES , s( er?.'oA f'[`'• I• tic rrh V. 1010 INDEX avallnble for otential offlry building. Addition- ally, The Irvine Company requests that 4,156 sq. 1 I It. of apace be reallocated from Pacific Coast I : I Iliphwey and d West, and 1,511 sq. Et. of space I i Crnm etthor 01ock 500 or Black 700, at their option. ' be reallocated to Block $00 At Newport Center Co allow For the construction of a 10,000 sq. ft. restauran[ w ,6 hich vould contain a maximum of ' 67 sq. ft. of net public area. I A port was presented from the Community Develop- man Department. i harry ubb, President, and Steven Gavin, Vice ' i Presid t Corporate Relation Offiecr, of Pacific Mutual L to Insurance addressed the Council. Mr. Gavin eta ad that they were reducing the elevation by three cote and would be willing to continue ' for not mor titan six weeks, if necessary; that they would It willing to eliminate the high-rice condominiums, or that they would continue to be committed to a mitigation required for the two ton-story build ge, traffic and otherwise, and ' all other condlt no. Robert Shelton,of a Irvin Company, addressed the Council and otat d that the condominiums wore included in the Envir mental Impact Report , because of a previous rection of the Council. 1 Donald Cralneck, repreaet ing Pacific Mutual i Insurance, addressed the until and asked if the ordinance warn changed to late reference to the ' residential development, if hat would require a ' revision to the ardinehCC nox time to cams back for reintroduction, or if it w old be enacted at that time. 1 The City Attorney stated that the colon would ' lower the density of the project a could be ' rl considered on April 23, if continue to that date, without reintroduction. i Cary Schonberg, President of Eastbluff omaownara , Association, addressed the Council regar ing the 1 necessity for developers to institute sou d atten- I untlon factors along Jamboree Road, and we asked to submit a letter with suggestions propose by the ' Association. non t.on : I Ix : The public heating was wntioued to April,23, th LI %V" : ' the applicant stipulating concurrence to cont } I The Counrnr{1 anontmouely agreed to take Agenda Item P-1 ! i I cut oC order dnd consider if nt"this time. I A report wits presented from the Community Development Department regarding the Planning Commission's recom- mendation concerning the definition of the term ' "reasonableness" as applied to n tmffJr phnaing Plnn I far "excepted" Planned Community Districts • ! I j SS Volume 33 - Page ' ' 11111 ' I 1 ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH e I IAi 'r MINUTE S I r ��(�•ln, •t vecZip , INDEX r y I 1 I:u oleo wr•tl, President of the M(wporr IlarLnr Ate,:i i I Chamber of Commerce, and Mlahnel C. Cerine. addressed the Cmucll, but were ruled out n4 order by the Mayor ' V,,r nol addressing the subject under cmrsiderattoa. 'fire information to be submitted by the developer, as j recononeud_ed by the Planning Commission in connection r wifh the test aE reasoriabTendss'for applicable planned r communities, was modified to change the percentage :Ie,r i„rr I j x of increase in item 7 from 57. to 2X, to revise item 2 ' AV.... IxI Ix x x and to add items 7 and .—"The list was approv"ed'as .or j x x x fallo-vs: i ' (a) Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Couneil Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of development remaining to be completed. (b) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. (a) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determin what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those ' improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increase the traffic for any leg of the intersection durin the peak two and one-half hour period by 2% or more. ose (d) Existshowning prioratoic at makinghany projections, shall be (e) The developer may include in hie proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu- tion to completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and ' I I a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. ' I r I (f) The developer is also to take into consideration i I I in the preparation of his plan characteristics t the design of his development which either red traffic generation or guide traffic on Lees impacted arterials or through intersections j i in the least congested direction. ' i e (g) Upon receipt of rha plan aad inforr"-ce, the I f Cummission will dutarwia, whether there is t r reasonable correlation betweon projected traffic r I i at time of project completion and capacity of I affected intersections in considering the project I I I I I for approval. r I I I Volume 33 - Page 59 I ` CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH I„oN n Mt N MINUTES ' n,• af�p��yrc�yr,Gs� 12 flnrrh I°, 1919 INDEX ' I i � I (h) HltlEatlan proposed neu,U to Indicate degree of , ' ' I permanence in order to mept the test. } the regular order of the Agana was rcmuned. ' I ' 1. npyor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding, Newport ' I Planning CovmioAion AmenQmonA.Ho, 527, a request Center ' initiated by the City of Newport Bench to consider Civic ( an amendment to the.Civic Plaza Planned Community Plaza Develo�p nens Pens P��l�nn to icquiro the preparaClon or a (2285) traicing plan and reduction in allowable _ I intensity of development and the acceptance of an • ' Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. ' Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted projact, and asked that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that , the project be considered on a 30%/70% approach. Nntlon I x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Aven i that no one also desired to be heard. Nee Jun x Councilman Rummel made a motion that the test of ' reasonablenns be applied to 100% of the Civic _ Plaza project. Councilman }leather made a statement for the ' ' record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by 100% development review instead of 305, I think I that it Is beyond the scope of this Council to ' make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- inate against this project." netlon xl Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to ' continue the item to March 26. •b,uan j I x Councilman McInnis made a substltucq opbptitute Aveq I xl x x x motion to adopt.Resolution No. 9517 ,ascending the R-9517 x„eq Ix x xl I Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza ' revle-ing 1u ilYovable development plan, and ' accapeTng a,env3[onmental document, whiiF'motlan i carried." I I P. CONTINUED BUSINESS: ' I � I 1. PreVlously considered. ' i. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Place ment Department regarding Planning Comp lesion Planned ' action with regard, to A regUeat of'Pmkny Develop- Community • I mrnt end Aealty Company fur the approval of A I 111711 j -_ ..«. I I I ( { I Volume 77 - Page 60 ' ' - - - -----__-__-- - _THE IRVINE CDMPANY 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92663 ' (714) 644-3011 July 10, 1979 ' \`' RECEIVED L Community i Planning Commission 0/-1 Development City of Newport Beach -4 Dept.9117111- 3 ' 3300 Newport Boulevard JUL 1 v or•OF Newport Beach, California 6 aT NEWPORT EACH, 92663 CALIF. SUBJECT: Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Plan S ' Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission: In order to proceed with full development of the Civic Plaza site in accordance with the City's P.C. district regulations, we are submitting attached Traffic Phasing Plan for your approval. City Council Resolution No. 9472 sets forth guidelines for the "test of reasonableness" to be used in evaluating such' projects. It is our- belief that the attached Traffic Phasing Plan has been prepared in compliance with all applicable City regulations and, in fact,meets the criteria established for the test of reasonableness. The Traffic Phasing Plan was prepared assuming that development .currently in process ' under Lite 30% exception rule would be fully occupied in 1980. The additiona3 70% of future allowed development, according to our Traffic Phasing Plan, is scheduled to be developed and occupied in 1981. The attached traffic study and responses ' identily the traffic impacts associated with the proposed development. Our proposed site development phasing plan is summarized as follows: ' 1980 - Occupancy of existing plus development in process.under the 30% rule. (This includes 34,000 sq. ft. for, the art museum and library, plus approximately 81,000 sq. ft-. additional) . 1981 - Occupancy of remainder of allowed development, subject to the 70% phasing requirement. (This includes approximately 190,000 square feet consisting of office/restaurant/theater uses, and an addition ' to the art museum.) WiLhin Lhe traffic limiting parameters, it is highly desirable from our point of ' view to complete the Civic Plaza development at the earliest feasible date. This would minimize aestlietic impacts due to•grading and construction, and would allow the most effective implementation of erosion control measures. Responses to the City's guidelines for Traffic Phasing approval are attached. 1 ' .July 9, 1979 14 ' page 2 Wo hoptr that this Iettor, along, with the altarhed 'I'rarrit• Pin will answer your questions and couccrm; related to ttafric impaeLs due to the develop- ment or the Civic Pinza P.C. Should you have any additional questions or ' comments, please feel free to contact me or our Traffic Consultant. Yours very truly, Ronald W. Hendrickson ' Director, Design/ConSLruction Commerical/Industrial Division RWII:1k ' encls. I � 1I ' 15 ' CIVIC PLAZA TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN 1 Item 1 ' Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and the amount of ' development remaining to be completed. The Civic Plaza Planned Community provides for five separate land uses on the site. upon completion of the entire project, the PC provides for the following identified land use developments: Art museum 30,000 sf Library 14,000 sf Restaurant 8,000 sf Offices 234,706 sf Theater 20,000 sf' ' The only presently developed land use on the site is the Newport Beach Art Museum with 20,000 square feet. Additional land uses for the site which for traffic ' analysis purposes are under construction or in the process of development are the City of Newport Beach Library and 81,812 square feet of offices under the 30% rule. Those portions of the planned community which would remain to be developed upon approval of the Traffic Phasing Plan are the restaurant, 152,894 square feet tof offices, the 650 seat theater, and 10,000 additional square feet for the museum. Item 2 ' Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. ' Based on the appropriate traffic generation rates as identified in the Newport Center Phase II Traffic Study, the total traffic- to be generated by the site is as follows. ' July 1979 i p.m. Peak Hour ' AUl In Out L•'xisting - Occupied ' Art museum - 20,000 sf 840 20 20 Under Development.- 1980 Occupancy , Library - 14,000 sf 588 10 10 ' Offices - 81,812 sf 1,064 49 140 Sub-total 1,652 59 150 Future Development.- 19B1 Occupancy ' Art museum - 10,000 sf 420 10 10 , 8estaurant 400 40 20 Offices - 152,894 sf 1,988 91 260 Theater 975 n/a n/a Sub-total 3,783 141 290 ' Total PC 6,275 220 460 , The amount of traffic to be generated by the completion of all remaining develop- ment in the peak hour is shown on Table 2 of the attached report. The existing portion of the art museum was not included in that analysis as it was an existing , land use and included in existing traffic volume data. Item 3 An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the ' project to determine what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving ' traffic generated by the project. The area to• be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increases the traffic for any leg of the intersection during the peak 2i hour period by 2% or- more. ' Table 3 of the attached report summarizes the analysis for critical intersection identification, with the backup calculation sheets included in Appendix A. Identifying critical intersections was based on the intersections to be examined ' by the procedures of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance for the area in which Civic Plaza is identified, and further examination is included for any intersection for which the project would increase traffic by 24 or more during the 23, hour ' period. The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive. All roadway improvements adjacent to the site ' have been previously improved and completed by the owner. -2- ' I� Item 4 ' Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. ' Existing traffic volumes for all identified critical intersections are shown in Appendix B, Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis. ' Item 5 The developer may include in his proposed Traffic Phasing Plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed improvements consistent with the level of ' traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. As previously identified, the landowner has already made the identified ultimate ' General Plan improvements on the roadways adjacent to the site. Due to this previous contribution by the landowner to completion of the roadway system, no deficiencies on the existing circulation have been identified adjacent to the site. ' Table 5 identifies a summary of circulation system improvements included in future period ICU calculations. All of these improvements are required as a ' part of approved projects or are planned as- government. projects. Of the projects identified, the landowner has committed over $152,000 in the improve- ment of the Ford/MacArthur intersection•. ' Item 6 The developer is also to take into consideration in the preparation of his plan ' characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersec- tions in the least congested direction. ' The proposed land use plan reflects a reduction in traffic generated over the original approved PC for the site. The proposed 14nd use plan reflects a 26.6% reduction in office use of that initially approved with the existing PC being ' amended in April 1979. ; The current PC also includes a mix of land uses which have beneficial traffic generation impacts in the peak hours, such as the proposed theater, library and ' museum. Although of a higher generation rate, a restaurant at this site will potentially serve to divert some trips from the surrounding area in the peak hours. -3 M1 �J It.um 6 (continued) �9 ' Pull access to the site is to be taken from San Clemente and Santa Rosa, with , a restricted right turn only access from San Joaquin Hills Road. San Clemente and Santa Rosa were identified in the Newport Center Traffic Study as roadways with a less degree of utilization than other roadways in the vicinity of the ' site. The internal circulation system of the site is oriented towards encour- aging vehicles to utilize these roadways for ingress/egress from the Civic Plaza site and Newport Center area. The orientation of traffic to Santa Rosa and San Joaquin Hills Road intersection and Santa Barbara/Jamboree intersection ' are intended to encourage traffic to divert to non-critical movements at the San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree intersection. Item 7 ' Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at the time of ' project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. The attached traffic study had identified two intersections that will have ICU's ' that exceed .90 in 1982 after full project completion; these are the intersec- tions of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, .and the intersection of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, with projected ICU's of .9279 and .9496, respectively. , For the Bristol Street North and Campus intersection, with or without approval of the project, the intersection has a projected ICU value of .9279. This is ' due to the project generated traffic being added to a non-critical movement through the intersection. Thus, approval or denial of the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at this intersection. For the Jamboree and MacArthur intersections the project increases the ICU ' analysis value by .0227 in 1982. The traffic consultant has indicated in his report that drivers utilizing this intersection would not perceive this increase, , and in his opinion, the intersection would operate satisfactorily. He has also identified that the construction of the Corona del Mar Freeway would also result in improved conditions at this intersection.' Item 8 ' Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence in order to meet the ' test. . The land use reductions made in the April 1079 PC amendment reflect a perman- ent reduction in land use intensity and traffic generation for this site. ' The roadway improvements' identified as necessary for the approval of other projects are considered as permanent fixed facility improvements although ' additional modifications such as re-stripping, construction to ultimate (where appropriate) and signal operations modifications, may also occur in the future. -4- i Wow P ' ee and Am' iaw 1 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 1 I0V 5, 1979 1 Mt . !ton Ilcndric•kson t:uunuc•rcial/ fnduslr?al bivision 'I'1•r Irvine Coml)any 1 510 Newport 0-11to1- Drive . NLwpor, Ceach, California 9200 hear ilr, IlLndrLckson: 1 'Phis letter sumivarizes our analysis oP the traffic requirements ol: the devel- opment of Civic Plaza with respect 'to circulation improvement phasing. The study 1 was conducted to evaluate the circulation needs in response to the Newport Beach Citv Council Resolution Number 9472 requiring an improvement phasing plan for 1 this project. 1 The study was based upon current planning for Civic Plaza and previous traffic studies related to this project. Previous studies include the following: 1 1. Newport Center Traffic Study, Phaso I1, Crommelin-Pringle and Assoc- iates, Tnc•. 1976. 1 2. Civic Plaza KlR Traffic Analysts, Cronmtelin-Pringle •and Associates, Inc. 1975, 1 Tn addition, current traffic volume data, regional traffic growth data, and committed projeCLs were Provided by Lhc (aI:V, 1 PROJCCT DBSCRTP'1'T0N 1 (:ivic Plaza is locatod within the Newport tenter' aroa at 1'11e soul,hwrst corner of aan .Joaquin hills and Santa L•r W: Drivr. VvIlicular accr:.rs will he providrd lu 1 San .Joaquin Dills Road, tirtnta Cruz Drive, ban t1101MvnlP Drive and Sauta liarbru•a Drive. fhe San Joaquin Itills Road access is limited to rigliL turns only. 1 Proposed development- Lncludes offic and restaurant uses in addition to the exist-int.; art museum and library that is under consrructi.on. A total of 234,706 1 , 1 1111 FAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 square feel of office usv is planned along with an 8,000 square, root restaurant. Thr library will includu 14,000 square feet and a 10,000 square foot expansion of the museum is planned. A theater is also proposed at some future date. Since this would have a nesligible traffic impact during critical hours, IL is not included in the ' analysis. 'rRlP CE\BRATroN ' For this analysis, estimates ware made of PM peak hour volumes and the 2.5 hour peak period. Ceneration rates and estimated volumes for each use and time period are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The existing art museum building was not included as it is included in existing traffic volume data. These generation rates are those utilized in precious studies of this site. TRTP OfSTRIRUTION AND ASS(CN1,11:N'f The 1,eographic distrthuLiun or traffic generated by Lhis dovolopment has been dev- eloped in the referenced previous studies. Figure I illustrates the traffic dis- tribution that has been utilized for this study. This distribution is for out- bound traffic from Lhe site. Inbound traffic would be the same percentage in the ' opposite direction. . By applying the distribution percentages to the trip genera- tion dnta in Tables I and 2, estimates can be mado of traffic volumes from the ' nroject at various locations. The distribution in, Figure I is for outbound traffic which must be reversed for inbound traffic: CRTTTOAL INTRRSIiCTrON TNORN'I'1FTCATTON ' The next step in the analysis was to identil'y those intersections that could be t impacted by the project. As a starting point, the 16 intersections identificated for analysis under the Traffic Phasing Ordinance for this area were examined. For ' this examination, the "17. 'Traffic Voltune Analysis" forms from the Traffic Phasing Ordinance were utili::od. Appondix A cottLa(ns the data for the individual inter- sections and the rosults nry simmarized (n Table 3. The basis for companrisun in- ' cludud existing traffic, rogiunal gruwlh Lraffic and approved project traffic. The criteria established b the City Council d 'i y i y ncil indicates that any intersection where the project Lraffic during Lit(- 2.5 hour peak exceeds two percent of the existing , plus regional growth plus approved project traffic must be analyzed in detail. 1 -3 1 Table 1 1 2.5 HOUR TRIP GENERATION Civic Plaza 1 T.ANT0 USE RATE VOLUME TN OUT TN OUT ' Office (234,706 SR) L.2 3.4 280 800 Restaurant ( 8,000 SI�) I1.3 7.7 90 60 1 Library (14,000 SR) 1 .0 1.0 10 10 Museum (10,000 SC) 1.0 1.0• 10 10 Totals 300 820 1 1 Table 2 PM PEAK 1101111 TRIP GRNKRA'f.',LON 1 Civic Plaza LAND USE RATE VOLUME 1 TN OUT TN OUT Office (234,706 SF) 0.6 1.7 140 400. ' 1 Restaurant (8,000 SF) .5.0 3.0 40 20 Library (14,000 SF) 1 .0 1 .0 10 10 1 Muscum (10,000 SP) 1 .0 1 .0 10 10 TOLAIs 160 420 1 1 1 1 1 1 .F FIGURE I TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION !O % ' /O. N..BRfs7•p� . TOE 0 2 O% S d� J 25'/. 5y, 25 % , 20 0 o SAMT� 1&4 3s'1� SANJCAO�ufMNICLSRp w Y 25% 25 6 ' QPG�F�c COAST HIGHWAY ' /0 z ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES 1 -4- 1 23 i 1 Table 3 CRTTICAI, INI9?RSRCTTON TDRNI'TPTCATION ' Civic Plaza ' LOCA'I'TON 2.5 IIOCTR PERC1:NTACI:S 1983 NB LBI B WB ' Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. - - 4.6 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 3.5 Coast Highway & Dover Dr. - - 2.6 3.6 ' Coast Ilighway & Bayside Dr. - - 1.9 4.8 Coast Ilighway & .Jamboree Rd. - 6.2 2.1 - ' Coast Ilighway & Newport Center Dr. - 1.4 - 0.7 Coast Highway & Mac Arthur Blvd. 1.6 1.3 1.1 ' Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. - - 2�4 1.5 Jamboree Rd'. & Santa Barbara Dr. . 4.7 1.4 6.8 Jamboree Rd. & San .Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.6 3.0 - 13.4 ' Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 5.4 3.8 - - Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 4.7 1.4 4.1 - .Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N. 4.4 1..2 - - Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd. 2.0 1.2 2.6 1.1 ' Mac Arthur Blvd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 .3 2.6 9�1 •1.3 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 5.5 2.1 1 1 Review or Tamv 3 indicates Chat 14 ill' till- Ib ittlersveLLons exceed Lhc umxiuuuu ' Lwo percent on at least one approach and must be considered critical. ANAVIS IS ,file 14 intersections idenliried in the previous section were further examined to ' determine potential LmpacLs. Utilizing "Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis" forms from the Traffic Phasing; Ordinance procedure, ICU values were determined ' and include regional growth and approved projects volumes. The ICU's also include improvements requirt•d by previously approved projvets. •t•hese improvements are ' discussed in the next. section. The individual analysis sheets arc contained in Appendix B and summarized in 'fable 4. Review of Table 4 indicates that two inter- sections are projected to exceed 0.90: Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, and ' Jamboree Road and Plac Arthur Boulevard. All other intersections are below the 0.90 level. ' Since City Council ResoluLion Number 9422 allows 30 percent of developmeliL WLthoUL ' improvement phasing, the '14 critical intersections were analyzed with existing plus 30 percent of the remaining developments These data are included in Appendix C and summarized in Table 4. The ICU's for the two intersections of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, and Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard still exceed the 0.90 level under Lhese condiLions. ' As indicated in the orevious i%nVd9rapbs, Lwo intersections have ICU's that exceed 0.90 whether they are :utalyzed with 30 percent or thv project development or with ' full development. it should also be noted Lout both of thesu intersections have ICU values greater titan 0.90 without development of Civic Plaza. 'These two inter- sections paragraphs. • •d 'n rile following 1 1 sections are discussed g Bristol Street NoYllt and Caumu's Drive , Review of labll- 4 and till. rvlaLcti Shoals in Appeudites B and C indicates ' that Litt, ptujecl would It.lvr un impart uptat (Ill. Il:lt values ;it this intersecting. Since project voluuu•s .Iry added ro non-cjilical IIIVveaµglL•y, the ICU values art- pro for both eaHos With antl without, the projel-t. , .Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard 'file I CU vatuos at this intr•rSection increase 0.0069 in 1981 and 0.0227 in ' 1982 as a resnlL of Lhc• project. 'I best• incrrasys Would trot. be pvre vptible ' to drivers utilizing; Lilo intersection. In addition, with observed driver 1 -6- Table 4 ' ICU SUMMARY Civic 9'la•r,a IN'rE,1'SE(:'Vf0N EXISTING EXISTING + EXISTING + EXISTING + ' REGIONAL + REGIONAL + REGIONAL + COMMITTED COMMITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT 1981 1981 1982 Bristol St. N, & Campus'Dr, 0.9898 0.9256 0.9256 0.9279 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0.72 0.6467 0.6498 0.6613 ' Coast Highway & Dover Dr. 0.99 0.6556 0,6623 0.6788 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr, 0.89 0.8051 0.8118 0.8282 Coast• Ilighwav & Jamboree Rd, 0.83 0.7644 0,7644 0.7650 ' Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. 0.68 0,7425 0,7466 0.7560 Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.53 0.6171 0.6233 0.6373 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin ,llills Rd. 0.64 0,6473 0,6487 0.6522 Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 0.83 0.7449 0,7517 0.7739 ' Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.54 0,7944 0.8032 0.8247 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St, N. 0.72 0,8219 0,8298 0.8489 )amborce Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd, 0.85 0.9269 0.9338 0.9496 Mee Arthur Blvd, & San Joaquin lulls Rd. 0.72 0.7945 0,8070 0.8368 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd, 1.01 0,8653 0,8753 0,8997 ' (1) No Project Related improvements are Considered in Calculations. 1 1 cl'nrncterisLieS in the neca, the inLersection would operate saLisracCorily. Observatiuns havo indicated Chat, as intersections near capacity, the capacity ' is increased and yellow or lost time decreased. Construction of the Corona Del Mar Freeway and San Joaquin corridor would also result in improved condiLions. , CIRCULATION IMPaDVEW'.NT NEEDS ' The ICU analyses for the project included some circulation system improvements. All of those improvements me cul•runtly required as part of approved projecLs or planned as goVerna1e17Lal prolveLB. The Improvements are susuuarized in Table 5 and ' illustrated in Figures 2 through 13. Table 5 ' SUMMIY OF RECMENDED SYSTEM IMPROVEHiNTS Civic Plata INTERSECTION SYSI'11M IMPROVEMENTS Bristol Street North/ Add southbound through lane. Re._ ' Campus Drive quired by previously approved pro ject. See Figure 2. Bristol Street/Campus Drive Add southbound through lane. See Figure 3. Required by previously ' approved project. Coast IligIlway/Dover Drive Add southbound Left turn lane. ' Add southbound rigilL turn lane. Add castbofmd left turn lane. ' Add eastbound optional through or right' turn lane. Add west- bound right turn 1anc. , CiLy/CalTrans ProjceL. Stu Figure 4. ' ~ Coast highway/Bayside Drive Add eastbound through lane. ' Add westbound op4ional through or right turn lane. , -B- ' CalTrans Project. See Figure 5. ' Coast llighway/JamborLL Road Add westbound through and west- bound, left turn lanes. Required by previously approved project. See Figure 6. ' Jamboree Ruad/San La Barbara Drive Add northbound through lane. ' Add southbound left turn lane. Add westbound lane. Required by ' previously approved project. See Figure 7. ' Jamboree Ruad/San.Tunquin Add northbuund through lane and Hills Road convert right turn lane to opt- ional through or right. Convert westbound left turn lane to ' optional through plus left. Required by previously approved project. ' See Figure 8. ' Jamboree Road/Eastbluff Drive- Convert northbound and south- Ford Road bound right turn lanes to optional through plus right. Add eastbound through lane, iorvcrt wesr5out:J tiro A 1vn• Io turn ]nn.•. IQ- quin•1I by prv•vioutily approved ' pro jecr. See Figure 9. ' Bristol StrecL/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane to northbound left turn lane. ' Required by previously approved project. ' See Figure 10. i I -9- ' Bristol Street North/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane $ ' to northbound left turn lane. Required by previously approved ' project. Sec Figure 11. ' Jamboree Rudd/Mac Arthur. Boulevard Add northbound right turn lane. ' Convert eastbound right turn lane to optional through or tight. Required by previously , approved projt•cL. See Figure 12. , Mac Arthur Boulevard/Ford Road Add northbound left and right turn lanes, southbound left turn ' lane and eastbound left turn lane. City of Newport Beach project to ' be constructed 1979-80. See Figure 13. SUMMARY ' The potential impact of the proposed Civic plaza site has been analyzed at 30 percent of development and at Gull development. in 1982. Both analyses have indicated that two intersections would have ICU's greater: than 0.90. For one itltersec tion, the analysis indicates that with the project and. improvements from approved projects, the ICU would be less than the existinft !CIT. it would als., to equ.,1 to thy_ 1961 ani 1922 ICU without the project,, Coavcrsely, o, tht' ..tl1," ,t,_. i .,L ;. n; u.� , ILA l, si: indicates that the 148? 1CU would be work, ihau tnc -%tat iffy; Wt 1; 1,t.Nvvrr, t,W ,-,Li- mated 1982 ICII without the project. is 0111v :-111%11tdy less (0.0'.I27) tha:1 with C11e ' project and is still over 0.90. An optional improvemunt which would reduce the [CU value at Jamburea, and Mac Arthur to less thsri 0.90 was also examined. 5inco this improvement would not bo required For ultimate conditions, it uD uld be an inLerim ' solution. it -10- , We+ trusL Lhat this analysis will be of assistance to you and the City oC Nowpurt ' Bunch. If you have any questions or require additional information, please con- tact us. Respectfully submitted, ' Wf:STON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES Weston S. Pringle, P.13. I,SP:RS:cd 05452 1 1 . 1 1 ADD THROUGH LANE _ w > 1 NOT TO SCALE 1 BRISTOL J { \ STREET NORTHa. 1 cn l , 1 1 RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURA'TIUN Al' INTERSECTION OF 1 BRISTOL ;'TREE'F NORTH / CAMPUS DRIVE . 1 1 2 1 WESTON ARINGIE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 1 1 w I � H A BRISTOL STREET NORTH Tr N E' ADD THROUGH LAN I I N NOT TO SCALE } } } ` I BRISTOL STREET 1 ADD THROUGH T,ANl: ' RECOAMWDED CONFIGURATION AT 'INTERSECTION OF CAMPUS DRIVIi-IRVINE AVENUE/BRISTOL ST. 1 ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 3 1 � W ADD LEFT TURN > LANE I o 1 ADD RIGHT TURN I ADD RIGHT TURN 1 LANE I I LANE COAST 1 t I HIGHWAY 1 ADD LEFT TURN I t 1 LANE ADD THROUGH LANE I I W 1 > • 1 NOT TO SCALE 1 RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION 1 AT INTERSECTION OF COAST HIGHWAY / DOVER DRIVE 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 4 1 1 ' ADD THROUGH LANE WITH BRIDGE ' WIDENING ADD ,THROUGH LANE COAST - I HIGHWAY v ADD THROUGH LANE \ O� �G ' NOT TO SCALE RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURA-1ON 1 - AT ^INTERSECTIOR OF COAST HIGHWAY / BAYSIDE DRIVE WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 5 1 a 1 ' I I J i i ADD THROU011 IANE' I I ADD T1IROUGFI LAMS I I COAST mc. WAY lIl ti I ADD LEFT TURN LANE I I 1 I I I I I 'I � I . I RECOMMENDED (:ONRT(:IIRA•i'fON AT (NTER5PcTION o ' COAST IITGIVAY/JAMOR)"E ROAD , WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 6 ' ADD LEFT TURN ' LANE ADD RIGHT TURN LANE ' r ' fAIDD ANTA BARBARA DRIVE Q I t t THROUGH LANE w � w I . o: NOT TO SCALE m ' RECOMMENDED LANE .CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION OF ' JAMBOREE ROAD / S.ANTA BARBARA DRIVE 1 ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 7 it i � .SO 5� 1 o I 1 � CONVERT T,1iF'f TURN LANs w TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND LEFT TURN LANE � SAN JOAQLIIN HILLS ROAD 1 r I � II CONVERT RIGHT TURN LANE 1 TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND RIGHT I RN LANE 1 ADD THROUGH LANE 1 RECOMMENDED CONFICURA'PTON AT TN'I'IiRSECTION OF 1 JAMIR)REE ROAD/SAN JOAQUIN IICLT,B ROAD 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 8 1 � CONVERT R CGHT TURN LANE-- ' TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND I I 4 RIGHT TURN LANK V 1 I CONVERT THROUGH LANE CO LEFT TURN LANE ' EASTBLUFF DRIVE I I r5 �` FORD ROAD ADD THROUGII TAN2 1 I I I CONVERT RIGHT TURN LANE' TO OPTIONAL T11ROUGH 1 w I I AND RTGIIT TURN LANE o 1 NOT TO SCALK' 1 . 1 RECOMMENDED CONPYCURATION Al' INTERSECTTON OF JAM150'RHE' ROAD/1;ASTMAIFI DRIVIS-FORD ROAD 1 i WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 9 it . ' 36 II II s i l l I I BRISTOL STREET NORTH CONVERT 'THROUGH ' N a I I I LANE TO LEFT TURN x 1 LANE ' w NOT TO SCALE � I I I I I I BRISTOL STREET ' .J 1 CONVERT THROUGH LANE TO LEFT ' � . I TURN LANE I RECOM ENDED CONFIGUMATION AT INTERSECTION OF ' JAMBORIEE ROAD AM) BRISTOL STREET WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES • FIGURE 10 ' y I I •I I ' I I I ARISTOL S'IRE]iT NORTH CONVERT TIIROUGH LANE TO LEFT TURN LAMS w NOT TO SCALE I ' I � I BRISTOL STREET 1 ' RECOMMENDED CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD AND BRISTOL 'STRLET NORTH WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE II 1 v � NOT TO SCAL � 1 i ADD RIGHT i TURN LANE i O \ 1 . 1 RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION i AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD /MAC ARTHUR BOULEVARD i i i WE5TON PRINGIE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 12 • 1 r Q ADD LEFT TURN ' LANE-----___ m NOT TO SCALE FORD ROAD 1 k• TT _ --ADD RIGHT CADD LEFT TURN LANE ' TURN LANE----a U --�� Q ' NOTE: ALL IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN CITY PROJECT ' RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION AT_ .INTERSECTION . OF ' MAC ARTHUR_ BOULEVARD/FORD ROAD WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 13 1 • 1 J APP1sNDIX A 1 2.5 ❑OUR INTERSECTION ANALYSRS 1 Zd. Traffic Volume Anaiysis ; I1terSeCtiun BriSLOI SLL( !!: lr/S,•wapu;;_.UXixc - ll-vinr Av.', (ExisLing Traffic Volumes based on Averai.lw Winter'/Spring ::4781 AGI :❑ I Peal lour I Apptuvvd I ulrl 1ptl i 0", ..r14• •Y• , •kmr VI'q nrlu. I I'rU rrl.h r,d . . IenU R"al 'l•. o,l I. ..d IuIOP'' or UblL I PPdI - IJe I• � iul Wnv ' IJ 11100 . I sowluo�le - 3705 /3o / �' i y003 80 _ --.... 4790 Project Traffic is estimated Lo be letis Lhdn .l': of Projected Peak 2', Hour Traffic Volume • L © Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than Yz of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 ' 1 ' 1 . 1 . I . 1 !'1"Jvr 1 - . 'LX iraffic Volume Analysis ' intersection 11ristol Srr1.1't/Caugyrn__nrivy Crvinv Avv. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Averayr. Winter/Spring 1: 18) p::' f.r .r r i Peal •InJr I .AI.1`mu I ' •'r•[rJ i �, ar 'nllr• h f ;nl ' •u. •.• . ' •rl VP04 r'a I't bi14(i dl •4r•, r'1 Il . . '.•1• . IJ@P• 'fuMll I r'I'.I r. Jyll' • LOIN'• it rIMIC•• IL'.N( • 1606 W)7 Sy .. %�a ?Oa 7(0 1.3y 3s% Project Iral'fic il, estimated Wr be than l'• of Pr•o,lri.te' ' Peak 212 hour Traffic Volume xx © Proj[.ct Traffic is estimated to be greater than X•., of Prujec-,tA ' Peak 21: HOUr Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utiliza*iun ( I .CIU. ) Analysis is required. 1 ', l 115 ' Zx• Traffic Volume Analysis ' ,ntrr' rCl lull Cone Ilil'.Ilw,lV/nl+vl I nl ivl' . (tni`.tln+i ll'J1111; UllilJmes basod oil Avel"I1(' I� llt( 'f 5111'11ih ' .. ipol 1 •0..Of .. :.-AI i'I .HJ .1i our I � •••II , ., n I•rq• I Prulr I•, ••nl+ Pvul b . .. . li.' It•n1 n.w lol dolt r,l Lour .,. ua 242 a yy J y,rA Ian I 30 2V3 0 S-? :,.I n:.:,I'G 5279 37 (��0 ✓� a/� 3 ' Project Traffic itt estimated to be less than 1'11" of ProJocted Peak 21, Hour-Traffic Volume z ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be Treater twit X of Pro7ec.ej Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilizil. 01) (I .C,U. ) Analysis is required. 1 Zl , ratfic Vohilliv Ana Iy•♦is , ;nLtt r'.aC Li UII f1rdSC lliiLLwnyflSnyKidr Url�'v , (Efi',trnq iralfic. vo mies'baeed nu Aver tit lWintvr /Splint' 1.118 ) •r Ira. : ♦OJr Y' A19:nwJ ♦i •..Ip•1 I rl ♦r. ,,•, .� .w;rv•n,. 1 Pr p•i It �..µ•„ urJr 1, IL .. a• ;ur• anwl1. Peal ^i e� S♦ I�Ofly Vu1Jn'o �.. .nl nm i Wlmir i 1t1 L•'•'114�•.j I ! ta.u;••�,.�a 1411 1 r , JSi: 4847 Jy /�J�l 96600 ♦ .. r 1 • I •I ♦ III 3860 Project 'traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Pruiected ' Peak 21, flour Traffic Volume. 2 © PrujOCL lraff lC is t+,timated Lo be yratlter than if', of Pt'-.0 tvLI Peak 2': Iluur fratfit. Volumen, Intersoction Capec.it.y Ulfrfnll ,Lln ' Analy',1•, r'. requlr'od. ' t 1 Ll— 1-,Iffic Volume Analvtii', 1 •ntrl ',tctit'll Coal[ Iliv,lnmly/.I:u11101of. R,aJ tiny tratflL Volumles"bdsedon Avera.lo Wlrlter SI)rluy 1 'Ir,ur Al.l-,.Vrl P•11 ri1 i ZI ip J " Rn, u•.I I Pro le,t'. 11 n4 Hour ;,..at /� .r •a• , •nrrul N-,4 rnm roI In., i lI,I ume ,.. 1 rul•,n, I Volwur . r JD ion q a/ lo.a To 1 130 i /9a 5 5'S�o 90 9lo a i ,,.: . "1 4264 IQ 1 sta: ,5y 4192 1El Prulect IraltiC 11, estimated Lo bo loti , than I" ul I'rojvtled Peak 2', hour Traffic Volume z 1 ® Project Trdfiic is lrstimated to be ylt'ater thdn ,t', of Prujcett'd Peak 2', Hour Traffic Volumen. Inter'•ection Capacity llt.ilita! iun (1 .C.u. ) Analysis is required. 1 . 1 • 1 • 1 , 1 1 f �Q , t•1 Traffic VoItpie Analy:.is ' ntl•1'•rrl:t l of Con.sL Il i;;htaHy,/N.•1:p.u'l Ci-pl!:J' Pr.Ivo , l,tin,I Tratfic Vrluuies based on Averjuta Winter/Stlrirl.l 1'1/y! ., , ilUur AP,n.n•1 Irn PIY•dv l♦ ml., •IP J• Vent .... .1•In r +1mlu °r rl , 'ttlur volume • lo-1 Wup . n,•� _, r.a nin• Hrimnr ' 33 0 U/ '314, • z ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than /•, of ProTacter ' Peak 2:,, Hour Traffic Volumv ❑ Project Traffic r5 estimated to be 6raater Than U., of PrOJOCLOd ' Potik P•, hour rraflic Volum+n• lntrw,wc.tion Capacit.v Iftili:ali.,n II .C.U. ) fulalytil r i5 rlxluurd. � 1I � 1 ' , ,Y traffic Volume Analysis ' ,II LC•I'SeGtjl;ll ,Coast: Ili-;,'��w.,lyJrl_i5• c�S•cjitli.. jai+SilCYilld Li .',Liny 1 "di'fi'c volwne.s based on -1lverage t1inter/Spring 1918) -mur i AI•prl v..n A: of , .;;.•,•,I ' 6„u.d f'i ulr,1., �..J i. �hv,i ' I'rn, i A. , ., ..n,. ,."Oh I'v.,l flown�lumr i Gri unp.. i n••„ nW a690 sy yy �o 3 �$ i /68 1130 l09 yy l s —'I2o4 _ -. ' o Project Traffic is estimated to be Kass than /1',, of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Molds ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1 of Projucted Peak 21: Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ( I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 ' 1 a lraffir. Volume Analal.is .IIiC I'%,'Lt loli Coast ME.hwaL/Na 1*vurrite ,lvynui. (E..i •tiny trut'f1C Vol•mies based oU Average Winter/Sprin.i 1.1:8 : 'rA, ear A19amid ' Lnm n•d I al lh. m.1• IIMI�.nnn , r.a It.. 1M1 • r r lnwln Vvnk . Jnnr u •aqv 4ollpl' • •w. .pl qn i Vllllgl. 1 , ' 43o f la 1 0/0 3 rdo (9( o7%% .4nt 6?0 { 9(o assyEl Project traffic is estimated to be less than 1 of Projected t Peak 21, liour• Traffic Volume' • z ® Project traffic is estimated to be yrrater than T'• of Pr,)jdctei ' Peak 2'. i1our Traff Ir, Volumes. IrrterSdCtlpn Capacity UI i I1;,lt ion ( I .C.U. ) Anolyl, 11, Iti requir•nd. 1 rr•affic Volume Analysis ' Intel"+ecLiurl ;Iamburt.o I:nod/:;null BaI•h;lrn Ilriy\' (EAi ,Lirig Irllffic. Volumes based on Averayr Winter!Sllrino 19181 ' .. r i'.•u 'lour I pl9rnrvrA PIP, l ;'r•p•,IOIM1ldJ i a: nl Ih•n r.: „ ;; ,'I ,II L✓9r u.l' Pt I. .O r I'pol . 'Ibul •nl ,,vv, ' nrll, I I'rtll Iluul I \• lump 4a lump, \✓rums ' 1895 y l; �1_'5/�/ i .20e/9 •r ,.,'I. - 2659 .� _ I / 7 / i a�/OoZ I �P a 7 y �. y70 1?99 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1'-• of Projected Peak 1 21, Hour Traffic Volume. z ® Project Traffic is estimated' to be greater than X:; of froJected ' Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volumtn. Intersection 1.aracit 1 .Y Utilization (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 I �Z 1 Traffic Volume Analysis 1 :IiLer,,ecLi( n Jamborev Ry,tVSm JOASII!ill. LLUIS.Iwad 1 !Eb7°.tiny Traffic Vuluutes hased on Avera,li- Winter!Sprim; !,I:8.) 1 r •. , inf• , , 't1.tlP •l •AVpI.•uJ , .,. fro t •.f .p•• Now,P •.n4• n•Nt• P"A l 01.1.11 .,41mLL• VvIWN' , .,:+ f J096, ao aG col at-ief o 'Ya 17, Project Traffic is estimated to be leas than I'. of Projected 1 Peak 214 dour Traffic Volume' . Z ® Project Iratfic is estimated to be greater than d". of Prnlected Peak 21, hour Traffic Volumen. InterSCCLi On CapaCity lltllizafiOn 1 (I .C.O. ) Analysis is required. . 1 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 ' 1 Z �Y Traffic Volume Analysis t interseCtior Jamboreq I:gidfl; 5t;b1!ltl_Drivr,.r-Ford ;:oad (L'r.l ,tlry lrnfflc Volumes based on Aver,!ge Winter/Spring irm unir i A,•rr':v...1 ! " LPI II:: l A• It 7r''11e ', •.•" . .. ' . J In' 'f. 1 !'l l'il' ( . 'd4 i IIPy: I,dl : P • . . •a Hell. I I•ra4 . . unm . •lams• ' lelump L,• () ) y AJ t OQ J �/ ye) :•,. ,.: 981 00 ' Project Traffic i,, estimated to be less than 1'i of. Projecl.ed Peak 21; Hour Traffic: Vol Ull!C • z ' ® Project -Traffic is estimated to be greater than i4 of Projected Peak 2': Ilour Trgftic Volumcn. 1ntCrsecti0❑ Capdc;ity Utili'afion (i .C.U. i Analysis is required. 1 1 1 1 1 J I z ',( traffic Volume Analysis ;nLei WILLIon fir islol SLrreL/_Ipnlllnroe. Rgad ' (C/,i:ticesq froffic VolVolu based on Avery c t�inter!Spring 1'�731 ,r,,, Ipar Ilnpr R,op..1l ' rrulr\lCit of '1 \. .•1 ...n•.t 1 . .. npghiul Iv.1) . . InI nua Irn4 , una , \ ••I/wll. {'l`.11 111'lll' \•�IlMlll• � PUIUmv .. • Y r 4046 i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1:, of PI-L)JUCted ' Peak 21, Hour -Traffic Volume 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than Xi of Projected ' Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I .C.U\ ) Analysis is required. I d` Traffic Vniuuu• Ana lIt',iti wc f.I un Ill- o f;I rct,I Nulth/.I,unbo rrL• Hold (Lnv,tiny, froffic VuIuW,, based on- Avervyr wiIItaris,p •inq 1,1/8; l•1 Ifl Ivaf '1011,' I Al'j 41 'IulPr ll'•J I PI I'nd,1p.l aq: R•nU , •val •i a. . 'a uwin VOnI : IIOW ' r•l mup' I Vr.I UiI1Q Luvnv . Y•'I nn, 1 V'ol on.. , , r 2811 � 1 i o�J �U J/ 6 1167 ' Project traffic is estimated to be less, than 1'„ of Protected Peak 2': ilour• -Traffic Volunii' z ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than ,Y% of Projec,ed ' Peak 2', HOUr Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ( I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 a Zj{ T-affic Volume AndlyNis ' ;11.prlr•ILioil fandlgr�•g• It yl[�ta4 ILyIn,11.1S1Y.d.(I) ' 'tUl,timf Traffic Vulumies based on Average Linter/Spring) hUS.) •l u• 1••.I, •luul 1 AI'I"rw l 7 :L •r.Ud 171- .•: p I4'qu • Prnp>1`. �rAl • Ilonl I•ral a..• .. . . I•.•• •a•wll. I'r.11 mup ,•IUMp Yu1nnN` • an•• . .I rw i lnign. 1 1 I latt t �; yid 4/0 7 o ,7o ....•I.:• •,.� r814 (� t //o 3a3 0 { (.c S ..�8 I A % 2e23 .._ a S�� .7s'of" i 70 ?p -z 90 ' El Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 10 of Projected ' Peak 2t, Hour Traffic Volume• ZZ� [� Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than ,. of Projected Peak 21: Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' ( I .C.U. ) Andlysl•, IS required. (1) Mac Artbur Boulevard is assumed north and south ' 1 rl T Traffic Volume Analysis Intel,!,oction _Mac Al_tlru r- Iilnllpyal Iftir•la .!etti9tlin Hills Road (C�l rting ira mes ffic. Vnluhased on Ave i-ago Winter/Spring 19i81 •a IWnI I Algn nvr,l ' ih e,Pa led . •quo I'i ulrD. 'gym Ilnm '.IV Ira. nwn•r 1'ra4 :. nluu r. iunu• lr•hnOr ..••:••• ' /a /6 0 0 i a o l 3 `�o 1 ti�.l.;•c.�: 484 ' :51 30h a• �o 3140 ' o2OR �33 t/� 1 O G 7 � i ' J4517y _ .31 ao /.3 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1'. of Pro,lected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volume• z t ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than /1% of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1/( IraIflc Vuluniv Ana IVti is ' ,nt01;41(•tiIpI Mav Arthur Ruuli•vat'd/Pori) Ituad (Lii, turfba Tr'r,ffic Volumes seLi on Average t wteri%rin, I 78) ' . r •t 'uq rrau �10111'• •I >1i'prr w•Iiup•r lyd UI 1'r ',+• ' r q Aln 'l'rlrnr • I 1'1'n!ry(•• iY.d IIPut IYM '.ur •d owlb I'nn! du r wlamr Yorynlr• u•.un,.• od nn Yi•I nu 1 r :3657 i8 a ,rrti ao i yr86 v6vo 93 Y a•� % 71107 a 1, /033 6?0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 11, of Projected , Peak 21, Hour -Traffic Volume . Z ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than of Pro,wcted Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I .( .I+. ) Analysis is required. 1 I� 1 y n APPENDIX 8 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSES ' Existing + Regional + CommiLLed + Project (1982) 1 1 " 1 1 1 1 1 1 • )n;,•, '• tum kiiS�o�,�� /_ l �._t.�.!^o.n�vS .n (Existin;l fra( I Vnl ,;nes fiasecron ll!vverage Winter7Spring 19/F) /-/6 n•+I Sr IhG �•,•,., +., `I'•1 IXItT RIOIOREO COM1111C0 PI,gIICnO PRQIECI Paanrl ' leneY Cal, „•'.• ' I• a I•u :/L• OR04111 PAM CI V/( Retla Volume M Rj Uv '—_••_• ' '' •Su( ' 9.100 VOL. Vol. Nhi Uq�JPal t Vol. NL /) 1A 0o N _—'1t _� v6JG —l1� 0�^76 D•o76 NT oo — -- i n/ .t8� /a- q7 �. as/a a•aaia NR ---- r— SL S1 Z)j2co 3(4 300 • oS4/ .315/* 04 L?23G t y SR ) o _y r A79 §i�,iiiTee o.4094Ell TER A /6ar� F.+7) Sc�l 0.5 ZO� t L.. _ - WT t/ f�ab 1 c� .oJf� 11 ! goo zq WR rnLNI,NL ;etv 0,iacU C1151144 !M'<:ECTION CAPAC11( UNI11,4104 .989 Ct R'iI.6 FCS COHIM= PUf, RILIOVn' Lm)NIN N/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENIS I.C.0 O.9279 F fl S`(N•i PI J; :OMiETT(D Pie: a"41 u4M—±d-l1N(11 el,P, PROJECT I.C.11. Projected Plot. prnporl l.n(ffic 1 .C.U. will la than or equal t to 0.90 ® Projected ! lu', !,rlor- L tt,11fic I ..C.U. 1�i,11 l•o ,beater than l -90 ' i!rojectmf pfu . tli11f- I I I'd IIi(• I J .U, wihh •, •h`nr• Improvelilrul•, will be Ic•. r, q.I.l I 10 0.00 • , riot i.•• .. ,• I• ^ un;., nVV11IV,ll t I. P'dd Sou4H bouvld optiurla( 4hraLl. h or Yi9k+ IQne .(o) 1 1 I L Ir fl <'c ,tin,1=�5 (.Wnte7� �yblN� I VC (Existing iTa; °•+- Volumes Base on verage Winte 7Spring 1.97 11151 ING wTru'�.1 �e:51 EXIST REGIONAL COFTII ITED PROJECTED PROJECT VIC Rat ml,o�'nt Lane; Cap Lar.r L P ' "• HR VIC GROWTH PROJLCT VIC Ratio Voluar VIC Rattn Y„t ' Patto VOL. VOL. w/o Project I 1 NL _ _ _. I_ p NR - - O•/68/ o./EB/ SL _ 1 --- -�-I,r�� 2 e. QS7Z a..QS7Z rSR T 1�y800ilLo� ' J� 67 333 " Y 0.3333 - * - - E !?/QB/ a,/a6/ 1 o : 1. . :_c2 y _ 6 R� I '� Rf O.Z/7 �'� o,z WR — - vtt L0Y.41PE D•/y DU dl Q,/OOU � LXlST1 NG :nTE@SECTION CAPACITY U1:L1ln1 ION 2 [x:;iEhG :W; COFMITTED THIS RlGIO:NL Gf•.ONTN H/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS LC.Ua. /Q EK,SIING PLUS C"ITTCO PI 61GIOaAI-GnOH11I mu% PROJECT I.C.U. •6H/.j ' Projected idw 0110t•'C t t.r;,tfic I .C.U. wi I I be les% than or equ<, I Lo 0.90 ' Projected plu•. ;,ruj1:CL tXdffic I .C.U,''will be greawr than 0,90 ' © Projected lilt", ,rn,lr:r:L Iruf I is I C.11. wi,l.h •,ytit"115 iNlprovonH:nts. YY111 be lv<<, n;,,„ W 1'(lur.l to 0.90 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' ( rud I1,1 a.r ,ryruu:nt ' 1. Add sou+ bouid +hrougk laIig• l)) fit Wit ' IiiN i.Al'ACI I Ul 11,11W IE1l7 ArML Ill. ' ifl{(1r°. '•:T1h11 Cll� �T I; r. (Existing tra, f'ic Voluules Based bn Average Winter Spring 197$� (yZ r 11 ST ING l'4rn 7Sr , —LITIM I U.15T REGIONAL COMITILD MaJECILD PROJECT PRQII CT W..wknt lanes Cop ran, , •p 1 :� IIR Yll GROWTH PROJECT Y/L Ratio VOIOme V11 Nano Vnl Ratio VOL. VOL. Vw/ool Project ' I 1 Yol. xl NT I N R 1 O SL oZ 00 (3)yBou .( Sl r I fI>Tbo�_ . I ra.Oy911 U•ay9� SR (i� Ihou � e! ovtl O ' EL �tr} lLp ;o3Y/'t v3% J ET (3� 'l6o�i � (� 1 0.3oZ3 rW 0 3/23 _ER WT (3) S/£oaa _Ij (�_ ��� 11.3510 I08 WR 0) fFmp 6 — 9. fa zmty YtILDWr•E u_ • 10 O./coo � a•/O0u< ' Lf IiT INu :ST:-CECTION CAPACIff L112 Ir A110N Elli:i4L %.ii C"l TIED PLUS RU,10AL GROWTH WIPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS E!!STINC PLOE r"ITTED Pi US A161 IAI GROWTH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. Dlo mei Projected I,luc 11ei}mCt. traffic I .C.U. will bo less than or e11ua1 ' to 0.90 Projected plus uru.l'•l I lI'affic J ..C.U. 14111 be ill't?dter than 0.90 © Projected plu, prom,(,) 11',111AC^i .C-11. wllll ' y •1('111" iWillrovenu'nt" ' will be 1 vs I h."i nl ' llu,l l Lo 0.90 , �. .f t'1p1 u,n rJ , . ••,. . lf�nl �•Vlqurnl : •� I Add sou4hbound lr-- 11 - -urvl larle . (0) 2• Add soLA-hbound 1-;9h� 4(Arw lane. (0) ' 3. Add easy bound le4 +fAyvl IGyIQ• (o) 4. Add eas+ bound 4roup lane. (o) 13. Add Cues,+ bournld r-ig h+ 4aI-pi lane. (o) ' ;I ••,!•! ' I ;ON CAPACITY UlILILAIION ANALYSIS ` l y t t., t 1(Al •e i�t 'v1�Q_rL__�. . y S' p 9�C' (Existing Ira. + :. Volumes Ease o ver• b WTr er S rin 191 E AISTING f4"011 I rAi57 I.AIST REGIONALCOIMITTED PROJfCUD PROJECT PROJICT Mo.trpot �y•,• .p I PI' Pd ! V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/L 6ai.1a ' Lanes Cep — Yul. I Ratio VOL. VOL. M/a Prglrct Vol. NiNL �1 --- -�-°2 — o.0/B ao/B8 NR - _ -- I SL SR _ . _I 4 •-._-- E ra.93 ' ET (.5Dve`00 �pRil. ; O Z 5- 3yzf E R 1 O WL 1) (600 WL 3)y600 ; 313 D•3879 If7g !oy WR 2 . ' VELLNII°E --_ ' IV 0./(Jb0 Et IGTIhL 'hTE°=ECTION CAPACIff bf!L 1;4'LJN ' Et;',T,hb ILL'S C"17TCD Plut RIIi10AI GROWTH W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMINTS I.C.0 .90777 U:SIING PLJS :OMITTED Plt'N 111+ :W141 +U0.1WI11 PI 0% PROJECT IX to. 1 Projected ;I'I 1,r1J1"cl trnlfic 1 .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 Projected I-Iw, I:' l ;^I:t II•ilItic 1 .•C.U. o-rill Iv; greater than 0.90 ® Projected 111u'. '.n , ' Ir,Illic I .C.t', rr: t'h Irnlr ""I11 "Va;nrnl ,..-ill be ie•. m , i1 .' i[7 0.90 ;.r• r rlhl I'�'� :'I •' 1'II; I '�V�'IIII:111 1. Add ens4bourtd +hrougdi lane. (o) ' 2• Add west bound +PlroLl-3h lane. (o) 1 .1 . 1••„ l,1•. , .."A: 1 'Y U' 1! 1!11' ;r+t c t9 S , (fxisLInj ir,l ' u,t,,111' 1 6as`cF('i Averigh Wnnter/Spring 197P, ' 11:,71hd� l HlrllltlN COW! 1'611„CI ,IU I'FJJF:1 rh: I M, .,•Ye1 . ' i •.4 relali'• I't,vl a' Y;, V.1 ., I e„Im� t or1� pt Cap 1 : , 1:U Yul �Vlll ,'+I r St Oct SR c,zzCR Hl` 111 Ob—•i�r—�•�3?��. .r �C?. Hi Q� 2!fE"oo � WR rills.-;�l __._ ..__. I D Dioov'� p✓000 � ' ', [r7'•i•.. •.1. . :./4SIT71,; V,i^, 41,,;r 4:, i:UDI V/PPOPOSIII ;PPROV[Mf NI\ 1 C.0 (o/ (P� I ' 1 r.'.':'1' 1, ',rlvl Tt l:. t I� •�,'p.ytl -o�Id1A I�i PIIOJCI'7 I.G'U ..Y.+.__ _.._..._.�._._.__ �:�i�•�...I, 'I �',7ectl:d !.r � ,• I I l al l it. .I ,l .II, wt i I hr Ir'.•, lhnn tu' 1'+u1�+ ' ' •. + '1.gU : ro ectrJ I.;u•. .':r • 1 L '.nll tIc l .C,L•, vl11 lit• IIrC,thlt than 11.•nl I'Yr,•)CC tC•1' +' n . ' 1 t lit 1 .1 .li, 1.1 NI i t'g1'r 11:',11'uVlrylll't,' +t: . t be 11 .1 w ' ill (1.911 J Adel ojes4bowid leII Akrn /one• lu) 2. Add west• bound 44irou9 l lane(d) ' 1 I0N I.APA1.11Y till: I/A; I,' r r51Y,91 , r I•::.'•' t Iort..Cpsq," 4 �-qfq c, I� (f,xisting i rn . f,( 4nluult•:; Based (br Avetta je Wiryter/Spring 1xISI 1N�—ru�•�•'•,• ' i.. 'i'.: ' I utiT HEG1OtW (OWHIIO•E1I�r l'W1010 PHOJrcI PRaI— 1— I.; Mu.rrw•n1 LeneS UPI +1'1"• b "' bH ' ./C GRONIII PROJI CI 1 V/( Rntlo Volunle Lh ImLS" f d I,it to VOL. YOI�— Vol Pro.lr•�L ..-- Yul. l _ i OS hR 7 ..._._—. .l— SR ' Et Qt: i 'U - �nZti9 O,0,?A ETto o• o/�B O.a/38 WT I ---- ----- WT /5 LL�oa9 6'R . 10 ' rFamt!°`• _- p /r^nG N p./OOV Lt I S T M 'A.E—SCT I ON CAPA(I I Y L_I 11 f 111 ON t U:ST r:ro •-C'. UMITTEO PLO', Rl,_O:(AL rD(;wim H/I'RO1'OSLO IMPROYTMr.N71 1 C.0 S/�h L l;S11�} PL'IS 'L)IMITTCO P,t • 1:111O'4-111 ••DOwIII PIIIt PROJLCT I.C.U. ' © Projected pI.1'.. :'I•ni' ( t tratfic -I .C.II. hill In' itlss thiin or equal to 9.90 ' Projected lrlu , Ilr:. ;La,t trt:! fic I .C.,I. ieill be greater than 0.90 11IQC t('J L 1 J •"' ' I i 1'�I' I I L i l..Il'. U'11'lt 1 I'61'. I19N,'U VI'llll'll I, . ' ., ,'.r'II)!, �r,r. I , , . . I".•�r Ivvuu•nl : • 1 • I.n"f•Y.^t.tlnn I.A�5 0 I\ 1 �1 ILL'* YO�`lJ'•�✓'�. (Existing 1raifir• Volulrar ase on Menge i ter Spring 19/s) —r-- _.- T -- — Rn.n.•nl 'x l Si lho .f151 III%f REMONAI LWfr11 IED MIDI LILD PRlwm 1`Rdslll tents Cep tau.•. r .p 1 Ilk lilt ./C DRUR111 PRQII CI V/t Ratio Volum 1/• Ra Uu Vol, naLlo VOL, Vol. Wo Project ' t Vol. Nl I NT 3D ooj(3) `!Boo i-7a.Q I o ./sy NR 1 —__ 5 p SS 1 38 9 SL 1 C2)3Zoo 1 6 I U.009 , SR 'FL E•.T ER wT (y)ifoo ' L> •In x 0./S >1 ' NR IELLOL:f Ir.E 'I 0, /qw'y Q,/OOu LIMN, :N"E IrCTIOM CAPAC111 UM iblll:IR Er:PPoG . C"ITTED PIGS RfCDNAL 4PPAtN V/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS L.C_0 O.61711 EIWING F 1S :ik'HITTED f•.d:—u(f•la01 rd^ndfil PHIS PROJECT I.C.U. Projected plw. Irrair•I L Lr•affiC I .C.U. will be less titan or equal to 0.90 ' El Projected plu• •rnll•r.l Iraflic f .1;.l1, lvili hi, Ijrratrr than U.,lll ® 0 u,iected ,-lu , ;I- OJO! l Lvafli(, I .L.11. vnl.h •.;; .h•lu•, nnln'uvcuM•nl.ti ' 1:i 11 be 1tI••: 'f•oIl ill oqua l to 0.90 ..••,rrlfil14.- 1L: ' 1. Add vior4bouvid +hrough lane . 1`0) C Z• Add 5ou4+ bwIld Ie44 .6ro lame. (o) ' 3• Add we&+ bound lame.. CO) /I� I J r.`? • [r,1,I:r°.^ctiun 1�0 Pe �C,.S roc�l� (Existing ir ,;it:` V01u9iks l3 ii 1(vera�e Tnter ring 19'h 'xlsnnC °Yln�:'�I :XISI 11n5T REGIOMM. COMIIILO PROJICTEO PROJECI PRIM I lenes Call ( : \'^ ` 'I' i W III , I./C GROWTH PROJECT V!C Ratio Voim ,1\ Rn Uo Onl ..,Lt.) VOL. Vol . a!o Pr a.le�l ' NT (y)�goo ' 02 O 9tU / NR n _ _ _1 I D — - ' --- - STc. 3Bl SR I Ihen I of ril EL I 00 ----I •S� 0 �.a 7 t' G.o32 ' J ET ER ui �) �_ r3jys�il. �.:�'$ -- a�- U�y���f �2 aes'yo ' wT - - ----'- -- -— = � w'R S1 Lltl it l'... : _==ECTIOM CAPi\CIIf l.::LIAYI ION - I -L: CCfTIITTEO P014 111 LI0Nd1 GPONPI NIPPOPOSEO INPROYEMLHTS I.C.0 7 (� 1'74 EY;,TIV; P_J: CWITTEO PIGS GL,.:nR0.1 CRO,4TH PIO, PROJECT T.C.U. �6S'ZZ ' Drojected pill, Vr'pil•( I 1) ,l1 (ic • l XAl. Will In• or l'Llu'll to 0.90 ' Projected lllu . I'F Irl' ffic I ,C.U. will bo Ilr•eater than 0.90 . ' Projected ill.l: J''lr 1':tl il'Ofic I .C.H. 'v.'llll Sj'•l.C'lIH llliprovemellts ::ill be lc,. " ,: , ;'< rerun ' to 0.90 ...,I rl I1; 1')11 1. . . I1.1, 1:14•' 11'/('llll`Ill (. Corlverf norAbourTd r1910 41Arn lane to oPlknlal -16-ou9A pILL� rip (o) 2• Acld r,orAbcuhd 4,hrou9h lane . ('o) ' S. Comorf WejAboL,,d lei -Furvl la.h¢ fo op1'i'anal +hrough plus leF1. (o) 1 Itr'IIE,I I r UI 11 a r'+, �•'•• •••••••/• • ' ti'} 11�I�s� �S�u - rC�Y ��OQL� (E cistl�r/ Ira, r r Vn1.I%'fie• Rase on Avrrage Winter S prin g 191i bZ 1tLlING ,• " •� _ '1•I , til`i N141011nL COMIITIEO PIMACTLO PROJFCI PROW I t lmmt CnO I "" ,r ,N rC GROWIII PROM CI V/1 Ratio Volwm Vn Nadu aJ 111 R.�llo VOL. Vol. w/u +'rujact Vol. N! NT 00 s)Yaoo i133y '� 3 _ 16 o.4da6 rta 1 100 I _ Q, , SL sl If noo sPgsg! 0.3o y 6 0.318 SR— ET 1 �)37ovll � //7y ER -/�B f1 WL t z>3zco LT/��_ ' oc3 0.06 Z 0.o6/z 1p ' Wi O �I)lbbb 0.061 � O.odi WR ` Iboo toC . O,ObSv D.06�� - I Lznrt+� +-eCTlon cnPnnu t•I•, I:, tun U i'u, Lii C"11*,Fn t'lu', Rl+. 0-01 MIOWIII N/I'IMPOSLO IHPI10VIHIHTS I C.0 D, l t;a,lnd N.J. ;trwlr«u vu+. 1.1 t�'nm ,.nawur I•l N•-i�Roalu ia.11. .^� ,713�) '. %lrojecteo plv'• :11,11"Cl 1 "(Iff•ic I.C.II. will l+I: lets than or equal ' to 0.90 E'rojecteri plu .•I ": I I IrlllTil I ,C.U, frill br grvater than ().t)+) ' l'ru;jeeLed ;,lu . I'In,7 •, I I r„I l j<: I .f..li', with ., .UnP, uupr'uvolot'lltr, ' wIll be It 'II, It n• '•,Iv.J lu ').90 :,. 1 r11,+ .,. � 1 lnn•I ,vl•uu',rl.: ' I. CorverF Ylor4h bouAd-y-%g114 dury lave 40 optiavlal fhrouSk plus rigkf. (o) ' 2. 60nVert sov+hbound HSI, kuv'A /ovle fo apfimial +Krou9ll p(LI.S right• <°) �. Covlvert ec sfboullcl riyh+ lure Jane b optlona► - hlrogg plus righ+. Cd) ' 4. Add eas4bound optlo-A(d +kY-0LJ k plM� rlr�h f. lo� I atle, <e) VC eS k -} hrou 41 hive -I�o leaf 'kctrl, I S• Con Yt w 'CCU 1d � I�rl l t7'+' +1+� l 111'Al.l i T 111 11,1/rt+ l'rrr ruvv i � � Ifnl.ZLISR� u (;.xisting ITa, t " 11/,lul4!'s [tried url �tvera r W'IiLer Spring -- rtlSTlNf I%1ST REGIORhL COM+I71l0 P"WtC1EO PROJECT PNt-J:at Y.St nagnt t I t'•,• P r '' 1+ i/C GROWTII PRWECT V/l, Ratio Volume V/. Nlo are$ Ca. ' v�.l Ratlo VOL` - Vol. + Vol Project Vol, 0 � p•Z 996 106 0. SZ1 Z. NT fCZ_)3Zoo 11U�S( 'a Z_ 0.�1! B — I ' r;R . - _- _.- SL ( � � _�_ O. ZS ST �Fis D.Zb SR I E I p• oy�v O•os's'v : II _�....-._._..__. . q_�.: 37 p. ///ob I o.Nt6 - ut ' wT — ^ - - --�- ~ -- -- - -' Ir'R — — :mE-=ECTION MAIM LNIU"' ION, ' E;••-;•„ !OMITTED PUPS RI'•:O_MVI y.04,11 WrPROPOSCU IMPROVCM(NTS I.C.0 i r;5'2•,: P!JT 'OWITTCC PLt'' gPOHllt min, PROJECT I.C.U. D•BZ9�7 ' Projected ;+lu.. In'u ' rl Ilaffic I .C.11, will hr IeSS than or vliu,tl to 0.90 ' Projected {,•!r`. n'1,;' ct Lraffic 1.C.11. iai f l l:r ,Ireawr than 0.90 ' © Projected 1•I ;nn';'•t,t InIIf1c [ C.11. P/il.0 '. '.Ivor• unprnvcolt'nL ' r, ill be lt' .'. ' I rtpll; Lo 0.90 "Vf'llll'fit /. Comer-+ one 11oelhboavld 4rougl (one. dv hoy� k 6olLm'd lc- + -Iurvl Iavle. Co) 1 ;-I:or`.. ".t Ion �.s1� _LEr1.lL/ ^� (ExiStinq fro E'r Vr luint`. 13�dn .verane Wlnten7 pring 19/ �D 1 AI111Nt. r_ `^"�+ " •>"y' ` aIV HLIiIUfULL 1GY1111CD P40.1l lIlD PRWIcI P6J t2s CAV I +•�+•' '' "' I +:� GH0N111 I'lAILCI WA Rat 10 Yolume ht. 6n Uu n ' a•,to VOL. VOL. :a ProjOLt 1 YoL ' Nl 1/31.y6o� _II�0:7_' Sd o3i92 ' NT 1W $zoo 1 " �4066- Nil 0O.•r3�y�i/z9 'x ' SL SR _ _ It�l. _ 0./368 i36e EL ET ER WTJT1.. TR KuP•nrE -�_ - .._ p,/oda � O./map � ' UINIha 'N11ti SCTION LAPAC111 4ial(A111IN EAi1a 4e s,d: C"ITTEO Olt', Pir.10NAI SR.,Jlll N/PROPOSED 1MPROVEMCNIS I.L.01 O BZZ y p Er:STIN: Pis: 'OM9ITTEC P.u. W is A[ WORTH PIUS PROJECT I.C.U. Projected t'llr '+1'l)'+4 ' troffic I .C.U. will bC loss thA3n ur equal t to U,90 rrojectt.-d hln'. ar:,,'• rt. 1.1-atlic I .C.U. will he (1l'L'atty' than tLan ' ® 1'rojectet: phr .: i" 1 Ir,111 iC I C.11. wiLll 4'y' Whir Ill)pl VC11lent dill be 11•s a ' l;u," Lo 0.90 I. Gnverf one nor4bound •Wlrmu h lane 4v not Fti bound le 4 -•urn lane. Ca) 1 ' Il,lllt',+ IItIN L.APACIfY (1 III ILAIJIM ANAI r11J (1) -�-`'� ��.VC� . (Existing irn+ f'c Votuafe Basedon verage Winter prtng ISO 1t M•iv,iait FA 151 INC 1 tISI I IVST REGIONAL COMIITILD I'kGJrLTID PROJECI P14111II t.ene$ Cap PR t'/C GROWTH PRIULCI V/L Ratlu Volume V/C Rath i Vnl I Wn L10 VOL. VOL. w/o Project Vol —_ --_ f2)3Zoo I� Q I �( CJ•2o��4 20 N? o•zlSv Lyv NR ' $L _.. ......._.a13 ST_ 3 J /Eoa a I �1{.3 O•/L'O (� O./87/ ESRNZJ - - -.. ET i ER Ar WR —! 0 _. ' rntnWrlPE — Y. .— I 0./cov 19 1 /1 9ov ',I` EXISTING :Mr-'iECTIOtl CAPACITY UI:11:•Y lun , ' CA.ST ihG 'r.L'S COMI TTED PI IP=RI I'I D4A;:.I,0d 111 W/PROPOSLD INPROVI ITT NI5 I.C.0 1 F(151INC PLUS -WITTED PLL'• "+:'.!vNA1 5+4W C11 I'1115 PROJCCL I.C.U. t c n Projected ulus :11fT,i1Ct. l.ratfic I.C.U. will be less than ol• equal to 0.90 ' ® Projected plus prr+.l''cL l.r,l'ffic I.C.U. Lvi,ll Ile greater than 0.90 ' P.1,0jectoo ulu', il' op, I 11a11 if. I .i:,l6, with '., •Irur, iDlpi'avonu'nl ', r,iII be 1111.•. ' !1—t 11, 1 10 0-90l i 1 . . r.rlit:.;,,•, ,.+ � Ih•: , �•ar9ur:nt: Add Iior4bouvld righ+ +uYtl lane Co) ' z CDYluev-4 eajs boultd ) i511+ -ILtrll lane -la o.pf rnlul Aroup plus rgkf. (o) 1 • 1 ,' 1 t,"•. �.AI'ACIIY III ILIM IONI AMAI Y�)I`, ' ;,.,... . ..tlnn_�(xl� . .�i•� (Existing irn l 'c Velurti'� (lased on fivctaup WmLclr7, pri g WEI �Z trullNG i�11 , 1,1•,� I m r 1ILMONAl uunnn PI•wluln PRwlcI Pom,• lanlS CPp + RR 1 .,C 5RONil� PRIM CT Y/k Ratio Yol I Nal•. I V,A ho,to VOL. Vol. w!o PnOmt ' Vol ' i I - C•oyc0 � ^Iv O.cyFz �' nL HR Sr SR E7 .u� J r^•/6/Z ER A (I 16 fi •0 n.6; ooyas , wt WR jai p/cove O/ ' LrISTH. ' •:ECTIOM CAPAt'IV 61:,11111 ON c/:.-;•• •-.: CClWITTEO PIW. A1515vAl ,,NC4IN WIPROPOSLO IMPROVEMENIS I.C.0 •'J' 47 ' :OWITTC^ PR v'�•k .:r 9Pl :jOUlll P,IIS PROJECT I.C.U. © rrr,•jectea I,:.r' .•'11 '• I traffic I .C.U. will be Hass than or egt.,tt ' to b.90 El1' �CCttw 1•i . n , . ! Ilr' IiL I .i .11, 1il l l Iv• Illydll'1' tltltit Ii,•111 , El i'rojectec: 1 ,.. . "1 .r , 1 I r.,l f it IA M. V,1 :ll '. , tool'. unprlwoulrl,r ' n' lI be i,•• , '111.11 I.ct 0.90 ' 1 I� 1 I' :i „ A' I' ANAI I , (Existrnq Ira I - yr,l ,l e ilasea on wrrrtjr W7nLer SPrrng 197c,', —rcl: tnc { " I I rl ulrmnra tn+,tntn RRwn'I .s¢rt hors CGn i —I.—_._.—_ ,,., I •' nR 1 1•C CROR IIt I•Mol 4: Vf, Ra 11 I Volumt 4n1. r kL ll) 600 jcz� 3zoc q i.f _ I� } 0. omz I o.oiz�� NR J _ AIJ� 1600 '' o� _0.0319 0.Os/9 ' st_ (Il � �o il.cz�sz� ^ ;30 ► �1 �0./266 �O.�Z66 � '-�=-- � Il�� ! . . �"���:I:.J.� ___. �g _t_0.o13e•- � --_ —_ ' �.a138 ii ter' I ' • � l�//a r—'-- ' I E R p79 b.07 WT }I3_ :, I _g7/Z 0.07/2 uk ' �1+ ' I I . 0. 1Zee, 0.Iz6P O./oov 0./pp0 T10N C.'tPatl 1, :,,if 1,:!ION 1 ' I,•^„^ :.. , r;H11;pP rllr, h���l n•t�u �'•"t.71N u/l'I"WOSIU IMPROVIMINIS 1 (..11 p. �5 p�99 I 'rFJ 71 Ib, I:J9 -.)WIIIG N, dl: .,,v41 '.dONlll NIP, PROJILI T.C.P. ' n '11-0jectec! I•i,t' I•,' II I,` Illlc I .C.11• hill bo 1,°�,1 tball or PI)II•II to "-,.go 1 Pt't`JCCLP:I lilts' ,•I . „ ' 1',`Illl l .l�.il. hlli I'I II'01114• Ilbnl I). t ® PI'ntrctod 1:: ,nn,:••, I Intl I11. I .l..11• with '.t Ir'Nl . INq•rtivrl:u`II' . tWlli be Ir',•, I .., ,r ,•.lu,' I III I add nor4bound IeP - two lane. <o) ' Z. Add nor4hbownd nigh+ -Furs lane. (o) 3. Add soufhbound le-44urn lane. (o) Add eas.�,L,ound leP4- -Fu ll lane, (o) 1 _ 1 3 APPENDIX C ' 1NIMISLU11,014 CAPACITY UVILURVION ANALYSES ' WsLili)6 + 30 PcrccnP of Projoc•L + Regional + Conuni CCod ' 1 I Ii11IR:,l ' II ON IAPACIIY ut //u.1/AIIWP1 ANAI. Y',1`, I In rrl � tior7 j,7/SS7o/J7' Nl �%'~ C4 in tiS (Existirvj fra1,f '/ VnIwiles Dase on ICver59e Winter Spring 191�i �zIST ING 1'Ph�o'JO ' •'(tl LUST REGIONAL C"ITICD PROJLCTLD PROJECT PRAILLt M",M.+nt ;ones Ca I „''• (.P t 'Y 1•P V/C GROWTH PROJLCT V/C Ratio volume Y/C Ratio Loi Ratio VOL. VOL. w/oVol Protect — ' Vol. Nt i o O.o769 .leg /S 9s 0_7 2 C�.2222 NR r SL _. --r ST _ z) 3zdc 3 4800 1 ,J f/.15s a5' _.3 0.228/ * o z?eI SR —1 T 79 48 o,4o49 o.4049 E _— - - ---} - _ ET _ — L_---- A _28 0.52G1�'k O.5206 WT !/ 7� --- --•-act_ oif� a y fj00 _ �� 4s WR _ /c+� U.IDUO�k O.IOOO I IIST I'ir, IN:L+CECTION LAPA'i1Y UIO I/AI ION C"17TtD Phil', Air.li m SIWUIII N/PNOPOSED IMPROVIMENTS I.C.0 O, 266, :Uwl tit L' Pl•' of IOCA, ,.1.11WIII PI II'. PROJI CT I C.11, Projected IYlus ovow(:I I.raffic' I .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 © Projectv:t I'lu: pri-jiv( L L1-affic I..C.U. w,i I1 be greater than 0.�16 4 'iu,7eCLed }'I,r nll,i,• t Lrrtfi( 1 C:ll. wlt.h '.'r',LrPI , inglroveNloot" 1 10.1M be i r•'. lC vou,l I to 0.90. .,.rtu'I .II ,1 Pot k ,lvrlllr'n(.: 1. AJJ sou4k bowed ��"/7r0 iv/") ipI)c, 1 ' I ' 1 - � I H 11 '!'11 1 1 119Y l.Hi'7WC1 1 1 U' 11.�I r�I,�r�'r'��rn�rnnn(.i�r/.'r�r r 1' • 11 a ff, lines u 1sd On AyE„Rnte1r` Y�.__l l�t/•t (n i`'' �j I Ile- (Existing lraf t' r. VE/lumes Base on veragE. WTnte Spring 19/ . ' EXISTING Pupa r, !r!SI EXIST REGIONAL CO MITTED PROJECTED PROJECT PNOJICI No.laknt Lenet UP Lanr, frp w' NR V/C GROWTH PROILCT V/C Ratio Volume WE Ratio Pltlo VOL. VOL. w/o Project j Vol. NL N1 1_ZZ�1r • ✓r �3 O.f 0 o u ' SL 05 1 0.0572 0.05 ' ST C3)c� I � � • 3(,o 67 0.3300 0.3333 # SR 1 _ _ — ' EL j 0 _ ! _ 31 0./001 WOO/ E7 (� 20 0.2198 ER WT WR VELLNTIOE _... 0./OTV 1k 0.1000 T , EXISTING :NTEJCECTJON CAPACITY 6111.1141104 2 EA; NG %LLi CCtMITTED PINS REVIO:AL 6P0Nn1 WPROPOSEU IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 0.6 EXISTING PLUS COPMITTED Pt., fill IdNAI C1OWIR PIUS PROJECT I.C.U. Projected plus nrul"i.f traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal ' to 0,90 projected 110S 111'11.11•I I IV0tIiL I .C.U. gill bl-• t1roator than 0.90 ' © Projected plus. oi-m a f traffic I .C.H. wiLll '.-v 'tems unprovrinelll�. , All be IvI.' tt.. 'I is, oIludl Lo 0.90 1• 1 r1Ut 11 'r .•( /• •' ��' III�;Q uVr1111411.: ' Add sou4( bound 4krou3b 10he . (o) (Existing 'Ira , fir' vcrluines Base n ve age Winter Spring 197R m%r REGIONAL COMA TIED PRNI LILD PROJECT PRO.I w„a.•nt l enei Cnp I �a•�,• , p ", IIH V/L GRONTII PRNI Cl V/L Ratio Volume Vrl 11 U, :nl lf.Wo VOL. Vol. w/n 1y11JOLt Vol. NL ko o_ot31 N1— p NR ! ' SL a oo C3)4-B C?I 1 I S o•14 0`i4Z9 ST t I CI) lboo_�_ La 6%D 0.0 491 ' SR Cl� l _ �sZ -- 0.0_19 0. El I I (2) 32o -(10•_, •:p� 0.o3 * o.o 34/1 ET ) C3)��t� � / 616.96 1A 14 D a ' E P - - - ] . -- — Wl II b --._.t a�.tf . _�> _�_. 0 0�56 0.0/56 ' WT C3) Bko--- _ - 2SI O. 3S�3 32 o.3600 �k WR CI)/bDo 6 SB . D. 4734 0.4"731 ' ruuluTM --------- l7 0./UOU 0.7D0c) 4' LtISTINO :ST:;5ECTION CAPACITY UI II Ih1110N ' EI[S'ibo ;_L'S CJMITTED PI OS RI CIUNAI-_I(ORTII W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMLNTS I.C.0 �i 65:j' E!!SI lNG GL•1'. :0WITTED Pill% 41GIU9AI FI'aarll PHIS PROJECT I.C.U. Q.(�Z� ' Projected ;)III, ' r01rLl I.l',Itfic I .(-0- Will be II'ss l.han or Elllual to 0.90 ' Projected ;11u-. I ra,l 1 II ,1 I I1. I .l:.11. tvl l l hr ,II•rrttor than I),Inl © 1,r0jected uur., .1•'n.i:', I II-,IIIiC I .C.It. w, 11 .y .Ionn inproventeiIL', be 1L .° ' h,'n 1,1 '^111a1 !.0 0.90 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,' �...�.r)pt 1�•r r .� ,. • it ,� -,v,yurrl • . 1 Add souA bound ]ef-1' -bpi lalle • (u) ' ?. Add souA bound n'9h{ 4urh (a.he. (o) 3. Acid easy bound kef'f- -I-url,i lane. M ' 4. Add eas4 bound 4-brwjh lame. (o) 5. Add was bouhd right -kl.rh lamp— CO) of11 kSti ION CAPACITY I11I1.I/AI ION ANAL I'SI`, l•Ij tl rc lcl.t In1I IL- 4yy� +(Existing fratfic Volumes Base o� lnlver ge WT er Spring 197� �$ ' IW.inynt SXISf ING W.:(r,10 1I151 IEXIST REGIONAL C"IITED PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT Lanes Cep Ia1P 'p i Pi: Ilt 1 VIC GROHTII PROJECT VIC Ratio Volume VIC Ratio Vol, 1 Ratio VOL. VOL. win Project ' Vol, Ni I a W138 NR St 1 oc� _ I 0 I 0.0088 0.00138 ST I I _ 1 SR tf ' EL 1 1 _ �U _ O.0312 4, 10,0312- ET ( pv l5Oq ER I I O Sbo � 3125 Wl 1 1 __. .'... :. _ 00 61.OD56 WT S) 00 iI 8 313 93 32 WR _,C '2 . YELLtn,3:rE 10 0. (000 do 0.1000 R ' LIMING :hl"c-:ECTIOH CAPACIff 1.1111141:Oh [1:WIla, ,.CG Cr MITTEO Pile, P[BIONAI 4hJd111 WIPROPOSEO IMPROY(MINIS EMIINu P.J'. '"ITTEO P11-% 11111wini '"Iffilii PHIS PROJECT I.C.U. 0•811&.' Projected Pi'r. ovoil-il I1'MFic I ,C,I1. will be IvY, Lhdn or rlTudl ' to 0.90 Projected plus il'1'.IT!t;1 trolFlc I .C.U. Wt ll I1(' 11T'i:dtclr than 0.`T[1 ' ® P'rudectea olty, ,•1'U•111I It11lI IC I .G.H. WA .Y IF • .Lellil, 1111111'011011Ipniti o,1I1 be 1r1. t.11.•1, nl ••rp1„' I:o 0.90 , ''r 6r111t t.d, ,•I . li •� Idl,�l �'V"IIIPiII I Add easy bound 4-h•rou9h !ane. 2, Add wesf bound �hroup lane, (o) i0ri CAPACI I 1 11 ALIZAI IUll APIAL.T �)I) IntersP.-.tion ' �Spring(Existing Trait=- Volumes Based E+ , ver g W UISTiNG PRul Ov'l ' -X—i I EXIST REGIONAL COMMED f'RWECTED PROJECT PR0.11 CI M�'mc"L Lanes Cap I .are: I p I PY ;:P ! V/C GROWTH PAp4Ci Y/C Ratio Volume VIC RA00 ' Vul. N.ido VOL. Vol— w/o Protect �— Vol. ' NL h I ^ _I-0 I 0.0257o* 0'oz�6 NT —_�, _ 2 2 6.1 1 — L SL ( OC> 1 0.0 19 O,o719 5T _ 00 _ 2 9 0.I$}31 0.183 �` ' SR I � o � ' --__ 241 __ 0.4814, _32 _v.5'�al9 El Uc7 ' ET38 !n 1Z o7y/ * ' _ ICI f Wl ERL ER C?>32oc�_.t _ �� _ �5_,__ 0;0766 O•o7 1 Wi (3)4800 L? =: / / //g U. 2.( -- 1S'WR _ — 2- — ' YELLDIVTJPE 10 W000 Coom E115TM :h..':ECTION CAPACITY LI ILIh:ION ' E/;57 i:•., '+.�: CWITTEO PLUS PIGIONAI 4POHIN N/PROPOSED IMPROVENENIS I.C.0 �,764 q E/ISi1V3 PEJS :CMSIT;EL` PIUb PROJECT L.C.U. Q 7(,qy ' Projected plus :)r0.1:•Ct traffic I .C.U. afi11 bL' less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected plu`, ure,!I•L,I, lraltic 1 .C,II, iY) Il tn' IlrealErr than I).'.IU © I fOJeCLe�t I�IJ.' u:, ;tl (,',i•CI, t"-' fic IJAI. iJ01 ` : •il�lltr, 111'nl'UVL'll1011i.`•, ' will be le—, .I, •r L',µ„Il Lo 0.SIU ' '� rip: �, . � ,,.r••v� Isl•I.; . . V Add We."I bound IV44 lUrvl (u) ' ' Add tues� bodnCl +hrou9h I4ne . (o) 1 r ...•• •.... ,TprSrtt14t1 (Existing lr,llfir Volumlvs B—a se r7 {� Spring 191 � � r•lill ING 1"^.O•J l rrM EIIST REGIONAL C"lllCO MWICTED PROJECta WICI lar-S Cap .ane J 1—u, bN 1/C GROWTO PROJECT WE Ratio YollmeE Natty r Ynl, katlo VOL. VOL. w/o Project NL - ---!rY3_('DS o.OS19*` os(9 NT r 6.0 o NR rp' ST r l I __. _fi 3_ D 6b o.loo6k 01006 �c SR I / , ' El ---- ?. :� _ 0,0 9 ET _ 00 _ ;.1� _ a�z 53 0. /a 13 0,4453 ER 2 0.0 3 AI I _ _ . . i.. � o:44�a* WT WR +(I.tnarE O•/000 'k 0•1000 ' LIISTING•INTC�:ECTION CAPACITY t•TN UAL10N U:iTilw 1.�: C"ITTFO Pu.S Rp.;LANAI IpOW111 W/PPOPOSED IMpROVTMENTS I.C.11 0,•7 a�' Et;S11I;. F,Uf ;,FWITTCG PI "• 41 t,"k 1,1100111 PIU`.• PROJECT I.C.U. 0•1 Q•GG^ ' QProjected IIIV•. •,rill• t I Ira, I is I .C.D. t•EI I I lit, Iw". Ihtul nr r+pl.11 ' Lu U.9U Projected pllr•. 1'1.1e`-t Lt'd' tiC I ;C.II. hill bp 13rrator thrill 0.90 ' rrujoctea ..iu., v-I. 0 Il'otfit`I .L.U. l•it•il .y••t0l1IS IIUpr6VCUlt`Ilt`.. ' 'rriiI be lei•' '.,.. r rt t•rlu,l) Lo 0.90 rtlt• .. 1: r •�rlrrul: ' I t'N ,.III RE.I I T u 111.1/.I%I I Lilt 111VnL 1 0 1.) r',:`t,LTM!I�lf7s ,rvam r ' iLtx K0 '�V\. (Existing --Tra! f,r:} Vnlu ase on erage T ter Spring MS IxI511M1G F I`�ul'0'.I'1 I 1XISI EXIST REGIONAL COIMITIED PROM CIEO PROJECT PROJIC1 Hovtn„nt lanes Cep I LXrv••. :•V I "L HN VIC GROWTH PROJLCT 4/L Ratio Volume 4/t' katim ' Vol. Ra Lfo VOL. VOL. w/oProject ( Vol,401 I t Nt` -- - --'; - - - - N T oo ZO o. l ' 3 .1550 NR I I- I S 0 55 0.0700 I 0.070 ' SL _ 1 C2Z32do .• I65 6.0�09 0•09� ST 00 � ID� 2 37 0.3 441-k 0. 463 1 SR I _T - — E L -- - - - -- ET E R Wlo __ •132- 2b WT 0.1770 WR 4-74 ' YELtOWTIPE --, A -4 0./0004 o./000 'k LXISTING :V:E-!iECTION CAPACITY UT!L IlAI IiRI ' EA:5'i14 7.t3 COWITTED TEUS RIGIONAI Gt1*1111 W/PROPOSED INPRO4EMENTS I.C.0 �,(71 EX!St!NG PLJS 'WITTED PIUS RFM(MIAI GROWIII 1'1111 PROJECT I.C.11. O.6233� ' D Projected ;)It,; ur02t-t traffic I .C.U. will be less than Or equal to 0.90 ' Projected t'lu° t.ralijc I .U.U. w1h) be lir ator than 0.90 !'r'ujected plu , pltlll`; I Iratllt. l .C.11. 4rll.h '.,v'•II`nP, nlgnuvt'inl`nl ', will be lv , . ! h„II n! I`t111a1 to 0.90 ' �•• 1r'IpLI��• �•' ' �.•' Ini'11.:"IIII'llt: 1. Add hov-+kbound 4rou9k Iane . Co) ' Z. ,odd sou4 bound le-4� -furor lovle. (o) 3. Add ules� bound Iuyie. Co) r.. 1,Cr— , 'I ( rrr<.^.tu,nN10 QcNqI I"IL V (Existing lraffl': VoIL s Ba eb on Average inter ring 191 lsr>,c ' +At TING �+w'p`. + +�1 x151 tI I+IST REGIONALUMIT1L0 PROJICTLD PROJrCE RIIAA fI Lanes Cap I ' +"'• I •P 1 p, IJl 1 1/C GROWN VRLIJLCI VIC Ratio YOIWK 11L Wit,, t I lul R.Llo VOL. VnL. w/o ProJrct l Vol. ' N! I _ . . _,..�IS �_� 19 0.o838•k 777o.o83B *' NT 217 o 153 NR_ I q 4 ! I� . _. _r 20 o•!bb ' ST^^ 00 /_ I81 0.38!/ndf 6.3BI (c SR l¢,6 . I 56 ' F'. f I oo S� o __ 0,0325,E D•o ' - t-- ? ET O G.o ER __ AI C48W!�.3_l._ 26 0 �* o.oso8 k Wim wR {qa _ — _ 5 ILLLm.'I! 6.1Ooo D•l000 yk , L11571`+L !'•TL45EC7ION CRPArl I f•CTII IIdry ON ,.l l ST i•u L.t; C"17-'10 PHIS RICI10611 ,.PORIII N,'PRDPOSLD INPROVENENIS I.C.0 b•64, 3 ' ElSIIN; :P`WITTED Pl LS 61d:'1NRI GPORID Pill! PROJECT I.C.U. (1•�Yg� Ilrojectea I'iu•' I'r,11 .1I Iralfic i •C•U, will III' Irti', than or rquai , to 0.90 ProjectPU 1+1u i !•'+ lrl l I I'.'' l iC l 'c.tl, will I`v g1'pdL19' t11a11 11.;11t t © projected , (•I , , +'+ i•" I 11'atl is I .C.U. t'i11.11 '•;i' lt'il•+ 1111111'UVCIIICIIl.'. ' will be lrs% I wIl nr "111101 to 0.90 '•u ,f rlEl! ,••. 1.' l.9i 1 q� ,i`/1+1111'lll 1 ' I I Convert northbound rlylil 4uro lane •to op•tionui through Plus rigH. (o) 2. Add 40r4bound •throujb lane- &)) 3. Convert wes- bound le44 ¢'Etrn laYie •lo' optional • hrouSh plus lef4. (o) ' ll,t ' •':,t : • ;;III LAPACIIY Ul1LILA110P1 AML YM, ) --II lllrl,ry ,,.:cinrl I, u 1 OG'Qi (Existing lra ; f i VoILIC s (3ase orl verft a Winter Spring 191g} h� ,AISI INc T"I" �'•" `,ISI ' IXIST REGIONAL COIMITTED PAOJICTLD PROJECT PROACI h t lane; Cap 1 Ir• �� 1 u, !iR V;C fiRO1rT11 PROJECT V/C PAID Volume VA ketto fyitlo VOL, VOL`— W/oVol PruJrct -- --_'— I Vnl. N' _.—. _ `cyS t'1 4g a,( �` o. /6o3 NT_ 1 00 32Aeo-o-t1133 (! a 41b o.4093 45 o.4i68 NR_ I I �C7 I t (� 23 ' SL (I; _ __.r�?Z 0 (8 o.os31 531 ST _-t( � a00 3�¢�po��( '• 2 269 0 20 3022 -03 ' EL'�l �6 �- _ O. OIoo O.OIDO ET ER _ 23 O.0612 o.p I2-W I 232_0_LL7a .JI WT 0 .1-91_ ' 0:0619 •1 WR 0.0&e5U 006S0 LAISTI%G 'NTEi:ECTION CAPACIlf CIIIIIAIION , :ui: C:)WITTE4 PIGS PLC ONAI_?'OW111 W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 o.74 9 ry EUSIING PWUW._OITTEG PIP' Nt 1001 ;d,JWTII Plul PROJECT I.C.0 0.751 ;'rojected l+lu' :nul' tl Ilatlic -1 .C.It. Will' In, Ir','. than ill' rtlwti Lo 0.90 Projected plu' .n't ;rc6 i.r,lftic I .-C.U. will be yreater than 0.`10 0 Ilrojectod pin•, iWll.flLI :X-I i _ I .C.11. wTYh ',�^.LrnP, nnpr•Ovouuvlt', will he IL-Y. 111011 W "I'l,11 Lu 0.90 1, Convert nor+h bound rigk+ -hare lane 40 optional 44)rou9k PLus rigkk. �o) ' ' Convert Sou+kbouncl rigkf—turn lavie -la apfiioTia► +hrouyk plus rlSr f• (0) 3• Conuer+ eastbound 1-;Sli F 4urh 14ne +c> optional 4-hrogk plus risN+- C°) add eas+bound optio-nal -♦'ht-au k [plus rick f. (o) 5 . Convert wes � tbuvtd �ti� ov�k la he I'o Ie�� t4rt1 lavie. (e) 11IIIC11 I It IN LAI•/1E,111 U111-10Funn, I"'"' . . ' iltr:'I'SL'I.t1Un1 ,11_—�1�1_T o OC e ►�O (� q �' (Existing 1ra, f4( Volumes Base on verage •„ nter Spring n,,,mknl ''1ISI INS II'.°`'''I rl!%I I%IST REGIONAL COMITIED PROJLCIEO PROJECT PROACl Lauer cap I r 1 •P 1 I`i Pk VIC GROWTH PROJECT VIC Ratio Volume VA ke Ua Vol. Ratio VOL. VOL. w/o Project ' ~.^ I 1 431 D. 299 'Y 32 0.3064 NL D C3)�B�J�QQS T C2) 320o i ID "[J— N 241 419 14, o• AF ' NR SL sT J(jqa . a 147 o.2sss 6 0-222 SR ET y►L •1 � 6 3-7v14 o 6 D. / ER `_-- -Lai 182 0. 50 14. 0-2-77Y Wl WT hR +Ettev't IPE _� D.lOGt7� D•10o0 � ' L1l5t1YG :STE�SECTION CAPACII+ LL't I:a11lIN t' U;S'rho :L$'GOPMfT7EO PLIK RFWO'IAL Gk011111 W/PNdPOSEO IHPROYCMF HIG LC.0 0. -' IST ING 1': 1! '"11TEC PIUti W411,11A1 4'+OWrll PLUS PROJECT LC.U. Q,$Q3A Projected plu . nrul'•c'1 Lraffic I .C.U. will by 14151 than or e(Judl ' to 0.90 Projected p'u:, nl.;••IL Ll'affic I.C.U. (aill he tirratvr than 0,90 ' ® Projected id 1 :'1'11,h', 1 11.11f lic I .L.U., IVlfh "•ll`RI'� Illlpt'IiVCIIRVIr'. , .•,ill be lvN-, Ln O.LA) ' ' '••,r,t'lf�' '1 'U IICI•I nVCRIDIIL: I. Convert- one vlor-kbound --hrouyti [ane }o vlo4k bound le14 4urrl lamdl' 1 1 ' IPI • `!-•1 ' t lltll LJtI'/tE.l l I llt LI vrtt Itn• ,t,•nt , -.. , F 1TYr(•r, t.T ✓c (Existing iralftC. voluniFr [lase on verage Wtnte ring 197 f AIS11NG ru�u lr•.I It.SI I IIIST REGIONJU COMIII IFD PRUCTEO PROJECT Pkll,tl LI 1 w„tmknt lanes c P la^t' I.P I ryC GROUTII PROTECT V/C Ra t.fo Yolume V/L kntla ' - — :nl Rclfo VOL. Vol. w/oPro,lect j Vol.Vul 1 I S'2S 0. 3190ik 32 0.325(v 'k NT C2L3�oo I •0�11 Z 319 O. _"! 1 0.462 N R SL r ST 00 i ����Is!� 1 l b5 o.2s2 7dc Co a_2540 SR IZ_ OL1.1_ q- ^4^ o_I3813 ' EL ET — ER - - Wl --- ' WtI A49001 WR _ EJISTI•u :N-:':EE ON CAPACITY LIT I(IN ' ' E);',C:4; =..L; CWITED PLIJ_RI GIONA, ;Io)WIII W/PkOPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 I E r;S•1N,7 c_,:.` "owi TTEL P.U'. =It I,'rd, .,u0t1(N PIII' PROJECT I.C.U. ' Projected lthIt. tru-t :.T. tratfic I .C.U. will be less than or otluai to 0.90 ' 1'rnjected irlll : .l ;, t I. Irall ?C I .C.II, wi•I1 Ur tnvalrl I,han O:vT t ® Pro,?ectr_t' ,tiu II ,I! lit l .C.11. L•liLh •trur, unina�E•Duul 1 - ... I•Ilrl ,.. I U , , ,vrllll'III � . 1 Corver40ne 17or�kboiivFd +-mush lane -Iv vlOr- hbouhd 1e4 -6yii /ane . (v) 1 l t'il l.AI'ALII Y 1f111.1/Al IU.t ravrtl I II.) �,{ v 11) (Existlnq + ralY Yulua'ht'(iaSea on-XveragL' �11n er/ prin 191' �p M,... t11;IM.r_ • I,I.. I , •r1'•I RISE REGIONAL LOMIIILO PIIWIITLO PRWEC "II VIIUMII tents Cap GkWTII PAWLCT VA ROLID Volume V.L heUu I vol I Rat to VOL. VOL. r/o Project , 1 Vol. I—nL III 0•01 0-o/88I h` ) i(z)3zoo 113�fJ.I 3 NR _ C_116o I 1�• 60 0.1381 6 O.l ' S� I 13 '� 0• os441� o.c844 v 3_ 00._ .� _13 0.1356ST 8 SR — EL 1 I ({ �: !� 7 0.3281 '1 0.33 ET _ 4)fz '_ 2 193 I 1 WT G?.ZQ�b* 3-0.20 WR— L115115 !17T'.ECTION CAPA(llf 611+I:A•IPN LInT i•.,. :.L: C"ITTlp P D. PLMNAI ^r JA19 R/VPOPOSED 1MPROVEMINIS 1.C.11 6 269 -Er:51149 PLdS COtWITTM P 111drNAI I.H All I9tl5 PROJECT I.C.O. 338 (I) MacAv4kur' is noy+4 /SOUR , , Projected ; I j•. : r of •c 1 traffic I .C.II. will br 10" than or rqual to 0.90 Prvjectl'•1 I•. ic I ..I..II• lvlll 1•t' grralrr thJn (I.011 I'I'e',ICCI1h ; t . t 11eII Il I .I .II W11•II •.•. .I1`III•, IPllrt'stVt411rU1 ' will ha ;1•' 011lhl ! !.n 0-90 i rlp� 1 .� r ni, .t •VOItl1•'II ' I Add mr4hbound righ+ IuYn lane• lo) 2. (fonueH ea&lbound ri914 +Ut-n 14ne l0 opfional Aroujh plus Yi30- Co) , L II%( iI15 IIll' :.APACIIY MIL!/klllIN luv/u.IZ)I:, i `� r •11 n'r r 5. •c t i n n I. 1!'U-i lit rIQY�•-.+-r��rtiZ� ' .-•• - -- - -- -- —• dd --A fWTnLe Pri 197 4 � (Exist inq Iraitt. VoluileT. Base on verage, 9 8 %ISI IN; ,'F4n1'al t%1514l%Itil HIfiONM COm ..LOI I'R11.11U1U PHWICI I'It1411, 1 n.�,�rin•nl ,ours CAP lan,. p '' IIR I t;C !iHUNiII PRO'),CT Y/l' Ant la Volume Y/, Han�� Vul P,,I lu VOL. Vol , w/o 1'rV,rcl Yul. 3 0,0419 NL Ia ' NR _ SL o - I -73 o.fslb o.l I(r� ST oo 186 o.z41 * 0.29/9 SR _— --- - �J ? --- 2 0 EL 3a 2 _55 32 ET ---- S S O.l 7 �0-/642 ER _ I I WL �l _ — � O •�I 0.0 38 0.0438 1.1R — 20 - YC'LOti9(ME 0.1000* 0•/000 LXISTIS. :',TE:CECTION CAPACITY I.I111/SIION ' i''P1'�• •.�; CWITTEO PIUS RI1114NAI _RUWIl1 W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMCNIS I.C.0 0 �794.1- t[;S IV3 I;. - :OWI TTCO V;U'- At 1.1,19NI 111(1WId Pt II'• PROJECT 1.C.U. 0,8070 ' Q Projected plu, ! -oi"CL Iraffic - I .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected hlu ;,1011art t-raffic I ,C.U. wiII Uo greater than 0.90 ' Projected oi,,', pru,It'cl ! I*Mfic^I .C.U. with ';Y"toI1I% improvenWmnt" ^ 11 be leti•. Own •'1' (IM1,11 to 0.90 ' 1 rllll .' hl •1' Ilbi'I ,•VI'lllhfll • 1 1 ItIN f.,lr,At.I I 1 to It.I I AI Ito . 1n11o11 •, ' ' r ( 1 / r•' lnrl'r' I I/,I1y} �• +_{� t{+' �1I/ L)1=:! I�Ngs(Existlnq ird 1tu1.RnP5 Base an verac'e W,nter�57�7 'x,i:IHn I• •'• • '- ".t `j ltl�l RinlOHN UBHI tillo IT101.IID 1'RWICI NO >i•.t^wtI Lane; Carr ' PIi i L LRDNiII 1.141.111i V11 RAtIt, Volume 511 '•�Ue I pt , V,I'll 4UL. Vol. w/o PreJet I r Vol. tkL I 1 ? _+Ca)3aa> .�L ' 1;._ --- ID t D10125 0.0al; ` N". 1 i (z)32oo j1� 1 . r •_112 0.457a4c 3z 0.467a x ' I rill 11FC_t_) IGov z 6.0319 o.0319 s` L 1 ; C2�3zoo _35 o.12E6 iE o;1266 # ' 1r o. 19- 1 .52A8r St t I ( I 241 5 _0, SR YI( 1,� I60o I�„!I .+1 ~ /S o�09�3�-_ 0.0938 e: I!i I I(z)3Zoo I w 7 o.Ito3aK ' JO.1(o3 tt (I; b I �� •I _ f 0.1431 0.1431 r.___.—. ..� 0_0�94 D.o�94 ' ER 1j1) (boo ;_. . . r .'� ' ::'�i 1 o.ol19 0.0 19 Wl - I I . __ O:q'112* _� O. 12 0o L _ 11.3_ wR 1) --• --- �.. J . 1� r...:-- �-a2 0.12 B 0.12 •I G.1600 4 0. 1000 'k U(',TNt "P:^ tMDH rFY.'•rlrr ' I h.IILR 1. U •,•,•,; :IHIt't o,l• k1'•'1N91 '•t•4Apl R/YYDPDSLD tNYRovim Its I.c.0 o.eGs aI :r,^I4'. ; '•FM+IT)E: t; alt,l•,hl '•'N'll Ma;. PROJECT I.c D. ••,-- L87S ' drojeCLed ,"'i . It ' t Hall is I .1•.II. 1a111 Ill It-%,. thtln t'1' rtpl.tl ' Lt• .1.9U fir(jectel' 1•,;r •t" • 1 f ','It is 1 .(:.Il. a.i I I tot' gvnator than 0. © I'.rt.lectt't: '': . , oi . 1 I ' •' 1It i .1, ,1•,. 611 LI it'lII'• ILtlll )Vl'llll"I' ' •illl_t)P I• 1 Add hov-4-1 bound (uV,C. • ("� Z . Acid horkh bound ri 9h i- -tu rn la m 3. Add souAbotund (elf '{LlrYi lane, �o).• 4. Add eas+bound leaf +UrY, lake- 60> ' ' 1 t. NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Department ' 1400 Tenth Street City of Newport Beach Sacramento, CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Clerk of the Board of ' Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 Santa Ana, CA 92702 NAME OF PROJECT: • ' .� "C 4 'C1� ��M ' PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: "Yl\c. accep-caNc c or- A. � �c`a pmc�c asp �\aw ' F02 CHI: RCCYNMtN1'Ne OPF\CC-) t- .SG%-Am I�-,d CGTCr Q\sTrlcr. I FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect ' on the environment. ' MITIGATION MEASURES: ' INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 1 DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: Environmental Coordinator Date: f MITIGATION MEASURES . y; J, 1 I . The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy �� 1 regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any ' 1 Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. Disclosure Statement 1 The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate 1 air service for business establishments which rely on such service; b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out 1 of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional 1 commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not actively oppose 1 any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet are service at the Orange County Airport. 2. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach 1 Municipal Code, 1 3. The project be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph G, Division T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4. 1 4. Should any resources be uncovered during construction, that a qualified archaeologist or paleontologist evaluate the site prior to completion 1 of construction activities, and in accordance with City Policies K-6 & K-7. 5. Final design of the project should provide for the incorporation of 1 water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using facilities. 1 6. The final design of the project should provide for zhe sor-,inL of recyclsbia material from other solid waste. 1 17. The development on the site should be in accordance with City policies on traffic. 1 1 n ' Planning Commission Meeting August 16 , 1979 ' Agenda Item No . 6 ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' August 15, 1979 ' TO : Planning Commission FROM: Department of -Community Development ' SUBJECT: "SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REPORT" Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remaining development In the Civic Plaza Planned ' co! munit District, and the acceptance of an Environmental Document. Discussion ' LOCATION : The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive , San Clemente Drive , Santa Barbara Drive, and Jamboree Road , in Newport Center. I ' ZONE : P-C APPLICANT:The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER : Same as Applicant ' Subsequ.ent to the August 9,. 1979 Planning Commission , the ' applicant ' s consultant provided the City with revised information pertaining to the Traffic Report. Based upon the new information and discussions with the applicant' s , staff suggests the following changes to conditions of approval as listed in the August 9 , 197.9 ' staff report ( italics indicate change) . Conditions ' 1 . That prior to the occupancy of any buildings on the site beyond the existing development and 95 ,812 sq . ft. of new ' construction , the circulation system improvements contained in the Traffic Report in Table 5 , Pages 7 through 9 , and listed below shall have been constructed, unless subsequent project approvals. require modification *thereto. The. circulation systems ' improvements. shall be subject' to the spprobal of the City Traffic xnginees. ' INTERSECTION : G . Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Add northbound through lane Hills Road and-eenvewi -wght-town-}one ' ' 'te-epi;�ena�-tHp®agh-er-wight Convert westbound through 4e€t-turn lane to optional ' through plus left. ~ ' TO : Planning Commission - 2 . K. Jamboree Road/MacArthur add southbo6nd through lane Boulevard Add northbound optional through ' right turn lane Gepaert-east- beapd-�}gHt-tarp-}aee-�e-egt}e�fa}: �Mweagq-ew-w#gh�: ' DEPARTMENT •OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R . V. HOGAN, DIRECTOR By. \ ' red Talarico Environmental Coordinator ' FT/dt Attachments : Corrections to Traffic Report ' Weston Pr4ngle & Associates - August 14, 1979 1 1 . 1 L ' R W + A ft TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING August 14, 1979 ' Mr. Ron Jonas The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive NeWDort Beach, California 92663 Dear Mr. Jonas: ' Enclosed are revised pages for the Civic Plaza Traffic Phasing Study. The revisions cover the intersections of Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road , ' and Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard. In both cases, improvements were indicated by others that are not required by the project and are now not re- quired by others. These improvements were related to the Prudential project ' which was not approved by the City. ' At Jamboree and San Joaquin Hills Road, the northbound right turn lane is not recommended to be converted to an optional through or right turn lane. This change had no effect upon the ICU calculation. At Jamboree and Mac Arthur, the eastbound right turn lane is not recommended to be converted to an optional ' through or right turn lane. The conversion of the northbound right turn lane to an optional through or right turn is recommended. These changes resulted in ' a lowering of the ICU value at this intersection. These revised pages can be inserted into our July 5, 1979 report. If you have ' any questions, please contact me. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES Z� Weston ngle, P.E. ' WSP: js #5452 1 ' 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 671-2931 f ' -5 ' Review of Table 3 indicates that 14 of the 16 intersections exceed the maximum ' two percent on at least one approach and must- be considered critical. ' ANALYSIS The 14 intersections identified in the previous section were further examined to ' determine potential impacts. Utilizing "Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis" forms from the Traffic Phasing Ordinance procedure, ICU values were determined and include regional growth and approved projects volumes. The ICU's also include improvements required by previously approved projects. These improvements are discussed in the next section. The individual analysis sheets are contained in ' Appendix B and summarized in Table 4. Review of• Table 4 indicates that two inter- sections are projected to exceed 0.90: Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, and ' Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard. All other intersections are below the 0.90 level. Since City Council Resolution Number 9422 allows 30 percent of development without ' improvement phasing, the 14 critical intersections were analyzed with existing plus 30 percent or the remaining; development•. These data are Included in Appendix C and summarized in Table 4. The ICU's [or the two intersections or Bristol Street ' North and Campus Drive, and Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard still exceed the 0.90 level under these conditions. ' As indicated in the previous paragraphs, two intersections have ICU's that exceed ' 0.90 whether they are analyzed with 30' percent of the project- development or with full development. It should also be noted that both of these intersections have ' ICU values greater than 0.90 without development of Civic Plaza. These two inter- sections are discussed in the rol,lowing paragraphs. ' BrIsLol SLi-vet North and Campus ilri.yo , Review of 'lable 4 and the related Sheets in Appendices B and C indicates ' that the project• would have no impact upon the ICU values at this intersection. Since project volumes are added to non-critical movements, the ICU values are equivalent for both cases with and without the project. Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard The ICU values at this intersection increase 0.0052 in 1981 as a result of ' the project. This increase would not be perceptible to drivers utilizing the intersection. In addition, with observed driver ' -6- tTable 4 ICU SUMMARY Civic Plaza (1) (1) (2) INTERSECTION ' EXISTING EXISTING + EXISTING + EXISTING + ' lq REGIONAL + REGIONAL + REGIONAL + COMMITTED COMMITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT 1981 1981 1982• 'Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. ,q 2&2✓ 0.9898 0.9256 0.9256 0.9279 0 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0,6467 0,6498 0.6613 (2) 'Coast Highway & Dover Dr. 0 0.99 0.6556 0.6623 0.678803 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr. .S,540 0.89 0.8051 0.8118 0.82820 'Coast Highway & Jamboree Rd. ,glIA 0 0.83 0,7644 0.7644 0.7650 B Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. 1-\ 1 51 0.68 0.7425 0.7466 0.7566 'Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 1151 5 0.53 0.6171 0.6233 0.63730 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. ,-►3+160.64 0,6473 0.6487 0.6522e Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd �1IZ15 __-0 83 0.7449 0,7517 0.77390 ----------- Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. ,(0 3 51 0.54 0,7944 0,8032 0.8247 (D Jamboree Rd. & Bristo`1 3t. N. ,SIS l 0.72 0,8219 0,8298 0.8489 ellJamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd. �93 y 0.85 0. 9326• 0.937.8 0.9284 Mac Arthur Blvd. & 'San Joaquin Hills Rd:' .,72 0.7945 0,8070 0.8368 l3 � Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 1.01 0,8653 0.8753 0.8997`� ' ( l�3 '(l) No Project Related Improvements are Considered'"in Calculations. i ' (2) Project Related Improvements are Included. �13Msu1t;5� 1 ' -7- ' characteristics in the area, the intersection would operate satisfactorily. Observations have indicated that, as intersections near capacity, the capacity is increased and yellow or lost time decreased. Construction of the Corona ' Del Mar Freeway and San Joaquin corridor would also result in improved conditions. ' CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT NEEDS The ICU analyses for the project included some circulation system improvements. All ' al' these improvments art, currently rrquircd as part of approved projects or planned as governmental projecLs. The improvements are summarized in Table 5 and illustrated in Figures 2, through 13. Table 5 ' SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Civic Plaza ' INTERSECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Bristol Street North/ Add southbound through lane. Re- Campus Drive quired by previously approved pro- ject. See Figure 2. ' Bristol Street/Campus Drive Add southbound through lane. See Figure 3. Required by previously ' approved project. Coast Highway/Dover Drive Add southbound left turn lane. ' Add southbound right turn lane. Add eastbound left turn lane. ' Add eastbound optional through or right turn lane. Add westbound right turn lane. City/CalTrans Project.. See Figure 4. Coast Highway/Bayside Drive Add eastbound through lane. ' Add westbound optional through or right turn lane. 1 1 - 8 - ' CalTrans Project. See Figure 5. Coast highway/Jamboree Road Add westbound through and west- bound left turn lanes. Required by previously approved project. See Figure 6. Jamboree Road/Santa Barbara Drive Add northbound through lane. Add southbound left turn lane. Add westhound lane. Required by previously approved project: See Figure 7. ' Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Add northbound through lane. hills Road Convert westbound through lane to optional through plus left. Required by previously approved project. ' See Figure 8. ' Jamboree Road/Eastbluff Drive- Convert northbound and south- Ford Road bound right turn lanes to ' optional through plus right. Add eastbound through lane. Convert westbound through ' lane to left turn lane. Re- Quircd by previously approved ' projecL. See Figure 9. ' Bristol Street/.jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane ' to northbound left turn lane. Required by previously approved ' project. Sec Figure, 10. t 1 - 9 - ' Bristol Street North/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane to northbound left turn lane. ' Required by previously approved pro it-ci . ' See Figure 11. ' Jamboree Road/Mac Arthur Boulevard Add northbound right turn lane. Required by previously approved project. Convert northbound right turn lane to optional through or right and ' add southbound through lane. Estimated Cost: $2,000.00 tSee Figure 12. Mac Arthur- Boulevard/Ford Road Add northbound left and right ' turn lanes, southbound left tern lane and eastbound left turn lane. ' City of Newport Beach project to be constructed 1979-80. See Figure 13. SUMMARY The ootential. impact of the proposed Civic Plaza site has been analyzed at 30 percent ' of development and at full development in 1982. Both analyses have indicated that two intersections would have ICU's greater than 0.90. For one intersection, the ' analysis indicates that with the project and improvements From approved projects, the ICU would be less than the existing ICU. It would also be equal to the 1981 and ' 1989 TCU without the project. Conversely, for the other intersection, the analysis indicates that the 1982 TCU would be more than the ICU without the project although would still be greater than 0.90. I � . .SO .o0`Z o I � CONVERT THROUGH LANE w I TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND a o LEFT TURN LANE I n SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD r r �j ADD THROUGH LANE I RECOMMENDED CONFTCURATTON AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREH ROAD/SAN JOAQUIN II•ILLS ROAD WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 8 1 NOT TO SCA i ADD T1IROUGII LANE / / \ ADD THROUGH OR 1 � \ RIGIIT TURN LANE 1 1 . 1 RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION ' AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD /MAC ARTHUR BOULEVARD 1 1 FIGURE 12 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES u III I I NI IUf NHrtL 1 . l.a II' r t.., Cif[r•,t(�rsnction �q • {�O 2 >�OGI� l� r7 M �IOAq�tl (Existing Traffic Volu ,VS Base on vera9e inter ring 19/ ' C%1 STING PKNAEO 1 EXISI EXIST REGIONAL LOEMITTLD PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT Movt'n nt Lanes Cal ( Lane+ CrP ! PR HR V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/C Ratio ( Col, Ra Llo VOL. Vol. W/o Project 1 Vol. NL I • o I o oB a d.oesa ' NT (?)y800 j o2 0.z3/5 a 2s/: NR n 1 3 O. oPS; 10 0. 09/ ' S� —; - . o/Sys 6-7 o./7t6 ST CO T ' SR lbrana33 a iysd 9415-4' EL I I 00 j • Q 9.0 7 S' h.o32 ' ET _ Q 27 ,oz7 ER WL ' WT O I —go0 � WR S1 LXISTISG : ..;SECTION CAPACITi UTILTM ION CC#MITTEO PLU5 REGIONAL`ROW91 W,'PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 UISTNY P:JS COMIITTEO PIGS REGI01U1 GROWTH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. p,t�sZZ I ' Projected 111u! project Lr•rltfiC I .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected plu , project trtlrfic I .C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ' Projected plut> Ir•oject LratfiC I .C.U. with SySLenIS inlprovelnentS will be less. thou or equal to 0.90 ' � rr' Cri(I:, tVii Irl , /' Ir'�i' IIIIIriIP/elll('IIL: AJJ horA bcwnd -I-hraujh lane . (o) ' Z Co-tiv¢r+ wes I boE,,c/ la ha Fo optcaxal +hr USh plus leaf �o) IN1IK',t !" IION CAPACITY 11111.I1.AIION ANALYSIS avd Intersection A nr� gt�� ' Existing lraff+c Vol(In1e ase on verage Winter prTng 197_ EXISTING MPfn USED i EXIST EXIST REGIONAL COMMITTED PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT Mover,er.t LaneS Cap Pane: Pro 1 nb HR 1'/C GROWTH PROJECT Y/C Ratio Volume V/C Ratio ' _-- Vol. Ratio VOL. VOL. w/oVol Protect 1 � 401. NL I I W)o ;_ { y" O. a/Bag o•o/BS NT I a•zoBB 20 a. 38 NR _ � 1 0•/36/ ' SL --- — 0. 199 l7.ogr/ ST 3)dBov_t 4-3 0•Z77S4 Its 0• 1971 ' SR EL Q9 ' ET 4900 - MN_ a 1 3 o. 7-ZSO oZo2 02z94 ER -S . . ' WL , - -- (` 5T D 3/f/// O.32oo WT ' I 1±:1 t O• zoS6Y WR _.i 0 V rELLMITIME 0,/0ob 0 /pov ' LIIII14G :N!E°SECTION CAPACITY UT111,14 Ion —H ELiSTi.G PLUS CO!MITTEO PI US RECIONA: aluall! W/PROPOSED TMPROVIMLNIS I.C.0 • 57-; Ettr:STING PLUS COIMITTEU PtUti RIGIPNAL SROWTII PIIIS PROJECT I.C.U. G.9LS�f Projected ;IlUS projoCt Lraffic I.C.11. will be less than or equal ' to 0.90 ' ® Projected Iglus project trafficI .C.1i. will be greater than 0.90 ' Projected Ills(•, poo1l'(.t II'd ific I .C.11. with .,, .L(!urv, i'111 - )von111 t' will be losti Ii!aU or equal Lo 0.90 ' ��• (.rill l, in� / 61 III?'r •�VCIUCIIL: - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of ' Add .•n �riae ��/y10r+hbouvld ri,00,7 � �"/us ,:stir Z. Add so�� bov� � ����y �� /G•�e c,�� ,11//*rl✓7'X •� ;NTE"itSt (.'IIIIN CAPACITY UTILUA110N ANALYSIS ' Intersection _. ('JO 2 I (^tlJ�ovS�f ' (Existing Traffic Volute Based on Average linter ring 197 Movement EXISTING PROPOSE) J EXIST t EXIST REGIONAL COtT1ITTED PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT Lanes Cap I Laney Cap PK HR VC GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/C Ratio ' Val. Ratio VOL. VOL. w/o Project Vol. ' NL 1 ! I� ` p I9 D.o838* O•o838 N7_ (jlggoo ' 2I7 �D.Z3/2 o.a3/Z NR n Q3 14 0, 0,91 ' SL J o. Zv O.lbo9 ST 00 _ , IQ l I81 0.38/6d� 0.381 (a ' SR _ FL 00 i . 0 o•D325* 0-032.5 ' ET ER _ 3 ' WL g WT O l 0 WR �ofa — _ 5 ' 0./oOo O•IpoO iCLLOw4IME _ EXISTING !NTr;SECTION CAPACITY UTILI7ATION ' E./:S'.i!.0 iLUS COMIITTEO PIUS RLGIONAI GROWTH W/PNOPOSLO IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 Q,4j 3 EX:%TINS PIUS COMi17TED PLUS RIGIONA1 GROWTH PI INS PROJECT I.C.U. —77 P•�yB7 ' Projected plus I,roject traffic I .C.U. will be less than -or equal to 0.90 1 ' Projected plu_. lor(i uLt treffiC I .C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ' © Projected Plus ProjeCL Lratfic I .C.U. with syst.enls ililproveillents will be less tha,J or equul to 0.90 ' �d':trill:, Ir"; _ - - - - _ _ Add rlor+hhound -I-hrovuh lane. (a) Convey+ Wes+bound fh,o ,yh lane -I-o op+i0>1al -Phroujh plus lef4. Cod is LrR:, ':.iIlvl LAPACITY UIILIZA110N ANALYSIS 1 V4 cl) Inatf'l Lion -l[�(`nhnye (Existing 1ralf`r Vnlume ase on Average ter prTng 19T 1 --- —xi - Nu.lr.Kr.t kxIS11NG�- I'aW 0'�l.I iSI I.LIST REGIONAL COMMIT) PROJUILO PROJECT PROJII.1 Lanes Cap .a��u•. p { "r; HR v/C GROWTH PROJLCT V/C Ratio Volume V/L Ratio 1 Vol. I Ratio VOL, VOL. w/oProject( ; i Vol.Yol ' 4 D. 018DO.OISB NL I I 1 —_t-��_" O 1 NT �2)3200 3 5 0. o �r 2106 NR I(�oo0 I 60 0. 13 6 D.1 1 44 SL ------Y o. OB D.CB ST 3 _ . i I 143 0.185.0 3 0.185b 1 SR __..��3 62 — 3 — EL I1 __.r4' �a� �7 0.328) 0.33 MET ! - -- _ 1 2 193 . Z?1T0 x 70.ZZ6 1 TER .s . — WC—L _'_ _ ' 2 ' ' 57 0.3144 3 n. /63 4 1 WT --- _-I Ql�]_ I 102 b. 3 r.V163 1 WR10 0.1ooD k # Y(Ll(W.TIP.E Lx(ST 14G IN'ERSECTIOX CAPACITY LTll 1;i.T 10N i 1 EXIST i'.] :-L'S CO MITTED PLUS RLCT04A1_GROW711 W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 6 3 Z Ei;STI4G PLJS MVITTEO PLLS RE(,I^.NAI OROWTIJ PIUS PROJECT I.C.U. 13J�i 1 �(1) MacAY4kur is n.'iti Sou+l'1 Projected ;`III`. l)k•n.I#'ct traffic I .C.U. will be less than-or equal 1 to 0.90 0 Projected plu'. nrrljlar L t.rdffic I .C.II. will he grratl`r than 11.9!1 1 Projected lih- , pru.Wul tral ( ic 1 .C.11. with "y`,taur, iulpruvonu`nl.`•' will be le- : 11,m n: ('foul to 0.9O 1 Yrml :a nHul veuN:nl - 1 1. Auld y;or 4kbound r ghk "Ay" lane. Cu) 1 ' Planning Commission Meeting August 9 ,_ 1979 Agenda Item No. B ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' August 1 , 1979 TO: Planning Commission ' FROM: Department of Community Development ' SUBJECT: Request to consider a Phasing Plan for the remain- inq development in the Civic Plaza Planned Commun- it District, and the acce tance of an Environmen- tal Document. Discussion ' LOCATION: The Planned Community of Civic Plaza , generally bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road , Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive , Santa Barbara Drive , and Jam- boree Road, in Newport Center. ZONE: P-C ' APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach ' OWNER: Same as 'Applicant Background Information ' The Irvine Company has requested approval of a Phasing Plan to comply with Resolution No. 9742 of the Newport Beach City Council ' and Amendment No. 514 as it pertains to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza . Attached for the Planning Com- mission ' s consideration in regard to this request are : ' a) Resolution No. 9517 b) City Council Minutes-March 12 , 1979-"Civic Plaza" c) City Council Minutes-March 12, 1979-"Test of Reason- ' ' ableness " d) Letter-The Irvine Company-July 10 , 1979 e) Narrative on Planning Commission-"Test of Reasonable- ness"-July 1979 ' f) Traffic Report prepared by Weston Pringle and Assoc- iates , dated July 5, 1979 , for the applicants g) Negative Declaration ' Environmental Significance The City of Newport Beach Environmental Affairs Committee has re- viewed the project and determined that it will not have signifi - cant environmental effect. A copy of the Negative Declaration is attached. r i , TO: Planning Commission - 2 , Phasing Plan ' The applicants have indicated that development in the Civic Plaza Planned Community, if the Phasing Plan is approved, would occur as follows : PHASING SCHEDULE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT ' Art Museum 20,000 sq. ft. 1980 OCCUPANCY Library 14,000 sq. ft. Offices 81,812 sq. ft. 1981 OCCUPANCY Art Museum 10 ,000 sq . ft. , Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. Offices 152 ,894 sq . ft. ' Theater 20 ,000 sq-. ft, Resolution No. 9517 Attached for the Planning Commission ' s consideration is a copy of the applicant' s response to the Planning Commission guidelines for reviewing the Phasing Plan , as modified by the City Council (Attachment "E" ) . Additionally, a copy of Resolution No. 9517 and the City Council Minutes for March 12, 1979 are attached. Traffic Report A Traffic Report was prepared for the applicant by Weston Pringle and Associates . The Traffic Report examined the 16 intersections ' identified for analysis in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. It is summarized on the following page : 1 r TO: Planning Commission - 3 --y ICU NlkmAPRY ' Civic 1'laia (1•) (1) (1) iNTF.RSECTION EXISTING EXISTING + EXISTING + EXISTING + 1:13CIONAL + REGIONAL + REGIONAL + II, ' COMMITTED COM1,1ITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT t981 1981 . 1982 Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. 0.9898 0.9256 0.9256 0.9279 ' Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0.72 0,6467 0,6498 0.6613 Coast llighway & Dover Dr, 0.99 0.6556 0.6623 0.6788 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr. 0.89 0,8051 0.8118 0.8282 Coast Flighway ,, Jamboree Rd. 0.83 0,7644 0,7644 0,7650 Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. 0.68 0,7425 0,7466 0.7560 Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.53 0.6171 0.6233 0.6373 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin .11ills Rd. 0.64 0,6473 0.6487 0.6522 ' Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 0.83 0.7449 0,7517 0.7739 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.54 0,7944 0,8032 0,8247 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N. 0.72 0,8219 0,8298 0.8489 ' Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd, 0.85 0.9269 0.9338 0.9496 Mac Arthur II1vd. & San Joaquin Ilills Rd, 0.72 0,7945 0,8070 0.8368 ' Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 1.01 0,8653 0.8753 0.8997 ' (1) No Project Related Improvements are Considered in Calculations. ' The Traffic Report found that Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 2% of projected 22 hour traffic volume only at the inter- sections of: 1 ) Coast Hwy. /Newport Center Dr. , and 2) Coast Hwy./ MacArthur Blvd. Therefore , ICU calculations were made for the re- maining 14 intersections as noted above. The applicant' s consul - tant has indicated that two intersections , Bristol Street North/ ' Campus Drive and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Blvd. , will be operating upon completion of the project at 0. 9000 or greater. : t TO: Planning Commission - 4 ' ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION ' Suggested Action If desired , accept the Negative Declaration and approve the Phas- ' ing Plan with the findings and subject to the conditions , as fol - lows : - FINDINGS : ' 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been pre- pared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality ' Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. 2. That based on the information contained in the Initial Study t and Negative Declaration, the project will not result in sig- nificant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach ' General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza. ' 4. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information submitted therewith , there is a reasonable correlation be- tween projected traffic at time of completion and the capa- city of affected intersections . 5. That the applicant has taken into consideration in the prepar- ation of his plan characteristics in the design of his devel - opment which either reduce traffic generation or guide traf- fic onto less impact arterials or through intersections in the least congested direction. CONDITIONS : 1. That prior to the occupancy of any buildings on the site be- ' yond the existing development and 95,812 sq . ft. of new con- struction that the circulation system improvements contained in the Traffic Report in Table 5, Pages 7 through 9, and ' listed below shall have been constructed. INTERSECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ' A. Bristol Street North/ Add southbound through lane Campus Drive B. Bristol Street/Campus Drive Add southbound through lane t C. Coast Highway/Dover Drive Add southbound left turn lane Add southbound right turn lane Add eastbound left turn lane i TO: Planning Commission -- 5 ' Add eastbound optional through or right turn lane Add westbound right turn lane D . Coast Highway/Bayside Drive Add eastbound through lane Add westbound optional through or right turn lane ' E. Coast Highway/Jamboree Road Add westbound through and west- bound left turn lanes ' F. Jamboree Road/Santa Barbara Add northbound through lane Drive Add southbound left turn lane Add westbound lane ' G. Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Add northbound through lane Hills Road and convert right turn lane ' to optional through or right Convert westbound left turn lane to optional through plus left. ' H. Jamboree Road/Eastblu•Ff Drive- Convert northbound and south- Ford Road bound right turn lanes to op- tional through plus right ' Add eastbound through lane Convert westbound through lane to left turn lane ' I . Bristol Street/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane to northbound left turn lane J. Bristol Street North/Jamboree Convert northbound through Road lane to northbound left turn t lane K. Jamboree Road/MacArthur Add northbound right turn ' Boulevard lane Convert eastbound right turn lane to optional through or right. ' L. MacArthur Boulevard/Ford Add northbound left and right Road turn lanes , southbound left turn lane and eastbound left turn lane 2. That no further development beyond that allowed by the Phasing Plan shall be allowed on this site. 1 : i T0: Planning Commission - 6 1 3. That prior to the issuance of any building permits , the ap- plicants shall indicate to the Director of Community De- 1 velopment in writing that they understand and agree to con- ditions 1 and 2 above. OR 1 If the Planning Commission desires to deny the Phasing Plan , the following findings are suggested for consideration : 1 FINDINGS : 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been pre- 1 pared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and City Policy K-3, and that their contents have been considered in the decision on this project. 1 2. That based on the information contained in the Initial Study and Negative Declaration , the project will not result in sig- nificant environmental impacts . 3. That the Phasing Plan is consistent with the Newport Beach General Plan and the Planned Community Development Plan for 1 Koll Center Newport. 4. That based on the Phasing Plan and supporting information 1 submitted therewith , there is not a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at time of completion and the capa- city of the intersections of Bristol Street North/ Campus Dr. and Jamboree Road/MacArthur Boulevard. 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. V. HOGAN, d 1 By Tala 1 Fre ri _0 Environmental Coordinator FT/gg 1 Attachments: 1. Negative Declaration 2. Letter-The Irvine Company-July 10, 1979 3 . Response to "Test of Reasonableness Guide- lines"-July 1979 4. Traffic Report-July 5, 1979 , 5 . Resolution No . 9517 6. City Council Minutes 1 1 1 I 1 r IESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ' OF NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING THE PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR CIVIC PLAZA REVISING THE ALLOWABLE DEVELOPMENT ESTABLISHING A PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND ACCEPTING AN ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT (AMENDMENT NO. 527) ' WHEREAS, Section 20.51.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides that amendments to a Planned Community ' Development Plan shall be approved by a resolution of the City Council setting forth full particulars of the amendments; ' and WHEREAS, tl3e Planning Commission conducted a public ' hearing on February 8, 1979, at which time it considered amend- ments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza; and ' WHEREAS, at said public hearing the Planning Commission 'adopted its Resolution No. 1032 recommending to the City Council ' that certain amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted as follows: ' 1. The allowed development for the Office Park area is reduced by 85,294 square feet, and the Civic Cultural by 16,000 square feet as indicated in the following table: Total Allowable ' Land Use (Existing P-C) Revised 11ota1 Office Park 320,000 sq. ft. 234,706 Art Museum 30,000 sq. ft. 30,000 Library 30,000 sq. ft. 14,000 ' Theater 20,000 sq. ft. 20,000 ' Restaurant 8,000 sq. ft. 8,000 408,000 sq. ft. 306,706 2. A Phasing of Development Plan for Civic Plaza be adopted to read as follows: "PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT 34,000 sq. ft. of development was existing or under construction as of January 1, 1979. The additional allowable development in the total approved development plan is 272,706 sq. ft, Any ' further development subsequent to Januar 1, 1979, in excess of 303 of the additional allowable development, being 81,812 sq. ft., shall be approved only after it can be demonstrated that adequate traffic facilities will be available to ' handle that traffic generated by the project at the time of occupancy of the buildings involved. Such demonstration may be made by the presentation of a phasing plan consistent with the Circulation ' Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. In the review of this phasing plan, a test of reasonableness should be applied, rather than the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance." ' 3. The Revised Site Plan, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof, be adopted; and WHEREAS, the city Council finds and determines that said amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza as set forth above are desirable and necessary; and t WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted a public hearing on said proposed amendments in accordance with all provisions of law, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council t of the city of Newport Beach hereby approves the proposed amendments to the Planned Community Development Plan for Civic ' Plaza as set forth hereinabove. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the environmental document is hereby accepted. ' ADOPTED this 12th day of March ,• 1979. , Mayor ' ATTEST% 1 City Clerk ' DDO/kb 3/8/79 ' It P', . r rP CkMkEF1 " 13" l CiTY OF NEWPORT BEACH MINUTES � �\v\\ o kiOl L CALL• March 12, 1979 INDEX gac�tion proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence-3T(-os to meet the test. The regular order of the AS was resumed. I 3. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regarding Newport Planning Commission Amendment No. 527, a request Center ' initiated by the City of Newport Beach to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned Community Plaza Development Plan to require the preparation of a (2285) traffic phasing plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an ' Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive in Newport Center; zoned P-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. Ron Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed ' the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and'that the project be considered on a 30%/70% approach. Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined ' All Ayes that no one else desired to be heard. Motion x Councilman Hummel made a motion that the test of reasonableness be applied to 100% of the Civic , ' Plaza project. ( Councilman Heather made a statement for the record, as follows: "I feel that this project ' which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and is now being further impinged by 100% development review instead of 30%, I think that it is beyond the scope of this Council to . make that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- irate against this project." Motion x Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to ' ! continue the item to March 26. Notion I x Councilman McInnis made a substitute substitute Ayes xI x x x motion to adoRt Resolution No. 9517 amending the R-9517 Noes x Ix x Planned Community Development Plan for Civic Plaza ' I I revising the allowable development plan, and aT ccepting €in.enviro_nmental documenTt, which motion carried. ' F. CONTINUED BUSINESS: 1. Previously considered. �. �.J 2, A report was presented from the mu Comnity Develop- Newport Place ' ment Department regarding-Planning Commission Planned action with regard to-a request of Emkay Develop- Community ment an�lty'Company for the approval of a (1275) Volume 33 - Page 60 1 � 1 I II CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH `Q .,,•al II MI N p r MINUTES ' . r'`r p _ 1L,rch_ I7, I9/0 INDEX I I � I I available for potential office Building. Addition n11y, The Irvine Company requests that 4,156 eq. i fr. of space be reallocated from Pacific Coast highway Eaot and Heat, and 1,511 sq. ft. of space ' I Cram .1thar Block SOO or Block 700, at their Sprint, hu reallocated to Black 800 In Newport Center to allow far the coSetruction of a 10,000 sq. ft. restaurant which would contain a maximum of ' '667 eq. ft. of net public area. I A port was presented from the Community Develop- men Department. Ilarry ubb, President, and Steven Gavin, Vice ' Presid t Corporate Relation Officer, of Pacific i I Mutual L fe Insurance addressed the Council. Mr. Gavin eta ad that they were reducing the elevation by three core and would be willing to continue ' for not mar than six weeks, if necessary; that they would It willing to eliminate the high-rise condominiums, u[ that they would continue to be committed to a m![ige[ion required for the two ten-story build ga, traffic end otherwise, and ' all other Condit na. Robert Shelton of a Irvine Company, addressed the Council and stet d that the condominiums were Included in the Envir ental Impact Report , because of a previous rection of the Council. Donald Gralneck, repress ing Pacific Mutual ' Insurance, addressed the uncil and asked If the ordinance were changed to Leta reference to the residential development, if hat would require a revision to the ordinance nex time to come back for reintroduction, or if it v uld be enacted at that time. The City Attorney stated that the c[ion would 1 lover the density of the project a could be considered on April 23, if continue to that date, without reintroduction. Cary Schamberg, President of Eastbluff omeownere ' Association, addressed the Council rega ing the necessity for developers to Institute sou d atten- uatlon factors along Jamboree Road, and we asked to submit a letter with suggestions propose by the ' Association. Ix , The public hearing was continued to Apr11_23, th %II Av,h , the applicant stipulating eoheuitconce to continuation. ' I rite Council unanimously agreed to Cnkn Agenda Item F-1 oat-of order and consider 1C aC this time. I A report wee presented from the Community Devalopmmnt ' Department regarding the Planning Commission's racom- mendutiono concerning the definition of the term "rensonnhloneae" AS applied Lo A traffle phasing Plan 1 For "excepted" Planned Community Districts. Volume 33 - Page 50 ' , i I I I ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH bit NUTfS , PA 1 • INDEX ' ' r I ' I:u riluu 0.,••rt i'rea ldenr of the rhwporr Ilarbor Arch Chamber al' Cormnerre, and Michael C. Gering addressed the Cour r ll, but were ruled out of Order by the Mayor ' for nal addressing the subject under conniderat Lon. The Lntnrmntinn Co be submitted by the developer, as I reconuneAed by the Plxnnin6 Coumisaion in connection i uL[h the Ceaf Of"eusona6re, 'for applicable planned ' communities, was modified to change the percentage of increase Sn item 3 from 5% to 2%, to revise item 2 Av,•ti I x I I x x x and Co'ndd items*] arid_R:-••"fhe list was approved as fellows: ' (a) Each project subject to the phasing requirement I of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent Of existing development and the amount of development remaining to be completed. ' I (b) Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. ' I i (c) An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the project to determin what improvements remain to be completed, with particular consideration being given to those ' improvements which will directly aid in moving traffic generated by the project. The area to be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increase the traffic for any leg of the intersection durin ' I the peak two and one-half hour period by 29 or more. (d) Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. ' (e) The developer may include in his proposed traffic phasing plan completion of or contribu- tion to completion of needed improvements con- sistent with the level of traffic generation and • I a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. (f) The developer is also to take into consideration l in the preparation of his plan characteristics ' in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersections i in the least congested direction. (g) Upon receipt of the plan aad in[OM'-1LOn, the Commission will determine whether [here is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic I I I I I i at time of project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. ' I I { Volume 33 - Page 59 ' I li • � ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH , ,;u It Mt N MINUTE$ ' t y 4 A, sfya�� •r�;����ta,. 12 AT t yP y\ ' Narrh 1�, 1979 INDEx � (h) M[t lgatian proposed needs to Indicate degree of , permanence in order to meet tlu rent, 1 The regular order of the Agena was renamed. ' i1. Mayor Ryckoff opened the public hearing regnrJink Newport Planning Comminnion Amnnilmen"o, 527, a request Center ' I initiated by the City of Newport Bench to consider Civic an amendment to the Civic Plaza Planned Community plaza Devela aRE—PPlan to.require. the preparation of a (2285) tra i-f£c Ring plan and reduction in allowable intensity of development and the acceptance of an Environmental Document on property bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente ' Drive, and Santa Barbaralrive in Newport Center; zoned T-C. A report was presented from the Community Develop- ment Department. ' Hon Hendrickson of The Irvine Company addressed the Council and stated that Council had voted to make Civic Plaza an excepted project, and asked that the revised P-C Plan be approved, and that ' the project be considered on a 30X/701 approach. i Motion x The hearing was closed after it was determined All Ayes that no one elan desired to be heard, rh-tlon It Councilman Hummel made a notion that the test of ' reasonableness be applied to 10DX of the Civic Plaza project. Councilman Heather made a statement for the , record, as follows: "I feel that this project which was accepted and has had its zone changed and reduced, and to now being further impinged by IOOX development review instead of 30%, I think , that it is beyond the scope of this Council to , mks that kind - I, personally feel, legally, that we do not have the right to further discrim- imata against this project." M't Inn xI Councilman Hart made a substitute motion to ' continue the item to March 26. Nation j IT Councilman McInnis made a substitutq subptitute .1va•3 t x1 x x x motion to adopt,Resolution,No. 9517 amending the R-9517 !1."4 Ix x x I Planned Conmunity Development Plan for Civic Plaza ' rrvvie�ng� ali e aaAlb development'plan,,and 1 i I I occo�Tng Tn an"v1•ronmental document, whiWinotion 1 , carried:' I + F. CONTINUED BUSINESS: , ( I i. Previously considered. 7. A report was presented from the Community Develop- Newport Place , mane Brpartmene regarding Planning Commission Planned I action with regardrequest to A of*£mjtny Develop- Community ment and Realty Company for the approval of a (1275) 1 � I � Volume 33 - Page 60 ' - - - -- -_--- THE IRVINE COMPANY 660 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, California 92663 ' (714) 644-3011 July 10, 1979 \>'11•%.�/ RECEIVED Community Planning Commission �/y Development City f Newport Beach Dept ' y o P JUL 1 01979z- 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 6 cI1Y0e• NEWPORT EACH, 92663 CALIF. ' SUBJECT: Civic PLaza Traffic Phasing Plan Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission: To order to proceed with full development of the Civic Plaza site in accordance with the City's P.C. district regulations, we are submitting attached Traffic Phasing Plan ' for your approval. City Council Resolution No. 9472 sets forth guidelines for the "test of reasonableness" to be used in evaluating such projects. It is our. belief that the attached Traffic Phasing Plan has been prepared in compliance with all ' applicable City regulations and, in fact,meets the criteria established for the test of reasonableness. The Traffic Phasing Plan was prepared assuming that development .currently in process ' under Lhe 30% exception rule would be fully occupied in 1980. The additional 70% of future allowed development, according to our Traffic Phasing Plan, is scheduled to be devoloped and occupied in 1981. The attached traffic study and responses ' identify the traffic impacts associated with the proposed development. Our proposed site development phasing plan is Summarized as follows: ' 1980 - Occupancy of existing plus development in process under the 30% rule. (This includes 34,000 sq. ft. for., the art museum and library, plus approximately 81,000 sq. ft-. additional) . ' 1981 - Occupancy of remainder of allowed development, subject to the 70% phasing requirement. (This includes approximately 190,000 square feet consisting of office/restaurant/theater uses, and an addition to the art museum.) ' Within Lhc traffic LimLti.ng parameters, it. is highly desirable from our poLnt of ' view to complete the Civic Plaza development at the earliest fe�isibl-e date. This would minimize aesthetic impacts due to,grading and construction, and would allow the most effective implementation of erosion control measures. ' Responses to the City's guidelines for Traffic Phasing approval are attached. 1 1 ' 1 • l JUIy 9, 1979 14 ' page 2 We hopo that this lottor, along with the aLLachcd Trarfir Plan will answer ' your gUOSLinus and concern; related Lo traffic imparts due to the develop— ImdnL of the Civic Plaza P.C. Should you have any additional questions or , Comments, please feel free to contact me or our Traffic Consultant. Yours very truly, Ronald W. Hendrickson ' Director, Dosign/Construction Commerical/Industrial Division RtdH:lk encls. 1 1 ' CIVIC PLAZA TRAFFIC PHASING PLAN 1 Item 1 ' Each project subject to the phasing requirement of Council Resolution No. 9472 shall be examined as to the extent of existing development and'the amount of ' development remaining to be completed. The Civic Plaza Planned Community provides for five separate land uses on the site. upon completion of the entire project, the PC provides for the following ' identified land use developments: Art museum 30,000 sf Library 14,000 sf ' Restaurant 8,000 sf Offices 234,706 sf Theater 20,000 sf' ' The only presently developed land use on the site is the Newport Beach Art Museum with 20,000 square feet. Additional land uses for the site which 'for traffic ' analysis purposes are under construction or in the process of development are the City of Newport Beach Library and 81,812 square feet of offices under the 300 rule. Those portions of the planned community which would remain to be developed upon approval of the Traffic Phasing Plan are the restaurant, 152,894 square feet ' of offices, the 650 seat theater, and 10,000 additional square feet for the museum. Item 2 ' Information shall be submitted indicating the amount of traffic being generated by existing development, that projected for remaining development, and traffic that will exist after completion of the project. ' Based on the appropriate traffic generation rates as identified in the Newport Center Phase II Traffic Study, the total traffic- to be generated by the site is ' as follows. ' July 1979 1 1 p.m. Peak Hour +� ' ADT In Out Existing - Occupied ' Art museum - 20,000 sf 840 20 20 Under Development - 1980 Occupancy , Library - 14,000 sf 588 10 10 Offices - 81,812 sf 1,064 49 140 ' Sub-total 1,652 59 150 Future Development - 1981 Occupancy ' Art museum - 10,000 sf 420 10 10 ' Restaurant 400 40 20 Offices - 152,894 sf 1,988 91 260 Theater 975 n/a n/a Sub-total 3,783 141 290 ' Total PC 6,275 220 460 ' The amount of traffic to be' generated by the completion of all remaining develop- ment in the peak hour is shown on Table 2 of the attached report. The existing portion of the art museum was not included in that analysis as it was an existing , land use and included in existing traffic volume data. Item 3 An examination shall be made of the circulation system in the vicinity of the , project to determine what improvements remain to be completed, with particular 7 P consideration being given to those improvements which will directly aid in moving , traffic generated by the project. The area to• be examined shall extend to those intersections where traffic generated from the project increases the traffic for any leg of the intersection during the peak 2h hour period by 2% or-more: Table 3 of the attached report summarizes the analysis for critical intersection identif.ioation, with the backup calculation sheets included in Appendix A. Identifying critical intersections was based on the intersections to be examined ' by the procedures of the'Traffic Phasing Ordinance for the area in which Civic Plaza is identified, and further examination is included for any intersection for which the project would increase traffic by 2% or more during the 2k hour period. , The site is bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive, and Santa Barbara Drive. All roadway improvements adjacent to the site , have been previously improved and completed by.the owner. -2- 1 I� Item 4 ' Existing traffic at those intersections shall be shown prior to making any projections. ' Existing traffic volumes for all identified critical intersections are shown in Appendix B, Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis. Item 5 The developer may include in his proposed Traffic Phasing Plan completion of or contribution to completion of needed improvements consistent with the level of ' traffic generation and a reasonable proportion of the cost of these improvements. As previously identified, the landowner has already made the identified ultimate ' General Plan improvements on the roadways adjacent to the site. Due to this previous contribution by the landowner to completion of the roadway system, no deficiencies on the existing circulation have been identified adjacent to the site. Table 5 identifies a summary of circulation system improvements included in future period ICU calculations. All of these improvements are required as a ' part of approved projects or are planned as-government, projects. of the projects identified, the landowner has committed over $152,000 in the improve- ment of the Ford/MacArthur intersection'. ' Item 6 The developer is also to take into consideration in the preparation of his plan ' characteristics in the design of his development which either reduce traffic generation or guide traffic onto less impacted arterials or through intersec- tions in the least congested direction. ' The proposed land use plan reflects a reduction in traffic generated over the original approved PC for the site. The proposed land use plan reflects a 26.60 reduction in office use of that initially approved with the existing PC being ' amended in April 1979. The current PC also includes a mix of land uses which have beneficial traffic generation impacts in the peak hours, such as 'the proposed theater, library and museum. Although of a higher generation rate, a restaurant at this site will potentially serve to divert some trips from the surrounding area in the peak hours. ' -3 a . Tf._tn G (continued) 'a ' Tull access to the site is to be taken from San Clemente and Santa Rosa, with ' a restricted right turn only access from San Joaquin Bills Road. San Clemente and Santa Rosa were identified in the Newport Center Traffic Study as roadways with a less degree of utilization than other roadways in the vicinity of the ' site. The internal circulation system of the site is oriented towards encour- aging vehicles to utilize these roadways for ingress/egress from the Civic Plaza site and Newport Center area. The orientation of traffic to Santa Rosa and San Joaquin Hills Road intersection and Santa Barbara/Jamboree intersection ' are intended to encourage traffic to divert to non-critical movements at the San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree intersection. Item 7 ' Upon receipt of the plan and information, the Commission will determine whether there is a reasonable correlation between projected traffic at the time of ' project completion and capacity of affected intersections in considering the project for approval. The attached traffic study had identified two intersections that will have ICU's ' that exceed .90 in 1982 after full project completion; these are the intersec- tions of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, .and the intersection of Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, with projected ICU's of .9279 and .9496, respectively. ' For the Bristol Street North and Campus intersection, with or without approval of the project, the intersection has a projected ICU value of .9279. This is ' due to the project generated traffic being added to a non-critical movement through the intersection. Thus, approval or denial of the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at this intersection. For the Jamboree and MacArthur intersection, the project increases the ICU ' analysis value by .0227 in 1982. The traffic consultant has indicated in his report that drivers utilizing this intersection would not perceive this increase, ' and in his opinion, the intersection would operate satisfactorily. He has also identified that the construction of the Corona del Mar Freeway would also result in improved conditions at this intersection. Item 8 , Mitigation proposed needs to indicate degree of permanence in order to meet the ' test. The land use reductions made in the April 1979 PC amendment reflect a perman- ent reduction in land use intensity and traffic generation for this site. ' The roadway improvements' identified as necessary for the approval of other projects are considered as permanent fixed facility improvements although , additional modifications such as re-stripping, construction to ultimate (where appropriate) and signal operations modifications, may also occur in the -future. -4- ' v, + Ldt "" " — — — ---- -- ---- ' TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ' tiny 5, 197Q ' +ir. Run Ilcndricksun rumnnercial/ lndustri'al Division I'I.o Irvine Cumpanv ' i'iU No�dpurl (:r•iil er Drive . Ntwporf Brach, Cali (cn-nia 92043 Dear Mr. Ilundricicson: ' rilis letter stuuinarizes our analysis ol'' Llic frafl"ic requirements or the dev(.l- opment of Civic Plaza with rc81)"L Lu circulation improvement phasing. The study ' was conducted to evaluate the circulation needs in response to the Newport Beach Citv Council Resolution Number 9472 requiring an improvement phasing plan for this project. ' 'The study was based upon current planning for Civic Plaza and previous traffic studies related to this project-. Previous studies include the following: ' 1. Newport Center Traffic Study, Phase II, Cronunelin-Pringle and Assoc- iatcs, Tnc. 1976. . ' 2, Civic plaza I•:LR 'Traffic :Analysis, (:Ionunelin-Pringle•and Associates, Inc. 1975. ' Tn addition, current traffic volume data, regional traffic growth data, and committed pro joc Ls were providod by Ow City. ' pinux'r DFSCRTPTTON (:ivic Plaza is loca( ed within the Newport ('onLe•r area aL the sourhwost corner of San Joaquin dill': KoAd mid :�apia Cruz: hrivi•. Vehicular accrsa will hr provided 11, San Joaquin ',ills Road, 5mtta CruzS Drive, an Cnu•ni:lrl Drive and Sauta Bu• 'ba D ru' rive. I'hc San Joaquin Ilills Road accvss is limited to righL turns only. ' Proposed development includes offic and restaurant uses in addition to Chc exisling art museum and library that is under construction. A total, of 234,706 ' 1111 FAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE III • FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 y -2. 1 square• fret of offieo list, is punned along with an 8,000 square foot restaurant. The library will include 14,000 square feet and a 10,000 square foot expansion of the museum is planned. A theater is also proposed at some future date. Since this would have a negligible traffic impact during critical hours, it is not included in the nnalvsis• 1'R1P GENMATTON For this analysis, estimates were made of PM peak hour volumes and the 2.5 hour peak period. Generation rates and estimated volumes for each use and time period are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The existing art museum building was not included as it is included in existing traffic volume data. These generation rates are those utilized in precious studies of this site. TRT1' I)TSTRIBUTION AND ASSIONNIRNT 1 The ,eog;raphic distribution of traffic generated by this development has been dev- eloped in the referenced previous studies. Figure 1 illustrates the traffic dis- tribution that has been utilized for this study. This distribution is for out- bound traffic from the site. Tnbound traffic would be the same percentage in the opposite direction. . By applying; the distribution percentages to the trip genera- tion data in Tables 1 and 2, estimates can be made of traffic volumes from the project at various locations. The distribution in Figure 1 is for outbound traffic which must be reversed for inhuund Lraffic: CRTTTCAT. INTCRSF.CTfON rMENfTFTCAT[ON The next step in the nnalysis was to identify those intersections that could be impacted by the project. As a starting point, the 16 intersections identificated for analysis under the Traffic Phasing Ordinance for this area were examined. For this examination, the "17. Traffic Volume Analysis" forms from the Traffic Phasing Ordinance were utilized, Appondix A contains the data for the individual inter- sections and Oiv results nre summarized hi 9:able i. The basis for comparison in- cluded existing traffic, regional growth Lraffic and approved projecL traffic. The criteria established by the City Council Indicates that any intersection where the project traffic during the 2.5 hour peak exceeds two percent of the existing plus regional growth plus approved project traffic must be analyzed Ili detail. 1 1 -3 ' Table 1 ' 2.5 HOUR TRIP GENERATION civic Plana ' 1.AN0 USE RATH VOLUME IN OUT 1N O11T ' Office (234,706 SIP) 1 .2 3.4 280 800 Restaur:mt ( 8,000 SIP) 11.3 7.7 90 60 ' Library (14,000 SIP) 1.0 1.0 10 10 Museum (10,000 SF) 1.0 1.0 10 10 Totals 300 820 Table 2 PM PEAK 11OUR TRI.P GIiNIiRATCON ' Civic Plana LAND USE RATE VOLUME ' LN OUT IN OUT Office (234,706 SIP) 0.6 1.7 140 400• ' Rostaurant (8,000 SIP) 5.0 3.0 40 20 Library (14,000 SIP) 1 .0 1 .0 10 10 ' Museum (10,000 SIP) 1 .0 1.0 10 10 TOL'A1S 160 420 4 l FIGURE I ' TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION H 10 % loz N• BQI575� eR�sTo �4 p�. ' � 0 20'/. tias� do w s r , m dd J Q 257. Q°• N V . Zo SAkr,� s Oa 64RgaR 3$y, 4NJOAQVINHl/CSRD. ci w to a 25 01 , c�F`O ui pP � COAST IdIGNWAy ' H /O% w ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES -4- Table 3 CRTTICAL (NI'1?RS17,CTTON IDRN'I'TPTCATTON ' Civic Playa ' LOCATION 2.5 IIOpR PIiRCRNTACRS 1983 NB SB NB WB ' Bristol St, N. & Campus Dr. - 4�6 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 3.5 Coast Highway & Dover Dr. - - 2.6 3.6 Coast Highway & Bayside Dr, - - 1.9 4.8 Coast Ilighway & Jamboree Rd. - 6.2 2.1 - Coast Highway & Newport- Center Dr. - 1.4 - 0.7 Coast Highway & Mac Arthur Blvd, 1.6 1.3 1.1 ' Coast Highway & Marguerite Ave. - - 2.4 1.5 Jamboree Rd: & Santa Barbara Dr. . 4,7 1.4 6.8 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin IlLlls Rd. 0.6 3.0 - 13.4 ' Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 5.4 3.8 - - Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 4.7 1.4 4.1 - ' ,Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N. 4.4 1.2 - - Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd. 2.0 1.2 2.6 1.1 ' Mac Arthur Blvd. & San Joaquin hills Rd. 1.3 2.6 9.1 •1-3 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd, 5.5 2,1 1 Review of 'fable 3 indicates Chat 14 ul' tilt- ib ivterseeLlons exceed Lilt, nmxinaun 7-4 ' two percent on ,it least one approach and must be considered critical. ANALYSIS The 14 intersections identified in the previous section were further examined to ' determine potential impacts. Utilizing "Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis" forms from the Traffic Phasing Ordinance procedure, ICU values were determined and include regional growth and approved projects volumes. The ICU's also include , improvements required by previously approved projects. These improvements are ' discussed in the nuxL section. The individual analysis sheets are contained in Appendix B and summarized in 'fable 4. Review of Table 4 indicates that two inter- sections are projected to exceed 0.90: Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, and ' II Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard. All other intersections are below the 0.90 level. t Since City Council Resolution Number 9422 allows 30 percent of development without ' improvement phasing, tilt- •14 critical iriLersectinns were analyzed with existing plus 30 percent of the remaining development. These data are included in Appendix C and summarized in Table 4. The ICU's for the two intersections of Bristol Street North and Campus Drive, and Jamboree Road and Mac Arthur Boulevard still exceed the 0.90 level tinder these c•unditions. ' As indicated in the previous paretit•aphs, two tutorsec•Li0119 have ICU's that exceed 0.90 whether they are analyzed with 30 perec»t of Lite project development or with full develonment. it should also be ndted LI)at both or these intersections have ICU values greater than 0,90 without develoipatunt of Civic Plaza. 'these two inter- ' sections are discussed in the following paragraphs. Bristol Street North and Camoue Drive ' Review of I:lhle 4 .utd the t'r1laLed .4beeLs in Appondicr.s li and C intlitalrs ' that Liu- project w.,uld h.)vr »" Impact "pun illy WO values at this inlorst•cl ion. Sinee project Vnlwnt•s are added ro nun-critit, ntuvetm•11l's, the ICp values art• equivalent for boLL cases with and a•iLboul tht• pt•ajut•t. ' .tamboree Road and Mae Artiltir. Boulevard ' 'lite ICU values at this intersection increase 0.0069 in 1981 and 0.0227 in 1982 as a resull of the project. The c incrra:os would not be porcopLiblo ' Co drivers utilizing Lilt, intersection. In addition, with observed driver ,r ' -6 1 2Gj ' Table 4 ' ICU SUMMARY Civic Plaza (1) (1) (1) INTERSECTION EXISTING EXISTING + EXISTING + EXISTING + ' REGIONAL + REGIONAL + REGIONAL + COMMITTED COMMITTED+ COMMITTED+ 30% PROJECT PROJECT 1981 1981 1982 ' Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. 0.9898 0.9256 0.9256 0.9279 Bristol St. & Campus Dr. 0'.72 0.6467 0.6498 0.6613 ' Coast Highway & Dover Dr. 0.99 0.6556 0.6623 0.6788 Coast highway & Bayside Dr. 0.89 0.8051 0.8118 0.8282 Coast highway & Jamboree Rd. 0.83 0,7644 0.7644 0.7650 ,• Coast Ilighway & Marguerite Ave. 0.68 0,7425 0,7466 0.7560 ' Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr, 0,53 0,6171 0,6233 0.6373 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin ,Ilills Rd. 0.64 0,6473 0.6487 0.6522 Jamboree Rd. & Ford Rd. 0.83 0.7449 0,7517 0.7739 ' Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. 0.54 0,7944 0.8032 0.8247 Jamboree Rd. & Bristol St. N. 0.72 0,8219 0,8298 0.8489 ' Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Illvd, 0.85 0.9269 0.9338 0.9496 Mac Arthur Rlvd, & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.72 0.7945 0,8070 0.8368 ' Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 1.01 0,8653 0.8753 0.8997 (1) No Project Related Improvements arc., Considered in Calculations. 1 1 -7- ' Zo c'.nrncteristics in Lhe nrea, Like intersection would operate sat isfac•turiIy. Observations have indicated• that, as intersections near capacity, the capacity ' is increased and yellow or lost time decreased. Construction of the Corona Del Mar Freeway and San Joaquin corridor would also result in improved conditions. ' CIRCULATION l,%iNuVIiMT•.NT NEEDS ' The tCU analyses for the project included some circulation system improvements. All of these improvements are c•urruntly required ns part of approved projects Or ' planned as governmmiLnl projects. Thu Impeuvemonts are suuuuarized in Table 5 and illustrated in Figures 2 through 13. Table 5 ' SUMMARY OF RECOMT-WDED SYSTEM IMPROVEM MTS ' Civic Plaza ' INTERSECTION SYSTIiM IMPROVRMN.NTS Bristol Street North/ Add southbound through lane. Re- ' Campus Drive quired by previously approved pro- jecL. See Figure 2. ' Bristol Street/Campus Drive Add southbound through lane. See Figure 3. Required by previously ' approved project. Coast Ilighway/Dover Drive Add southbound left turn lane. Add suuthbound right turn lane. Add eastbound left turn lane. ' Add eastbound optioial through or right'turn lane. Add west- ' bound right turn lane. City/CalTrans Projccl • See Figure 4. ' Coast Ilighway/Bayeide Drive Add eastbound through lane. ' Add westbound optional through or right turn lane. ' 1 -g- ' 27 Cal•I'rans Project. See Figure 5. ' Coast Ilighway/Jamboree Road Add westbound through and west- bound left turn lanes. Required by previously approved project. See Figure 6. Jamboree Road/Santa Barbara Drive Add northbound through lane. Add southbound left turn lane. Add westbound lane. Required by ' previously approved project. See Figure 7. ' Jamboree Road/San.ivaquin Add northbound through lane and Hills Road convert right turn lane to opt- ional through or right. Convert westbound left turn lane to optional through plus left. Required by previously approved project. See Figure 8. Jamboree Road/Hastbluff Drive- Convert northbound and south- Ford Road bound right turn lanes Co ' optional through plus right. Add eastbound through lane. :orvVrt wescbound taro 11 ' lvu• t ,o Iri: turd lana. Ce- quit .vl by previously approved ' hrojccc. See Figure 9. ' Bristol Street/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane to northbound left turn lane. ' Required by previously approved project. ' See Figure 10. Bristol Strect North/Jamboree Road Convert northbound through lane , to northbound left turn lane. Required by previously approved ' project. See Figure 11, ' Jambo-ree Road/Mac Arthur Boulevard Add northbound right turn lane. ' Convert eastbound right turn lane to optional through or right. Required by previously , approved proloct. See Figure 12. ' Mac Arthur Boulevard/Ford Road Add northbound left and right turn lanes, southbound left turn , lane and eastbound left turn lane. City of Newport Beach project to ' be constructed 1979-80. See Fi-yore 13. SUMMARY ' The potential impact of the proposed Civic Plaza site has been analyzed at 30 percent ' of development and at full development, in 1982. Both analyses have indicated that two intersections would have ICU's greater: titan 0.90. For one intersection, the analysis indicates that with the project and. improvements from approved projects, ' the LOU would be less than the existin:, 1.1% It would ls., be een.,l to Cho 1981 ono 1932 ICU without the pro It-.•i . C.OItVc rb VIV, %•t11 tht' o,.k•. 14 LIIL indicates Chat thv 198." TGO would br nnuo heat tnv o:.tnl in,; It:J; ),t�pwvtr, .t., o-,tt- mated 1982 1CU without lht• piolcrt is unit, Slightly lass (0.0'221) than with t:ic , project and is still over 0.90. An optional impruvemunt which would rtrducc the kCU valuo at Jamboree and Mac Arthur to less t}tnn 0.90 was also examined. Since this improvement oo uld not by required for ultimate conditions, it tatuid be an interim ' solution. ' , r -lO We trust that this analysis will be of assistance to you'and the City of Newport ' Beach. If you have any quostions or require additional information, please con^ i tnet us. Respectfully submitted, W]"STON PRINGLF AND ASSOCIXEES Weston S. Pringle, P.B. WSP:RS:cd t 05452 1 1 ADD THROUGH LANE • -- W I 1 I � 1 NOT TO SCALE ' I BRISTOL J \ STREET NORTH 1 , tTTr 1 1 U 1 RECOMME.NDF.D LANE CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION UI- 1 BRISTOL STREET NORTH / CAMPUS DRIVE I 1 1 2 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 1 1 . W . A I I • a BRISTOL STREET NORTH 1 ADD THROUGH LANE NOT TO SCALE BRISTOL STREET 1 1 ADD THROUGH LANE — 1 1 RECOMMPNDED CONFIGURATION AT 'INTERSECTION Or CAMPUS DRIVE-IRVINE AVENUE:/BRISTOL ST. 1 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 3 1 w ADD LEFT TURN LANE 0 ADD RIGHT TURN I ADD RIGHT TURN ' LANE I I LANE COAST l I HIGHWAY ADD LEFT TURN LANE llov ADD THROUGH LANE I w > NOT TO SCALE , RECOMMENDED LANE 'CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION OF ' COAST HIGHWAY / DOVER DRIVE t WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 4 ' 1 ' ADD THROUGH LANE WITH BRIDGE ' WIDENING ' I ADD .THROUGH LANE COAST -� I HIGHWAY ' l ADD THROUGH LANE �G ' NOT TO SCALE RECOMMENDED LANE CON EIGUN, Vll ' _AT. INTE-RSECTION• OF COAST HIGHWAY / BAYS0E DRIVE ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 5 3q . a I I I I ADD •I'HR(IUCII IANE ADD THROUGH LANs I I COAST BIC1114AY ADD LrIT TURN LANE I I ' I 2p SCpLC I rpT I I I I ' I H..COMMENOI{D CONNTOOItM ION A't' dN'CI?ItHrC'I'EON UP ' COAST HLGIRJAY/,*MBO11Er itOAD ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 6 , 1 . f ADD LEFT TURN 1 LANE ADD RIGHT TURN LANE 1 rAD BARBARA DRIVE Q I f f a: IROUGH LANE w uj T 0 NOT TO SCALE m 1 1 RECOMMENDED LANE .CONFIGURATION 1 AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD / S.ANTA BARBARA DRIVE 1 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 7 1 SGPtiw zo ' o 'CONVERT T.E['T TURN LANE w I TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND LET"f TURN LANK SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD r i ( I CONVERT RIGHT TURN LANE TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND HICHT TORN LANE ' ADD THROUGH LANE ' • 1 RECOMMENDED CONrIGURA'I'TON A'1' TN'TRRSECTION 01: , JAMBOREE ROAD/SAN .IOAQUfN IILT.T,S ROAD 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 8 1 , I CONVERT RIGHT TURN LANE-- TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND RIGHT TURN LANE V CONVERT THROUGH LANE. TO LEFT TURN LANE ' EASTSLUFF DRIVE I I ` FORD ROAD I I ( ADD THROUGH TANK CONVERT RIGIIT TURN LANE. 0 I TO OPTIONAL THROUGH AND RT011T TURN LANE o y I •I ' NOT TO SCALE ' RRCOMMENURD CONVfMIRATION AT 1NTfRSECTTON OF .IAMBORPa-" ROAD/EASTBLUFF DR1VI:-1.1ORD ROAD 1 III ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES ' 1=IGlJF1E 9 II II I I I I BR(STOL STREET NORTH ' s i� i I ! ' I I LA U NNE TO LEFT TURN , GH N � II m I LANK NOT TO SCALE I I ! I BRISTOL STREET ' 1 CONVERT THROUGH LANE TO LEFT ' I , I I TURN LANE RECOPAtMEO CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION OF ' ,7MIBORRE, ROAD AM) BRISTOL STREET 1 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES . FIGURE 10 , � r i ' Jill ! I BRISTOL S'L1tEL'T NOIiTIl I I CONVERT THROUGH LANE TO LEFT TURN LAME w °o NOT 't0 SCALE � BRISTOL STREET 1 ' RECOMMMDED CONFIGURATION AT INTEMECTION OF JAMBOREIE ROAD AND BRISTOL STREET NORTH ' WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE II t I� ' t{0 c+ NOT TO SCAL ADD RIGHT , TURN LANE , O RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION ' AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD /MAC ARTHUR BOULEVARD • FIGURE 12 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES , I 1 0 ADD LEFT TURN J 1 LANE--- co NOT TO SCALE 1 FORD ROAD 1 . • � r 1 1 T, i r _ ---ADD RIGHT ADD LEFT cr TURN LANE 1 TURN LANE----a a 1 NOTE: ALL IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN CITY PROJECT 1 . 1 RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION AT .INTERSECT ION_OF 1 MAC ARTHUR_ BOULEVARD/FORD_ROAD 1 1 WESTON PRINGLE RND RSSOCIRTES FIGURE 13 1 l�2 ' APPhNOIX A t 2.5 IIOUR INTEIISECT10N ANALYSIS 1 t Zd Traffic Voluble Anaiysis ' .rltersectiorl 6risLo7 9Lrc!•t \i};lh/S�agtpu8_.11ri�EL - Irvir2o .1vc. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring ::+78,1 ' A:I I. IN nll - rl•,u emr• I Appruvrd "u'a h•a i ''ll.•af tyro •. rig ., •nt': n •'r" :. •qnn 4r� u•e . 1 r'fu lPth r,d :. In'm 1•rJt i; ' ed i• •.J Iu101'' '•r Unlli I Prat - I',na• I h•lunw' lulvmr 1:' Vol mnr lino Jo a.i,.z 17 �p �p p35� Yu•ln;nlunJ ... 1 � , ' nuln;.owd -- -• 3705 130 / (< y001 (go. •r f I °ro 4790 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than LS' of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volume Z. ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than Z% of Projected Peak 2', Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis is required. 1 1 1 1 Y IS'Jvf Z,C iraffic Volume Analysis ' mLerS4;ction Rristol SLruct/Calnppti_irivp_ jrvine Avo. ' (ExiItinc; Trr;ffic Vollnnes Fas&Foi Averago Winter/SPriny l rl8.) Iron •luW' � .AI'I'Ir yr I ' ❑•.I 1 7J1. rl iruu• •r•r ;•vi ' ,d'.' '.a. . I,plr• .rnwlr Yr.14 Ill11r . hilly' ' 11 lVnlr• 1v.IrY•' • tr L,•. i Vl Icny 16n6 \;rl^:weoo i i r in,�: 6y 7oa '70a 7(0 /3y 3 S°Jo ' . _ . f 1 i (� Project traffic ir, estimated to be Icco, t11an 1'. of PI'o,irLtee ' Peal. 21, Hour 1'raffic Volume © Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than ) of Projecsud ' Peak 21: Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection faPaLity LICiliza*ion (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. Traffic Volume Analysis ' .nLvi '-,'Cl lot, Iltr,hwav/n,:v : Ill ivr u?L%i Lrte; , ratliC VolVou bawd on Avi�r,rly 14i11tor;5in'iIlk! I.t;rit h.0 mur hdWait, nlune• ..un i 242 a vy J r ' 'Ioo ; 30 2 13, 03489 i S � �'79 37 Sao s��� i ii9 ai6 3 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1s,. of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volume z ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than X or Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilizit'on ( I .C.0. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 ' Zt Iratfir, Volume llnaly ,is , :111'er•.v( Clult (,y!St III&Iluay/n.lyside UriPc . ' (Eii .turd ra! f!e Uulunles based on Av( ra l(i 'nirtur/Jln'iny I ! ti ) ., • ..p.. , I Pr-1.•,1♦ ...0 11p•,. 1 Il .. .,• witm.r• " 1 .37 ' 4847 Jy i /�� i fO33 /0/ 96, ,, . . 3860 "27. ..�L':r-�O�o i : ._ D _ `���0 ys% • ' Project Traffic is estimated to be lens than it, of Prujoctea , Peak 2', flour Traffic Volulne- 2 © Pru,ject lr•df f!c is P",til!Iated to be yroater than of P,i"'J �c trki l. 2', , Pea Hour Tr,!tfit. Volumes. intersrtl.ion G,Ipacit,y lit Nlaly% 11, 11, r(:(plurd. 1 1 affic Voluntc Ana Iy',i•, 1 ,nixI 'wk:Iit'll cow;t- IIi+_gliw,1vI, :uil+„I ''r• R,.tJ (t�.t••tiny Iraff it_ Vulunles based on Avera.{u k'utter/S fir lilt; 1 iJ u.. bNr 'AIq•ii vrl �p•'Irtl Zf, m 'r.'i.i Lrq I Pra tr.t•. ''�nA nouY rot /� +na •J' � I'co4 inm wLmip 6'lump ,. ,.. r.. ...... ` votwm• I ' •,uva�,•�c lnl', q i �sr� i 65�a 13.5'0/ 70 a 1lp G.a 1 /9a yv8� 90 9G • �o i I a.� ! IS" J- j a5o o. V ,7 70 1 Pru.it''•-t Iral tic 11. cstinlated Lo btu It'ti', than I'; of I'rt,jot f >:I Peak 212 flour TrdffiL Volunnr 2 ® Project fraflic is vstintated to be ytr'ater tlldII /V of I'TU,lat:lr,l 1 Peak 21, Hour traffic VOlUtOen. Inter�-ect.ioo (rapacity lJt.il i.a! iun (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. i • 1 . 1 . 1 . 1 1 i �I Traffic Volume Aiwly:•is an Lcr- t•ct l tit Cun6l Ili;'hw�y,/Nrtrtnu'I VvIlli',J• Ur,1vt- baoil ' ;G I,tin•I Tratfic Vr•lumes sed oilAvera(v Winter/51n•inq N18t I' N. . 19 o-.rt h •rA+ Ar d' I•nn1 .w ar a'•Inq •I•.Nib IY . , hUu1' WhAk I LP14hY . 'I!r ,•.1 nla , Nd.Unl' , ' :I'C.nJ saH 330 0/ 18 ` (4y z ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than /f', of Pro)ecter ' Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project fraffic is estimated to be nreater than *l:. tit 'ProjoCUN7 ' Peal. 2'; Hum, fraffic Volunlrn. lotrrwction calmcit.v tltilitati.ln 11 .C.U. ) Aualy+, l • i5 requirod. . t . t ,Y traffic Vnitime Analysis ' , ILL, 'SeCLIWI Least Hi ,thwy-/Nae rV l,ur.. LoJLJCv:lld :L� : .Lirly ir,iffic Valume.s based on Average pintor/Spring N/8) ' '•(In., I'PAr 1 '4Nf- .I •AI'I"uY✓A • 1'nh•;(ld d 01 a. ' Iu GhA P,u IO•I+ ' dl i dPM1• IPJI . ' n,ll, I'r.p tluu, blumr' i BPiumr' 'pim I J1.13o 1p 9 yy i s u 3204 1• a Project Traffic is estimated Lo be less than of Projected Peak 21, hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1' of, ,, oJecLo'.i Peak 2', Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ( I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. bo ' Z ,IraffiC Unlwne AnalY•.is .11ter•S,tCtlu1 Coast Ilitllt,'nZ/�Iarw•tu•ritt' .\v�•nyl�•. , (L.i•.tiny Traffic V)lalnes based on Averatic 1Vinter/Spriali t1;tt ; r .. •r•.1, rnR r AVI'r1.Yrd i• un lyd ( � JI r9•'r.L ' r I . .. .. •• ro•q,. . . I Pru pv I•. � nµ uvp 1'r.LL r. . .uiMlq 14•,rA r0•nr• i, ..nu. LnlrnW . ••i oil 430 ; /a o �Jry i /l /0 3.5ao �� 5� a. 373:. 98 a f. I ea El Project Traffic is estimated to be less than L., of Projected ' Peak ZIz Hour Traffic Volume' 2 ® Prr,,lect lraff lc is estimated to be groater than %r of I'roject i ' Peak 2'; hour Traffic Volullivil. 1ni.orarcl.1011 (.rlPdCity I'll il:,ll It'll (I.G.U. ) Roalyy,lr, It, required. 1 r • l 1 Z� rr•affic Volume Analysis 1 ;nter,,ecLiun aambor(.v Rand/SnuLa Barb.lri nri.va (EAI Lin(l irpffic, VoIume5 based on Average' Winter/Slrrinu N18 ) 1 , r" � " i'rdr 'Inw• I AI'{`nwr,t � r;r•Ir;IVJ � .�: al �9•„ir.:r„ .. .. :1 L,,ql n.l' I'r 1l l,v l♦ n! ,IOW 14•nA , •Ilya el ',ur. ,nd lr � I'r,J uuw r• hour h,lunir <a wny do51 2653 l. ygo 1299 Baia as'i� so i7a G.a7o 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 of Pr•ojrctod Peak 21: Hour Traffic Volume. z Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than X:b of Projec Led 1 Peak 2'2 Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Cal)dclty Utllil.dtien (I .C,U. ) Analysis is required. 1 ' 1 • 1 i . i 1 i Z� Traffic Volume Analytii, ' :ntersectlon Jamboreo ky{I�jSnn ,Ilt lshyLLli11s.1:oaJ , !Eri .tiry TrOfIC Volumes based on Averogv Winter/Surio.; I�t:g) t r i, r . IrJr •In JI' I Alqu r..r•J 'r •ya IMd ; fit. of it. .t,• , ... i n br,i r r' I'eup•r 1•. t'.dt Iv.n 1'rdA r •ou• , r •dh 4 P, IrdA unJ.• p4imo' 1 4t'lunx' .r:� :r581 r { 5 oe JOa Qo tl 981) 5.11 /3.Y 1 Project Traffic i,, estimated to ha less than I'.• of Projocte.l ' Peak 21: hour Traffic: Volume' . z ® Project traffic is estimated to be greater than d`s of Pro•)ectud ' Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. I 1 J ' 2 vY Traffic; Volume llnalvsis ' i.itersectioll Jamboree No,AdlE tblull_llrivw_csord I:oad (L'Ft ,Llrry irnffir, Volumes based c- Average Winter/Sprint 1018 ; ' t , rr:u uu11r � Ngnr r•I r nry tta � A• rrt IP .'e •.• ' , t. ,. .r 4rr,r •.. I Iq rr p•YI . na4 nr•r.r rin4 u , , ,nr •.r roll, I I'ral uw ' .. lunm ' Sr.l mnr •r.,n ' . •1 rm � N Ivrr•r 1 I • i7•t io Ej ac Project Traffic is estimated to be lees than 1'I' of Projocl.ed Peak 21: Hour 'Traffic: Volume Z ' ® Project traffic is estimated to be: greater than V of Projects Peak 21: Hour Traffic Volunum, Intersection Capacity IltiliZOt 'till ( i .C.U. } Analysis is requited. 1 • 54 ' Z 'traffic Volume Analysis l tl tei '.t•C t llln Bristol Stt'O.'��p�.1I111ri1P1`C lul.11l , (E.,J,tirg tr..ffic Vulumes based on llvera a Winter/Spring 14/378) .h. Ir.0 'I•NY ! •fl'inl vr.l ' ..•.;Y.,l.•J � J!• al .. h.•.n .. r 1 . . •a nwn 1 1'Yal . . mnur NO mnn Ynlumv .. . . ..•':ur � Yolnno 1 • . ,•,yl, �a ; any ; a(e�ss ; 3-0 3s lym,. • I i ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be loss than I :• of PrOJOC ted ' Peak 211 flour -Traffic Volume Project Traffic i;, estimated to be greater than 2X1 of Projec eo Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volumen, Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I .C.U. ) Analysis is required. �I . , I I Traffic. Vnlwml An,ali',is ' ,olrl ` t'CtIMI III-is_I ,II 1;IrvvI Not th/.Inullau•oo R,In.I (Cnr',tiny i'roffiC Vuluuies based on-Ave'ragu lJiutFr/Sf�rincl I +/ 3) c.I •m: Iva$ •luur I At,;nrvM 'Iola,IerJ al �� ,�a h.., •: •:.•. ' ial :', oral NIA ••a..l a• '„ e` 'uuwlq I'rnl MW, r 1 0 WIUme \u ann ' 515:4 llcs8 lt'gs/ i /37 t 30a `/ YTC 2811 1162 ' Project 1r,aftiC is estimated to be less, than 1'„ of Protected Peak 2', flour Traffic Volu+ne L ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than A of Projected Peak 2', Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I .C.U. ) Analysis, is required. • S4� ' II Zj{ T~affic Volume Andly,,is ' nl,pl••wC.Li oil ,tamUgriy' Itt,.ul[�kt4• ry;(lµll_1S1Y.5i..(1) , 'LA I',Lin/i Traffic INIuuies based on Average Hinter/Spring 19181 .r.ipy I.•,u M.W. I AI'I'n.vrtl j "i o.... y ungea • 1'nipv i♦ •.Al :. Ifta N.4 ... .r Ln. ..r uwll. I'r.11 n.nn rvdmup ! Vultlux• .. .,n. ION 0 ,70 gala /�O ��/D 3a 3 o i G 5" .�}38 / z L76 1, 2923 W S�� .�5�o r f 7O I _ .., 3037 /�/ `3��_ i 3370 i (e- / . �® l / 470' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than Jill of Projected ' Peak 2t= Hour Traffic Volume z� [� Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than ,., of Prujected Peak 2', Hour 'Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ( ► .c.U. ) Analysis 15 required. (1) Nac Arthur Boulevard is assunu'd north and south ' Traffic Volume Analysis ' �nterst'.ctSifi _Mac Arl,hpI"_ IS.nlllry.tryI/5:,�t3. •s1L1gtt7.n Ili IIs Road (LxIstifly Traffic Volurles leased un Ave I'ayti Winter/Spring 'Nis" mal Onm '•_� 01'yiuvrJ ' Pi �Ir� lr'I IP` ul`. a i.. .. . i , w11 I're/ m.n .. hnpr In lunir .. •.o. ' v''I en 1 tahnm• 1 ' . /a ! ao 3 �o 1484 Ior„ :,•; .,,.-� 3i40 doa 1 �3 (� 2 1 G7 �Dy 9. � 0/0 1451 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1'•, of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volume. z_ ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than /1 of Projected Peak 21, Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I .C.U, ) Analysis is required. 1 t 1jf Iralfic Vulumo Analv-.is , ntof4et.Cjurl Plat Arthur Buu11'V.n•d/Rurd Road (D i' tiwi Traffic Volumes based ori•Averagr Win[er/SUrinr, 1S1),81 , i'Pnr rnNf I AI4n y.-1 h.qr.LU I /• of u.• .. .. • •1 bn• LIv nl . 1 Pro 1•. 1 P.11 • tlPur 11M1 •. ..P . •arr• 'a nNlt. I'Pn4 dear ,ulumr � VVlunp• .. .u^r• ,n't1 ao vo I 93 qe r.• .. I,,rsn A 1nn7 a 1033 ' ao Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 11. of Prujrcted ' Peak 21, flour -Traffic Volume z ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than of Pro•iacted Peak 21, Hour traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I .L .h• ) Analysis is required. APPENDIX B 1 , tINTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSES Existing + Rvgional + CunnnirLed •h Project (1982) 1 1 1 t In;,,1 .• tlr,nJi)STa� i (/V) ;?' �4.n uS (Existin Irrsrt + VnLnnes (lased on wPra9e-Winter Spring 19/5� •ASST ING "'"•„ r'141 � IEIST RIGIONN- C"I I1LD PUtIACTLD PROJECT PIRUIII ' o!l' 4NOWTII PROJICI Y/T RAtlu Vole Sit kill,. It,lllo Ym OL. VolVOI. W/n Projpct Vol. ' NE / a .'!c _t oblG +t1 Oy^76 0.071 NR �� 1 SL - - — Si (Z) SZoo 3(4 00 _OSf.:Zi/* 3Cn 36 0.�304 SR 1379 o.4oq� o.4a94 4 — (T r ER Wl WT �/ �� —.I c� .olt9 �I I _ pell WR tYu tni.4INL :eT» p,iooU ,/oob CLISTj4'v :111'+:ECTION CAP1CIIY UI!11/41ION .989 TCC'i COWMED Ell"; RIC-10-0, wn7W111 W/PROPOSED INPROVENCNIS I.P..0 e7. 9279 J n E r;t'IN; P!U: ;OM9tTTfD PIv-4•' Un,"i ""04tll 1.111'. PROJECT I.C.U. Projected plu;, ln•rllnrt i•r,lffic I .C.U. wi I I by Wss than or equal ' to 0.90 ® Projected I ill•. oreaLPr than 0.90 ' i!r'ujeCLed pIt„ it, rlf'•, I I ",!] I1c IA .10. wlt'h ; .IrnP. unpt'tiveDlL'ut• will he IL•'. . • ,r 1'1(1' I�" •• .' i• " Iu,•1 nVl'uu!III ' I Prdd SOLA bound up}ia>IaI 4hrou9li or 6 kf lane .(o) ��r !n.^rrr"I:Tion �O( .`>��' J t�, (Existiny iTaE VclTumes Based on verage'WTnte47SPring 197 '� t —1--- - - -- - Y 11511NG 11f 1'+('•'�'.t.' :Sl fTIST REGIONAL [OMITTED PROJECTED PRQIEET PROJE(i N9.ru'K f I,ar,l• L h ' Hd V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volome ViC HaUu lane; Cep Vol ! Ratio VOL. VOL. w/o Pro,1rG[ ! 1 NL NT NR Jac 6 . 33 3 " a•3333 ST _ ��y800 i ���. ' - SR EL _ O - rn�. . :2 =17 d ET ER WL 1 WT ---1 - WR -- _.---— r[LlO,Yt IPE 10 Q,/(DDU�1 O•/o0U LISTING :nT EfSECTION CAPACi IY bIIL114110N 2 E A;;i ilai iLd+ COMITTED PINS REGIONAL GROWTH W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMFNT5 I.C.O 79 z E%slm PLU' COMITTED rl0'r GIGIO9AI LPOWIII PIIP. PROJECT I.C.U. •6�'+/J ' D Projected !' lul. 1' ' 11'' 't Lratfic 1 .CI11. Will be less than or ellu" Lo 0.90 Projected plu'r ;n-ujccL I.rafric I .C•U•'•Will be greater than 0.91! ' © Projected !,lu'. {1rJ,lnl:l, 11•dIlic 16C•I1. Wi).h l.y•,I(sus improvements. ;rll be lc<,r, film, 0? "(11W1 to 0.90 ' rll,r il,l w,lrr.tvhurcnl 1 Add souA bound 4-hrou5k la rig. M 1 pit W,I • 1i'r, ,.APACI I 1)I11.11ru ILla An1tL I,II ' �1� (Existing lrar *Ic fnl I'll eS Rase n ve a e W,nter Spring 197$7 Z ' ,x 1'.rn o', vl tW., I tkl',T REGIONAL C"Ir1C0 P!UUICTIO PROJECT PN0.4 CI ISIING 11 N•..,aer•t IdntS CdP ,•w,• , •I, 1 •� IIH Y/C GRONTII PRQILLI Y/L fldtlo YPlume 5!i kdtlo I Vnl. Ratio VOL. VOL. W/o ProJoct ' l '} Yol. NL NT NR `1L a oo (a) Yeo�...j�� f I s o./Vzg ST t 1 (1) 1600T • I o.oy9y U•oy9� SR (I-) 160 ' !t� l! o79y EL ET (3) y�ofi� (, ^1 O 3023 48 0.3/23 ' ER WT (3) y£+aa—}l L7_ 0.3510 '1 lOd' WR LYISi IHL ihTLR:ECTION CAPACItf LT!LLA_l It1N EI:ST ii+4 :.JS !J7rITTE0 PIUS Rr GIONAL SROWTH WJPHOPOSCD IMPROVEMENTS I.C.114A r/t SIING P:UE *"ITTED Pi US RIGIWAI r,POWni PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. 467.4e Projected plug !ifoinEt. traffic I ,C.U. will be less than or equal ' to 0 A0 Projected plIII. uru,lr, t lr,If Fic I .. .tl. %4111 h,, givattir Lhan 0.90 © Projected plu'. In n.irt.t l I rIt f is I .C.tl. wi til ' y .f onr, impr'ovemelit•, ' will be lt•s' I,h. 11 nl , qual 1.0 0.90 '. .t rTflt tun r•� � . .', ,,'^1 „Vriut•nl ; •. ' Add sou+hbou!ld leil - furvi lane . (o) 2. Add soA hboulTd Y 9h f 41m, lane, (0) ' 3. Add eas+bound le4 -F(Aror 100e• Co) 4. Add eas+ bound -Fhrough lane. (o) S. Add (w&+ bounrd I-ipf 4urP, lane. (V) ' ' ;;1 ' n`.•t ' , :11N LAPACITY 011LIZAI ION ANALYSIS I oil (Existing Ira. + E. Volumes Base oI ver, g WTry er Spring 197s� L FISTING Furl O:`-1 -Xi NI 11XIST REGIOM.IL CORIITTED PROJfCfLD PROJECT PRL1JrCl Mo rvkn[ Lanes Cap 'aF..•. v I Pr Pd I IyC GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/( La Uo ' I Vol. 1 Hado VOL. VOL. w/n ProJecL 1 J`J Vol. ' NL I a0r __ l•7�� I 1 o.ay, e.zr�B NI ' NR _----� 5L ------------ I Oct 1_I p I O.OoP�B oo� ST ,5R •-- —r,��f' EL t 1 ; 7o —_-- c. o3rZu 0_031 'r ET (5)4 3yof ' ER I O WL WT 9 -5:- 3)a(600 j 313 O.3B72 , log !ay WR 2 ' rELLDw NE — ._ IV 0•/(7bU � 0,/Oo0 1'f EXISTING !NTPCECTIOM CAPACIff 4fIl I;6ION ' EX:,',14u aL> COMIITTEU Pl ws RI 610MAI 'fWNlll N/PHOPOSEO IMPROYEMl N1S I C.D C, goy W SIING H.JS "OMMITTED PION iln(Win P10 PROACT I.C.U. Q,90z 1 Projected pl'I• ovol l:t trdtfic •I .C.N. will be less than or inquil to 0.90 ' Projected Plun v;vh ;0 Lraltic I :C.l1. will he greater than 0.90 ® ProjecLed I luq ilr,llk I .L.U. with %V ,Ipmh IIJI7rovo:1o"'.. will be 0 I n, w m . q,,, ' In 0.90 ' :'F'• t riPt I',„ 1. Add eos4bourtd +hrotlgli lane• (o) ' 7. Add wcs� bound +hroLLSH lane. (o) 1 1 i .1 , '.1 t,t•. . „W I ' Y I[' �; Ira' I'll •:,.tl l .I . ' ��ii 1 (fxistin� :Irt t, . :Ir,t n; t Ba c l� Aver�JgP l iint :h�� .� low!.- Olt,, q,ilD v reae:l 1 w ' r. .,•W.1 .,.s Cd jv(• val In I c"two• 1 .•'I, f:o Vol Vlll . I w �• ^.^,1 r,f - , 47 Fi (1) IbooLs �t _t., _ - _ "- �1_ _� o.3794� 1d.37Is--� 1 Al (Ol Op K.Z-)371'n. . h) , Q737`fgoo jLs :_ Ida ra-4- WTWR Y/t'vtd'OSfU fNPNOY[NINISI r_U01%MITTS'• 1 1' .1b ^dl -I�altl 1,11 PIIO,411 I.C.1, ''I1 Jt'Ctt•IT will III, It th,ln tit. 1'till,1 , . 't l.ab ' tl '.l 'lltil. ! .•f,.l', 1e111 h1` yrratrr than t!.'Nt IY,.IQCtI''�' •. n • vt � i Ill I .t .li, Ltlh ., :,'�h'. II:•.V'l,yl�lll,'li' ; . ' be II i11'I1.1)tl I Adel (,)es4 bowed h•f I 'Iurvi lone. (o) 0) 2. Add west bound �41rou9 !T IGIle ( ' Wri t.APAUI I T lltt [' II Ilk; Il' , .,1� 1•:':.'-i r Il,tl.�.91 r ve�17.`"Y� —j/��i1C.��.ee_�!lc' .• (Existing it:l , f,r Ynl;unE•;; Base A a e W�gLer Spring 19/g} 't..... 1 I'°rn"'•' ' ' 't••I ' I VSi RE I ould COMt 11 Ito I I'PIIJI Ll IO PROJEC1 P40.11 r.i �( Mna rant Lanes Cap I �anr. I• "' I'R f/,: GROW 111 11It001 CI V/T Ratio VoI ume V, hair• 1 inI ! I.11.10 VOL. VOI. N!u Project r;r00 _ _'_ I c'oo o.o9ov ' AR SL 1 00 _ ...;� C. D.os sir/ 4 SR +� EL k 4 p (_pZh9 c'nzh r ' ET - WT l5 48 o a 9 WR ' LIMING 'h'?=:ECTION CAPA(iI+ l•11 I:1`ION - ' i!,•. :.,: CCEMITTCO PU__ 11,.109AL f"CUIII N/I'R0POSLO IMPROVFMFNIS l!!51Iti:• I"IIS :"ITTEO i',; • RN I0Y41 •,POaIM PH)', PROJECT I.C.O. ,7flo0 © Projected 11I'r" :'roi' cL LroIfic • I ,C.U. will bt' loss thall or equal to 9.90 ' Projected 1,11,r, ur. ,(,Lt ( 1`01fic I .C.U. i,ill br t1reater than 0.:I0 ' � i'' n,IeC LI'J LIJ •"' � I i1n' I II.— ! .1 .11•, w1I•n . �'.11'11P. IPIIII'UV1`IMtn1l . ' •.: 11 be Iv- ! ;, • I I 1"111.11 Lu 0.1)0 i n*f•r t I nn yleQlSri 1 I'col ro'z-b I/e (Exist)ng Iraffir lnlulJtVr, Hased on Average 1 ter Spring 197, Kiune•nt 'alSllho ram J'e'I J151 H1%, RCriohAt tofM(I ILD PI.ol"LO P1111=1 PRIMI 11 lanes Cep I lane. a '1' I Pr, till Y/t• fNo.h. I'R(1J1 CI VA Ratlo Volume t/I Ialm Vol hallo Vol. -Vol. W/o Project ' Vol. Nl - --I •--I. N 1— 00 1(5) 1(600 I U _ l 0 O./,5-v NR 1 SL _ 1 (z)Lslo" O.o 09 ' Si bo _---I.)n _ 3� 3'/�/ a tog SR 1 E: E I ER WL WT (y)6Yoo WR allm.'(feE 0. leoa I __ I p,iOOu LSlit114 :h'E•SECTIOM CAPA:IIY CI111/Rl(ON U I'.'i'.D •.a: !cmiliuo P(l6 R(EtoRM —varll B/PROPOSCD IHPROVEmuns I.C.0 07 Era'Ih9 P. 1' :CV.41TTED P.US Mr.hMA1~GNI)IM PIUs PROJECT I.C.U. Projected ;,11I•, Irr(, iv( L Lraffic I .C.U. w-ill be less Lhan or• equal ' Lo 0.90 Projected plu• '.I 'tit- I Irof lC I .C.U. (•llll INI tll't•a Ll`t' Lhall 0.011 ' ® ''r•uoectedplu . A, n,ll'+ I I.r.Ifl it.yi .t.U. toih '.y,Irdr, uuprovelllprll.% ' 1. 11 be lr•.:, r.r•I rn t'gwll Lo 0.90 r rluf 1, • :.,r ,..I nunit: 1. Add nor4kboiAKd +hrouSh lane . (o) ' Z• Add sou+{a bound le44 +urvi lane. (o) ' 3' Add Wes+ bound lane. (o) ' .i+•t r.r/.^ct uln N� YJO t'e �� I (Existing in;=�:' Volu �s 6n Xvera;e inter ring 19/t Sa.onvnl `x'I51 lNG ronl u'.`d t71S1 MST RLGIONAIFPROJLC iLD PIi(IJI CTip PROJECT PIA\II CI I mlez Cap I : .1•u•. +V i P1 Itl+ f t/O GROWTH E V/L Ratln Volume V'•1 4alry l,ln VOL. NL NF o _ _ —_` I .Q — - I r ---- 10 6-7 S1 CO •36/9 YI C•3B/ SR I ,(1) lbon ' E II Oo — ET _ 0 z7 Dz7 ER _ Akmof (3)Y6cn i II WT WRa I sl VC UNIT M 4: LtISTI'O. I =ECTI ON CAPAC I f 6!:LVA I I ON , CCNIITTED PLIK, RIIJUWVI ROWPI W,IPPOPOSED INPROVEMINTS I.C.0 7. 6/176 1 PLJE CQ`PIITTEO Pi65 E1-d@IAI VIPOWTH PIUS PROJECT I.C.U. D•6?ZZ ' Projected ithe t'rowt1 11 -11lic I .C.U. will In• I0'.1, than or rtiudl Et, t1.90 ' PI•ojected plu . :'t . !'•1, 111`it1C 1 ,C.II. Nill by lit-eater thall 0.90 ' Prujected pi., , ,r'la1•: r trar(ic I C.II. v;Tl•iI louts ilnprovonlent" ,.ill be lc,,s. ' } ,: , / ,lw ! to 0.90 ' n11:r1i1! 1'+4 ,.' •, � ! rh PIH.I IrVI'llll`hl • (. corlverf hor�hbould riylvl 'Item lane Io opiimial -I6-ou9h plus ric�6if, lo) ' Z 4dd horAbowhd -lhrotujh lane . ('6) S. Coyiver+ Euealbotv)d lef-F -Furvi Ian¢ 4o op.+,"a( +hrough PLS (o) r Itl•I1l.I l l Lll zl 1/ r1, •.n, n.o.. . llt+r^. .111 'rl �L{Lir�I�C77L�_Iv W(Exisilnr In1. f ' vntwTii' Base on� t �lnSIt1e�ru1sZp5rllitn.Lgt'5:1— '��'Y� 1�UQC� 1 _-- •• '!,1 IYI`i PI OIORAL COMMED P1I0U1LtE,0 PROJPCI PWUU.1 r. . ,•,t teae, CnR n nR r'L ORON111 PROM Ci V/z PaLlu VOtume V,+ NUuo I • ••. ' .ol 1N.,tlo VOL. Y01. N/U I'ruJrct ' Vol. -_.. tiT a2a0(� 3)Yq(i i 133� t5/ v4410 * t sL (I) -- (� D 18 G3)/Si t gImo, • f 0.3o y 6 0.3t£� SR A TI b �!�_ :LI_ n.a/o o C•O/00 L)37oc //79 ' ER 0 (1)Ibf7o O.o6/ 0.46/ I600 oZ. D.ObSV D.06fa UISTI�u 'N::+:ER10M CAPAf I I if 1110 1:', IDR p 11;•,'i'u, i C"11Tf01`f P'. RI r.IURAi IdgINIB N/17011'USLII INI'IIOYIHI H1ti I L U 1 Yt51IN;. I•;J` :LYIMITnU I'I P`. LI IuyAl uU;1N 111 I.111' ill ill 1 f IL v•__-__ ,7/ 3C) Projected ;rllr' a:u;,'cI. Irl(fic i .C.11. will hlw, less than or egaal ' to 0.90 Projected hli .'+'"'' t.l trdiTil, f ,C.11. Wil bo 1livat`v than 0-ii ' Projected Illti . 1.1 n,1 'tl 11"0lic I .(..li•, Willi Iii IIIII)t1jV 111191t '. t will be Ivii '11, r1 n• r,l'1„I IU ll.l)(1 I. Carver{- no-i boui-ni 11-( iurwllavlc 4o optiovlal throu31, plus rigVt • ��) ' s. Convert sou+hbounc( righ+ +ur" lavle #a apfiotilal fhroui plt(s riPt- 3. CovIli eos+bottvi rjSh+ -harp lone 'ho optional +hrik Plus right• �a) 4. Add eas- boa"d optlCMal -6'hrot�k Iglus rijht• !ol ' 5. Convert wes-' ibowid 4 hrou3k lave tt' lcf -fur" laM. (0) i ' +lIN l All J'M'IIT UI II I i'i., MIMI , t , In' •r"•, .,_ .� .i �:!!',��F�o_r�.e• r.Oc4:":� ' CP1 (Existinq_Ira-t '— IH-Lnne:t > Na-,ed on Avera t- Wi nter/SPrTng rot,cR^t rXisilNt Im•oSi.i i+:°I { 1%1ST REG10NpL CROJECT D i'OVIC ECI Ratio PROJECT P/t kai ones Car ' ,s^'• 1` + 'i 1•P I i/C GROHTII PROJECT V/E' Ratio Volume 4/. 4a Uu ' • '. -• 4',d r+atlo VOL. - Vol. roject7u1 t + Vol.. Nl__ 7. D �3),�6cv _:112.4s!_. tU.Z996 . 32( 1 NT s(z) 3zoo fLO�ZS� 'a �. a 0- `n9 .1 a.vs a SL ' SR _1 I _ — — ET— T•... 3 O ///oC I O./Y66 4 9f�LI a( E R l^ 1� o..z9 0 A R:R n,• rE --•---- I LJ:;T P,g :r,'I-CECTION CAN-Mr :f:u;:,•iDN i;•••;•„ :,,.; COtMITTEO PUi'. R,6:10341 '_uOaTN W+PNOPOSEG` IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 `j• _p -'(0 r;4!;h: PEJS COMIIrTEC Pt U, dl 4P wt, GPt1M1,1 INU? PROJECT I.C.U. Q.SZyq ' Projected i,lii. ortii 0 LI ,Itfic I .C.II. will lit' les,, than 01' 01U, ol to 0.90 ' Projected 1,1tr. nl, r•ta trnFfic 1,C.11. Weill lit, +Treater than 0.si') ' © Projected i•I i . ,nni'•I,t Ir,Iffic I (I.11, tgitj onr, nnprnvonu'nt • ' r i 11 he 1 r,,•• , i • ripl,l i Lo 0.9n /. Cc:,mev+ one ylcir+hboavld +krouyl, lane -Iv hor�k 6ou+md Icf4 -turn lAwe. Co) t ltlil " �.,1 '2.�!II: .FI.. r � r„,.�Df!J (Ex is.tinq ' Ta . r'r Ur IninE ., Rase oil ,Verage Wintev pring 197 �� 1 AISI ING "•'� '•" •r"' I !LI\i NL•GIUtpLL (Umi TIED PI,UJILILD PROJI CI 1,141111 y'•"""L L.nes Cep I gar. " 'i 1:L GROWTH PROJLCI V/L Net to Volume N1 Faun a ; a,1I0 VOL. VOL. wio Prejmt Nl 31 y8ou._'100, 1•' Sc>Z o.3i9Z N y 1(Z) ?zoo t, 9.. o.u;7P> 46 o•47/9 ' hR •— SL ST 'I. �u� 2 5 2 .2 SR ( ) 1 __ _.I- c.i36E i36e EL ER r- — Wl1 -- -• WT WR ' ICI LP.I let LAI'd Nu rNT!i!ECT 10N CAPATIIT lol tllilioN [l I'd l',C 11.L': C3M17TEC ellll PICIANAI SIN"d111 M/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 D BZZ y d [r.5TIN3 P:i! '•)WITTED P.o,—+t' 4-AI.' OWtll PI US PROJECT I.C.U. O BBB/ t Projected pl,r• rlu ' '1. traffic I .C.U. ivill by 1L%ss timm or equ,ti ' to 0.90 �] rrajected plli'. ur.; r 1 t. Lrdttic I .C.U. Will blt (Irveltly thin ® Projected pi,v I 11%,11ic 1 .C.U. ciit)l .'r•tcula unprovenuslL .till be lees ;p,11 1.0 U.90 �. Conuerf one noeAbound +hrott k lane fv no'rA bound le 4 -Turn lane. Cc)) 1 110N OPAC I (Y tl I I l I/f%! I(M ANAI M>IN j ! (I) lnfnr' ''': lnf1 eE' G _" UKW .I/r( 1 ' (Existing Ire f,r lloIunle Basedon vera9e Winter pring 197' i( 1XIit INC Md l I Ii1ST REGIONAL C04411ILD PROJFCTLD PROJECI PRAIIII Lanet Cap PR 1'/L GROWTH !'NOJLCI V/t Ratio Volume Y/C Hallo V'.1. RJLlo VOL. VOL. w/o PrOJOCL Vol. 00 // O.0/88 o•o/B8 NY, (2)3Zoo ICI CJ•zo68µ 20 o.ZlSv NR I(f�L6nvL I I o-/3B/ al O./5" Z -- -' _.. ' --r..L1_. .0 �. Of3uV:>A U.Opjr/ sl__ ST s�✓6ov � a I _L(l-3 a./8fo Icy 0. /87/ SR EL 1— — --r- — �!� O.3ZBl a3Y23 ' E7 (t1�64o0 -i� a 13 ER O./7ZC/ 0202 D./7fs' I j F�^ r - ' WT (:::](I) I�� _ I I Ql_ D. zv 5-60.Zo7 WR ' Yr LLf'RTIPE -- --- l O./00l1 D /00J i LLISTIYG :h'r=SrCTIOM CAPACI IY UT!I CA157 i'.G r_V! C"ITTED Pllr_ RLCIONA: '60dill H/PROPOSLD LMPNOYL r SANG P.JS :"ITTED Ptl'• "Rr4!:'NAI 4�?dr11 Pill; PROJECT I.C.U. G7Y�b Projected plus :`I'n,il,ct. Lratfic I .C.U. will be less Ulan or equal to 0.90 ' ® Projected plu; l,rn,l,!t.t traffic 1 .C.11. Tvijl be greater than 0.91) Projecteo pill'. ,1••nII•• I 11oflit I .( .11.. 11ilh '.•.'•Irlu'. imllr•uvelltl'nl '. ' hill be l l•'... ' u„n +'' 1—null to 0.90 i AJJ Ylm4hboumd rlgh+ -luyti lane. CO) ' Z Comer4 easy bound h'g14 -tarn lane -fo o•pfi'val +hrou9h plus r yh f. (o) Ira'• ,.Al'ACIIY (111LUAI IM ARAI YS1S ' i(„'•( • ..ttnl' 1il( �1A1 • ��Y�',/��+h � �1�.�i.� (Exist inq Ir•a, I ) Vc-Ili l—t'S Bose on fivoraoc Wlntcoa 7 p rl_d�1911 72 11nG ( , • W I tl(•.'�, I%lir lo,GWI(N EOMII1l0 f6wu 110 PRWicl M "'Vvvt 118 I ,•C "ROW110 PR CT V/t Ratio vuluhir Y.. Nat•a Lanes tau I r-r• I• PROMYnl. lau la VOL. Vol. N!n PruJor,t Vol hi NT FIR__ i ST_ 00 .. . . 13 q{, '23 se 1 is �iC' (�o ER WL (I I6 — — I ,0 ar13B oay36 WT h'R �v � Q•/OoU O•/� � LI liT1S., ".:.•SECTION CAPA(IIY I.I;,II IDN U ,•;•. n,: C: ITTEO 1'Ijj� Rtriryy,ll a(Cgl)l N/PROPOSLO IMPROVEMENTS LC.0 y8 :ra•la. r:•r :rxwtrrEO P,O� .�+,xani wodul IPINS PROJECT I.C.U. D,6366 © ;'rr ja_CtLW P!X' 'I'''' I traffic I .C.U. will be less than or eoual ' to '1,9U I'r:•7ectrd 1,1 , r I I lrr i is 1 .1 .11, til l l I'r it cator dial: 1'rojectcd 1 r.. , al ,'.ir 1 Ir.11lit I .I .U. Vllltl trot. naprav(•U;rl,t • 11 be IL ^ar,l1 I,o 0.90 ' • 1 t 1 ANAI I'.I'. ^gg (.xistinr) Ira ! , vr.lr:�f� ased on llvrral(r �W7inlCr Snring 19'u: ' I •J ;?ING i1111 N(GI04fd ,1 Orrll l Ito I'"nlf(!!0� VRIMCCI - ' I� .,ri•r[ Ianrs CnN i r, I •' nu I I 1 •C GROHtII I'R0.9 CT l V.'. Rar1„ !1 Yalumr •, . rl P r to VOL. V(11 �>..•, I'r •,I r,t 1 .• kl--- 0 (z) izoo ._' 3o_! oizf f1 o.oiz�j NT h (2') 5zco 14 NR J _ Fl/� /600 cZ f/; D32 O•o3/9 ' SL^ 3 ;3:70I a o.rz66 o.f266 r t! � cn ^ 1.11-I : :4.. .. __�_ a`�!---i o•s�9/-- --_`f" -_. o-. ssYr-; t � =�_ r! I)�4sz . . ;':���' I:.li.k� ----• ��_-ld.ol3G'. � _._..__ I.p_a1381 rE: sL _.— . _ ..r � �'�6_ 0.o7Y ' wr i I boo I WR ! ' �_Ir )� l01 �o� . O. /ZB8 o.rzd$ • IV .•:fOT10N r,.1P;,(II, 6,!I li:!1lIN 111 .'i_, ., C'Mtll it{' {•1lr— Iq l ;llt1+ 4 -1.fI11 11'H/I'1"II'OSf II [MPItOYf MI N15 I L.U -_�J ! r x:',Ilb. I:JY -,kHllrCi I',�'• •i1: ,"NA1=.1,0411114 . PNOJICI I.C.11, n ''1-o3ectoc: :•i,l' !•r' I ! t.' 111iC i .C.II, tvI Ix' than (W r'(10-1 tc v.9U ' Prr�ectla Irllr ,'1 ,. ! I'd Ilic I .(;.U. IyYll !'l 111',Ilrr Ih,ul l). •':' ' ® !h•ri!eCLed i:: . ,rlr, ;, r I Irll l it. I (..II, I:'1111 IrNI , 104 r0veml'II' . ' ,411i be it I,, :I I••In,' 1 In 11.')fl I Add Y)or4bound leP •+urvr lane. (o) Add Y)OY4h botaid YlSh� -fern lane. (o) 3. Add soaA bound le-F+ 4urn lane. (o) ' 4. Add eaa�bound leP4- -furls lane. (a) AI'I'I'NU I\ C ' CAPACITY UTILIZAT[ON ANAi.Y5LS ' ISXi SLI119 + 30 Porccnl• of Projc-CL + Regional + Conunittod ' (I'itS 11 • ' 11,11 W,1 ' I ION (.APACI IY lit 11IJ/••Al [ON ANAI Y`,l`, gnrrrtvct ion /�iiS�a/.J7• ` N) t,`� �GI" v.S — P 9 (Existing Erai F " Vnluules 6ase� on ICvery+9e Winter S rin 197 I :a I STING ,•Pr�I"�'�, ' :llSl LtIST REGIONAL C"ITIfD PROJLCTEO PROJECI PR[A)LCI :ones Cap ,.,^'• r•o , :'r FP V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume C/C Ratl" Vol RnClo VOL. VOL. w/o Project — ( Vol. 0-o769 NT oo ( _ �& MIS /S 95 W222 t NR — --- -- SL ST _ z) j lna 3 4800 ; OSf_ .:Z3/* AJ- _3 G 0.228/ k 0 228! ' S R K/) o _"— T 79 48 0,4049 0,40¢9 ET 1 _ ___ER A ' A _28 0.52Q, 0.5206 '� WT WR rll Mil IPL D.I DUO rk n1D00 ' I YI5r1'•f, 'W:_'ECT ION CAPM 117011' 1/Ar ION ' I, _i•r•,,•.': CoFH1TPT0 p,o, pl fl UNA. r,ROWIII w/PROPOSED TMPROVTMfN15 I.G.D 0, 2 n I r;',!141 h'.' .urV!I ttlP PW. III IJ4AI "I'ONIII fill'. PROJI CT I.C.II•.__—_ ' Projected plus urvi„cl Lraffic- I .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected pllr, project Lraffic IN.U. w.i Il bu greater than 0.9t; proUecLud pllr, nI u•ip, I Ll'al I ic• I X%U, wll.h hvLvMh impruvemont.•. ' will by ir'. "I„I. nulll to 0.4I(1 r;I, . ' ' -'I I"ll I I)vrnunit. ' I. Add sou4k boul,d 'thw, iyh /pile. 1 I lfll '!',11 1119v l.l1t'Hl.t 1 I u• I..,rru n,n nnru . ., , y �} ' • !n;rrt.1't t tttn��� ..r_�"a^(Existing lraff'r. Volu n! veragc.wOS � Y1S9M ' t,+r,1t Cx ISTtNG f'Z,Ub' I11l1 { I%1ST REGIONAL C"ITTEO PROJECTED PROJECT PROII(I Unes Cap taer. rfl. of hW V/C GROWTH PROJLCT V/C Ratio Volume V/C RdtiO Vol 1 R1tlo VOL. VOL. W/o project 1 ; Vol. NL NT iI • _lo Z3 0.1 a0 0 NR �0 ' I 62 0.16,81 0. el SL 1I bOn 1 0.0572 0.0572 ST C3 4 L 40 3(p 69 0,3300 0.3333 'k EL ) 0 I�� _ Qq 31 0./001 0./08t ET b4or _ u IC�I� I I a 3/5 16,7* 20 0.2198 * ' ER WL WT WR YELLOSTIVt — hod 01/000 0.lQ� ' Et1STING ;RTE':ECT10N CAPACITY LTILIM104 2 Ea,-14 05 C"177ED P1a5 Rtf1ORA1. IPOWlll WIPROPOSEU INPROVEIICNTS I.C.U. Q,6 (pr/ ' [[SANG PLUS_ -' WITTCC PI-' RIf 1.VAl"•rTIOWfll PLO!. PROJECT I.L.U. Projectea plus, nrol"rt tr<Iffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal , to 0.90 El ProJected p1w, i11'lut-i L 11•df I i'6 I .( .U. I•/I) l In• 111TAU'r thtlll U.`h) ' © f!roiecteu 1•1u:. ,,, owtI Irr)fftC I .C.11. WI011.,y.lelils I111p1'Ovemellf.f. ' All be la'.,, 0, 111 r1- t';pl,l l Lo 0.110 t 1••.1 riot +1 n .J r, a' t1ly•f nV011ll'llL: ' If Add soA bound +krougll lane . (0) ; 1 0 ' .._.•-..'.�I.,�./.� IXl � e 1 (Existirq "Ira .`rr.• vc,Iumes Based bn-Ivef•age Winter Spring 197,�) 'II STING I IIIN REGIONAL COWIT IEU PRWILTLO PRUJECI PRII.•I(I Me„gent lanes Cep I 'an' Ilk I v/C GROWTH PRCUI CT Y/L Rat to Volume Vit ke U, Ail I Ito L'0 VOL. VOI, w/p I•1,11eit Vol. Nl II 6 _ ; •al _l cl _ D•v_I31 0.0131 NI— 0 ------�� 0 a U -9 NR l p : o1a I ' SL a oo C3)4,6001 I !S o.1429 �k 0_i429 STk(3) a_f.��. Et o0�.(10_ff: 0.03 * o.o 344 ET aEPWL WToviJ� _ 2 S I O. 3 S3332 U.WR0o i 6 8 . 0. 4731 0.4731 0./o00 o.f000 4' EXISTING :NT:iSECTIOH CAPACITY I;I II Ilia IJN ;WITTCO PIIP_RILIUNAI—uROWTH W/PkOPOSEO IMPROVEMLNTS Lf..0 C• GS� E L!51 rN:. PLJ'. :LMPIITTEO Pill', RUap'IAl `r''0•rTll PHIS PROJECT I.L.U. Projected ;'tlr •ro !rlt I.nlffic I .C.II. will be laat than nr equal to 0.90 Projected plu•. nrl,.l' I II •r1I16 I .l;.11. wall he 'Irtat.or l.han I1.`nl Projected olu., ,• n,t:•' ; [ r-d f is I.C.U. with '.Y • our, improvemrnt', :,ill be lass ' ll. 11 „I ••';'la1 to 0.90 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .. I.rtpt rl,, L , •vl;lMrl•t / Add ou�ti b ou nd leP IurP, IGhe • (0)� Add SOIAA bau nd h.9 h� +u ro lame, (o) 3. Add eas� bourn! /e�+ +urPl lane. (u) , 4. Add ea&+ bound +-rough Igroe. Co) 5• Add was bound nigh+ 4-twh lane- (0) 1 • mow I'�--- MillWit 0ON LM'ACIIY IIIILI/AIION AANAIYSIS ' irlrvr!."4t lon 1CL way yM C y+e . f (Existing traific Volumes Based oA Averigew-4iri er SprTng 197,y) �$ Nn•t�aoT "I STING Prhl U'.•d 01S1 1 Lt IST NEGIONILL COMIITED PROJECTED PROJECT PNOJEU Lanes Cap Iit •u i Ir: Id VIC GROWTH PROJLCT V/C Ratlb Volume V/C NaLlo Ratio VOL. VOL. w/n Projoet ' { Val, NL__ NT —•f as� 0 NR _ t_ St I ot� I 0 1 0.0088 0 ' ST t U0 EL I 1% __ _-•_„- i•�U_ : 0.0312 * D t)31Z k ET ( AD00. I .. - 76 0.331 I 0.33yN ' ER JI i 1600 SdUL 3125 0.312G wt 1 l ! .9ol 0056. cl005 ' WT �¢6D0 i I 8 313 93 3 2 0, o wR ( .2 01 loco o•I000 ' L11STItiG :NY"r:EGT109 CAPRtI tY I:I II I:0 I7h , L1;','II,b ,:L; SCV MUD Pill', PItIONRI ',f1dall1 41PRUPOSCD IHPROYRNIS I.C.0 (� , E M4. P;J° _"ITTCO Pit", nTr110101 r,VORW PIUS PROJECT I.C.I. 0.a118 Projected 111•r. 1,rilp-i1. 1rrlltic I .C,II, will bu la,r, Willi 01. rqudl , to 0,90 Projected Alas pt,,.li,c.t Lroffic I .C.U. ldtil Ile ilreater than IDYL' ' ® Pro,I ecteo illll', p1'11•it 1 IrofI lc I .t +II, wIIIT +,.Y ,LRIIIS I lilt)roveliiol l l} ''I+ r-rIIIL L,,, .'I , 1, , Ln,,l nV•'l1U'liI � '� I Add eo,&+ bound 4-h'-ou9 h !a ne. (C.) 2. Add We.S4 bound 4hr-ou3h lane. (0) ' 1 1 ' ",II0H (.APACI1Y (1111.11.AIION ANA0 :II*) t •InPersr•ai�n O � �"�'�� �+ (Existing Traff;+_ Volumes Based LT ver g W Ater Spring 197 ' I Cx IST IN���nd m!., ixl5[ } rxiST HEOIONAL COWITTLD PROJELTED PROJECT PROJI CI YU.tavot Lanes Cap I -.are•. I p I PY lio I VIC GROWTII PROJ4CT VIC Ratio Volume Yh: Hatlo VuI. i katlo VOL. Vol . w/o Protect Vol. ' Nt (� I t---- ; —I�° I o.ozsb o.vzsb —3 NR SL 1 OC> � — 1 0.0 19 0.0719 ST _ 00 _ E `j_ 29 ' SR '(6 I o ' — 241 _ 0. ` 2� 48�. 3z vO EL . _ 1 3 z ET 139 19 In IZ o. 7 /f * > ER — A I Ob W 32on_•'fp•• ) . 1� �___ YS .,__ 0;0�66 MOOD Co ' (3)4600jL> 1 llf3__. U. 2.1 WRYELLOVTIPE 10 0.I000) Lt ISTISG :N:E_ECTION CAPACITY L11111MION ' 1:1„ PLI; COMMITTCO PLUS PIGIOeAI 4POIIlM W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMFN75 I C.0 0.769 Yf E/157143 PLJS CWTTE0 P:US RI6I04A1 u10W111 PLUS PROJECT I.C.II, Q 76yy 1 Projected plus ::rol:•ct tl'affic' I .C.11. 1•IiII bo less than or equal to 0.90 tProjected I,lu', I11•0.!1',.!, tn11 fic 1 .(:.L). ia) 11 "1' yroaler than 0.90 ' I ;,I'L'i1•C.1. •.' f1C 1 .( .(I, IIPtwovellent`, © ('rOjeCLe1� I'I JJ will be lL .'. .1.. - •r 1:<1t.,11 ul 0.510 I Add west bound 1C�i I�t o-1 Itaroe 101 Add west bound +hr0Ugk 14ne . (a) ;nTrra t t It,n �g �� e /1'r, 197. (txisting Ira: ltr lloluines fuse n ve a e W ' ter Spring 197�� (s:li lNG I••�•�0•: I 'r:Sl FtUT REGIONAL COWIIIL0 PROJ(CTLO PROJECT PROJICt Uses Cao une• P I °j I•R /C GROWTH PROJLC1 V/C Ratio Volu V/i NaLle Vol. Aado VOL. VOL. w/o Project t Vol. NL IrY3_j 05 0.0519 00519 NT tg� .04o.o oU O oo NR I SL 1 - -'T-�77E2 0 o, ST I 1 1 Q. oo6k 01006 SR —._. _ El ET _ l� i �� 53 0. 1� 15 6,4457 ER 1 00 t.,� _•(1'>` Z O_0 3 WR Ir V YCILOR:�E J� I(7 b.1 000 ak o•to00 Lf IST14G•:R:ER:5CTION CAPACITY M 114110N U C.T(im r.2: CCMIITTTD PLt: Rf 4:hNA1 (.e0RI11 R/PPOPOSCD IMPROVTMCNIS l.f,.V Q w� U:STpG rtus :i.fV(ITTEC PI •. W IP•,N LnOatli P111:. PROJECT I.C.V. t'rojeCLett Illy. .'n, 1• I I Ir,IIIIC I .C.(I. wlli Dr Ir'. , Than ur t"111"l Lu 0,9u Projected pllw. :•rI ,rLL lrarfic l .,C.U, letll bN' greater than 0.90 � I' I;rujected t.lu . I-•ID'I.l IroffiC Y'Al'Ill') IIIIprOVn01('lli r. ' r:ii be II.-%, U.-- or rrpla1 Lo 0,90 :!t „'tit . iorl ',,Al AL I T UI 11.1/1kI IWi IIIVILL 11t.) E•1!'(.t 1'OEIM p (Existing Tra M r-44 V 0 1 u s ase on Very T ter S rin 197 ) Nuvc�wn[ to 151 Ih0 P1(d'0'.1'1 1 oV151 LAIST REGIONAL COIMI TIED PIi(1Jt C MO PROJECT PAL)JI0 Lenei Cep 13P.-% 'p I "I" NR Y/C GROWTH PREULCT V/L Retlo volume v/( Rn L!u Vol. Ihltlo VOL. VOL. VW/ool Protect Vol. • NL NT 00 j(3)�B� (7 _ 1 20 0. 1 ' 3 .150 NR h II �S 0 55 o.o700 I ' 0.0769 rSL _ 1 A EzZ32oo__t1" ,85 0,0909 O.0909 S T o ; l o� y 3 o.3 I 0.3463 SR — EL i - - - — — - ET ER Wl —_ - j -- --- •!32 26 WT Ub6 4�6¢00! 0 • 10 0.1770 WR a31 474 ' VELLOI,TIPE --- ' I 0.10004 0'/X0 LAISTIIO :'TEii ECT I ON CAPACIIV U11!I/AI ION EA:�!6C ;.Li COMIITTEO PLUS RIGIONAI (,MM111•W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMLNTS I.C.0 �•61 1 E(!Sf!%G PLUS '"ITTED PLUS RIGIl1pAl 61'0WI11 PPS PROJECT I.C.U. O.6Z3J ' Projected ;)ll,', or'uje(,L traffic I .C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected plug a! u.l' t.re' IiC I .C.U. will be creator than 0.90 ' Pru,lected I(li , I1 •1' lr, l Ir-11I1(, I .C.II. Ynl.h-'.•y'.Irnr, nlgnuvvnl(vIl ', ' 011 be le-o- ! h, n nl i•rplal Lu ().811 - ' '••' tr'IOtl�r n' 1"' 1111•'Ilii"IIII`I11,: • �. Aad hor-Fh bound +hrouAk Iane - L ' Z. A-dd sou4 bound le-4+ •♦%yvi lavle. Cv) 3. Add was bouvld lanQ. Co> 1 1 x ilIII of , +.. . ..... ..... . .. .. .. f 1 J r— . (Existing lraifl-: WOWS Base on vera9e Tnter ring 197 ^ry1 +x15tIhG !! vunrb`i + IxI',I~I I'IST REGIONAL LWHITILD PROJICTLD PROJFCI PRIUIrI av Nn"`4•,rt tenet CapI 'r•r, I +p I P, nN I t/C GRO1,1111 PAWLCI M Retln VpIWT Vl hallo 1 I 1n1 h�UO VOL. Vnt. Hen Project It Vol. —}— ----1 —�—. -- — Nl I _.._. l..(!5 �_�� 19 0.0838* 0•0838 ' NT ,2(7 0.19-Y 0I 53 SL -- . �� �_ 0.1' -7 2O 0.160 ST GY> '1029 l_ I 81 D.W/b* O• I !a SR i _ a33 6.1 1456 EL I I 00 O•o325M O " ET -- ---r--- . O 7 o ER 3 w� 1 00 L 4s1 .1._ ' Z 6 0 4 * 0.0508 hR jqa — 57 — TULNI t"E �— 0.1000 EJISTh6 !I,T:.-FECTION CAPArllt L'rn VAIION C"ITTPO Pitt' RIL:1001 IpV41ii U•+PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 6.Gi • 3 E I:a INi PLUS :P`PIITiEO Kit, 6h5;'1NA, GPOBTI, PLU; PROJECT I.C.U. 0.4'y67 , projected I'iv Ir,w, ( tratfic .l .C.U, will br I(Iti', than or rqual to 0.90 Nrojectlxd I,lu rl^, ;, , t trr: fic I .C.11, Anil la• gro,ttrP t.non o.91I ' ,I Projected ,',,,,,' • ', 1- I, t ,',)I I is I ,C.tl., t'J11.11 ';�' LPIII', illll)I'UVCIII011t.% ' Q .E•.1 •rill-be lea I.tl,,,l rr „goal to 0-90 ' a,f rT fl: IN I.' !-•U l y. i,Vl glllnit: ' 1 Conoei4 northbound rlyll l 4arn (ane 4c) opl;onal Ihrougg plus right. Co> 2. Add vlor�hbound fhrouill Iane. &Q ' 3. Comer+ toes� bouncl lc� 'I-ttrn lane -Io' optional - hroush plus 1ef4. Co) �I wri t.APACIIY Ul It. ILAIION ANALY.11 --++ trYC�I )e0cLCA (Existlnp lr,l f c voI4lj.s (lase on verage Winter Spring I91�} � 1S11NC T"11' �"'— -.tlSi ' FXIST REGIONAL COIMITiCO fAOJ[L'TLD PROJECI PR0.Rf1 4 Fa.i+rct I 1 u,, lip qco GROWTII PROJLCT V/C Ratio Vnlume V/C Rat to lanes CaD I •""' ' ' rul IIAL10 VOL. Vol. w/o rruJret —� • — ----- I Vol. I NI"— -•-- ---�:L�!,St'I � 4g 6_/�� O• 1603 NT_ I o0 3Z4800 11331! a 416 0.4099 45 0.41 e8 NR_ 23 St. (1) __ -----_i l (� (8 0.O'531 53( ST _ t( 00 3�¢ Qci ' 2 269 0 20 3 O SR_I(1)� 4 03 EL 1( lb _ - ' 1(� SZ1 __ o.ofoo o.o/OO ET 1 /13yoo _ O. 19# 0. 1 ER Wl I 2)3700 _ Z3 o.orol2 0• 1a --- WT O C�Iboo ' ___ o•ob19 * o.ob19 WR 1 Ib00 72 . o•0&1-;n 0.0650 VEIL06„PL _ 1 0.1 oW-� LXISTING 'NTE'=ECTION CAPACITY L'III RATION EI CCMIITTEO PI US R[C 0:1.11_'''OWlN W/PROPOSED IRPROVENENI5 I.C.0 o•74, 9 EMSIING PLUS -"ITTEG PIT' 1.1 iONAI GRJWTU I'IU4 PROJECT I.C.0 o,71 17 ;1ro,lected 1111], :111) I 11 ,Il f is 'I .(-U. wI I I l,r Icy, thtlrl ur rtlli,lI to 0.90 projected plu' .1rvf1'ct I.raffic I .-C.U. will be greater than O.d[l Q 1'raJectod plu', prn,jl t I :,rol f is I .C.I1, with '.ti".trot, nnprovcmuvlt' will be Ir'. . fh,'n 4',I'lof to 1, Convert- nor4k bouy%d rigk4 -furs lavte 4v opf(vnal fhroLLg� plus righf• !0) 2. Convert scsu+hbouhd righ+ •l trvl lave -la apf lovlal -l-hrou9l7 plus ri jC f• (o) 3• Covlverf e0.s�bouhCJ Yigh4 Turn lane +o optional +hrougl, Plus righ+. Co) 4. Add eas+bound optlonal -f'kvmn k 'ptus rl,Jhi• !a) 5. Covivert we-0-bouvid -F m,18ln lavie iv le-f-+ furtn lame (e) 1 v 1 Ili IL\l I IIIN 11/11/61 I UI LL.L(iu 1W.I iw1•+i • I • .1 lit or Ira; f�.l•ctloumes B d sjC�l (Existing tTa: r<t Volumes Base on vera9e , nter Spring 197 S� n tnent `,4IS11NL n•.1 { Ir;11 IXIST REGIONAL COLMITILD MUM PROJECI PRLI lanes Cap I „r.•. + •P 1 +'r Pk Y/C GRONTII PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume VA ka Uo Ynl. Ratio VOL. VOL. w/o Project ( 1 431 o. 299 y 32 0.3060 NL D L3)g.$�_11lZQS_(• ' NTH (2) 320o I 106 a ! 241 9 14 o. .96 4 NR — SL ST 14� o.2s-ss 6 0.2598 SR J Et I _...._ . �t• �. _I�� rY _�� U.OSSO ET �i.�9.(? 1 5 39 0.14:-'/ ER -_ (� 182 D. 50* 0.27 9 Y A _ t -• — NT — I — k'R ,Euc.�;ve10 L) 0co K 0.1000 I'I L11SUNG :5::+:EC7I0M CAPACItr LIILUAllom U:STi6o T_L7 COIMII'M PUTS 9111:0IAL 1PWIll N/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENIS LC.0 0. 9 Y ' NJ! LL WITTEC PIPS oV.irmAl G+Owlll PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. ❑ Projected Plu , nrut••rt nalfic I .C.U. will In, 1a55 Ulan ol• r.Iludl ' to 0.90 El Projected p'u!, +r1+.; •1 t. tl +aftic I.C.U. i- ll tu' +ircowr than 0,90 ® ('rojectod 1-l1 a1ut + I Irattis I .C.II, wi I'll ',"-I""'- 11111rovC11' , ill be lt'ti•. ' + I•+Iu.il Lo I)AU ' • +•',t.rtp• +� � a1. nrl•r++vi:ulvnL:f. Corlver+ o»e vlor l hbound +krouyll rune }o t,oi-A bouKc/ IefF Atypl' la),.e.(u)' 1 1 t :I'I • ': .1 ' i 1191 1./11'lll,f l l U1 I1 II III IUn rww,, 1 ..• 1 1 nr('r`. •'.1 Ioil __,11SJ_._75� 1`r��1r11.1. � g) ✓c�(Existing iralflc Vnluine5 Base on Average wlnte97 �lJ fz1.11NG +�+ +''�•u^.1 1,.51 L I115r REGIONAL CLRMII rED PRWI CTEO PRWLCI PROM CI 1 ro,.lm4nt Lanes Cap i lahP " I.I+ I Y;C GROWTH PRWLC7 V/L Ratio Volume V/,. ka Uv All ' R.LIo VOL. VOL w/o Protect i Vill. ' I 526 o. 3190 k 3Z 0.3256 'k 2 �45_ -0•_i_3a8 14 00.—.413�2NT sLsT 252 6 0.25 4 0 00 SR 1 I EL ET E R - - - ---- 1- - - r-- .•_ • -- wl wt _ _ 7 119 b1R _ ' YEi LLw.'r IOE _—._ • O.IUoo'k o.��o I*' Ll ISII NS ;N'_;_ECT ION CAPAr I I .r 1111A1 I ON ' Er ED PLU_RI i,IONAf ::RONIII N/PN:IPOSED IMPROVCMCNTS I.C.0 19 + r:j,IN.; 1:J5 ':v511 rTCL P•Cr• :'11,%11 •1'04lll Pill' PROJECI I.G.D. Q•8a98 ' Projected 1+ 1111. 11ru.i"'•.I. trarfic I .C.U. will be Tess than or etquei to 0.90 ' 1.rojected I,III '1; •I ;r1 I II'dIIic I .C.11. wl•il by grv.11111' Lhill U;VII ® Itru•jeCLcL' ,11u' I1 ,1! fiC 1 C.II. milk •v •luur, nn!no,cuu'nl ' I i be ir•, I ,. 1 0." , Lq 0.90 ' ,. 1'll,l �. I n 1 1 iu1'llll'll! • (on verl one 4cw�kbound +krou3A lane 49 Yior�hbound le4 4UYh lane . (v) 1 • I ,, •r,l I%IN LAVALI I UI II.I//N ttl.l MI'It I I 7 1� . (Exist Inra +ra. e ', y{,Iln,ir� asc on�`rage IJ ulter rTn9 19/' I tl:rlry� , �••••I'•' . •r 1 { IIISt REGIO4AL LOMI II tO PRWI t ILO YROJECI VRU,'llt n ��•ri lanes Chp 1 r 1 Ph , XIS GROWN 1'RNttf Y/l Adtlll YOIwnG Y.l 6ella soi 1 Retlo VOL. VOL. w/o Pro•Icct ' I vo). NHL i f 1 i �� I• 4 0. of o.01013 ' t, 1 i.(2)3 zoo 1520_. 3 hR J(0,/boo-!_I�`• 60 0. 13 6 O.1 sl _ ► 1.3 o. oe 1• ST 3 4800 , 'a 1 143 O./850 3 0.1856 SR --- i3 62 -- 3 El II ifs' -1 0.3281 ET _ L 4)(�¢00 _}A� i- r Z 193 ER � rj • I _ .. .lt._�_ � _ � --- Nl r 157 w 4 wr _ . . �b't.. l I� b.z 3ra.zo k,R „1 _ MINIM /000+ u1sm6 !st=:Ecnox trwanlr Lull;.'um U;;:i'.+ :.1': C:Ifs1 iTE0 P.II. 2rf 1:•Y.11 16v4111 RIPPOPOSEU IMPROYEMINi1 I.C.0 16,9269 r' ' " i" 's •YYr TTEL P.'• 41GIrNAI 'NYUTN PIII! PROJECT I.C.U. (1) MacAv4hur is noy+k /50U+h . Projected ; I•J`• + ' ni' cl ll'afric I .C.0. will btl less than or o(IM11 ' to 0.90 a 'I I• ''++• l I + dI IlC I .A•.l!. IYIII by +a+'1'd1 V1' tli,lil ll.`I'+ Prc,fect+ ! I Pro.1061III ;.! 1 ( 1 .1+ ! 11 ( .i .II wll•h .• hau•. nn;nuvrulrnt will be ;I l,l! !n 0-90 • ' T'IGi I ••, � . IP• �1 'VI'llll"II • I Add Mr4hbound rig�a� Iurn lane. (�I) 2. Covluerf eastbound h3h� +Urn IavQ •!o o Fional �hrou jh plus ri h . Co) ' it IN LAPACI I 011L1/HI IUN 1UYILL ICI:, lnrc'r:, '.:tinnL Air I�!si +, i��'/��OC�G( 4 (Existing Traits VnLnnes (lased on verdgelWTnLe pri g lg7g I t1511NU � 1'R:R U." tT.ISi :TI}I It101ONA1 COtMI I ILOI I'RWIL1IU PRU,r CI 19Y1,111I lnnei CAP '+nr V ' )IN S;C 1RUMH 1'NO.IL CI V/( Ratio Volume V/1 "'It", ' _-- Vol ual ltl Yl1L. _ Vlll M/1, 1'r'u.p:c[-Vol. I ! I 0.04-00* 3 0,0419 NT It�LI S I O.I G9 0. W ' NR _ st O _��(� • I ?3 o.15r6 0.l Ilo Si0•29l9 SR _ --- - 1 _ 2 0 EL 3a - ss 32 • P-z9 ET 4-5 ER I I A (I) { �L 0 0.0 38 0.D 6 WR 20 • ' 1 /00U lr 0•/000 rr Lowt:PE LIISTISu :',TER:ECTIOR CAPACM I.IILI/AiloN -LI; COWITTEO PIU4 RloirlNAI _Reldlll H/PR01'OsCO IMPRovi-mms I.C.0 o.7945- -70 c 1:S1iY,: i• :@WIfTC01`7 h'• R„�'JYM •:141Nb1 I'l ll`• PRO.ILCT I.C.U. 0.00 ' © Projected plus : 1o.i^C!. I,raffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' Projected plus, ;.r0,1Q t U'affiC I ,C,U. wi 11 bc` greater than 0.90 El Projected nla , {null'cl ! ra! fic-I .C.II, with 'y1,Ll`uI5 ingnove `nt" ' 11 be le,.' 01,111 1W Withi l to U.90 _ • - - - - - - - • - rlpl , l•I a❑141.11011uvll . 1 1f 'ill !l�\1 tt\V lilf'111.I 11 111 Ll,l/llt lll \ l\�V4 , .. . 1 Iflil II( / ,L�(r�1 • Ini,.Yl •.. yLIA1 �r (Existing Ira Vn1.nnL's Based t)n veracTT.e W)nter�S{)ring 197�7 , 'x,;;INt� I•—• _. ' "' lu%1 NIf1ONN LUM+I I I,DI Pru,'1 l IIU u 1'NWI CI "td •41 - M d••r'4 I.vw� Cop . " :,L LNOIIIII I'I:.f,111I �{ Y,h Hnt to 4.'1un.r• }.. •.•U.• 1 I k }'UL. N YIII /, Prplt'1 t 1 of d'a Yul. N' 1- Cz 3_za?- 1�1 i 1i lO 1 �.OI25 O.Oat; i (z)_3ZOo_Il,� �.. 112 o.457Q* 32 0AE ' r NR - 1 - z 0.0319 0.0319 Cr) 16cx> s' L l ! i (z) zoo ~ 99 O.I z66* 01266 ' (� 0. z28• 1 241 0.518 1 5 5R —1 !MQ_I _ . _ _lam 12 —18 0_0938 _— QQ38 ' E: trl I t(zJ3Zoo �. .� � ___ _ 7 O•Ilo3W 0.1103 ET I!1 b I �� I _ I 0.1431 0ER fl) .1431 o a�44 0.0794 ' 0.0119 d.o 19 WT�_ oo --I_•_.._o,o9/z* o• rz WR I) It� . _ ..., d2— 0.12 8 0.)288 G.low 4 O 1000 'k LJI:1l Ng " MIEN rAY:�iI+ , I 1-ru1f�N i, ofI U.:'.'G • , :7NI''f'. f'tt' ul l�;'aAt '•f'oNpl p/PknPOSf.p iMPNOYFMFHi$ I.C.0 O.8G5 3 ' :r; •1'.V '.kl`Itttr', r^�.•ah..r�61 '-r�ul r;n. PROJECT Lf. U. ,'1 I Ir.LI I i<. I .C,11. well bl Ir'rt Ih.ln yr 1•,u,ll I )' I , r .11 JLCtL 1 I ' Lt. J.9U PI•LJectei' I•Ip' rt, '..• 1 ( 1'dl }1C 1•S:•II• Y.•I II ln• fjl'P<lPt\I' than 0. © PI•t.JeCil+t: .. N: . i I ' �' IIt• I .1, ,I•,• }, t : N It'lll'. i:nitl )Npllll"r' ' .911i bt, I• .I. .I • .I.•.I ; Ifl ll.\'ll II. A ddvl or--hbv and IEN +IAM (Qhe Co) 2• Add h0r+k bouncl ri 9 h l- 4U rY' 3 . Add souAboamd 1elf 4t1rn 1(Ane. (v).• 4, Add easy bouvld lei+ +UrP) IAhe. Cu) , NEGATIVE DECLARATION ' TO: Secretary for Resources FROM: Community Development Department ' 1400 Tenth Street City of Newport Beach Sacramento, CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 ' NAME OF PROJECT: �W�L '1i�► ., Tf4 /C /N ��M ' PROJECT LOCATION: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1�c gccepcun�cc of v ' F02 C1il� RCc'nalr+�+� . OPF�c.G—� N.DUSGUM �iwi(�'Ictlrc V,S� 9Cfrn�TcCa ll� Il� I:I000. \ 14ZP P- e. pbT����. ' FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect ' on the environment. ' MITIGATION MEASURES: ' INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: F � INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: 1 Environmental Coordinator ' Date: MITIGATION MEASURES ` 1 . The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the Orange County Airport should be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions which may be recorded against the property. Disclosure Statement The Lessee herein, his heirs, successors and assigns acknowledge that: a) The Orange County Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; b) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the Orange County Airport; , c) The City of Newport Beach may continue to oppose additional commercial air service expansions at the Orange County Airport; d) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet are service at the Orange County Airport. 2. The on-site parking will be provided in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. The project be designed to conform to Title 24, Paragraph % Division ' T-20, Chapter 2, Subchapter 4. ' Should an resources be uncovered during construction, that a qualified 4y g archaeologist or paleontologist evaluate the site prior to completion ' of construction activities, and in accordance with City Policies K-6 & K-7. 5. Final design of the project should provide for the incorporation of 9 P J P p s for project lavatories and other water-using water-saving device o J 9 9 P facilities, ' 6. The final design of the project should provide for the sortin; of recyclab;: material from other solid waste. ' �7. The development on the site should be in accordance with City policies o 'n traffic. 1