Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTPO045_MCLAUGHLIN NEWPORT PLACE I Illllnl IIII III III IIIIIII Ilhl IIIIII NII III III TP0045 Pp�T e� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH u P.O. BOX 1768,NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92658.8915 IFORN`P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3222 August_ 3, 1988 Mr. David W. Miller McLachlan Investment Company 4141 MacArthur Boulevard Suite 100 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dear David: Professional and Business Offices Site 5 of the Newport Place Planned Community Development is zoned as P-C. The development of this site may include professional and business office and commercial amenities serving the business community. The plans currently being processed by McLachlan Investment Company for this site (plan check #439-88 and plan check #275-88) are in accordance with the approved uses for this site (including the proposed future restaurant, future athletic club, and future commercial lease space) , subject to compliance with City ordinances for building permits, occupancy permits, etc. Very truly yours, �Q - JAME D. HEWICKER rping Director JDH:ll cc: Amendment No. 638 Traffic Phasing Ordinance No. 45' 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach 66MMISSIONERS MINU its 9 yd GP May 5, 1988 m9� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 2 ROLL CALL INDEX ermit prior to completion of the public rovements. 7. That a deteriorated tree-damaged curb and sidewalk reconstructed, and the tree root pruned or removed replaced, as approved by the Parks, Beaches and Re eation Department, along the Iris Avenue frontage, nder an encroachment permit issued by the Public rks Department. 8. That the applicant sha pay an in-lieu park dedication fee of $6,8 37 prior to the recordation of the parcel map. 9. That this resubdivision shall expire the map has not been recorded within 3 years of date of approval, unless an extension is grante y the Planning Commission. Traffic Study No 45 (Continued Public Hearing) Item No.3 Request to approve a traffic study so as to allow the Traffic construction of a nine story, 183,740 sq.ft. office Study #45 building on property located in Professional and Business Offices Site 5 in the Newport Place Planned Approved Community. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 40-31 (Resubdivision No. 319) and Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 83-705 (Resubdivision No. 742) located at 1400 Dove Street, on the northeasterly corner of Dove Street and Newport Place Drive, in the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: MacLachlin Investment Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Mr. Don Webb, City Engineer, referred to the subject Traffic Study's revised Conditions No. 1 and No. 2 as recommended by staff. He explained that inasmuch as the original Traffic Study included an improvement at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Campus Drive that had been conditioned by the City of Irvine on a committed -5- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES '�A A�'�.�'FOdi•�tA y� 9N 9 AANq�q� May 5, 1989 qy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX project that will not be developed, staff has suggested that the requirement to improve said intersection be moved to Condition No. 1 from Condition No. 2 so the applicant would be required to construct the intersection as a part of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance improvements. Mr. Webb stated that additional language has been included in Condition No. 2 to explain where the intersection improvement fees will be deposited and the purpose of said fees. Commissioner Debay asked if the foregoing fees collected from the applicant will go into a general transportation fund? Mr. Webb replied that collected funds are deposited into the Circulation and Transportation Fund account and then said funds are drawn from said account to build the improvements. Commissioner Debay asked if an applicant would be allowed to build a project without any improvements at an intersection even if a fee has been paid? Mr. Webb replied if there is a program that would provide for the required improvements to be completed within four years, the Traffic Phasing Ordinance allows a contribution to the program to fulfill their obligation. Mr. Jerry King, J. A. King & Associates, 550 C Newport Center Drive, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. Mr. King stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and revised conditions No. 1 and No. 2 in Exhibit "A". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. In response to questions posed by Acting Chairman Pomeroy, Mr. Webb replied that staff does not require applicants to submit traffic evaluations of intersections outside of the City of Newport Beach; that the bridge will be widened on Campus Drive by about 22 feet between Bristol Street North and Bristol Street; that Bristol Street North at Birch Street will consist of three through lanes plus a combination of a through lane/left turn lane onto Birch Street; Mr. Webb commented that two lanes may be restriped to three lanes at the off-ramp of the Corona del Mar Freeway; and that Bristol Street at Birch Street will require pavement widening. In reference to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding Finding No. 3, Mr. Webb explained that the Traffic Phasing Ordinance allows the contribution of a -6- COMMISSIONERS • • MINUTES G� topm May s, 1988 Z° CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH y INDEX ROLL CALL proportionate share if the project is programmed to be completed within four years. The fee for the proportionate share would have to be deposited with the City prior to occupancy. He commented that the applicant is paying for their share of an improvement that would be guaranteed to be completed within the four year period. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Debay regarding the proposed project's completion date, Mr. Webb explained that the most critical improvement is the Campus Drive widening improvement, that the County of Orange is currently processing those improvements, and that the start of construction should be in approximately six to eight months. Mr. Webb stated that the construction time should be about one year, and that the completion date will probably occur at the same time as the occupancy of the proposed project. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Traffic Study Ayes * * * * * * No. 45, subject to the Findings and modified Conditions Absent * No. 1 and No. 2. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Council Policy S-1. 2. That the Traffic Study defines intersection improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. The improvements outlined in the traffic study are very costly and involve right-of-way acquisitions and bridge construction ' which are considered to be beyond the scope of this project. 3. That the improvements identified at Campus Drive/Bristol Street, Campus Drive/Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road/Campus Drive are committed by other agencies, and are anticipated to occur prior to occupancy of the proposed project. 4. That the traffic study indicates that the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service on any major, primary-modified, or primary street upon satisfaction of the conditions 7- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES May 5, 1988 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Z INDEX ROLL CALL for approval. CONDITIONS: 1. That prior to the occupancy of the proposed project, the circulation system improvements to the intersections of Birch Street/Bristol Street, Birch Street/Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road/Campus Drive shall have been constructed, unless subsequent project approval requires modification thereto. The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. Should the County of Orange or City of Irvine budget and program these improvements so that they can be expected to occur within four years of the completion of this project, the applicant shall pay a proportional share of the improvement cost to the City of Newport Beach as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. Fees collected for intersection improvements will be deposited in the Circulation and Transportation Fund of the City of Newport Beach and solely used for improvements to arterial roadways in the City's Circulation Element. 2. That prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay to the City of Newport Beach a proportional share of the costs of the improvements required at the intersections of Campus Drive/Bristol Street, and Campus Drive/Bristol Street North, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. Fees collected for intersection improvements will be deposited in the Circulation and Transportation Fund of the City of Newport Beach and solely used for improvements to arterial roadways in the City's Circulation Element. -8- Planning Commission Meeting May 5. 1988 Agenda Item No. 3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Traffic Study No. 45 (Public Hearing) Request to approve a traffic study so as to allow the con- struction of a nine story, 183,740 sq.ft. office building on property located in Professional and Business Offices Site '5 in the Newport Place Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 40-31 (Resubdivision No. 319) and Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 83-705 (Resubdivision No. 742) located at 1400 Dove Street, on the northeasterly corner of Dove Street and Newport Place Drive, in the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: MacLachlin Investment Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Applications This application is a request for approval of a Traffic Study which would permit the construction of a 183,740 sq.ft, office building in the Newport Place Planned Community. Traffic Study procedures are contained in Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Background On March 9, 1987, the City Council approved Amendment No. 638 and a Traffic Study, and certified an Environmental Impact Report, which allowed the construction of the proposed project in Professional and Business Offices Site 5 of the Newport Place Planned Community. The project had been previously reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on January 22, 1987. In approving the proposed project, the Planning Commission and City Council reduced the project by approximately 60% from that which was originally requested. A revised Traffic Study has, therefore, been prepared for consideration which reflects the development approved by the City. TO: Planning Commission - 2. Environmental Significance III An Environmental Impact Report was certified in conjunction with the approval of Amendment No. 638, and it is adequate to serve as the environ- mental document for this project. Conformance with the General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site for "Adminis- trative Professional and Financial Commercial" use. The existing and � g proposed office use is permitted within this designation. Subject Property and Surrounding Land Uses The subject property is currently developed with office buildings. To the north are restaurants and an office building; to the east, across MacArthur Boulevard, are office buildings; to the southeast is a bank; and other surrounding properties are also used for offices. al si An y s A Traffic Study has been prepared for the proposed project in conformance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Council Policy S-1. The proposed project is expected to be completed in 1989. Analyses were, therefore, completed for 1990. The City Traffic Engineer identified seventeen (17) intersections which could be affected by the project at full occupancy. The first step in evaluating intersections is to conduct a 1% traffic volume analysis, taking into consideration existing traffic, regional growth, and committed projects' traffic. For any intersection where, on any approach leg, project traffic is estimated to be greater than 18 of the projected peak 2-1/2 hour volume in either the morning or afternoon, Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) is required. The 18 volume analysis identified ten (10) intersections where traffic exceeded the one percent criteria in the morning and afternoon peak hours. The chart on the following page summarizes the results of the Intersection Capacity Utilization analysis for the project, including the ICU ratios with the suggested improvements described later in the report. TO; Planning Commission - 3. IGU SUMMARY - 1990 EXISTING 90 EXISTING 90 +COMMITTED EXISTING 90 +COMMITTED +GROWTH CRITICAL PEAK +COMMITTED +GROWTH +PROJECT INTERSECTION HOUR +GROWTH +PROJECT +IMPROVEMENTS MacArthur/ AM 0.79 0.80 NA Campus PM 0.89 0.90 NA MacArthur/ AM 0.55 0.56 NA Birch PM 0.65 0.66 NA MacArthur/ AM 1.06 1.06 NA Ford PM 1.19 1.19 NA MacArthur/ AM 0.41 0.42 NA Newport Place PM 0.65 0.70 NA Jamboree/ AM 1.10 1.11 1.01 Campus PM 0.86 0.87 NA Jamboree/ AM 0.60 0.61 NA Birch PM 0.61 0.62 NA Campus/ AM 1.06 1.08 0.88 Bristol North PM 1.46 1.46 NA Birch/ AM 0.76 0.79 NA Bristol North PM 1.17 1.18 1.12 Campus-Irvine/ AM 1.22 1.24 1.14 Bristol PM 0.93 0.93 NA Birch/ AM 1.32 1.38 1.00 Bristol PM 0.78 0.78 NA In order to meet the criteria of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance, a project must be found to neither cause nor make worse an intersection capacity utilization which exceeds 0.90 for the year of analysis, which includes all committed traffic and regional growth. As shown by the above chart, the project worsens ICU'S over 0.90. Mitigation of the traffic impacts at these intersections is required. 1. Campus/Irvine -Bristol and Bristol Street North An improvement to provide three through lanes in each direction with a dual northbound left turn is planned to be completed by April, 1990 as part of the airport expansion improvements. This will reduce the ICU to an acceptable level as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The project applicant should be required to contribute to the City a proportional share of the cost of this improvement. TO: Planning Commission - 4. 2. Birch Street Bristol and Bristol Street North The addition of a westbound left turn lane at Bristol Street North and an eastbound left turn lane at Bristol Street will reduce the ICU at these intersections to acceptable levels under the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordin- ance. These improvements are required by the redevelopment of Santa Ana Heights. The County has not, however, budgeted for these improve- ments, so they cannot currently be projected to occur within four years. The improvements will, therefore, be made a condition of approval of ,this project. Should the County of Orange program the improvement of these intersections, the applicant should contribute to the City a proportional share of the cost of the improvements. 3. Jamboree Road--Campus Drive, The City of Irvine has committed improve- ments (required of the Park Place project) which will reduce the ICU value, allowing the project to meet the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The project proponent should be required to contribute to Newport Beach a proportional share of the improvement cost. Specific Findines Specific findings and conditions must be made to approve a project pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and are set forth in Chapter 15.40 of the . Newport Beach Municipal Code. Should the Commission wish to approve the Traffic Study, findings and conditions for approval are set forth in the attached Exhibit "A" . The criteria to approve a Traffic Study pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance are objective, rather than subjective. If a project meets all the criteria as set forth in the ordinance, the project should be approved. The criteria of the ordinance can be summarized, as follows: 1. The project does not cause, nor make worse, an ICU in excess of 0.90. 2. That if an ICU at an intersection is made worse and is over 0,90, an improvement shall be completed prior to occupancy which will result in the ICU being reduced so as to meet criteria 1. 3, That if an improvement is planned by the City or another agency within four years of the project, a proportional share of the improvement cost shall be paid to the City of Newport Beach. It is staffs opinion that the project meets the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A". No exhibit for denial has, therefore, been provided. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Attachments: JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director 1. Exhibit "A" L Vicinity Map BY �Af�S 3. Traffic Study Patricia L. Temple /W- PLT P Principal Planner WP\PC\TS45.SR2 TO: , Planning Commission - 5. EXHIBIT "A" Findings and Conditions for Approval Traffic Study No. 45 FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the morning and afternoon peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Council Policy S-1. 2. That the Traffic Study defines intersection improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. The improvements outlined in the traffic study are very costly and involve right-of-way acquisitions and bridge construction which are considered to beyond the scope of this project. 3. That the improvements identified at Campus Drive/Bristol Street, Campus Drive/Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road/Campus Drive are committed by other agencies, and are anticipated to occur prior to occupancy of the proposed project. 4. That the traffic study indicates that the project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of service on any major, primary-modified, or primary street upon satisfaction of the conditions for approval. CONDITIONS: 1. That prior to the occupancy of the proposed project, the circulation system improvements to the intersections of Birch Street/Bristol Street and Birch Street/Bristol Street North shall have been constructed, unless subsequent project approval requires modification thereto. The circulation system improvements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. Should the County of Orange budget and program these improvements so that they can be expected to occur within four years of the completion of this project, the appli- cant shall pay a proportional share of the improvement cost to the City of Newport Beach as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. 2. That prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay to the City of Newport Beach a proportional share of the costs of the improvements required at the intersections of Campus Drive/Bristol Street, Campus Drive/Bristol Street North and Jamboree Road/Campus Drive, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer. s VICINITY MAP TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 45 Y-C t ��a SUBJE PROPERTY O IN 2\pr I P-C " kn i , ° N •a4�Qo R v ,• C LOT �. -----i 1tueT No.'1396 � �/ P-c P-C ' i ' QUA/L ST. i b P A Wain Pnigea and AaouiaW TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING April 26, 1988 '@ RECEIVEd r� Planninf � Ms. Pat Temple R2 198 Ir 5 Environmental Coordinator it Ap � City of Newport Beach NEJOI l`t , P.O. Box 1768 CAW § Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 Dear Ms. Temple: This letter summarizes our analysis of traffic factors related to the proposed McLachlan-Newport Place development in the City of Newport Beach. The study has been conducted to satisfy the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. This study is based upon information provided by the developers, City Staff and previous studies. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is the northeasterly corner of Newport Place and Dove Street with vehicular access to Dolphin Striker Way, Newport Place and Dove Street. A nine story tower is proposed on the corner of Newport Place and. Dove Street with a 1,175 space parking structure located to the north. This parking structure will serve the proposed building as well as the existing Bank of America and Continental Plaza buildings. Proposed land uses in the new building are listed in Table 1. As indicated in Table 1, 67,005 square feet of office use has previously been "committed" for this site. Figure 1 illustrates the project location. EXISTING CONDITIONS The streets in the area of the project are fully developed. Newport Place is a four lane street with raised median which terminates at Dove Street. There are two lanes of travel in each direction on Dove Street with no median. Parking is prohibited on both streets. The intersection of Newport Place and Dove Street is controlled with STOP signs on all apporaches. 2651 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE • SUITE 110 0 FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 y • -2- J Table 1 LAND USE SUMMARY McLachlan - Newport Place LAND USE QUANTITY , Proposed: Office 1539190 SF Restaurant 69060 SF Athletic Club 69950 SF Commercial 9s140 SF Lobby 59400 SF Existing to be removed: Office 13*911 SF Previously Committed: Office 679005 SF 8 DR. BRISTOL ST m SITE 5� BRISTOL ST. NORTH f Q<CO� A D s y a GIRD. F � FORD B< 6Q a c5a JDAQ��N a � y�<<S RD. O h � J W� W �° Q Q a Z _> > Q w r Q $ �° I r B� COAST HWY °�2 a o� w PACIFIC 9 � � qP SITE LOCATION MAP_ WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES P143UF N 1 9 III • -3- w Mac Arthur Boulevard is a major north-south arterial , easterly of the site and is fully improved. The intersection of Mac Arthur Boulevard and Newport Place is signalized. Existing daily traffic volumes and 1987 ICU vaules at major intersections are illustrated on Figure 2. These data were provided by the City of Newport Beach. TRIP GENERATION In order to evaluate the potential traffic impact of the project, it is necessary to estimate the number of trips that would be generated. Trip generation rates for various land uses have been established by the City Traffic Engineer. These rates are summarized in Table 2. By applying these rates to the land use data, estimates of trip generation were obtained and are listed in Table 3. As indicated in Table 3, the project would have a net increase of 360 AM peak hour trip ends and 425 PM peak hour trip ends with consideration for the existing building. The AM 2.5 hour period would increase by 720 trip ends and the PM 2.5 hour period by 850 trip ends. Also noted in Table 3 is the increase in trip generation over the previously committed project. These values are 205 for the AM peak hour, 270 for the PM peak hour, 400 for the AM 2.5 period and 540 for the PM 2.5 hour period. TRIP ASSIGNMENT In order to assign project trips to the street system, it is necessary to develop a trip distribution pattern. A pattern for this site was developed in a previous study completed in 1986 and approved by the City Traffic Engineer. That distribution pattern has been utilized to assign project traffic to the road system and is illustrated on Figures 3 through 6. The estimated trips from Table 3 were then assigned to the street system in conformance with these distribution patterns. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The traffic analysis has been completed to conform to the criteria of the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. A total of 17 intersections were 10 37 0.62/0.72 36 0.64/0.70 DR. 14 0.62/0.95 y� L 0.93/0.98\ u SITE Q. 8RIS7 m 0.60/0.61 o OL gT N 6 ORTH 0.62/0.83 �Q�°'� 8RIS70L ST vN�J LEGEND 1 .00/0.87� 29 48 56= DAILY TRAFFIC 1.08/0,59 I VOLUME IN THOUSANDS 0.87/072 56 0.87/0.72 = AM/PM ICU 0.66/0.50 A. �;.•+�"� 54 yo J4 50 n_-0.97/0.84 SC9 w 61 yG� st 39 VkD. W 0.83/0.84 0.76/0. 6 FORD 10 4� 0.62/0.74 50, 22 51 04Q0 Q 6PN32 �H 17 0.90/0.83 I-ri �j a 0.52/0.77 8 <4S RO. a o y w m m 0.71/0.87 v a tr w a a 29 40z 0 64 74 37 47 43 28 w a m� 0 60 COAST HWY, 52 0� � 00 w PACIf IC 9 Ln m o �9 �o 43 0 0 3 0 I° m `� �' qp o Q a o co m o 0 ci 0 0 $ i$ o EXISTING DAILY VOLUMES AND ICU VALUES WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES F10URE 2 I • t -4- , Table 2 TRIP GENERATION RATES Mc Lachlan - Newport Place TRIP ENDS PER 1000 SF(1) LAND USE AM In AM Out PM in PM Out Office 2.0 0.4 0.6 1.7 Restaurant 1.0 0.5 5.0 3.0 Athletic Club 1.0 0.6 2.2 1.4 Commercial 0.7 0.5 1.5 2.0 (1) All rates per City of Neport Beach except Athletic Club which is based upon "San Diego Traffic Generation" published by San Diego Assocaition of Governments (SANDAG). ly • -5- Table 3 TRIP GENERATION Mc Lachlan - Newport Place TRIP ENDS AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM 2.5 Hour PM 2.5 Hour LAND USE In Out In Out In Out In Out roi� aose3: Office (153*190 SF) 305 60 90 260 610 120 180 520 Restaurant (6,060 SF) 5 5 30 20 10 10 60 40 Athletic Club (69950 SF) 5 5 15 10 10 10 30 20 Commerical (9,140 SF) 5 5 15 20 10 10 30 40 Subtotal 320 75 150 310 640 150 300 620 Existing to be Removed: Office (13,911 SF) 30 5 10 25 60 10 20 50 Total Increase 290 70 140 285 580 140 280 570 Committed Project: Office (67,005 SF) 135 25 40 115 270 50 80 230 Increase Over Committed 155 50 100 170 310 90 200 340 13 i Project Traffic Distribution (Outbound) 15 5 10 5 lhlan �y o 15 y ` m u�R 20 E ��4 Y t25 10 Q`yslt 5 0 55 v ti 15 25 S 5 !0 5 �y All v ,b 4 Universily Drive V V E Legend ; 10•Percent Traffic From Project 4 Off. a u A tro 5 10 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 3 j Lf Drive Street Project Traffic Distribution (Inbound) Site F � o y Br stol U m � Street N .Figure 5 Bristol Street Q Legend _ N i50n 10 Percent of Project Traffico v 3 iD 5 a 5 oad s a c ford 9 iT Street San a Santa Barbara Drive- Joaqurq of a 9° i Street o /ills pow F m �� • Q � w W. hvvav 0 N Q O Z DrtVe = n 5 67 Coast p w Y � 5 Tustin Avenue v v 4 1 Ba/ Riverside Avenue v v i m u �a R R V ay levatd a Q u p0 ow at 1 ; O. a in z a. I j WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 4 Project Traffic Distribution (Inbound) 15 5 15 rhi n o" y°o.`• F to 4r x 5 30 r� 25 y� Gc c Site 35 O a 10 �s�Oi tb 25 o JX �b ti v Universit Drive O e S Legend e 1 10• Percent Traffic To PmJect 9 e� a u 5 f �T 10 WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 5 Ib Drive Street Project Traffic Distribution (Outbound) Site r o Br tol Stre �� Figure 3 Brislo Street s • A O p c also Le en N ' s 10 Percent of Project Traffic10�o� t y Road 0 0 Ford 5 to a m o p C S � 4 N $fleet S2ry Santa Barbara Drive boa 47 Sao 19 Street C Hills P� �c •� u � Ni hwa �°.��` Bass e � � � -q / oas O r a o i ` VILTuslin -Avenue 5 v i } gal niverskte Avenue U c c IN� CL Boukva� ; v H p in o u 0 a`in Z WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 6 J -6- identified by the City Traffic Engineer for inclusion in the analysis. The first required analysis is the 'One Percent" test. An intersection is defined as critical by the Ordinance when the project traffic exceeds one percent of existing plus committed ,project plus regional growth traffic on any approach to an intersection during the AM or PM 2.5 hour peak period. A list of committed projects was provided by the City for inclusion in this study and these projects are listed in Table 4. Since the project is scheduled for completion in 1989, the analyses were completed for 1990 as required by the Ordinance. As was stated previously, 67,005 square feet of office use on this site are included in the committed project list maintained by the City. This traffic was deducted' from the committed project traffic data provided by the City in these analyses. Since 13,911 square feet of office currently exist and contribute to existing traffic volumes, the equivalent number of trips for existing was deducted from project traffic for these analyses. Appendix A contains the 'One Percent" analysis sheets for the 17 intersections analyzed and the results are summarized in Table 5. Review of Table 5 indicates that all intersections passed the 'One Percent" test except Bristol Street/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue, Bristol Street/Birch Street, Bristol Street North/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue, Bristol Street North/Birch Street, Jamboree Road/Birch Street, Jamboree Road/Campus Drive, Mac Arthur Boulevard/Ford Road, Mac Arthur Boulevard/Newport Place, Mac Arthur Boulevard/Birch Street and Mac Arthur Boulevard/Campus Drive. In conformance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, ICU analyses were completed for the ten intersections for those periods that were found to be critical. These analyses are contained in Appendix B and included existing, existing plus regional growth plus committed project and existing plus regional growth plus committed project plus project traffic conditions. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 6. Review of Table 6 indicates that all intersections are projected to have ICU values of less than 0.90 for the critical periods except Bristol Street/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue, AM and PM peaks; Bristol Street/Birch Street, AM peak; Bristol Street North/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue, AM and PM peaks; Bristol Street North/Birch Street, PM i9 • • -7- Table 4 COMMITTED PROJECTS Hoag Hospital Corona Del Mar Homes Aeronutronic Ford Big Canyon Villa Apts. Civic Plaza 1400 Dove Street Corporate Plaza 1100 Quail Street Mac Arthur Court Heltzer Medical Office Newport Place Koll Center TPP Amend. 4A Sea Island Villa Point Harbor Point, Homes Rosan's Development Martha's Vineyard Block 500, NPT. Ctr. Project Valdez Newport Aquatics Center Coast Business Center 2600 E. Coast Hwy. Koll Center NPT No. 1 Jasmine Park Ross Mollard Mac Arthur Associates Banning/Newport Ranch Newporter Inn Expansion 15th Street Apts Newport Lido Med Center Heritage Bank Pacesetter Homes Big Canyon 10 Fashion Island Renaissance Fun Zone Crown House Marriott Hotel CDM Senior Project YMCA Point Del Mar Allred Condos 20th St. Bed/Breakfast Inn Four Seasons Hotel Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero Block 400 Medical Amendment No. 1 North Ford Sharaton Expansion Newport Dunes Amendment No. 1 Mac Arthur Court Bayview National Education City of Irvine Development Carver Granville Office North Ford Shokrian Riverside Retail Building Amendment No. 2 Ford Aero Edwards Newport Center 3800 Campus Dr. Seaside Apts. 3760 Campus Dr. Victoria Station Newport Imports Fidelity National Title Newport Place Tower Mariners Mile Marine Ctr. 1q • "8' Table 5 CRITICAL INTERSECTION IDENTIFICATION Mc Lachlan - Newport Place LOCATION 2.5 HOUR PERCENTAGES B AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Bristol St & Campus Dr. - Irvine Ave. 0.6/0.5 0.5/0.8 1.4/1.3 - - Bristol St. & Birch St. 3.2/3.2 1.1/1.8 2.5/1.3 - - Bristol St. & Jamboree Rd. 0.4/0.2 0.4/0.9 0.0/0.0 - Bristol St. N. & Campus - Irvine Ave. 1.5/1.3 0.5/0.5 - - 0.9/1.3 Bristol St. N. & Birch St. 5.1/5.3 2.2/2.0 - - 1.1/1.9 Bristol St. N. & Jamboree Rd. 0.3/0.2 0.3/0.6 - - - - Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff - University 0.5/0.2 0.1/0.4 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Boulevard 0.9/0.6 0.3/0.7 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & Birch Street 0.0/0.0 1.5/1.2 5.3/5.1 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & Campus Drive 0.6/1.6 1.4/1.0 0.7/1.1 1.0/0.8 Mac Arthur Blvd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.5/0.4 0.2/0.6 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Mac Arthur Blvd. & San Joaquin its d 0 5 0 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 q Hills R / .4 / / / Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 0.4/0.2 0.3/0.7 0.0/0.0 1.3/1.2 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Bison Ave. 0.7/0.4 0.2/0.6 0.0/0.0 - - Mac Arthur Blvd. & Newport Place 1.9/1.3 4.6/1.7 16.0/22.7 25.3/5.6 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Birch 1.0/2.9 2.4/1.3 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Mac Arthur Blvd & Campus Dr. 1.0/2.2 1.7/1.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 �4� Table 6 ICU SUMMARY Mc Lachlan - Newport Place INTERSECTION PERIOD ICU VALUE Existing Existing Existing Existing (1987) + + + Regional Regional Regional Committed Committed Committed • (1990) + + Project Project 1990 W/Improv. Bristol St. & Campus - AM Peak 1.00 1.22 1.24 1.14 Irvine Ave. PM Peak 0.87 0.93 0.93 Bristol St. & Birch Street AM Peak 1.08 1.32 1.38 1.00 PM Peak 0.59 0.78 0.78 Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr.- AM Peak 0.93 1.06 1.08 0.88 Irvine Ave. PM Peak 0.98 1.46 1.46 Bristol St. N. & Birch St. AM Peak 0.62 0.76 0.79 . PM Peak 0.95 1.17 1.18 1.12 Jamboree Rd & Brrch St. AM Peak 0.37 0.60 0.61 PM Peak 0.42 0.61 0.62 Jamboree Rd & Campus Dr. AM Peak 0.70 1.10 1.11 1.01 PM Peak 0.64 0.86 0.87 10 4-+ Table 6 (cont.) ICU SUMMARY Mc Lachlan - Newport Place INTERSECTION PERIOD ICU VALUE Existing Existing Existing Existing (1987) + + + Regional Regional Regional + + + Committed Committed Committed (1990) + + Project Project 1990 W/Improv. Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. AM Peak 0.83 1.06 1.06 PM Peak 0.84 1.19 1.19 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Newport Place AM Peak 0.34 0.41 0.42 - Von Karman PM Peak 0.55 0.65 0.70 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Birch St. AM Peak 0.43 0.55 0.56 PM Peak 0.52 0.65 0.66 • Mac Arthur Blvd. & Campus Dr. AM Peak 0.62 0.79 0.80 PM Peak 0.72 0.89 0.90 N it • � -11- peak; Jamboree Road/Campus Drive, AM peak; and Mac Arthur Boulevard/Ford Road, AM and PM peak. Additional analyses were completed for these intersections and are described in the following paragraphs. Bristol Street/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue and Bristol Street North/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue. Both of these intersections are projected to have ICU values greater than 0.90 during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of regional growth and committed project traffic. The addition of project generated traffic would increase the AM peak hour ICU values at both intersections by 0.02. No change is projected for the PM peak hour at either intersection. Discussions with the City Traffic Engineer indicated an improvement to provide three through lanes in each direction with a dual northbound left turn and single southbound left turn is planned as a part of the airport expansion. With this improvement, the AM ICU values at Bristol Street/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue is 1.14 and the AM ICU values at Bristol Street North/Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue is 0.88. Since both values are less than without the project and project improvement, the conditions of the phasing ordinance are satisfied. These ICU calculations are contained in Appendix C and the intersection are illustrated on Figure 7. Bristol Street/Birch Street and Bristol Street North/Birch Street. These two intersections are also projected to have ICU values grater than 0.90 due to regional growth and committed project traffic during the AM peak hour at Bristol Street and during the PM peak hour at Bristol Street North. Both of these are increased by the addition of project traffic. The City has indicated that these conditions will require mitigation due to airport expansion and redevelopement of Santa Ana Heights; however, there is no specific commitment from the County at this time. . In order to satisfy the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, improvements were developed for . these two intersections. The addition of a westbound left turn lane at Bristol Street North and an eastbound left turn lane at Bristol Street would reduce the projected ICU values to 1.12 at Bristol Street North and 1.00 for Bristol Street. These ICU calculations are contained in Appendix C and the improvements illustrated on Figure 8. )_7 LNG I I I NO SCALE 4 BRISTOL ST. NORTH r- r 1 I 7t II I I I11 II III a I I � I U BRISTOL ST. II IIII I III I RECOMMENDED 'LANE CONFIGURATION INTERSECTION OF CAMPUS DR. — IRVINE AVE. / BRISTOL ST. bs BRISTOL ST. NORTH WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 7 )-`IJ ' 9 I I I 61 II IOlSRJB H.LUON II_ Q n 0 LL Z 6 I I oc I I I I o I a n 0 I I N II I IIC m II I II I II � II I � I W I I J O = G C 4,�^ y I ,I II 'IOlSlue - - a u I z 1. I n z O I I 3 0 -12- Jamboree Road/Campus Drive. This intersection is projected to have an ICU value during the AM peak hour to 1.10 due to regional growth and committed project traffic. The project would increase this ICU value to 1.11. Intersection improvements are currently being proposed by projects in the City of Irvine that would reduce the ICU value to 1.01 during the AM peak hour and with project traffic. This improvement is illustrated on Figure 9 and the ICU calculations is contained in Appendix C. Mac Arthur Boulevard/Ford Road. No change in ICU values is projected for this intersection due to project traffic. In summary, project traffic impacts are relatively minor and will be mitigated by other projects. Airport related circulation improvements Would mitigate impacts on Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue. The redevelopement of Santa Ana Heights and airport expansion will also require improvements on Birch Street. City of Irvine projects will improve the Jamboree/Campus intersection and. the Pelican Hills Road will mitigate Mac Arthur Boulevard impacts. SITE ACCESS Vehicular site access was also reviewed with respect to traffic operations and safety. This site plan indicates that the existing driveways on Newport Place and Dolphin Striker Way will remain with the Newport Place dri-veway being right turn only. A service access and a general driveway are proposed on Dove Street. The general driveway proposed on 'Dove Street will provide direct access into the planned parking stuucture. Review of this site plan indicated generally acceptable conditions with the following mitigation measures. 1. A single driveway should be provided on Dolphin Striker Way with two-way traffic flow between the street and parking structure access•. 2. If controls are utilized for the parking structure, two inbound lanes are recommended from Dove Street with a minimum of 50 feet from the back of sidewalk to entry control . LNG I I i � NO SCALE I I I I p Q O CAMPUS -- - - - CONVERT THRU LANE --TO OPTIONAL THRU 7 OR LEFT r �[J w w Ix co IV II III � I ICI RECOMMENDED LANE CONFIGURATION AT INTERSECTION OF JAMBOREE ROAD/ CAMPUS DRIVE WESTON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 9 y� • -13- SUMMARY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to the McLachlan-Newport Place development as required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Estimates were made of trips to be generated by the project and the impact of these trips evaluated in terms of the Ordinance. Site access was also examined with respect to traffic operation and safety. While some Intersections were found to be impacted by the project, other planned development is anticipated to mitigate these impacts. Site access was found to be adequate with the recommended mitigation. Principal findings of the study are the following: 1. The project will generate 360 AM peak hour and 425 PM peak hour C trip ends over existing trip generation on the site. These represent increases of 205 AM peak hour and 270 PM peak hour trip ends over previously committed development for this site. 2. Of the 17 intersections evaluated, 10 did not pass the "One Percent" test required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 3. Of the 10 critical intersections, six were found to have ICU values greater than 0.90 with the project during either the AM or PM peak hours. 4. With improvements related to airport expansion, Santa Ana Heights Redevelopment and City of Irvine projects, all intersection impacts would be mitigated. 5. Site access was found to be adequate with the recommended mitigation measures. MITIGATION MEASURES The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project. • • -14- 1. Improvement of Campus Drive-Irvine Avenue to allow three through lanes in each direction, dual northbound left turn lanes and a single southbound left turn lane at Bristol Street and Bristol Street North. 2. Add a westbound left turn lane on Bristol Street North at Birch Street and an eastbound left turn lane on Bristol Street to Birch Street. 3. Restriping of Campus Drive at Jamboree Road as proposed by projects in the City of Irvine. 4. A single access on Dolphin Striker Way with two-way traffic flow to the parking structure access. 5. Dual inbound lanes from Dove Street with a minimum of 50 feet from back sidewalk to control point. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of Newport Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE & ASSO9IATES Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP:hld #870880 Planning Commission Meeting April 7. 1988 Agenda Item No. 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Traffic Study No. 45 (Public Hearing) Request to approve a traffic study so as to allow the con- struction of a nine story, 183,740 sq.ft. office building on property located in Professional and Business Offices Site 5 in the Newport Place Planned Community. LOCATION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 40-31 (Resubdivision No. 319) and -� Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 83-705 (Resubdivision No. 742) located at 1400 Dove Street, on the northeasterly corner of Dove Street and Newport Place Drive, in the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: P-C APPLICANT: MacLachlin Investment Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The traffic study being prepared for this project is not yet complete. Staff therefore requests a continuance of this item to the meeting of May 5, 1988. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By ai uca Patricia L. Temple Principal Planner PLT/WP WP\PC\TS45.SR1 i ��EwPoRr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U P.O.BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 C`q</FO RN�P NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing on the request of McLachlan Investment Company to approve Traffic Study No. 45, so as to allow the construction of a nine story, 183,740 sq.ft. office building on the northeasterly corner of Newport Place and Dove Street in the Newport Place Planned Community. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that it is the present intention of the City to accept the previous Environmental Impact Report and supporting documents prepared in connection with the request noted above. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the Environmental Impact Report and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92658- 8915, (714) 644-3225. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that said public hearing will be held on the 7th day of April. 1988, at the hour of 7_30 p.m. , in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, Califor- nia, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. For information call (714) 644-3225. Janice Debay, Secretary, Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach I .•„.......... ........... ...........,.,..u....,..o..+...w.aeu..•w.woa..x...u..u.wuaaouauxxonnoo.a..ox.muxouuua+-•wwwawauauuiuyinwuxNuutumsuuutuuUuuwtuuupru11tW1y;yNN011j�1ii�yWLiiiitltltltfl David L. Barnes RREEF USA FUND-ONE INC 4132 Fireside Circle 3435-Wilshire Blvd. Irvine, CA Suite 2900 u"•' �! AP # 449-131-22 Los Angeles, CA t AP '# 427=221-17 .. _' •: ."' " John J. Fahy Prudential'Insurance•Co: . 23371 Juanico 2049 Century Pirk 'East Laguna Hills, CA Suite 1300 i AP # 449-131-13 Los Angeles, CA AP # 427-222-01 Triton Southwest Aetna Life Insurance Co. Triton National Real .Estate Inv. 'Dept. i 375 Diablo Rd. Ste. 200 P.O. Box 1414 i Danville, QA I Hartford, CT i ' AP# 427-18i-03 AP # 445-122-14 Mic Dove Street Associates Pacific Club. 1400 Dove Street 4110 Mac Arthur Blvd. Newport Beach, CA Newport Beach, CA �. AP # 427-181-05 AP # 445-122-03 Ketchum Stuart Mitchell CNB Associates 824 Wilshire Blvd, Ste.400 4490 Vori Karman Los Angeles, CA Newport 'Beach, CA AP # 427-181-07 AP # 445-12.2-05 i Domino LTD, McFly Inc. 807 Cannery Row Q- Monterey, CA AP # 427-181-08 John P Skoby 49561 Avila Drive La Quints, CA AP # 427-181-09 I G Newport-Place Office - Alison Company �� P.O. Box 8040 Newport Beach, CA AP # •427-221-01 Pacific Mutual Life REO # 334 i P.O. Box 8580 Newport Beach, CA AP # 427-221-04 I I Rosenberg Real Estate Equity Fund West-5 3435 Wilshire Blvd. , #290C Los Angeles, CA AP # 427-321-06 i tN I V M Celmk.0 yl �l R EPizr � ✓ . tt 01R2 CITY . ,,wofa 6rRCH 6 �\ CALIF. fO OD APPENDIX A ONE PERCENT ANALYSES II 0 • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/CAMPUS DRIVE-IRVINE AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 1--9 87 AM Peak Hour Approved I I �I Approach Existing Regional nal Projects Projected 1K of Projected Pra�ect I Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 21, Hour Peak 2y Hour I Peak 2�; Hour Peak 2y Hour ;� Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4287' I30 0,6 '1 i� Southbound 1117 0 2241 1344f l7J 7 6, i Eastbound I `i 6913 -4 O 133Z Westbound O —•--•-- Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity-Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM T .0 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/CAMPUS DRIVE—IRVINE AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87) M Peak 20 Hour Approved �—� Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected lw of Projected � Project I Direction Peak 21; Hour Growth Peak 2t, Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2502• O 2Ci ( 27gZ Z<$ L I C�•5'' Southbound 3028 o 36)27 29 O,S/ Eastbound 5834 O 1 7563 C Westbound -- --_ _D O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume ©; Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity .Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM T 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87 Tart Peak 2; Hour Approved FApproach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2; Hour I Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 891 3.z :I Southbound 552 O ( 32 -7 i Eastbound 4560 O 3D �O S � I Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I • • l 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87 Pm Peak 2; Hour Approved I Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1`•: of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth— Peak 2ti Hour Peak 2,, Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 25 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume l i Northbound 425• 0 ib 4 Z 1 141 %l Southbound 1429 I S Z .2`d 115,141, Eastbound 3754 Westbound i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-, Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I ' l% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/JAMBOREE ROAD (Exist':rg Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 19 87 AM Peak 21, Hour Approved li Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected ! Project ;I Direction Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 2u, Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 2y Hour !� Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6036' 12( 117 7 -133q 73 2q 0,4/%: Southhound 1004 20 S7 1 q 7 Eastbound 6307 0 154P� 7$71 I 79 it Westbound D O O Q �I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Er Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than lq of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET/JAMBOREE ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Tverage inter Spring 19 87 PM Peak 2-, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1` of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour I Peak 21, Hour Peak 21, Hour it Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5425' `Oq Iq(0's (D`1g7 -70 ! 144 0,2 !� Southbound 2361 441 33i Q 33 ;z Eastbound 5472 D ��y5 74417 I N ; 0 it Westbound I 0 i r� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected U Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET (N)/CAMPUS DRIVE—IRVINE AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 87) AM Peak 2; Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1}. of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume VolumeVolume Volume Northbound 5255 yck' S75- ' I 5 � `7cII Southbound 1180 G 1 aq 301-1 15 ,rj'�/I' Eastbound I� Westbound 3121 S7U 3(v� 3 7 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET (N) /CAMPUS DRIVE—IRVINE AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87) Pm Peak 2; Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1•.. of Projected ! Project II Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 25 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume _ Volume , Northbound 3012. Z2(Q Southbound 4598 �f,� 1-70 Zg Eastbound Westbound ' 8478 _1 0 �2 10, 312 (6 ,3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET M/BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 1g 87 AM Peak 2; Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1`1 of Projected Project II Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2853 � I 5cl � 314y4 1 ?�. � 1-7,/ � I r uth'ound 726 ZI $ q{yy i ZI Z1stboundstbound 2653 O y3S 3oss8 31 I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET (N) /BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87 PM Peak 21i Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1"' of Projected Project Direction Peak 2, Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour !) Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 291 Z`3 T,3� southbound 3793 D (018 444411 qq VP 24 r� Eastbound Westbound 5476 0 -7-7 -7�5q 3 2 i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [�] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection 13RISTOL STREET (N) JAMBOREE ROAD (Existing Traffic Vol—un-ie—s-Tased on Average Winter/Spring 19 .U7 AM Peak 21, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1; of Projected Project I� Direction Peak 24 Flour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 21, Hour i Peak 2, Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume �I Northbound jl 7647. 15-3 S109 8600 57 :21 6,,2,%: Southbound 1568 3l 540 1 25 -"7 0.3"I�, i Eastbound I Westuound __ O f r Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1`6 of Projected LJ Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL STREET (N)/JAMBOREE ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 8 PM Peak 21, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1; of Projected I Project �I Direction Peak 2�, Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 21; Hour Peak 21i Hour Peek 2� Hour iI Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume u Northbound 7161 � 6 ICJ e,z �I Southhound 3751 7S n441 e-lq(,7 -jcj ;ZS 0,4,` � Eastbound O iI I i Westbound z I Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE ROAD/EASTBLUFF DRIVE—UNIVERSITY DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 AM • Peak 21-, Hour Approved AF�roach Existing I Regional Projects Projected 1", of Projected Project ii Direction I Peak 2y, Hour I Growth Peak 2, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume kortnbound I 4664 q3 q,5 5702. S7 !z ar i--- southbound 4330 L337 575�' T Eastbound I 1116 lyz( i IA —i Westbound ' I ' _ ! 91 Z O I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected j Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE ROAD/EASTBLUFF DRIVE—UNIVERSITY DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 pM •----'. I Peak 211 Hour -T_Approved Approach rxistin9 Regional Projects Projected 1", of Projected Project jl Direction I Peak 212 Hour Growth Peak 2+ Hour Peak 2A, Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume korthbound 4965 G 3`'( 7 14f O.2 L Southbound 5248 105 1$'24y 7( �i7 7�2_ ;Z�d d•`f`(L Eastbound 679 ; p j 3l 7 (0 7 G Wes Mound 1.`�Q—..--1—.— ,+ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume V Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE BOULEVARD/,MACARTHUR BOULEVARD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Winter Spring 19 a2 AM Peak 2§ Hour Approved I Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1�t of Projected Project :I Direction I Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour � Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume •; Northbound 2552 _� St rcc6� 3254' 33 IISouthbounnd I - jJ ((0�7 b L7 3Z 4072 (�o�Eastbound - 53 I I Westbound I I II 2124 Z 7`6y Z�1Sb r-y Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected lJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE BOULEVARD/MACARTHUR BOULEVARD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 PM Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1,, of Projected Project I Direction Peak 2s, Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 21; Hour Peak 2p Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume hortnbound 1479 30 4603 2ZSZ 23 Southbound2888 Eastbound 2038 Westbound 3487 _i_ 76 102,5— 1 415-z3 2, i q4, 'Q r� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected L� Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2_ Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Util'ization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE BL BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 66) AM Peak 2> Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1�1 of Projected Project Direction i Peak 21, Hour I— Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 25 Hour Peak 21. Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2163 7 z�( sorthbound 3511 Z lS-T T6? S 7 57 (,S�,I Eastbound 354 O 417 .440( — 1' Westbound I 23 C)• Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected © Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: ;1;� FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE BL/BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage Inter pring. 19 86 PM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected ]n of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour — JI�Volume — Volume Volume Volume — Volume Volume Ir Northbound 2512 Southbound 2560 O ally- 3 S 3 ' 412 1,Zc Eastbound I 1499 G �23'�> 1-732 ' Z 0560 Westbound i 3('� O I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 3 FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE V (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Verage Inter Spring 19 87)AM �— Peak 21-, Hour Approved A.aroach Existing Regional Projects Projected It of Projected Project I I� Direction 1 Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 21; Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 21; Hour Peak 2> Hour Volume Volume I Volume Volume Volume Volume 61;rtnbound 2494 0 I 751 3a24.5 'J"Z i 'Z outhbound I 3948` Q I 2 144 1 CFQ2q I (LI } Eastbound 618 G �J6, G744 I 6 i O,7 CM wEstbound I I I < I 2465 I 3$� .Ztf53 —� Zy zcl } IV , 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected �— Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Ed Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE BOULEVARD/CAMPUS DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 32) pM Peak 2� Hours Approved' -^roach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project 1 Lirection Peak 23; Nour Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 21s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume - „w:nbound 3503 ,I Scjtnbound 3161 101is y 1 -77 Eastbound 1 2135 i d i y'r 25-4 Westbound i 1662 +--� (pZ `6 .114 GSM Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected L Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR 13 (Existing Traffic Volumes base on verage Wlnter Spring 19 87)AM Peak 2�, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1;, of Projected Project I II Direction I Peak 2� Hour I Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' - r— II Northbound �4983 S� 3 qs 5�1� �I?� 6,5`Y� Southbound I 2571 z�5 y 77 3313 33 7 6, z`ta-I itEastbound 461S�y S i Westbound O 1 3y -Uol 1 rrs� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/SAN MIGUEL DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87 pM Peak 2i Hour Approved Approach Existing I Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume r— Itorthbound 2606 i 21Q5 4JQA4 33U$ 344 !)y G,-tl itSouthbaund I— �UO fdZ3880 G — Q,(o` ; Eastbound 2266 —_— G 3j,y 2(E,;2© Q Westbound I 704 0 '47 75-1 c$ 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected❑ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD SAN JOA UIN HILLS ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average Winter Spring 19 87) AM II Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1, of Projected Project II Direction Peak 2; Hour Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour II Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4694 �B3 5ryS S?'1� 2-16,S` I I Southbound 4122 -4zs ssz'b 53-15- 54 `7 U' j Eastbound 577 O i aIG, -743 g CJ � Westbound -2 _ Z 3 2110 i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic .Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 PM �— Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1', of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour I Growth Peak 23; Hour Peak 23, Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2918�— Sot O 3-6;Z,75 :-/t( Ifj Southbound 5129 rj'oZ`� 5�p �c tc$ �J 6)S f2`6 6y Eastbound 2532 d 44 3oi 30 ; II—Westbound 1145_ 0 -3 r Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/FORD ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 AM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1%, of Projected Project I �i Direction Peak 2, Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2: Hour Peak 2-, Hour Peak 2> Hour Volume I Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume c i. Northbound �- 5493 SloCo G'( ( 70 30 ?D ! Zq () CZ Southbound 4272 � I ,i Eastbound 667 3 (p76 iiNestbound 1 2140 — - -- 6..— l7~a` •7.2�1+'Z 2 .3 ':� ��3`Cu-� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/FORD ROAD (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average Winter Spring 19 U1 pM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected B; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour I Growth Peak 21, Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2y Hour I Peak 21, Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound c _ 4692 �$ 3 (D SS (cZ(vG (0 3 • !`/ 0,2 �j Southbound 6487 (,CUSS 1313 1 5344S� 13 Eastbound t� 1143 _ I 3? Q) � Westbound I � 1117 . - ._ . . C3_. ' �7 I644 z_ H Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/BISON AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 Am Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project l Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 21, Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 7110� 73a &2-7 Southbound 5428 5 875- (vim( L` Eastbound i 730 Z.t t q4f ( 9 ! Westbound I +— b Z Z ZIP d i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/BISON AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Wlnter, Spring 19 _ PM Peak 2+� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10; of Projected Project I Direction Peak 2 Hour Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2 Hour Peak 2 Nour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound �- 5842 Cob2 (OOZ- -744q�p -7y ?Z? 6,q ISouthbound 7085 7W � Eastbound I 1540 ! � � id -I— II—Westbound i _--- -- -- ... 1.— I --' -- I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than Iq of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/NEWPORT PLACE—VON KARMAN AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average Winter Spring 19 87) AM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach I Existing Regional Projects Projected lf; of Projected Project it Direction Peak 2y, Hour Growth Peak 2i Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 21; Hour Peak 2> Hour Volume volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 1' Northbound 2321�— L((0 51253 +Zq5-0 36 I S�outhbound 1233 25- (020 `$-7 Eastbound 422 �( 443 i S i�T l� westbound i 543 _ C� _ C -7 �y� �_ I145' 2S, 3` Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/NEWPORT PLACE—VON KARMAN AVENUE (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average Winter Spring 19 87) PM Peak 2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected li; of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 2. Hour Peak 2i; Hour Peak 2A Hour — Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume �iorthbound �— 1537 31 55'3 Z12-I ZI ;-Z5f Southbound 1856 37 I S7Z 25✓ ;11Z 7 itEastbound 1153 O 28j /413`� i 144 L i i3 22,7`7• `�—westbound i 1213_- D� (D`{ 127-7 3 76 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [/] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average 4Jlnter Boring 19 87 AM Peak 21- Hour Approved ! ;.:roach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1'•; o° Projected Project ! Growth Peak 2>, Hour Peak 2�a Hour Peak 2), Hour I Peak 2�, Hour i .irectian Peak 2, Hour Volwne Volume Volume Volume u-- Volume Volume — i ZI ISO°i I,,,rthbound 1428 �L("'J S�{ Scuthbound 2461 Eastbound 0 '34r� _!t 1382 ! westbound 715 c— r—, Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/BIRCH STREET (Existing Traffic Volumes based on verage Winter Spring 19 87) PM iPeak 235 Hour Approved A i pproach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1�. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2;j Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i• Northbound 1797 +c�5' �� Z r9 I Southbound I 2259 ( 449 I 3il-11 3l yz (13 �i Eastbound 1308 - tJ zq3 Westbound i 1638 j a Z 1 12 -Z ( O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PR0.1 Fr.T- 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/CAMPUS DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 87 AM Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1n of Projected Project I Direction Peak Z� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1799 �0 375 22I0 22 12 jISO Southbound 3600 �72 1 q2-9 S to t S ( i 8'i O itEastbound 1 2456 V I q17 2-Y7-3 Westbound go logo_ . Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BOULEVARD/CAMPUS DRIVE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 87 M Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existi"g Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project I Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2762 66 Ztr Southbound 3406 j Eastbound 2143 Z13 23St'v ' 214 L_ 'i—Westbound 1 2786 O 747 353_3 _j 3_, ':O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: N I .(Lryi R E�uED i� R2'T19fl�. �" 1l QP Dgi`!C"r O\ NE'N CF�F, LQ yp APPENDIX B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION CALCULATIONS BR4155AM • M INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET & CAMPUS DRIVE/IRVINE AVENUE - 4155 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING PROPOSED] EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED] PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECT] I Movement] Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I Capacity] Capacity] Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project] I Ratio I I I I I ] I I I Volume I I I ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ] NT i 4800 ] I 1478 I 0.31 " I c l)-( I a. I ] d•?J _I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------'//QQ--=y---------- - NR ] I I ] I 2 ------- --- ---- ------- - ---- i -JL I SL I 1600 I I 871 0.05 " ------I 0 I I ---------------------------------------------- ------------ ------- = -�/--� 4800 ST ] ---- I I --- I ---- I -------I I SR I I I I I I 0 ] I I ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------I ] EL I 2400 I ____--- I 1532 I 0.64 " I 2 i ------------------ ------------------------------------------ --- - -------- -- -� I ET I 4000•I I 1464 I 0.37 I I v0q I ] 73 �'I l 1 ---------------------------------=--------- -y�----- f- ER I 1600 I I 390 I 0.24 I _____-- I ] --------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------� ] WL I I I I I I I ] I ] ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I WT I I I I I I I I I ] I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� WR I I I i I I I I I ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------i ( EXISTING I.C.U. I 1.00 I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I 1.ZZ._ I I I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --1 ] EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ] �,Z�/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I J Projected + project traffic -I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 Ivy Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ID Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 ID Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BA4155PM • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET & CAMPUS DRIVE/IRVINE AVENUE 4155 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECI� I Movementl Lanes I Lanes f PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I Volume I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I NL I I I I I I I I I I ---- ---- _ NT I 4800 I I 694 I 0.14 I I 2 I O,/ I -7 I --------------------------------------------------------- ---------------j--- - --- -------------I l NR I ---- I I --- I ---0 21 I ------- I 11-- �--- I - -- I I - &------ = - SL I 1600 I I 120 I 0.08 I -------I I d.�U I 1 Q_DB_ I --------------------------------------------- ------------------y------------- ST I 4800 I I 1337 I 0.28 * __----I Z4,4 I �.3 'F I ��' I D.ZY I ---------------------------------------------- -------------- - --------------]- I SR I I I I I I D I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� EL I 2400I I 454I 0.19I I I- 114 I I --------------------------------------------- -------- D-Z-----— ------- ET I 4000 I I 1134 I 0.28 I ------- 1 -7OGf I 0,�� I 3S 10, I --------------------------------------------- --------------f--Q--------------- Q I ER I 1600 I I 943 I 0.59 * I `°------------------------------------------------------ i WL I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WT I I I I I I I i I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WR I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.87 I I 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ©,9 3 -- I ------- -------- EXISTING i ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ID ( + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 Ig Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 11 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4160AM • . INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BRISTOL STREET & BIRCH STREET 4160 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I ] I Capacityl Capacity] Volume I Ratio 1 Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I I I I I 1 0 1 1 I 1 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------�1 i NT---} 1600 I------- - -- —-- ----} 0.34 i------- ----�---- (?. - -I------ '�?/ I NR I I 26 I 1 Q I r I I ---------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------i 1 SL 1 1600 1 1 100 1 0.06 * 1 -1-1 1 Q=o9 I I �1 0,09 ------------- -- I ST 1 3200 1 1 130 1 0.04 1 I I 1 ------------------------------------------------------ -------p,, - t ------- I p_p i I SR I I I I I I I I I I I -----------------------------------------------------I--------------------I-�—--I------ ] EL 1600 ** 1 1094 0.68 I --------------------------------------------------------- -- - 1 ET 1 1 1023 1 I I --------} 3200 ------------------1 0.35 ------------ ----- -�=4 ------------ -I I ER 1 1 96 1 i --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� I WL I I I I i I ,� I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� WT i I I I I I I I I ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I WR I I I I I 1 11 1 14 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1EXISTING I.C.U. 1 1.08 1 • 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I 3 Z I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I1,5g I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _ ** Assumes no through traffic in left lane I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I � Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic Z.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will ' be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4160PM • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BRISTOL STREET & BIRCH STREET 4160 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED] PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECq I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I 0/C I I I Capacity] Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I I I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NT 141 I -- --- 1600 ------------------} 5 -. I I --- !?_1 ] NR I ] 45 I I I i� I I ---------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------I SL I 1600 I I 204 I 0.13 * I I ----------------------------------=--------------------------------------------------------� I ST I 3200I I 563I 0.18I I - I --------------------------------------------------------—�---�- d.! ---- --� - -��-`��-- I SR I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I i EL I I 316 I 1 1U`! I 1 3`r I i --------} ------------------} -------- ---------�------------------ I ] ET 4800 I I 1235 0.34 k I ��7 I 'k I I I --------} ------------------1 } ---------------------}Q'b�---------- -}�' �-I I ER 1 I 90 I I U T 1 � ---------------------- --------------------------------------______--__-____________----__-� I WL I I I I I 1 O 1 1 I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WT i I I I I I 0 I 1 I i I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I WR I I I I I I J I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.59 I I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I D 78 ] I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ] EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH +-PROJECT I.C.U. 10,7b ] --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ ]Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4172AM • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & CAMPUS DRIVEIIRVINE AVENUE 4172 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSED[ EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED] PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECT) I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity] Capacity] Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I 1600 I I 477 I 0.30 I I 1 -I--� U-- I ------10,30 - ------ --------- - I ---------------------------------- - - ------- - -µ / ] NT I 3200 I I 2163 I 0.68 I ZS�j I 'v7b I yy [ �•*1� I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NR I I I I I I I I I I ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------] ] SL I I I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- II ST I 3200 I I 311 I 0.10 I I l=; I �q•/D ] 4/ I �•/� I -------------------------------------------------------- -- -----------f---------------------� I SR I 3200 I I 293 I 0.09 I I U $ l 0•/---I------10,// I ---------------------------------------------------- --=------------ -------� i EL I I I i I i I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ET I I I I I I -, i I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ER I I I I I I I I I I ( ---------------------------------------------------- ----=---------------------------------I l WL ] 013 �.J ---------- ---- ------- --- --- --- - ------ - -- --- - F WT I I 1404 I ] ; A 5 I --------} 6400 ------------------) 0.25 "------------------ ---- 3 b--I -2 -- ��--� I WR I I 167 ] I i`rc— I 1 1 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ] EXISTING Z.C.U. I 0.93 I 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I [ EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------�- -- 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ]✓f Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ] J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic Z.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4172PM • 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & CAMPUS DRIVE/IRVINE AVENUE 4172 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------�-----I NL I ---- I l --- i ---- * ------I I --Q` ------ 2 ' 0.23 l NT I ---- ------I - l --- --- I ---- I ------- ( -` I I �-Z�---I-—I--I--- -- I NR I I I I 1 i I I 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I i sL I i I I I i I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ST l 3200 I i 1095 I 0.34 I I I I l y I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- �=3 ---------------'I - -�-(I, I SR I 3200 I -------1 1163 I 0.36 * I 220--I--D 43 I------I bl i s I ------------------ --------------------------------- I EL I I i I I I I I I I i -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ET I I I I I I 1 I I I I I ---------------------------------------------------------=--------------------------------I I ER i I I I I 1 1 I I I I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I i WL i 1600 I I 993 I 0.62 *-------I I --------------------------------=------------ --------------------- ------ -1 WT ---- --- --D=i------------ -- I I I116(0 I WR I 1 93 I I OY I 7 I i -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.98 I I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I I.C.U. ---------------------------------------------------- --I----- ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I V� II I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 l Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 IQ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 lJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4175AM 0 . INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & BIRCH STREET 4175 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I IEXISTING PROPOSED[ EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALICOMMITTED[ PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movement[ Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacity] Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I 1 --------I ------- 1 --------I ------- I ----------------------------- -------------------------I NL _ I ---------------------------------------------------I---��--- -- - - 1 I i 1 NT 1 3200 1 1 1381 1 0.43 " I ; .r� i - - I $7 I M1l I ------------------------------------------------------------------- 53------------�'S --I I NR 1 I I I I I : S I 1 1 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 SL I I I I I I „�, I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 ST I 1600 I 74 0.05 D:o ____---I---- 1 1 I ------------------------------p.- -- - ------� B ----------------- I - - - - - I 1 SR 1 3200 1 1 199 1 0.06 1 1 I 1 1 1 I ----------------------------------------------_--_-_ --=---------Lnf;�-------�---- =��--I 1 EL I ---------------------------------------------------------7--------------------------------I I ET I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ER I I i I I 1 C 1 1 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WL I I 129 I I U I I 1 --------) ------------------) ----------- ----------------- -------5-----_- I --`°T---} 6400 1 -------I--- 976-} 0.19 *-------TI_ 22�-- 1 D 'G� 7K 1 - -- �} �-2,-T-tII WR 1 1 124 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.62 1 1 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 074 I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 1 I 0.1 i� Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1J Projected + project traffic E.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project --------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II BR4175PM is • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & BIRCH STREET 4175 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I PROPOSEDI EXISTING'1 EXISTING} REGIONALI COMMITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECI'I I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I Capacity) Capacity) Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I W/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I ___ I Volume I I I I ------------------------------------------- --------------- --------------------------- I NL 1 1600 I ------- I ----156 I 0.10 I I Q. /O I ---------------- - - --------------------- ------------- ------------------I NT 1 3200 I 1 328 1 0.10 1 -I S-I--- - =� ---I-y+2 I -o /6 ------- --I INR I I I I I I - ------------- I ------ I ------ SL I I I I I 1 ------------- I ------ I I ST 1 1600 I ------- I ----512 I 0.32 I _ I ��? I Q•3 5/ I I Q• b I ------------------ - ------- ------- ---------------------- SR I 3200 I 1 1425 I 0.45- -__--- 1 j •r I Q,SZj I ��1 I Q 5� I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I EL I I I I I 1 ------------- I ------ I I I ET I I I I I I ---- --- ---- I ------ I------ I I ER I i I I I I --- ---------- I ------ I I I --------} ------------------} ------------------ ---------- ------- ---//--- 1 WT 6400 1 1 2135 0.40 " I ;70 I y l •7 1 7 I - } } ---------- --------�-}� -� -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� 1 -------- I.C.U.------------------------0 95 I-------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I //' I I --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I //� I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 �rProjected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ➢escription of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II DR4175PM JA43OSAM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSI• INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE.-ROAD & BIRCH STREET 4308 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1986 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSED( EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity) Capacity] Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I NL 1 1600 I 1 174 1 0.11 * I I * 1 1 '(!I ----------------------------------------------------- o• I 1-------------° it NT I I 801 I --------) 4800 ------------------} 0.17 ------------------- ------------ --1 i NB 1 1 6 1 1 :D I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ......- --------� I SL 1 1600 1 1 4 1 .00 1 1 -- 1 d,v� I 10,00 1 I -----------------------------------I------------------------ ------------------- /--I I ST I 4800 I I 1070 0.22 *------- �:_-+ / I D I I aiy`/ I --------------------------------------------- - ------------------------------I SR I N.S. I I s88 I 1 I 1 _ I 21 1 — I I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I EL I i 123 I i ly 05� I a12 D,D .- _I I --------} 3200 ------------------) 0.04 "------------------ -------------- --- I ET 1 I 3 I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ER I N.S. 1 1 36 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WL 1 1 2 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 I --------) ------------------) -----------------------------------------------I I WT 1600 1 1 2 .00 " I I I I 1 I --------) ------------------) -----------------------------------------------i I wR 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING Z.C.U. 1 0.37 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I / (� I1 I ------------------------------------------------------------------ - ---y-- -------------- 1 ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I D,�/ I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 !, ( Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II JA4308PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD & BIRCH STREET 4308 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1986PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I IEXISTING PROPOSEDIEXISTING EXISTING REGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK ER I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I Capacity) Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume Iw/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I 1 ---------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------I NL 1 1600 I 1 60 1 0.04 * -----I 1 0,0 -----------------I--------I----------------------------------------------------------------I NT t 1 I / 1 --------} 4800 ------------------} 0.21 I-------I----+-'---7--—r b---I------- ----- I NR I 1 0 1 1 O 1 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 SL 1 1600 1 1 4 1 .00 1 1 �_. -- 1 0100 I -------------------------------------------- - ----- ----- - ST 1 4800 1 1 943 1 0.20 * 1 <15`_- 1 b, z 9 1 I fl z9 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------i i SR I N.S. I 1 1501 1 1 yp I -- I yy I1 --- -----------'--------'------- ------------------ - y ------------------ I 1 � I 1 0, Z;z 563 {Ia -------- 3200 ------------------ 0.18 ------------------} ------- ET I 1 1 i 1 1f 1 1 I ----------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------1 ER I N.S. 1 1 1281 1 1 1 1 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WL I 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 I I --------} ------------------} ------------------------------------------------i l WT 1600 1 1 0 .00 * I I I I 1 I --------} ------------------) -----------------------------------------------I I WR 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.42 1 I --- --- -------- --- ------ -- ---- - - -- ------- - IEXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 1 --------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I0'l Z I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IVf Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 11 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II JA4306AN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE-'ROAD & CAMPUS DRIVE 4305 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I EXISTING PROPOSEDIEXISTING EXISTING REGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECT PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity] Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Project[ I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------) I NL 1 1600 1 1 89 1 0.06 * I I L I 1t 1 NT I 1 982--- I i --=}-- Q=2 ----- I NR I 1 75 I 1 I I ---------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------I I SL 1 3200 1 -_-___- 1 302 1 0.09 1 1 __ 1 0,0� 1 1 0,09. 1 I ------------------ --------------------------------- ------ --------------- ST 1 1 1224 [ 1 1 I _ I �_�J I Llcl__ S L _I I --------} 4800 ------------------} 0.30 *--------------- } -- - i SR I i 234 [ 1 1" 1 I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------I I EL I 1 85 - (� i ET 1 1 123 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� 1 ER I N.S. I I is I I ---------------------------------------------- -----------------=-- --------------- I -I- I WL 1 1600 1 1 487 [ 0.30 * I 1 Z , I - mot` I I rg I -----------------------------------------------------------------=--- ---------------------I 1 WT 1 3200 1 1 674 1 0.21 1 1 ] 0, I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 -I 1EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.70 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 ,/D [ I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ID'*'Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1 ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II JA4305PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBORELFROAD & CAMPUS DRIVE 4305 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI-EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I - I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL 1 1600 1 1 35 1 0.02 1 1 d 1 I I L I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- --- °--�--� I NT 1-------- 1 1044 I I Q� I q 1 Z 1 0,dD T I --------} 6400 ----466-} 0.23 *---------- ---j--a=� ------------ -- --- I NR I I 456 I I I z3 1 I ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------^ I SL 1 3200 1 1 247 1 0.08 it Q I I I I -----------------------__ --------------------------------------- =°$--=---------°�°B-� I ST 1 4800 1 ------- 1 959 0.22 1 ------- 1 141 0.3 __ 14 3 �_ I ---SR--I--------' I ----102�--------' I -- --- - - - I ---3 I ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---- -------------- 1 EL 1 4800 1 1 z81 I 13(o I2( I 6 I ----------------------------------- -----'-------------?�'-- ---- ------------} --I 1 ET I -------'-------I --- l ------- I I ER I N.S. 1 ------- 1 123 1 1 ----'- 1 © I 1 f -- 1 I ------------------ ------------------- --------------------------^---------- I WL 1 1600 1 1 183 1 0.11 * 1 2`] I D,6 4 I I D.13 I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I WT 1 3200 1 1 2931 0.09 1 I 26 I 0.1p I I f1D_ ----------------------------------------------------- I WR 1 1600 1 1 200 1 0.13 1 1 Q I ! 3 I I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- =----------------Q_ --I 1EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.64 1 I '----- - --------- -- - -- - -- - - - - - 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 O 8 6 1 I 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------I 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. In_B 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------^------------------------- S� J 1VProjected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II I MA4985AM • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR-BOULEVARD & FORD ROAD 4985 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONAII COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECT( PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio [ Volume I V/C 1 [ Capacity] Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projectl 1 Ratio 1 I I I I I I I I Volume I I I ------------- - -------------------------- --/------------------- ----------- 1 NL 1 3200 1 1 160 1 0.05 I I I D,Q 'hI 19,0�_;Q I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I NT 1 4800 1 II 236 1 0.47 * 22� I ------------------------- ---------------------- -------c{-G--G---I--- NR D_62 -- I -► S' - I�6-Z--II I N.S.N.S. 1 1 131 1 1 0 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ] SL 1 -- 3200 1 ------- 1 237 0.07 i 1- I --- ----- ------------------------ -- ---- - - y- D,�B --- - --- -- - ST 1 3200 1 ------- 1 1543 1 0.48 13 I ------------------ --------------------------------------- --------------------� I SR I N.S. 1 1 381 1 ----------------------------------------------------------- ] EL 1 3200 1 ------- 1 122 1 0.04 *------- 1 1 0, oe/ I 10d9 I ------------------ ------------------ ---------------------------------- --I 1 ET 1 32001 1 1591 0.05 1 I 0 1 I 1 1 -�'�7-------- ---�,0?- ER I ---- I ------- ----62 I 1 ------- WL 1 1600 1 ------- 1 12 I 0.01 1 ------- I I 1 1 1 O.d/ 1 ------ - -- - - -------- -- ------- --- ---------- -------- -- -- WT 1 1 --- i i 3 �_�,0/ I ------ 1 �� I WR 1 1 651 I 1 1 ] I I -------------------------------------------=------------ --------------------------------] ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.83 1 ] 1 -----------------------------------------------------------------------/----- 1 06 I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I 1 I 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------/-----I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U, I 06 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I � Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA4985PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD & FORD ROAD 4985 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECT) I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I - I I I I I Volume I I I -------- ---------- I ---------------------------------- - -------_ —------------------------ I NL 1 3200 1 1 54 1 0.02 1 I I p. Z I ------------------_-___-- ------------------------ -------------------------------------I I NT 1 4800 1 1 1927 1 0.40 J I NR I N.S. 1 1 241 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I SL i 32001 1 6011 0.191 i ((0 1' 0, 7 1 1 _14J 1 O'l 1 I ------------------------------------------------,-`------------------- ----------LL-rr--------- I ST 1 3200 1 1 2419 1 0.76 ZVY I G I� I __Z, 2 3 �_ ��7 1 /,0 3 I ------------------------------------------------ -------------- -----------I I SR I N.S. 1 1 1731 1 I 1� - I I I — I I ---------------------------------------------- --------- --------- ------------------ -I I EL 1 3200 1 1 131 1 0.04 1 I % 1 I -----------------------------------------------------------------------/----------------l---� 1 ET 1 ---- I ------- 1 --- I ---- I -------I 1 �.�(� 1 1 �06 0.06 ER I I---- ------- --- 1 ---- *(a) 1 I �= --I------ D.p� 1 WL 1 1600---- I 0.02 - ------- 31 1 ----- ------- CD--- I I I i I -------} 4800 -------I--------} 0.09 -------=) -- ---- -�=��or, I----------}�=�a-� I wR 1 1 269 1 1 j0 I I 7 'f l I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.84 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I //9 I i I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9--I 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I /, --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (a) .02 is concurrent with NL I ,J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 �Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic Z.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA428SAM • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BL & NEWPORT PL-VON KARMAN 4285 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJEC11 PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I - -------------------- ------------------------------I I NL I 1600 l I 95 I 0.06 I I ) 7 I Q, /0 I 2q► I D.�� I ------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------- I NT I 4800 I ------- I --- 639 I ---0-13-�- 13 I 2� I ---------------- - r I Q.�Pj I I- - ---------- ------ ----------^--------I NR I N.S. l ------- - I --- --- -------I------- I I I I SL I 1600 I -----'- 1 ----107 I 0.07 *------- I -- l� I 0.0 7 I 10 O7 I ------------------ - --------- --------------------------------I ST I 4800 I ------- I --- 333 I 0.07 I __ I ?t I L I — !Z--I------I�.(Z I ---------------- - - ------------ - ---------- _ I i SR I N.S. I l 158 l I 1 /� (� I — I 4� I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I EL I 1600 I I 211 0.01 I I 17 I _ D_D Z _ I 11 1003 I I ---------------------------------------------------- I ET I 1600 160 -I----�-,------ D -� - $--- Q / I ------------------------- ---- --O-lo--------- = - - - - - _-�-- ZI I ER I N.S. I 1 411 I I IS I -- I ( ( I — I ----- ----------------------------- -------------------^-'--------'-------------- ---WL--I *1600 I I 70 l 0.04--------- I P.O I ------------------------------------------- --------------------------------I WT I 4800I I 1771 0.04I1 4J3 I Q,d� I 'T3 I ---------------------------------------------------- Q.Qb WR I N.S.- -------I 34 I , ---- I I------- -- IEXISTING I.C.U. 1 --0.34 1 1 1 ---------------------------------- - ------------------------------- I IEXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I D_ .//-^- I I ----------------------------------------------------------------- 71 --__^----_-_-- I IEXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U.-------------^_--__-_-^--_- IQ, -------------------------------------------------------- - ------- IAL]' Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 ID Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA4285PM . • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BL & NEWPORT PL-VON KARMAN 4285 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM ------------------------------------------------------------------ I I EXISTING PROPOSEDIEXISTING EXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTED( PROJECTED IPROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK ER I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacity] Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL 1 1600 1 1 53 1 0.03 * 1 2$ 1 O,OL I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 NT 1 4800 1 ------- 1 474 1 0.10 1 9 I 2�� i ------------------ ------------------------------------_---------------------------I i NR I N.S. 1 1 561 I 1 D I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I SL 1 1600 1 1 55 1 0.03 1 - 1 p 1 p. �3 I 1,00,3 I I --------------------------------------------------- ------------------ 1-----------------y-I ST 1 4800 1 1 756 1 0.16 * / 1 ?4: I , 2! '1 I 1 Q,?i1 'W I ---------------------------------------------- ----------------------- - - ---------------I I SR I N.S. I 1 98 1 1 1 31 1 — i z I I I I ------------------------------------------ --------- -------------------------------------I EL 1 1600 1 ------- 1 107 1 0.07 1 1 TS I l y 3 I V I -------------------------------------D ' // --- 1 ET 1 1600 1 ------- 1 265 1 0.17 *------- 1 SO 1 D• Zf7 1 -71 I ------------------ ------------------ ---------------------------------- -I ER I N.S. 1 1 2201 1 1 ----- -------------------------- - ------------- ---------- ---- --------- - - --- ------------- - -- 1 WL 1 1600 1 -------I----308 1 0.19 * I I Q ./ 9 I I Q./9 '4 I ------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------I 1 WT 1 4800 1 ------- 1 243 1 0.05 1 -------I I ------------------ ------------------ -------------------------------------I l WR I N.S. 1 1 95 1 1 1 6 I ------------------------------------------- ------- -------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.55 1 I --- --- ------------ --- -- --- --- - ------ IEXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I �q, 6tr I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 1D,70 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA4295AN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD & BIRCH STREET 4295 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- I IEXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALICOMMITTED PROJECTED IPROJECIIPROJECII I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C l I Capacityl Capacity] Volume I, Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio l I I I . I I I I I Volume I 1 1 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------I 1 NL 1 1600 1 1 471 0.03 1 1 -2 1 0, � 10,041 — `� - 1 I -- 1 NT 1 4800 1 1 492 1 0.10 ■ 1 ?'zj7 I 0. �� 1 I 10./6 1 1 -----------------------------------------------zja-----------------------------------------1 i NR I N.S. 1 1 621 1 1 25- I — I 1 — I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I SL 1 1600 1 1 171 1 0.11 w 1 0 I 1 1 1 1 --------I --------I --------I ------------ -------- ------------- - ------------ ST 0-15 I I -1 1 SR 1 1600 1 1 300 1 0.19 1 1 ?7 1 I I 1 I -----------------------------------------------------------------�—z ------------O Z---i I EL 1 1 205 1 1 2-8 I I I --------) ------------------) ---------------- ` l ET 4800 I I 385 0.14 " 1 } i=1 1 0, --- ---} � I 77-------- ----- } ------------------ -----------1 1 ------ ------ ER I I 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 WL 1 16001 1 281 0.021 1 2co 1 0.03 l 10,03 i 1 -------- -------- -------- ---------------- ------------ -------- - - - - 1 -------- - -- - WT I 3200 1 1 - y t.�. 1 ---------------------------------- ------------------------- - =�9--- ------ 0,0 ---I i WR I N.S. 1 1 671 1 1 U 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.43 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I Q. 5-Jr 1 I 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IL3/ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA4295PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR�BOULEVARD & BIRCH STREET 4295 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I IEXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING EXISTING REGIONAL] COMMITTED PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PE HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I . I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1 NL 1 1600 1 1 134 1 0.08 * 1 7 1 *1 I 1 I ------------------------------------ - --------------- --NT--I -_---- I ------- - --- --- i --0 13 I - Z-- I - y �7-- 1 - 0_ Z3-- I - 43- 1 Oy2� -1 ] NR I N.S. I 1 191 1 I 37 I i I I I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- l SL 1 16001 1 791 0.051 I 0 O,nb ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I I 678 1 1 I 27q I I z l I 1C I I --------) 6400 ------------------} 0.14 *- - --------------- - =/�---------- i SR 1 1 206 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I EL 1 1 252 1 I --------) ------------------) ---------- —-- ----- 11 ET 4800 1 1 292 0.13 * I (,G 1 O, I --------) ------------------} ------------------ ---------------- ------ I ER 1 1 62 1 I I 7 I I i -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I WL 1 1600 1 1 85 1 0.05 1 1 G I I p, I 1 p.// I I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 WT 1 3200 1 ------- 1 550 1 0.17 * 11 y Co I ------------------ -------------------------------------- ] WR I N.S. 1 1 197 1 1 1 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ] EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.52 1 I 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------—--- I 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------/---I 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 10 66 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 �/Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II MA4300AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: 14ACARTHM BOULEVARD & CAMPUS DRIVE 4300 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 -AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTING PROPOSED-EXISTING EXISTINGI REGIONALI COMMITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJEC11 I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I NL 1 1600 1 ------- 1 66 1 0.04 * ------I O 1 �.ry--I---- I I ------------------ ------------------- z ---------------- � ----- ------I NT 1 6400 1 ------- 1 653 1 0.101 1J' 1 $� 1 0, 1S - /J2--tI -q I '/ I ------------------ ----------------------------------------- ------_D__=17--I I NR 1 16001 1 951 0.06I I I 1 1 a __ A,06------------ I SL 1 1600 1 1 259 1 0.16 1 1 ,clC1 I D• -- --- -- ---- ---- -------------------- i ST 1 4800 1 1 1205 1 0.2s * Zr1 _ 1 �6`f 1 D. 3 6 i l l ------------------------------------- 1600 0. I SR I I 1 --- I -----19I-------I-- - ---I------L ---- 1 EL 1 1600 1301 1 0.19 . 1 ---- - -___-___I _--------I 1 I -Q--/-/--- ET 1 1 1 719 1 1 20c1 -- I I 'H - ------------ 1 --------} 3200 ------------------} 0.25 ------------------- - -- Z �0.3 Z ER 1 I 89 I I Q 1 1 1 1 I --------------------------------------7----------------------------------- -------I-------� 1 WL 1 ------- I -------I----73 I--0.05 I-------I I---O WT 1 3200 1 1 435 1 0.14 * 1 '3 7 1 p, ---------------------�-------- -------------------I 1 WR I N.S. I I al I I I ------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------� 1EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.62 1 I 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0 1 I 1 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------I 1EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 1 4 6P I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ivy Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic Z.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II KA430OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR-BOULEVARD & CAMPUS DRIVE 4300 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 1 EXISTINq PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTINq REGIONALI COMMITTEDI PROJECTED 1 PROJECTI PROJECI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity) Capacity) Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I volume I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL 1 16001 1 1661 0.10 * 1 0 1 p, I ------------------------------------------------------ I NT 1 6400 1 -------I 904 1 0.14 I ILe 1 ------ -- ------------- - - -------- ----- ----- 1 NR 1 1600 1 -------I 811 0.os_1 ------- I (7• p S I I p,v5 I I ------------------ ---------------- - ----------------------------------'/---I I I ------- -- 1 ---- I -------I-- ('` 1 �"/�l' I ------ 1 D,! I ST 1 4800 1 - 1 - 762 1 0.16 a /,_1_j. -- 1 - 0, ZJ I --------------1 _ - -------------------I 1 SR 1 1600 1 1 512 1 0.32 II7 1 �= Z-I------ --------------------------------------------------------- EL ---- --- - ------ I 1 1600 1272 1 0.17 �7 1 D, lb ------Il1:1 ------------------------------------------------------ ET ----- -- - - --- - i I I --- I I 45q -Q=2 ---------I 0.23 ---ER--} 3200 �--------I----131-} 0.21 �--------I--------�- 1 �---------------------------------------------------------- ----- WL -------D o ------------O�----i WL 1 1600 1 1 1181 0.071 1 i -7 1 I 7 I I ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------�I 1 WT 1 3200 1 -------I----932 1 0.29 « 1 �llC) 1 Q•3 5/ I I��3 5 I ------------------ ----------------------------------- ------------------------I I WR I N.S. I - 1 206 1 1 1 18� I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I 1EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.72 1 1 --- --- - --- -- ---- ----- --- I EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0 g 9--- 1 I ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- ------ 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 10 9D --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 � Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ( J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II APPENDIX C INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSES WITH IMPROVEMENTS BR4165AM • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET & CAMPUS DRIVE/IRVINE AVENUE - 4166 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED] PROJECTED [ PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity] Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I I I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -_ NT-_ 1 4800 I 1 1478 1 0.31 * I - 61 --- I -_d_3Z_ �5� I O 3 ._I------------------------------------------- - NR i 1600 672 0.366ZZ71D -- - - ------ 0=�-,-� ----------- I SL 1 16001 ------- 1 871 0.06 ---------------------------- ------ D.D ---------- =� - I ST 1 4800 1 _______ 1 426 1 0.09 1 I -f12 1 I I 1 -------------------------- ----- /� O.// _ I SR I I I I I I I I I I I ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------- - - - I 1 EL 1 2400 111632 1 0.64 * -- --1 Z5.3 I p 7/ 1 2/ I D 76 ----------------------------------------------------- I ---/-/--Q---------------------------- /-p--1 ET ] 4000'I ___-_-_ I 1464 1 0.37 I I I t�, I 73 1 I ------------------ -------------------------------p---------------------------------I 1 ER 1 ---- I ------- --- l ---- I -------I---_-- I I I 1 I WL I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WT I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WR I I I I I I I I I I I -----------------------------------------------------------=-------------------------------I ] EXISTING I.C.U. 1 1.00 I I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: ADD �(/DQTi/Boo vD /1/6��T 70 QN G4bYE PROJECT FORM II BR4172AM • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & CAMPUS DRIVE/IRVINE AVENUE 4172 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTINGf PROPOSED( EXISTINq EXISTING( REGIONAL( COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL 1 1600 1�2)2JZD I 477 1 0.30 1 1 7 1 _ l�_ 50 1 ------ 1 D. I ---------------------------------------------------- ---- ------ / 1 NT 1 3200 r3� y3Zo I 2163 I 0.68 » 1 S'3_ _D• 76 Z'- - -- ------------�Y1�� -- I NR I I I I I I I I --------I--------'--------'--------I--------I--------I---------I-----------I-------'-------I I ----- -------- - ------- -- ---- ------------------------------------------------- I ST 1 3200 1(3)�/3zo1 311 1 0.10 1 1 �� I Q,7(7 1 H 1- -- �.,OQ_ � I ------------------------------------^--------------- --------------------------- --- 1 I SR 1 3200 ------------- 200 I _------ I 293 1 0.09 1 __---_- i� I °=!% 1 1 1 ------------------ ------------------ --y-------- ------------ --� I EL I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ET I I I I I I I I I i I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ER I I I I I I I I I I I -----------------------------------------------------------------------p-----------------Q---� I WL 1 1600 1 1 210 1 0.13 1 1 i I -------------------------------------------------------- --- -------------------- ------I WT 1 1 1404 1 1 BZ 1 0_30-�, I --------} 6400 ------------------} 0.25 "------------- -- WR 1 1 167 I 1 /fiY I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.93 1 1 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 l� Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: ,�0l7 N2Tf/%lD Dv.VO /AFT G9�/E� �/aBO�}jlDvNV TyQoU6/1- 4/1AA5 Jo�7yBOdNO 71Vd1PaG11 PROJECT FORM II ER4160AM • • • INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: BRISTOL STREET & BIRCH STREET 4160 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING PROPOSED[ EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED[ PROJECTED 1 PROJECT[ PROJECTI I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I I Capacity) Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I NL I I I I I I I I I --------------------------------- -------------------------------------—-------- -- I --------} 1600 -------I --- ---------} 0.34 i - -- I CJ=��--- I NR I I 26 I I ---D--7 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- � SL 1 1600 1 1 100 1 0.06 I-----__ 1 I 1 yz-----° 9------------p.oY- ST 1 3200 1 ------- 1 130 1 0.04 I I I ''// [ I I I ------------------ -----------------------------------------z-------------Q=----I I SR I I I I I I I i I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I EL 1600 "M I 1094 0.68 I 1 I 1 �1 I �Z�2�?a---------- �3D---_o_,89------�3---Q.55_ ------------------ ------------------------- [ ET I I ---- I ( 8/ 3-�= � --I------I a 7 -I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WL I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WT I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I WR I I I I I I I ' it I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I [ EXISTING I.C.U. 1 1.08 1 ' • I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I [ EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I / ;5 Z I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 1 /.00 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _ xw Assumes no through traffic in left lane J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I (d/Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: fipD 5,W7L00ND 65rC7- 704V 19J✓E PROJECT FORM II BR4175PM . INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION BRISTOL STREET NORTH & BIRCH STREET 4175 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 PM ----------------------------------------------------------- ----- - - -- ------------- EXISTING PROPOSEDI EXISTING EXISTING REGIONALI COMMITTED( PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECT( I Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I Capacity] Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project[ I Ratio I I I I I I I I I I Volume I I -------------------------------------------- - ________ ------------------------- I ][ NL I 1600 I I 156 I 0.10 - Q I 0,//s9')4 II II ------------------------- ---- - ----------------I --Q--•-,-/--5-- --- NT I 3200 I I 328 I 0.10 I 1 -. �rI I ---------------- -------- --- - ---------------- _-- I -II NR I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I SL [ I ------- I ------- I ---------------I----'-/---- I ---------- I ----- ST I 1600 I I 512 I 0.32 I I -- y, I �7,a;5 I /t/ 10,1J)� I I -------------------------------------------- --------- - ----------------------------- SR I 3200 I I 1425 I 0.45 *____-____ I _ -z I O. S3 I 7 Ia 63 I ------------------------------------------- - -------------------------------I I EL I I I I I I -------------- I ------ I I -------I I ET I I I I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I I ER I I I I I I ------- ------- ------- I -------- ---------- I ------ I -------I I WL 356 I I / I I I I --------} I -} ---------- p0.3Z ---- --- -- -- -------- ----- ------------- ---} WT 6400 @44cp 2135 0.40 87 I 71 --- -- 74 --------- - --3---- --- - -- _2-2 - -- I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------� IEXISTING I.C.U.-------------------I O--- 95 I--=-=-------------------------- I ( EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I [ I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,-----I IEXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I I /Z, --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ] J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 IProjected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: AI9D y✓ftT/IovM1J GEFT re;10 1-4M5 PROJECT FORM II BR4175PM JA430SAM 0 0 ' INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD & CAMPUS DRIVE 430b EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED-ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1987 AM I - I EXISTING1 PROPOSED]-EXISTINCj EXISTING1 REGIONALI COMMITTED] PROJECTED I PROJECTI PROJECT ] Movementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio [ Volume I V/C I I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I] I Volume I I ------------------------------------------------------- -- -------------- -- NL I 1600 I I 89 I 0.06 " IBo }I -o�--,?i--o I---------I-°-=-Z--�--I -------------------------------------------------------------------- I ---I NT I I 982 I I Zg/ -------<< -------- 6400 ------------------ 0.17 -------- - NR I I 75 I 1 I� II p I ------I I------ --------I I-------1 302 -----09--------- ---Q ] ST I I 1224 I I / I --------} 4800 ------------------} 0.30 "----------�/O/-- -f� ------y� SR - ----------- -------I--- ------------I-------� Lf I I - --- EL I -------I Sb I I -- -- I D_•� -- ETI I ---------------- ------ - -I--��--------------I- --------- ] ER I x.s. I ] is l I I I I I I ] WL I 1600 I 487 I 030I. )2/6 I S0. 3B -------- - - ------- WT i 3200 IGS)?6yDl 674 I 0.21 l I O Zj1 I f I -------------------- 7-------------o------------------I WR I 1600 I l 151 ] 0.09 I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.70 I I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I //0 I I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I O/ I' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I ] Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ID Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 eProjected + project traffic Z.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Description of system improvement: (O/✓!/F/�r y/�JT60�N0 7f/2ovGF/ (/9�/E ?b O��ONyL /Qov6ff Oe /FAT PROJECT FORM II