Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Study- 401 Old Newport (PA2003-301)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No.. 2( April 8, 2004 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3208, rung 0 city.newport-beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Traffic Study No. 2003- 005(PA2003 -301) 401 Old Newport Blvd. APPLICANT NAME: Orange Coast Association of Realtors, Inc. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 subject to the findings and conditions of approval included within the attached draft resolution. DISCUSSION Site /Project Overview: The applicant requests approval of a traffic study for the construction of a 16,500 square foot, two -story office building at the northwest corner of Old Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road. Presently improved with a 4,782 square foot, two -story commercial building, the property is zoned SP -9 (Old Newport) District and has a General Plan land use designation of Retail & Service Commercial. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building and build a new office development for medical and general office uses. Approximately 10,737 square feet of the proposed building will be used for medical uses and the remaining 5,763 square feet will be occupied by the applicant. The proposed development is planned and designed to fully comply with the Zoning Code, and the only required approval before the issuance of building permits is a traffic study. Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 April 8, 2004 Page 2 VICINITY MAP 401 Old Newport Boulevard ' St d 2003 -005 ff Ic u Current Develo ment: Office Develo ment To the north: Medical/Office Developments To the east: Retail Commercial & Office Developments To the south: Retail Commercial & Office Develo men's To the west: Medical Related Developments Tra f Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 April 8, 2004 Page 3 A traffic study is required pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) when a project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). A copy of the TPO is attached as Exhibit 2. The City Traffic Engineer prepared a preliminary estimate of trips and concluded that a traffic study would be required. A traffic study has been prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the TPO and its implementing guidelines (Exhibit 3). Analysis: The traffic study identifies the potential traffic and circulation impacts associated with the proposed development. The proposed 16,500 square foot medical and general office building is forecast to generate 551 new daily trips on average, 34 new trips during a.m. peak -hour, and 56 new trips during p.m. peak -hour trips. The City Traffic Engineer identified eight (8) intersections to be included in this study. Potential impacts to these intersections were analyzed using the methodology required by TPO. The project is forecast to contribute one percent or more to the traffic volume at two intersections: Newport Boulevard /Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard /Coast Highway. The other six intersections were omitted from further analysis as they did not meet the One Percent Test, The study concluded that both intersections are forecast to continue to operate with satisfactory levels of service during both peak hours. The traffic study also performed a cumulative traffic analysis. Reasonably foreseeable projects that are not included in the committed project list were added to the project related traffic and evaluated. The most - recently approved medical office project at 494/496 Old Newport Boulevard was also included in this traffic analysis. The conclusion of this analysis also indicates that there will be a less than significant impact to traffic circulation and that no mitigation is required. The study, however, identified that the intersection of Newport Boulevard /Coast Highway is approaching the 0.9 ICU (LOS D) threshold. Access to the project site will be provided via an existing driveway off Old Newport Boulevard. No changes to the site access are proposed and no access- related impacts are anticipated. Parking is not allowed on Old Newport Boulevard adjacent to the site. A total of 66 parking spaces will be provided on -site. The site is parked at the city parking standard of 1/250. No parking waiver is requested. Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 April 8, 2004 Page 4 Environmental Review: This project has been reviewed and it has been determined that it is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act under Class 32 (In -fill Development Projects). Public Notice: Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website. Prepared by: Submitted by: -OOL � ] ,- o Ass ciate Planner Patricia L" Plan ing Director Exhibits: 1. Draft Resolution No. 2004 -_; findings and conditions of approval 2. Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) 3. Traffic Impact Analysis dated March 22, 2004 4. Project Plans RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 2003 -005 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD (PA2003- 301). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was filed by Orange Coast Association of Realtors, Inc. with respect to property located at 401 Old Newport Boulevard and legally described as Lots 21 through 24 of Tract No. 27 (Assessor's Parcel No. 425 - 271 -16), requesting approval of Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 that will facilitate the construction of a 16,500 square foot, two -story office building. The 0.82 acre site is zoned SP -9 (Old Newport) District and has a General Plan land use designation of Retail & Service Commercial. Section 2. A public hearing was held on April 8, 2004, at 6:30 P.M. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was duly given. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds as follows: a) A traffic study, entitled Traffic Impact Analysis for 401 Old Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California (LSA Associates, March 22, 2004), was prepared for the project in compliance with Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code (Traffic Phasing Ordinance). b) The traffic study indicated that the project will not increase traffic on six (6) of the eight (8) primary intersections by one percent (1%) and therefore no impact is predicted. c) The traffic study determined that the project will not cause the level of service to decline at the two (2) intersections where there will be an increase of more than one percent (1 %) in traffic volume, and therefore no mitigation is required. d) The traffic study also performed a cumulative traffic analysis. Reasonably foreseeable projects and approved projects that are not included in the committed project list were added to project related traffic and evaluated. The conclusion of this analysis also indicates that there will be a less than significant impact to traffic circulation and that no mitigation is required. e) The project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32 - In- Fill Development Projects) of the California Environmental Quality Act. The M. project will occur on a 35,632 square feet site within the City of Newport Beach corporate limits and the site is surrounded by urban uses. The site is presently developed with a 4,782 square foot office building which will be demolished to accommodate the new development and has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Approval of the project will not create any significant impacts to traffic, noise, air, and water quality in compliance with existing codes, policies and regulations of the City of Newport Beach. The traffic study concludes no significant impacts to area intersections. Lastly, adequate utility services and other public services presently exist and are so located to serve the project site. Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Traffic Study No. 2003 -005, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached. Section 5. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk or this action is call for review by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20, Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8t" DAY OF APRIL, 2004. M CAF Earl McDaniel, Chairman Michael Toerge, Secretary AYES: NOES: q EXHIBIT "A° CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 The development shall be in substantial conformance with the conceptual site plan, floor plan, and elevations received by the Planning Department on March 18, 2004, and specified below: a. The maximum FAR permitted is 0.46 (16,500 gross square feet). b. The maximum building bulk permitted is 0.60 (21,500 square feet). 2. The development shall provide and maintain. a minimum of 66 on -site parking spaces at all time. 3. Traffic Study No. 2003 -005 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval pursuant to Section 15.40.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. This approval shall be deemed exercised by the issuance of a building permit to construct the proposed office building. 4. Pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, construction of the proposed office building shall be completed no more than 60 months from the date of final approval of Traffic Study No. 2003 -005. roil EXHIBIT 2 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE Chapter 15.40 TRAFFIC PHASING. ORDINANCE* Sections: 15.40.010 Findings. 15.40.020 Objectives. 15A0.030 Standards for Approval - Findings— Exemptions. 15.40.035 Expiration. 15.40.040 Definitions. 15.40.050 Procedures. 15.40.060 Hearings -- Notice. 15.40.070 Appeal — Review. 15.40.075 Proportionality. 15.40.080 Severability. * Prior ordinance bistory: Ords. 1765, I777, 1787,85-30, 86-20 and 94.2. 15.40.010 Findings. A. The phasing of development with circulation system improvements to accommodate project -gen- erated traffic is important to maintaining the high quality of the residential and commercial neighbor- hoods in Newport Beach; B. Traffic congestion caused by inadequate phasing of circulation improvements and develop- ment is harmful to the public health, safety and general welfare due to the potential for delays in emergency response, air quality impacts and an overall reduction in the quality of life. C. While some development may be important to the continued vitality of the local economy, the City should continue to require mitigation of traffic impacts by project proponents to ensure the circula- tion system functions as planned; D. Circulation system improvements should not alter the character of neighborhoods or result in the construction of streets and highways which expand the capacity of the roadway system beyond levels proposed in the circulation element; E. This chapter is consistent with the authority of a public entity to ensure that project proponents make or fund improvements that increase the capaci- 15.40.010 ty of the circulation system to accommodate project - generated traffic. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.020 Objectives. The City Council has adopted this chapter to achieve the following objectives: A. To provide a uniform method of analyzing and evaluating the traffic impacts of projects that generate a substantial number of average daily trips and/or trips during the morning or evening peak hour period; . B. To identify the specific and near -term impacts of project traffic as well as circulation system im- provements that will accommodate project traffic and ensure that development is phased with identi- fied circulation system improvements; C. To ensure that project proponents, as condi- tions of approval pursuant to this chapter, make or fund circulation system improvements that mitigate the specific impacts of project traffic on primary intersections at or near the time the project is ready for occupancy; and D. To provide a mechanism for ensuring that.a project proponent's cost of complying with traffic related conditions of project approval is roughly proportional to project impacts. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.030 Standards for Approval- Findings— Exemptions. A. Standards for Approval. Unless a project is exempt as provided in subsection (C), no building, grading or related permit shall be issued for any project until the project has been approved pursuant to this chapter (approved). A project shall be ap- proved only if the Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal, finds: 1. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Ap- pendix A; 2. That based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made; and 569 (Newport Beach ") M 15.40.030 3. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contri- butions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of ap- proval. B. Findings for Approval. No project shall be approved pursuant to this chapter unless the Plan- ning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal, finds that: 1. Construction of the project will be completed within sixty (60) months of project approval; and: a. The project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection, or b. The project including circulation improve- ments that the project proponent is required to make and/or fund, pursuant to a reimbursement program or otherwise, will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impact- ed primary intersection, or c. The project trips will cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at one or more impacted primary intersection(s) but the project proponent is required to construct and/or fund, pur- suant to a reimbursement program or otherwise, circulation improvements, or make contributions, such that: (1) The project trips will not cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection for which there is a feasible improvement, and (2) The benefits resulting from circulation im- provements constructed or funded by, or contribu- tions to the preparation or implementation of a traffic mitigation study made by, the project pro- ponent outweigh the adverse impact of project trips at any impacted primary intersection for which there is (are) no feasible improvement(s) that would, if implemented, fully satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030 (B)(l)(b). In balancing the adverse im- pacts and benefits, only the following improvements and/or contributions shall be considered with the greatest weight accorded to the improvements and/or contributions described in subparagraphs (a) and (b) below: (Newport Beach 989) 570 (a) Contributions to the preparation of, and/or implementation of some or all of the recommenda- tions in, a traffic mitigation study related to an impacted primary intersection that is initiated or approved by the City Council, (b) Improvements, if any, that mitigate the im- pact of project trips at any impacted primary inter- section for which there is (are) no feasible improve- ments) that, if implemented, would satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030(B)(1)(b), (c) Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection in the vicinity of the project, (d) Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection operating, or projected to operate, at or above 0.80 ICU, or d. The project complies with (1)(b) upon the completion of one or more circulation improve- ments; and: (1) The time and/or funding necessary to com- plete the improvement(s) is (are) not roughly pro- portional to the impacts of project- generated trips, and (2) There is a strong likelihood the improve - ment(s) will be completed within forty-eight (48) months from the date the project and traffic study are considered by the Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal. This finding shall not be made unless, on or before the date of approval, a conceptual plan for each improvement has been prepared in sufficient detail to permit estimation of cost and funding sources for the improvement(s); the improvement(s) is (are) consistent with the cir- culation element or appropriate amendments have been initiated; an account has been established to receive all funds and contributions necessary to construct the improvement(s) and the improvement is identified as one to be constructed pursuant to the five year capital improvement plan and as specified in Appendix A, and (3) The project proponent pays a fee to fund construction of the improvement(s). The fee shall be calculated by multiplying the estimated cost of the improvement(s) by a fraction. The fraction shall be l� �Y calculated by dividing the "effective capacity de- crease "..in the .impacted primary intersection attrib- utable to project trips by the "effective capacity increase" in the impacted primary intersection that is attributable to the improvement. The terms "effec- tive capacity increase" and "effective capacity de- crease" shall be calculated in accordance with the provisions of Appendix A. Or: 2. The project is a Comprehensive Phased Land Use Development and Circulation System Improve- ment Plan with construction of all phases not antici- pated to be complete within sixty (60) months of project approval; and a. The project is subject to a development agreement which requires the construction of, or contributions to, circulation improvements early in the development phasing program, and b. The traffic study contains sufficient data and analysis to determine if that portion of the project reasonably expected to be constructed and ready for occupancy within sixty (60) months of project ap- proval satisfies the provisions of subsections (13)(1)(a) or (B)(1)(b),and c. The Land Use and Circulation Elements of the General Plan are not made inconsistent by the impact of project trips (including circulation im- provements designed to mitigate the impacts of project trips) when added to the trips resulting from development anticipated to occur within the. City based on the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and d. The project is required, during the sixty (60) mouth period immediately after approval, to con- struct circulation irgprovement(s) such that: (1) Project trips will not cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impact- ed primary intersection for which there is a feasible improvement, (2) The benefits resulting from circulation im- provements constructed or funded by, or contribu- tions to the preparation or implementation of a traffic mitigation study made by, the project pro- ponent outweigh the adverse impact of project trips at any impacted primary intersection for which there is (are) no feasible improvement(s) that would, if 15.40.030 implemented, fully satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030 (B)(1)(b). In balancing the adverse im- pacts and benefits, only the following improvements and/or contributions shall be considered with the greatest weight accorded to the improvements and/or contributions described in subparagraphs (a) or (b): (a) Contributions to the preparation of, and/or implementation of some or all of the recommenda- tions in, a traffic .mitigation study related to an impacted primary intersection that is initiated or approved by the City Council, (b) Improvements, if any, that mitigate the im- pact of project trips at any impacted primary inter- section for which there is (are) no feasible improve - ment(s) that, if implemented, would fully satisfy the provisions of Section 15.40.030 (B)(1)(b), (c) Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection in the vicinity of the project, (d) Improvements that mitigate the impacts of project trips on any impacted primary intersection operating, or projected to operate, at or above 0.80 ICU; and .3. The Planning Commission, or City.Council on review or appeal finds, by the affirmative vote of five - sevenths (5/7) of the members eligible to vote, that this chapter is inapplicable to the project because the project will result in benefits that out- weigh the project's anticipated negative impact on the circulation system; C. Exemptions. The following projects are ex- empt from the provisions of this chapter. 1. Any project that generates no more than three hundred (300) average daily trips. Ibis exception shall not apply to individual projects on the same parcel or parcels of property, such as changes in land use or increases in floor area, that in any twen- ty four (24) month period cumulatively generate more than three hundred (300) average daily trips; 2. Any project that, during any morning or evening peak hour period, does not increase trips by one percent or more on any leg of any primary intersection; 3. Any project that meets all of the following criteria: 571 (Newyon Beach 11.99) 1�' 15.40.030 a. The project would be constructed on property within the sphere of influence of the City of New- port Beach and that is within the jurisdiction of the County of Orange or an adjacent city as of the effective date of this ordinance; and b. The project is subject to a vesting tentative or parcel map, development agreement, pre- annex- ation agreement and/or other legal document that vests the right of the property owner to construct the project in the County or adjacent city; and c. The property owner enters into a development agreement, pre - annexation agreement, or similar agreement with the City of Newport Beach: (1) That establishes the average daily trips gener- ated by the project ( "baseline's, (2) That requires the property owner to comply with this chapter prior to the issuance of any permit for development that would, in any twenty-four (24) month period, generate more than three hundred (300) average daily trips above the baseline for the project, and (3) That makes this chapter applicable to the project immediately upon annexation; d. The City Council determines, prior to annex- ation, that the environmental document prepared for the project fully complies with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. (Ord. 99-17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.035 Expiration. A. The Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal, shall establish a specific date on which the approval of the project shall expire (expiration date). In no event shall the expiration date be less than twenty -four (24) months from the date of approval. The initial expiration date for projects other than those described in Section 15.40.030(B)(2) shall be no more than sixty (60) months from the date of approval unless subsequent approval is required from another public agency. In the event the project requires approval from another public agency subsequent to approval pursuant to this chapter, the date of approval shall be the date of the action taken by the last public agency to consider the project. Approval pursuant to this chapter shall terminate on the expiration date unless (Newport Hwh 11 -99) 572 a building permit has been issued for the project and construction has commenced pursuant to that permit prior to the expiration date or the expiration date has been extended pursuant to subsection (C). B. Any project approved pursuant to this chapter shall be considered a "committed project" until the expiration date, if any, or until the final certificate of occupancy has been issued if construction has commenced on a portion or a phase of the project. All trips generated by each committed project shall be included in all subsequent traffic studies con- ducted pursuant to this chapter as provided in ap- pendix A. Committed projects shall be administered in accordance with Appendix A. C. The Planning Commission or City Council may, subsequent to the date of approval, extend the expiration date for any project. D. The Planning Director and Traffic Manager shall, at least annually, monitor the progress of each project to ensure compliance with this chapter. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.040 Definitions. The following terms used in this chapter shall have the meaning indicated below: "Circulation element" means the Circulation Ele- ment of the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach as amended from time to time. "Circulation improvement(s)" or "improve - ment(s)" means a modification to a primary intersec- tion (possibly including a related roadway link) that increases the capacity of the primary intersection. "Date of approval" means the date the project is approved, pursuant to this chapter, by the Planning Commission or City Council on review or appeal. "Feasible improvement" means a circulation improvement that: 1. Is not inconsistent with the Circulation Ele- ment at the date of approval and has not been iden- tified as infeasible by the City Council at a public hearing to initiate or approve a traffic mitigation study; or 2. Is not inconsistent with any amendment(s) to the Circulation Element initiated and approved in conjunction with the project and is required to be SIR 0 completed by the project proponent and/or the City within the time frames required by this chapter. "ICU" means the intersection capacity utilization computed in accordance with standard traffic engi- neering principles and the procedures outlined in Appendix A. "Impacted primary intersection" means any pri- mary intersection where project trips increase the volume of traffic on any leg by one percent (I%) or more during any peak hour period. "Level of traffic service" means the letter as- signed to a range of ICUs in accordance with Ap- pendix A. "Members eligible to vote" means all members of the Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal, lawfully holding office except those members disqualified from voting due to a conflict of interest. "NBTAM" means the most current City Council approved traffic analysis model for the City of New- port Beach. "Peak hour period" means the four consecutive fifteen (15) minute periods between seven a.m. and nine a.m. (morning) and the four consecutive fifteen (15) minute periods between four p.m and six p.m. (evening) with the highest traffic volumes (for each primary intersection) as determined by the field counts required by Appendix A. "Primary intersection" means each intersection identified.in Appendix B and, with respect to indi- vidual projects, any additional intersection selected by the Traffic Manager pursuant to Section 15.40.050(Bx1). "Project" means "project" as defined in the Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines, and relevant decisional. law without regard to whether any environmental document is required for the project. The term "project" shall also mean any application for a building or grading permit for development that would generate more than three hundred (300) average daily trips. "Traffic engineer" means the traffic engineer retained by the City to prepare the traffic study. 15.40.040 "Traffic Manager" means the person employed by the City who occupies the position of Traffic and Development Services Manager or similar position. "Traffic mitigation study" means a study designed to evaluate and recommend a plan to mitigate the impact of an actual or potential unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any primary intersection on traffic volumes in any residential neighborhood in the vicinity of that primary intersection. "Traffic study„ means the study prepared by the traffic engineer in strict compliance with this chapter including Appendix A. "Unsatisfactory level of service" means a level of service at a primary intersection, which is worse than level of service "D "' (.90 ICU), during any morning or evening peak hour period as determined in accordance with Appendix A. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.050 Procedures. A. The Planning Commission shall determine compliance with this chapter based on the traffic study for the project, information from staff and/or the traffic engineer, and the entire record of the proceedings conducted with regard to the project. The traffic study shall be prepared in compliance with Appendix A. B. Subject to review by the Planning Commis- sion, or City Council on review or appeal; the traffic manager, in the exercise of his/her professional discretion, shall: 1. Direct the preparation of each traffic study by a traffic engineer retained by the City and, in com- pliance with Appendix A, determine those primary intersections (or other intersections if the impact of project traffic on primary intersections may not be representative) that may be impacted by project trips; 2. Ensure that each traffic study is prepared in compliance with the methodology described in Ap- pendix A and independently evaluate the conclu- sions of the traffic engineer, 3. Make recommendations to the Planning Com- mission and/or City Council with respect to the criteria for evaluating trip reduction measures, the 573 csewp=>�cb 9-M 14 15.40.050 appropriate trip generation rates of land uses, and the criteria for distributing project trips to ensure that each traffic study reflects modern transportation engineering practice. C. Any finding or decision of the Planning Com- mission with respect to any project that also requires discretionary action on the part of the City Council, such as an amendment to the general plan or zoning ordinance, shall be deemed an advisory action. In such cases the City Council shall take any action required by this chapter at the same date and time that the City Council considers the other discretion- ary approvals required by the project. D. The application for any building, grading or other permit for any project subject to this chapter shall be approved, conditionally approved or denied within one year from the date on which the applica- tion is deemed complete. In the event action is not taken on an application within one year, the project shall be deemed approved provided it is consistent with the general plan and zoning ordinance of the City of Newport Beach. E. A fee as established by resolution of the City Council to defray the expenses of administering this chapter shall accompany the application for a traffic study. The application for a traffic study shall be submitted in compliance with Appendix A- F. The City Council shall conduct a noticed public hearing prior to initiating or approving any traffic mitigation study and identifying as infeasible any improvement at or near any primary intersec- tion; G. The City Council may establish reimburse- ment programs to ensure that multiple projects af- fecting the same primary intersection pay for im- provements in proportion to their respective impacts. The reimbursement programs shall developed and administered in compliance with Appendix A. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.060 Hearings — Notice. A. The Planning Commission, and the City Council on appeal or review, shall hold a public hearing on any project pursuant to this chapter. The public hearing on the traffic study may be consoli- (Newport Beech 9-M 574 dated with other hearings required by the project. The hearing shall be noticed in the manner provided in Section 20.91.030(C). of the Newport Beach Mu- nicipal Code or any successor provision. B. All findings required or provided for in this chapter shall be in writing and supported by the weight of the evidence in the entire administrative record for the project including the traffic study. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.070 Appeal — Review. A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, any Planning Commission decision to approve a project shall be final unless there is an appeal by the project proponent or any interested person. The appeal shall be initiated and conducted pursuant to the procedures in Chapter 20.95 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or any successor provision; B. The City Council shall have a right of review as specified in Chapter 20.95 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or any successor provision; C. The City Council shall be subject to the same requirements as the Planning Commission relative to decisions and findings required by this chapter. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.075 Proportionality. A. In no event shall the Planning Commission or City Council on review or appeal: 1. Impose any traffic related condition or condi- tions on the approval of a project that would require the project proponent to construct one or more cir- culation improvement(s) if the total cost of traffic related conditions and/or improvements is not roughly proportional to the impact of project trips; or 2.. Impose any traffic related condition or condi- tions on the approval of a project which would require the payment of fees or costs that are not roughly proportional to the impact of project trips. B. The provisions of this chapter are intended to address the specific and, in most cases, near term impacts of project trips on impacted primary inter- sections rather than the overall impact of project traffic on the circulation system Chapter 15.38 of �5 15.40.075 the Newport Beach Municipal Code is intended to address the overall impact of development on the circulation system. Conditions or fees imposed pursuant to this chapter shall be in addition to fees required pursuant to Chapter 15.38 except as other- wise provided in Chapter 15.38. C. The provisions of this section shall not limit or restrict the authority of the Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal, to impose on any project all feasible mitigation measures pursuant to the provisions of applicable law, including CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. D. The provisions of this section shall not re- quire approval of any project if the Planning Com- mission, or City Council on review or appeal, is unable to make the findings required for approval pursuant to this chapter. E. The provisions of this section shall not re- quire approval of any project which the Planning Commission is authorized to deny or modify pursu- ant to any State law or City ordinance, resolution or plan. F. The provisions of this section shall not limit or restrict the authority of the Planning Commission, or City Council on review or appeal,. to impose conditions, fees, exaction or dedications on a project pursuant to: 1. A development agreement; 2. A reimbursement agreement, a reimbursement program, or any agreement acceptable to the project proponent; 3. The consent of the project proponent; or 4. An amendment to the land use element or zoning ordinance of the City of Newport Beach that is required for approval of the project. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 15.40.080 Severability. If all or a portion of any section or subsection of this chapter is declared invalid, all of the provisions of this chapter that have not been declared invalid shall be considered valid and in full force and ef- fect. (Ord. 99 -17 § 1 (part), 1999) 574 -1 (Newport Bead' 9.99) l(D ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE 1. General. These Administrative Procedures (Procedures) apply to any Project for which Traffic Study is required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). 2. Application. a. The proponent of any Project subject to the TPO shall: file an application for a Traffic Study; ii. pay the required fees; and iii. sign an agreement to pay all costs related to the Traffic Study. b. The application shall be accompanied by the following information: i. A complete description of the Project including the total amount of floor area to be constructed and the amount of floor area allocated to each proposed land use; ii. A Project site plan that depicts the location and intensity of proposed development, the location of points of ingress and egress, and the location of parking lots or structures; iii. Any proposed Project phasing; iv. Any trip reduction measure proposed by the Project proponent; v. Any information, study or report that supports any request by the Project proponent to use trip generation rates that, differ from those used in the NBTAM or the most current version of the ITE Manual or the SANDAG Manual; and vi. Any other information that, in the opinion of the Traffic Manager, is necessary to properly evaluate the traffic impacts of the Project or the Circulation System Improvements that could mitigate those traffic impacts. 3. Traffic Study Assumptions. a. The definitions in Section 15.40.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall be applicable to these Procedures. (Newport Beach 9-99) 574 -2 11 b. ICU calculations shall assume a lane capacity value of 1600 vehicles per hour of green (vphg) for both through and turn lanes. No factor for yellow time shall be included in the lane capacity assumptions. ICU calculations shall be made by calculating the volume to capacity ratios for each movement to three decimal places, and then adding the critical movements to obtain an ICU with three decimal places. The increase in the ICU attributable to Project trips shall be calculated to three decimal places. The ICU shall then be rounded to two decimal places. For example, an ICU of .904 shall be rounded to .90 and an ICU of .905 shall be rounded to .91. c. Circulation System Improvements may be included in the Traffic Study for a Project provided that the Traffic Manager determines: i. The Improvement will be completed no more than one year after completion of the Project or Project phase for which the Traffic Study is being performed; and ii. The Improvement is included in the Circulation Element of the General Plan, and is defined in sufficiently precise terms to allow the Traffic Engineer to conduct an ICU analysis; or iv. The design of the Improvement is consistent with standard City design criteria or has been approved by the City Council, or other public entity with jurisdiction over the Improvement, and is defined in sufficiently precise terms to allow the Traffic Engineer to conduct an ICU analysis. d. Traffic volumes shall be based on estimates of traffic volumes expected to exist one year after completion of the Project, or that portion of the Project for which the Traffic Study is being performed. The intent of this Subsection is to ensure use of the most accurate information to estimate traffic volumes one year after Project completion. Traffic volume estimates shall be based on: The most current field counts for each Primary Intersection with counts taken on weekdays during the morning and evening Peak Hour Period between February 1 and May 31; ii. Traffic generated by Committed Projects as determined in accordance with the TPO and these Procedures vi. Projects reasonably expected to be complete within the one year after Project completion and which are located in the City of Newport Beach or its sphere of influence; iv. Increases in regional traffic anticipated to occur within one year after Project completion as projected in the NBTAM or other accepted sources of future Orange County traffic growth; and v. Other information customarily used by Traffic Engineers to accurately estimate future traffic volumes. e. For purposes of the traffic analysis of Circulation System Improvements, seventy percent (70%) of the incremental increase in intersection capacity (based on a capacity of 1600 vphg for each full traffic lane) shall be utilized. Upon completion of any Circulation System Improvement, traffic volume counts shall be updated, and any additional available capacity may then be utilized in future Traffic Studies. 574 -3 ii&w ¢ Beach 9-99) f. Trip generation rates for the land uses contemplated by the Project shall be based on standard trip generation values utilized in NBTAM except as provided in this Subsection. The Traffic Engineer may, with the concurrence of the Traffic Manager, use trip generation rates other than as specified in the NBTAM when NBTAM trip generation rates are based on limited information or study and there is a valid study of the trip generation rate of a similar land use that supports a different rate. g. The Traffic Engineer may, with the concurrence of the Traffic Manager, reduce trip generation rates for some or all of the land uses contemplated by the Project based on specific trip reduction measures when: The Project proponent proposes in writing and prior to commencement of the Traffic Study, specific and permanent treasures that will reduce Peak Hour Period. trips generated by the Project; and ii. The Traffic Manager and Traffic Engineer, in the exercise of their best professional judgment, each determine that the proposed measure(s) will reduce Peak Hour Period Project trips and the specific reduction in Project trips that can reasonably be expected; and iii. The Project proponent provides the City with written assurance that the proposed trip generation reduction measure(s) will be permanently implemented. The Project proponent must consent to make permanent implementation of the measure(s) a condition to the approval of the Project, and the measure(s) shall be made a condition of the Project by the Planning Commission or City Council on review or appeal. h. In determining Project trips, credit shall be given for existing uses on the Project site. Credit shall be given based on the trip generation rates in the NBTAM. In the alternative, the Traffic Manager may, in the exercise of his/her professional judgment, authorize the use of trip generation rates in the ITE Manual, SANDAG Manual, or on the basis of actual site traffic counts. In the event the Project site has not been used for any purpose for a period of one (1) year prior to the filing of an application for a Traffic Study, credit shall be limited to trips generated by the last known land use, if any, that could be resumed with no discretionary approval. For any land use that is not active as of the date of the application for Traffic Study, the Project proponent shall have the burden of establishing that the use was in operation during the previous one (1) year period. i. The purpose of this Paragraph is to ensure that trips that would be generated upon completion of a Project approved pursuant to the TPO are incorporated into any subsequent Traffic Study conducted prior to completion of the Project and/or post - Project field counts specified in Section Idd. A Committed Project is one that has been approved pursuant to the TPO, requires no further discretionary approval by the City, and has received, or is entitled to receive, a building or grading permit for construction of the Project or one or more phases of the Project In preparing a Traffic Study, trips generated by Committed Projects shall be included subject to the following: All trips generated by each Committed Project or that portion or phase of the Committed Project for which no certificate of occupancy has been issued shall be included in any Traffic Study conducted prior to the Expiration Date of that Committed Project; (Newport Beach 9-99) 574-4 �a ii. In the event a final certificate of occupancy has been issued for one or more phases of a Committed Project, all trips shall be included in subsequent Traffic Studies until completion of the first field counts required by Subsection 3(d)(i) subsequent to the date on which the final certificate of occupancy was issued. Subsequent to completion of the field counts, those trips generated by phases of the Committed Project that have received a final certificate of occupancy shall no longer be included in subsequent Traffic Studies. iii. The Traffic Manager and Planning Director shall maintain a list of Committed Projects and, at least annually, update the list to reflect new Approvals pursuant to the TPO as well as completion of all or a portion of each Committed Project. A Committed Project shall not be removed from the Committed Project listuntil a final certificate of occupancy has been issued for all phases and the field counts required by Subsection 3(d)(i) have been taken subsequent to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. iv. The total trips generated by Committed Projects shall be reduced by twenty percent (20%) to account for the interaction of Committed Project trips. j. For purposes of Chapter 15.40 and these Procedures, the following Levels of Traffic Service ranges shall apply: A .00—.60 ICU B .61—.70 ICU C .71—.80 ICU D .81—.90 ICU E .91- 1.00ICU F Above 1.00 ICU 4. Initial Traffic Study Procedures. a. The Traffic Manager shall retain a qualified Traffic Engineer pursuant to contract with the City to prepare a Traffic Study for the Project in compliance with the TPO and the methodology specified in these Procedures. b. The Traffic Manager shall advise the Traffic Engineer of the methodology and assumptions required by these Procedures and provide the Traffic Engineer with a copy of the TPO and these Procedures. c. The Traffic Manager, in consultation with the Traffic Engineer and in accordance with accepted traffic engineering standards and principles, shall determine the most probable manner in which Project Trips will be distributed throughout the Circulation System. The determination of Project trip distribution shall be consistent with: the assumptions in NBTAM relative to the trip production and attraction characteristics of various land uses; and ii. previous trip distribution determinations for Projects of similar size and location; 574-5 (Newport Beach 9.99) 01 Trip distributions shall be in increments of 5% of Project Trips. In no event shall Project trips be removed from any roadway on which a Primary Intersection is located except at a signalized intersection with another roadway on which a Primary Intersection is located. The determination of Project trip distribution shall, in all cases, reflect the most probable movement of Project trips throughout the Circulation System. The Traffic Study shall clearly explain the rationale for the determination of Project trip distribution. d. The Traffic Engineer shall determine if Project trips will increase traffic on any leg of any Primary Intersection by one percent (I%) or more during any Peak Hour Period one year. after Project completion. e. In the event the Traffic Engineer determines that Project generated trips will not increase traffic by one percent (I %) or more on any leg of any Primary Intersection during any morning or evening Peak Hour Period one year after Project completion the analysis will be terminated. In such event the Traffic Study and worksheet shall be submitted to the Planning Commission with a recommendation that the Project be determined exempt from the TPO pursuant to Section 15.40.030 C.2. f. No mitigation shall be identified or required for any Primary Intersection unless Project trips increase traffic on one or more of the legs of the intersection by one percent (I %) or more during any morning or evening Peak Hour Period. 5. Traffic Study Methodology. a. The Traffic Engineer, in preparing the Traffic Study, shall evaluate the impact of Project trips generated from all proposed land uses based on the assumptions specified in Section 3 and the methodology specified in this Section. b. In the case of conversion of an existing structure to a more intense land use, the incremental increase in trips generated by the Project shall be evaluated. In the event the uses within the existing structure changed during the preceding twelve (12) months, the differential shall be calculated on the basis of the prior use or uses with the highest, trip generation rates according to the NBTAM (or TTE Manual or SANDAG Manual as appropriate). c. Project trips shall be distributed in accordance with the determination specified in Subparagraph 4c. d. The following ICU calculations shall be performed for each Primary Intersection where, one year after Project completion, Project generated trips will increase traffic by one percent (1%) or more on any leg of the Primary Intersection during any morning and/or evening Peak Hour Period: i. The existing ICU; ii. The ICU, with Circulation System Improvements that will be in place within one year after Project completion, based on all projected traffic including regional traffic increases and trips generated by Committed Projects excluding Project generated trips; and iii. The ICU in (ii) with Project trips; (Newport Beach 9 -99) 574 -6 iv. The ICU in (ii) with Project trips and any trip reduction measures approved by the Traffic Manager; The ICU in (ii) with Project trips and any mitigation resulting from Improvements; vi. The ICU in (v) with trip reduction measures approved by the Traffic Manager. e. The Traffic Study shall, for each Impacted Primary Intersection with an Unsatisfactory Level of Service (ICU of .905 or more) that has been caused or made worse by Project generated trips, identify each Feasible Improvement that could mitigate some or all of the impacts of Project trips. The Traffic Study shall also determine the extent to which the Improvement provides additional capacity for critical movements at the Impacted Primary Intersection in excess of the Project trips and any other information relevant to the calculation of any fee required by the TPO. f. The Traffic Study shall, for each Improvement identified pursuant to Subsection e., estimate the cost of making the Improvement including the cost of property acquisition, design, and construction. The Traffic Engineer may perform the cost estimate or, with the approval of the Traffic Manager, retain a civil engineer or other qualified professional to prepare the cost estimates. g. The determination of "effective capacity increase" and "effective capacity decrease" as described in Section 15.40.030 B.l.d. shall be made as specified in this Subparagraph. i. In determining the "effective capacity increase" attributable to any Improvement to any Primary Intersection, the Traffic Engineer shall first calculate the ICU with existing, committed and regional trips (Future W/O Project ICU). Then the ICU shall be calculated with existing, committed and regional trips and the Improvement (Improved W/O Project ICU). The "effective capacity increase" shall be determined by subtracting the Improved W/O Project ICU from the Future W/O Project ICU. ii. In determining the "effective capacity decrease" attributable to Project trips the Traffic Engineer shall fast calculate the ICU of the Primary Intersection with existing, committed and regional trips, Project trips and the Improvement (Improved With Project ICU). The "effective capacity decrease" shall be calculated by subtracting the Improved W/O Project ICU from the Improved With Project ICU. iii. For example, if the Future W/O Project ICU is .92 and the Improved W/O Project ICU is .82 the "effective capacity increase" is 10. If the Improved W/O Project ICU is :82 and the Improved ICU With Project ICU is .87 the "effective capacity decrease" is 5. Assuming the cost of the Improvement is $100,000 the contribution of the Project would be $50,000 ($100,000 multiplied by 5 /10). h. The Traffic Study shall also provide the Planning Commission with any additional information relevant to the findings or analysis required by the TPO. 574 -7 (Newport Beach 9-99) 6. Staff Analysis. a. The Traffic Engineer shall transmit a draft Traffic Study to the Traffic Manager for review, comment and correction. The Traffic Manager shall review the draft Traffic Study and submit corrections to the Traffic Engineer within 15 days after receipt. The Traffic Engineer shall make the corrections within ten (10) days of receipt and transmit the final Traffic Study to the Traffic Manager. b. The Traffic Manager shall transmit the final Traffic Study to the Planning Department for presentation to the Planning Commission. 7. Issuance of Permits. The City shall not issue building, grading or other permits for a Project Approved pursuant to Section 15.40.030 B.I.b., 15.40.030 B.l.c., or 15.40.030 B.2. until each Improvement that has been assumed to be in place for purposes of Project Approval, or is to be constructed or funded as a condition to Project Approval, satisfies the following criteria: a. The Improvement has been budgeted and committed for construction by or on behalf of the City; or b. The State, County or other governmental agency making the Improvement has accepted bids for the Project; or c. The Improvement has been approved by the appropriate governmental jurisdictions and is to be constructed by the Project. proponent in conjunction with development of the Project or the Project proponent has guaranteed construction of the Improvement through the posting of bonds or other form of assurance. 8. Reimbursement Programs. a. The City Council may establish Reimbursement Programs to ensure Project conditions are roughly proportional to Project impacts and to facilitate the prompt construction of Improvements to mitigate the impact of Project trips. A Reimbursement Program may be proposed by the City Manager to the City Council whenever he/she becomes aware of the potential for multiple Projects to impact a Primary Intersection and a Feasible Improvement may be required of one or more of the Projects because of the impact of Project trips. b. A Reimbursement Program shall have the following components: Identification of the Feasible Improvement(s) including, without limitation, preliminary design and cost estimates and the estimated date of completion of the Feasible Improvement(s); ii. Calculation of the "effective capacity increase" attributable to the Feasible Improvement(s); iii. The amount of the cost of the Feasible Improvement for which the City or Project Proponent shall be entitled to reimbursement from subsequent or contemporaneous Projects; (Ne."n Beach 9-99) 574 -8 a5 iv. The duration of the period during which Reimbursement shall be required of subsequent or contemporaneous Projects. 9. Committed Improvements. In the case of Projects Approved pursuant to Section 15.40.030 B.I.d., the Improvement(s) assumed to be completed within forty -eight (48) months after Project Approval shall be listed in the Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The City Council shall not remove the Improvement(s) from the CIP unless a different Improvement (Substitute Improvement) is identified and the Substitute Improvement will result in reductions in the ICU at the Impacted Primary Intersection that equal or exceed the reduction(s) in ICU at the Impacted Primary Intersection(s) that were assumed or projected when the Project was Approved. 574-9 (Newport Beach 9199) AA EXHIBIT 3 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 95 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 4or OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA L S A March 22, 200¢ f TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................. .................:............. 1 METHODOLOGY................................... ............................... I PROPOSEDPROJECT .................................................. I.......... 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................... ............................... 7 EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND CONDITIONS TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................. l I EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND CONDITION LEVEL OF SERVICE ................... 14 EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND PLUS CUMULATIVE PROJECTS ., ................... 14 ON -SITE CIRCULATION ......................... ..................:............ 20 ON -SITE PARKING .............................. ............................... 20 CONCLUSIONS................................. ............................... 20 MITIGATION MEASURES ........................ ............................... 21 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Traffic Volumes from Approved Projects APPENDIX B: One - Percent Traffic Volume Analysis Worksheets APPENDIX C: Traffic Phasing Ordinance ICU Analysis Worksheets APPENDIX D: Reasonably Foreseeable Projects Location, Trip Generations and Distributions APPENDIX E: Existing plus Background plus Cumulative (without and with project) ICU Worksheets P.1Cnb430\Tmffic Study(Snal).wpd (3119100> '11 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1: Location of the Proposed Project and Study Area Locations ........................ 2. Figure 2: Site Plan .............................. ............................... 6 Figure 3: Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ....... ............................... 8 Figure 4: AM & PM Peak -Hour Project Trips ...................................... :.... 9 Figure 5: Existing AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes . ............................... 10 Figure 6: Approved Projects AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes ....................... 12 Figure 7: Existing Plus Background Condition AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes ......... 13 Figure 8: Existing Plus Background Plus Project Condition AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes............. ....:.......................... .............. 15 Figure 9: Cumulative Projects AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes ...................... 17 Figure 10: Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Conditions AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes............................... ............................... 18 Figure 11: Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Plus Project Conditions AM & PM Peak -Hour Traffic Volumes ................ ............................... 19 TABLES Table A: Project Trip Generation ...................... ............................... 5 Table B: Existing Level of Service Summary ............. ............................... 7 Table C: Existing Plus Background Plus Project Level of Service Comparison ................ 14 Table D: Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Projects Level of Service Comparison ..... 16 P :\Cnb43017taffic_Study(fmal).wpd ft3119/04» it LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAPPIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 9004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION The purpose of this traffic impact analysis is to identify the potential traffic and circulation impacts associated with the development of 10,737 square feet of medical office and 5,763 square feet of general office land use on the northwest corner of Old Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road in the City of Newport Beach (City). Figure I shows the location of the proposed project and the study area intersections analyzed in this report. This report presents a traffic analysis of near -term traffic conditions consistent with the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). Although the TPO does not require a cumulative projects analysis, this analysis was included to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Issues addressed in this analysis include off -site intersection impacts, internal circulation, and parking. The traffic analysis for the proposed project will examine five scenarios: 1. Existing conditions 2. Existing plus background conditions 3. Existing plus background plus project conditions 4. Existing plus background conditions plus cumulative projects 5. Existing plus background plus cumulative projects plus project conditions METHODOLOGY This traffic impact analysis is prepared consistent with the requirements of the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The study area intersections analyzed in this report include the following: Study Area Intersections • Superior Avenue/Placentia Avenue • Superior Avenue/Hospital Road • Superior Avenue/West Coast Highway • Placentia Avenue/Hospital Road • Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road • Newport Boulevard/West Coast Highway • Newport BoulevardNia Lido • Riverside Avenue/West Coast Highway PACnb4301Tniltic_SWdy(fma1).wpd «3119100) a� LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT.ANALVSIS MARCH 1000 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA Consistent with the TPO methodology, the eight study area intersections were evaluated to identify any locations where the project has the potential to increase traffic on any leg of the intersection by 1 percent or more in the existing plus background condition. Intersections where the project would not increase traffic on any leg by 1 percent or more would not require further analysis. . Intersection Level of Service Methodology. The Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology was used to determine levels of service (LOS) for the signalized study area intersections. This methodology compares the volume to capacity (v /c) ratios of conflicting turn movements at an intersection, sums up these critical conflicting v/c ratios for each intersection approach, and determines the overall ICU. The resulting ICU is expressed in terms of LOS, where LOS A represents free -flow activity, and LOS F represents overcapacity operation. The LOS criteria for signalized intersections using the ICU methodology are presented below.. . LOS Description A No approach phase is fully utilized by traffic, and no vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Typically, the approach appears quite open, turns are made easily, and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation. B This service level represents stable operation, where an occasional approach phase is fully utilized and a substantial number are nearing full use. Many drivers begin to feel restricted within platoons of vehicles. C This level still represents stable operating conditions. Occasionally, drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication, and backups may develop behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted, but not objectionably so. D This level encompasses a zone of increasing restriction approaching instability at the intersection. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial during short peaks within the peak period; however, enough cycles with lower demand occur to permit periodic clearance of developing queues, thus preventing excessive backups.. E Capacity occurs at the upper end of this service level. It represents the most vehicles that any particular intersection approach can accommodate. Full utilization of every signal cycle is attained no matter how great the demand. F This level describes forced flow operations at low speeds, where volumes exceed capacity. These conditions usually result from queues of vehicles backing up from a restriction downstream. Speeds are reduced substantially, and stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time due to the congestion. In the extreme case, speed can drop to zero. The relationship between the ICU value (i.e., v/c ratio) and LOS is as follows: PACnb430vrranic Study {final) -"d (0/19/04)) 3! LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIH MARCH 5004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA Level of Service Intersection Capacity Utilization A < 0.60 B 0.61 -0.70 C 0.71 -0.80 D 0.81 -0.90 E 0.91 -1.00 F > 1.00 The City of Newport Beach considers LOS D as the upper limit of satisfactory operations. Mitigation is required for any intersection where project traffic causes the intersection to deteriorate from LOS D to LOS E. If an intersection is operating at LOS E or worse in the baseline condition, project impact occurs when the project - generated traffic increases the ICU by 0,01 or more. PROPOSED PROJECT Project Description The project proposes the removal of the existing land use on the project site and replacement with 10,737 square feet of medical office and 5,763 square feet of general office land use with 66 surface parking spaces. The existing on -site land use consists of 4,782 square feet of general office use. Figure 2 shows the site plan for the proposed project. Access to the project site will. be provided via a full- access driveway off Old Newport Boulevard: Peak -hour trips for the existing land uses and the proposed project were generated using trip rates from the Newport Beach Transportation Analysis Model (NBTAM). Vehicle trips associated with the existing land uses were subtracted from the project's trip generation to determine the new peak -hour trips generated by the site. The project trip generation analysis is presented in Table A. P: \Cnb430UratTC_Stu4(rina1),wpd ((3/19/04)) 32� LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT.ANALYSIS MARCH 5004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORTSRACH. CALIFORNIA Table A: Project Trip Generation Notes: ADT — Average Daily Trips TSF — Thousand Square Feet 1 General Office —NBTAM Newport Beach ADT and Peak -Hour Trip Rate Summary 2 Medical Office— NBTAM— Newport Beach ADT and Peak -Hour Trip Rate Summary PAC643MTraffiic_Sludy(filal).wpd (<3/19/04)> 3 AM Peak Hour I PM Peak Hour Size Units I ADT In Out Total In 1. Out Total Existing Land Use General Office 4.782 TSF Trip Rates 14.03 1.69 0.21 1.90 0.32 1.55 1.87 Trip Generatio 67 8 1 9 2 7 9 Existing Trip Generation 67 8 1 9 2 7 9 Proposed Project 'Medical Office 10.737 TSF Trip Rates 50.00 2.40 0.60 3.00 1.50 3.50 5.00 537 26 6 32 16 38 59 General Office 5.763 TSF Trip Ratesl 14.03 1.69 0.21 1.9 0.32 1.55 1.87 Trip Generation 81 10 1 11 2 9 11 Project Trip Generation 618 36 7 43 18 47 65 Total Project Trips (Proposed—Existing) 551 1 28 6 1 34 16 40 1 56 Notes: ADT — Average Daily Trips TSF — Thousand Square Feet 1 General Office —NBTAM Newport Beach ADT and Peak -Hour Trip Rate Summary 2 Medical Office— NBTAM— Newport Beach ADT and Peak -Hour Trip Rate Summary PAC643MTraffiic_Sludy(filal).wpd (<3/19/04)> 3 i rr �y,�,�� / ^ w r rf w _ P r + � M w w w/w ♦:. i wJ I I w rr �.. ww(ecwarl a...A i I ' l./ i L S A ric�ux� o04 qof Old Newport Boulevard Mr Project Site Plan SOURCE: Hill Partnership, Inc. 1- .WNB4301Site Phmcdr (3/8/04) 3`� LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MARCH 1004 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA As shown in Table A, the project is forecast to generate 551 new daily, 34 new a.m. Peak -Hour and 56 new p.m. Peak -Hour trips. The project trips were distributed to the surrounding roadways based on logical travel paths to and from the project site. The project trip distribution was reviewed and approved by City of Newport Beach staff and applied to the project trip generation to arrive at the project trip assignment. The project trip distribution is shown in Figure 3. The trip distribution percentages were multiplied by the project trip generation to arrive at project - generated trips at each intersection. The project trips are illustrated in Figure 4. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing peak -hour traffic volumes at study area intersections were provided by the City of Newport Beach and are illustrated in Figure 5. The existing traffic volumes and ICU calculations are included in the TPO Analysis worksheets in Appendix C. Table B summarizes the results of the existing a.m. and p.m. peak -hour LOS analysis for the eight study area intersections. As discussed above, the LOS is determined using the ICU analysis methodology for the study area intersections. Table B: Existing Level of Service Summary As this table indicates, all study area intersections operate at satisfactory LOS D or better during both peak hours in the existing condition. P: \Cn6430 \Tratiic_Study(fnal).wpd ((3/19/04N AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Superior Avenue/Placentia Avenue 0.73 C 0.84 D 2. Superior Avenue/Hospital Road 0.67 0.68 0.34 B 0.45 A 3. Superior Avenue /West Coast Highway B 0.61 A 4. Placentia Avenue/Hospital Road A 0.40 A 5. Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road 0.54 .... ..._ ......... — 6. Newport Boulevard/West Coast Highway 0.82 1 A 0.71 C I D 0.63 B 7. Newport Boulevard/Via Lido 0.46 A 0.35 A 8. Riverside Avenue/West Coast Highway 0.71 C 0.79 C As this table indicates, all study area intersections operate at satisfactory LOS D or better during both peak hours in the existing condition. P: \Cn6430 \Tratiic_Study(fnal).wpd ((3/19/04N rear 46� 4 T. 1 Superior AvenuelPlacen is Avenue 2 xmcarcv. 5 rROdaCr 3 sin r o12 a r t 2 Superior AvenueRlosphal Road t 3120 Na t 012 ? . 114 *J « 114 L, . 012 t, C 3116 111 1 111 3/2 > r' 312 y 3 Superior AvenueMlest Coast Highway 4 Placentia AvemWHosphal Road 5 Newport Bmwianwaspaal Road ie 6 Newport BoulevardMest Coast Highway 7 . Newport BoulevardMa Lido 8 Mverside Avenue/West Coast Highway L S A FIGURE 4 LEGEND: 1231456 AWPM Volumes ¢OI Old Nearport Boulevard AM and PM Peak Hour Project Tripss, PA04m30\TnP_AmPrpmentxI, 3/9/04 ,/� W . � t 12M 243/732 41 4 4 t 61/101 415!514 J '' t r 10851954' 21/64 1 N 1 L S A LEGEND: .1231456 AM /PM Voluraes P:NCNB4301EzisdWxts 3/9104 ¢o1 Old Newport Boulevard Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes �b M1 ... .. et0 t 55188 F 32/448 B t .r s � 7 IE 2 Supedor Avenue/Hospital Road t 1931120 .' C 12 t 3601368 N !` t 18/49 a 58 811628 m v m 1451174 ems ° vii F 2641179 1 4 r 781182 iJ d 4 r 1441108 �j 4 y F 681151 90311 P u b. r 61/99 J "i t r 1941471 J ''t t r 19791984 . 264!206 ^v 1631152 2961277 40/24 7 2391226 -1 .a 3 Superior Avenue[West Coast Highway 4 Placenda Menue/Hosphal Road 5 Newport Boulevard4lospilel Road ' _R t 55142 cu t 3401479 m e t 3111372 N MOM j L, . 766/1765 1 4 r 17126 �j d 11144 2181 /1222 t r 2941246 J °1 t r 1671124 Z 2060511 -. .^v 4/19 Z N ' B Newport Boulevard /West Coast Highway 7 . Newport Boulevar&Via Lido 6 Riverside AvenueANesl Coast Highway L S A LEGEND: .1231456 AM /PM Voluraes P:NCNB4301EzisdWxts 3/9104 ¢o1 Old Newport Boulevard Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes �b LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IM PACT ANALYSIS MARCH 3304 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND CONDITIONS TRAFFIC VOLUMES The existing plus background condition is developed by applying a growth rate to the existing traffic counts and adding trips from approved projects in the vicinity. A one - percent per year growth rate was added to all traffic volumes on Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard, consistent with the City's Regional Traffic Annual Growth Rate Table. The TPO requires that the project be analyzed one year after the project opening year. The project is anticipated to be opened in 2005, therefore an analysis year of 2006 was used in the application of the growth rate. Traffic from approved projects was also added to the existing plus regional growth traffic volumes. The following approved projects were included: • Balboa Bay Club Expansion • Fashion Island Expansion • Temple Bat Yahm Expansion • Ford Redevelopment • Cannery Lofts Village • Hoag Hospital Phase II • CIOSA - Irvine Project • Newport Dunes • Irvine Development 1999 • 1401 Dove Street • Newport Auto Center Expansion • Olsen Townhome Project Traffic volumes from approved projects were provided by the City of Newport Beach and are provided in Appendix A. The approved projects' traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 6. The existing plus background condition traffic volumes (existing traffic plus a growth rate plus approved projects) are illustrated in Figure 7. One Percent Traffic Volume Analysis The one - percent traffic volume analysis was prepared using the City of Newport Beach One - Percent Traffic Volume Analysis worksheets, provided in Appendix B. The purpose of the one - percent volume analysis is to identify any study area intersection where traffic from the proposed project will increase traffic on any leg by one percent or more. The existing plus background conditions were used as the baseline for the one - percent volume analysis. The following intersections were identified as having a project contribution of one - percent or more in the existing plus background condition. 1. Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road 2. Newport Boulevard/Coast Highway P:1Cnb430 %Tmftic_Smdy(final).wpd 03/19/00> 11 �11 9 t 34163 F3 ` fro 4/4'1 h r. 408 � Q - 1 3 Suped 8 Newport Boulevar&Wesl Coast 7 . Newport Boulevard/Via lido L S A LEGEND: 123/456 AMMM Volumes P: 1CNB43Mpproved_Prgecu.xls 319/04 1 SuoedorAvenusiPlacenkAvenue 2 Supedor Avenue/Hospildal Road O W F1 d r 1/0 74/117 J' +1 f 8113 Z T N 5 Newoorl BoulevardHospltal Road Riverside t'1C3t1KL' b . 4ot Old Newport Boulevard Approved Projects AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes l_ 1 J 108158 Q 7 "1 T r � a � W 4 Placentia Avenel iospilal Road 7 . Newport Boulevard/Via lido L S A LEGEND: 123/456 AMMM Volumes P: 1CNB43Mpproved_Prgecu.xls 319/04 1 SuoedorAvenusiPlacenkAvenue 2 Supedor Avenue/Hospildal Road O W F1 d r 1/0 74/117 J' +1 f 8113 Z T N 5 Newoorl BoulevardHospltal Road Riverside t'1C3t1KL' b . 4ot Old Newport Boulevard Approved Projects AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes l_ OD N L 120 137184. 2481747 .j 4 L> r 72/109 423/524 J `1 1 r' 11071973 - n o 21165 "1 � � 1 Supedor Avenue/Maeentla Avow M • 1481177 v 2701183 La F ..°Ind. FI 4 L 58190 4 L+ r 691154 36/462 10171321 J -1 T r 1 `1 t r 2721597 J 206811040 N mr O N �n 2691210 + `� c�'i 1871155 252!244 -4 Si 3041283 2 Supedorkewe/Hosp!W Road low o' mom. N L 3471469 L, . 8241182 6611311 - 170/126 1 I 8 Newpod 8outevardl "Coast 4 PlamnUa AvenuelftplW Road 1`17 n � `�v L 319!378 17127 1 r QQ$�fff � N 7 Newport BoulevamMa Lido L 56143 137184. 4 4 r 11145 `1 L 197/122 n n M �j L 367!975 L 18150 a °~n' , 634/1724 ;; • 1481177 v 2701183 La F 811186 FI 4 4 r 2551166 �j 4 4 r 691154 F1 1 r 10171321 J -1 T r 62/101 J `1 t r 2721597 J 206811040 N �n 2691210 + `� c�'i 1871155 252!244 -4 Si 3041283 -1 a 45126 N low o' mom. N L 3471469 L, . 8241182 6611311 - 170/126 1 I 8 Newpod 8outevardl "Coast 4 PlamnUa AvenuelftplW Road 1`17 n � `�v L 319!378 17127 1 r QQ$�fff � N 7 Newport BoulevamMa Lido ' I 8 MvMdeAvsnuelWsM Coed Nghway L S A LEGEND: .,. .. 123/456 AWPM Volumes ¢OI Old Newport Boulward Existing plus Background Condition AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic. Volumes � .. P :\CNB430\Existiag+Backgound.xls 3/9104 `� L 56143 137184. 4 4 r 11145 `1 t .r 300/251 J 218611631 a � 4119 1 ' I 8 MvMdeAvsnuelWsM Coed Nghway L S A LEGEND: .,. .. 123/456 AWPM Volumes ¢OI Old Newport Boulward Existing plus Background Condition AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic. Volumes � .. P :\CNB430\Existiag+Backgound.xls 3/9104 `� LBA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA The existing plus background condition is the most conservative scenario for which to apply the I percent test; therefore, this test has not been applied to the existing plus background plus cumulative projects scenario. Because the baseline traffic would be greater in the existing plus background plus cumulative projects scenario, the project contribution would also have to be greater in order to contribute 1 percent to any leg of the intersection. As a result, the same. two intersections are analyzed in both the existing plus background and existing plus background plus cumulative projects scenarios. For purposes of project impact analysis, the two intersections identified above will be considered the study area intersections. It is not necessary to analyze the other six intersections because the project will not increase the traffic on any leg of these intersections by I percent or more. EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND CONDITION LEVEL OF SERVICE An existing plus background condition and existing plus background plus project condition level of service analysis was prepared for the two intersections with a project contribution of one percent or more. The existing plus background plus project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 8. The ICU . worksheets are provided in Appendix C. Table C shows the existing plus background condition levels of service comparison for the two study area intersections identified in the one - percent traffic volume analysis. Table C: Existing Plus Background Plus Project Level of Service Comparison As shown in Table C, both intersections are forecast to operate with satisfactory levels of service during both peak hours. EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND PLUS CUMULATIVE PROJECTS Traffic from reasonably foreseeable projects within the City of Newport Beach was added to the Existing plus Background condition. This cumulative analysis is not called for as part of the TPO, but is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and was requested by the P.\Cnb430 \TreffIc_Swdy(fina1).wpd 3/19/04N 14 �� Existing Plus Background Existing Plus Background Plus Project AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Newport Blvd./Ilospital Rd. 0.61 B 0.78 C 0.61 B 0.79 C 2. Newport B1vdJWest Coast Hwy. 0.85 D 0.67 B 0.85 D 0.67 B As shown in Table C, both intersections are forecast to operate with satisfactory levels of service during both peak hours. EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND PLUS CUMULATIVE PROJECTS Traffic from reasonably foreseeable projects within the City of Newport Beach was added to the Existing plus Background condition. This cumulative analysis is not called for as part of the TPO, but is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and was requested by the P.\Cnb430 \TreffIc_Swdy(fina1).wpd 3/19/04N 14 �� R I - t 120 v t 246/747 ai v t 3201380 721169 4231524 J h T r' 1107/973 . r 11145 ^o 21/65 7 271/187 4 4 r h 1 Superior AvenuaMacentia Avenue I t 56191 4 4 r 36/464 I `+ A t 197/122, v t 3671377_ ai v t 3201380 t 21170 +.I L, 82411822 4 Lo 6351728 a1 4 L> 300/251 J r 11145 66113il , 1464179 1701126 Z 271/187 4 4 r h 814186 T r' +J 4 624101 L, J 47 "t 2551166 T r' e1 4 2724597 4 1 ` 724170 10181322 J "i T r' 207141042 > m�n 2704211 > `i� ° 1901157 + 3041263 . -4 ^ 45126 -1 o ^3 m , 2521244 Z N 3 Superior Avenue/Wesl CeaM NI9l w+aY 1 4 Placentia Avenuediosp6al Road I 5 Newpod BaAevardMospital Road 6 t2 7 . Newport BoulevardMa Lido L $ ' ` LEGEND: 1234456 AM/PM Volumes S Riverside Avenue/Wast ritiuxr. c *oi OldNeatportBoulevard Existing plus Background plus Project Condition AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes j. P: \CNB430\Existing+Background+Prc jAs 3 19404 `'t� v R t 347/489 t 3201380 1378!2387 +.I L, 82411822 4 Lo C 17127 T r' a1 4 L> 300/251 J r 11145 66113il , "t T r' 1701126 Z m m 2167/1639 4119 -1 t2 7 . Newport BoulevardMa Lido L $ ' ` LEGEND: 1234456 AM/PM Volumes S Riverside Avenue/Wast ritiuxr. c *oi OldNeatportBoulevard Existing plus Background plus Project Condition AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes j. P: \CNB430\Existing+Background+Prc jAs 3 19404 `'t� LEA ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 1004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA City to address specific cumulative projects. Only cumulative projects that contribute traffic to the study intersections were included in the report. The City of Newport Beach provided the trip generation and distribution for the following eight reasonably foreseeable projects: 1. South Coast Shipyard 2. Mormon Temple 3. St. Mark Presbyterian Church 4. St. Andrews Church 5. Regent Newport Beach Resort 6. Newport Coast 7. Newport Ridge 8. Lower Bayview Senior Housing The project trip generation and distribution for one additional project, 494/496 Old Newport Boulevard Medical Office, was taken from the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the project by LSA Associates, Inc. in February 2004. The project trip generation and distribution for each reasonably foreseeable project are provided in Appendix D. Trips from the cumulative projects are illustrated in Figure 9. Trips from these reasonably foreseeable projects were added to the existing plus background condition and analyzed both without and with the proposed project. The existing plus background plus cumulative projects traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 10, while the existing plus background plus cumulative projects plus project traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 11. The two study intersections are included in this analysis. The other six potential intersections are omitted as not satisfying the One Percent Test. Addition of the cumulative project would only diminish the project's contribution at these locations. A summary of the existing plus background plus cumulative projects levels of service both without and with the proposed project is provided in Table D. The Existing plus Background plus Cumulative Projects (without and with project ) ICU worksheets are provided in Appendix E. Table D: Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Projects Level of Service Comparison P :5Cnb430\Traffic_Study(final).wpd <(3119104>> 16 yI Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Projects Existing Plus Background Plus Cumulative Plus Project AM Peak Hour . PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Intersection ICU I LOS ICU I LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Newport Blvd./Hospital Rd. 0.61 B 0.79 C 0.62 B 0.79 C 2. Newport Blvd./West Coast Hwy. 0.90 D 0.75 C 0.90 D 0.75 C P :5Cnb430\Traffic_Study(final).wpd <(3119104>> 16 yI rx�sr 0 a � L 61158 Fl L, 154/1 1/1 J 100/173 —> 3 Superior Avenua/Mest Coast N a a t 5n J L, . 23A 1391251 19111 Z 6 Newport BoulevartllWest Coast Hi 4 7 . Newport BoulevardNla.udo I 1 a 2 SuoenO 3 8 o 1 r 012 T m r N r ffl t 1/9 , 0/4. 1 4 .F 211; 3/1 . T r evard/Howhal Road Coast FIGURE 9 L " A ' LEGEND: 123/456 , AM/PM Volumes ¢07 Old Nea+port Boulevard Cumulative Projects AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P:1CNB430 \C=ulative_PmgMs.x1s 3125/04 , I M� m t 12/98 N t 367/377_ F 146/179 dr t 56190 «1 4 u+ 248/747 1 I.. T r' 72/109 423/524 1 ~ i T r' 1107/973 : 49 " Q 250 2168/1213 304/283 + Z wrn M � � N 270/211 45/28 Z . ^ M $ M 1 8 r t 278/180.^ 768/1644 � rg N t 367/377_ F 146/179 dr t 56190 «1 4 u+ .` 36/464 1 I.. T r' +3 4 4 c r r o 621101 1 +i T r+ 1018/322 J F T r* 272/597 �i 2 SuoedorAvenuaMosablRoad n r t 278/180.^ 768/1644 � rg m t 367/377_ F 146/179 dr t 19159 2701187 «1 4 u+ r 81/186 1 I.. t 255/166 +3 4 4 F 711169 621101 1 +i T r+ 1018/322 J F T r* 272/597 1 `, T r' 2168/1213 304/283 + Z wrn M � � N 270/211 45/28 Z . ^ M $ 1901156 252/244 of r 3 Superior AvenueNJesl Coast Fliighway 4 Placentia Avenue/Hosphal Road 5 Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road n r t 56/43 m E �3 1669/2605 ...i 4 �v 11/45 3011254 t 352/491 .T r+ L 320/380 N b 1058/1996 1 4 r 17127 2405/1562 Z 180/137 . Zi "d N h 6 Newport BoulevardlWest Coast Highway 7 . Newport BoulevardMa Lido n N t 56/43 m E F 1669/2605 ...i 4 4 11/45 3011254 J .T r+ 2360/1964 N M N a �— a 4/19 Z 8 Riverside Avenue/West Coast FIGURE 10 L S A LEGEND: 123/456 AM/PM Volumes ¢o7 Old Neugbort Boulevard Existing plus Background plus Cumulative Conditions AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P: 1CNB430\ Existing+Background+CumulatiwAls 3/25/04 46 t�sr 1 P g t 12198 t 22/79 , 2481747 t 278/180. J 1 L� 17 721109 "1 T r• 423/524 J 1107/973 a 3 6 25/69 -4 FI 1 L+ 1 P L S e ravva••. as LEGEND: 1231456 AM/PM Volumes ¢ o1 Old Newport Boulevard Existing plus Background plus Cumulative plus Project Conditions AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P: \CNB43OExisting+Backgmmd +Cumulative +Proj.xis 3/25104 a ` m m fr t 22/79 t 278/180. t 3681379_ 271/191 788/1847 149/181 FI 1 L+ .�F 81/186 1 62/101 L+ J d" +1 255/166 T r• �J 4 272/597 L+ J 1- 731185 ''1 t r+ 10201322 J °1 t r• 2171/1215 > c°o n vm ^ 2721211 -a a c° 192/158 > n V 304/283 Z 45126 Z c"5 2521244 Z 3 Supedor AvenueANest Coast Highway 4 Placentia Avenue/Hospital Road 5 Newport SoulevardlHospital Road m' m t 56143 t 352!491 1 322/380 N' m �- 1674008 cv 'J L, 1058/1996 1 L+ 1- 17/27 J 4 La ` 11145 T r' 3011254 J `1 T r' 2 4 0 511 562 1801137 -4 ^rn 236211972 6 Newport Boulevardlftst Coast Highway 7 Newport Boulevad to Lido 8 Riverside AvenuelWest Coast FAghway L S e ravva••. as LEGEND: 1231456 AM/PM Volumes ¢ o1 Old Newport Boulevard Existing plus Background plus Cumulative plus Project Conditions AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes P: \CNB43OExisting+Backgmmd +Cumulative +Proj.xis 3/25104 a ` LEA ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 5004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA As shown in Table D, both intersections are forecast to continue to operate with satisfactory levels of service during both peak hours. It should be noted that the intersection of Newport Boulevard/West Coast Highway is approaching the LOS D threshold. ON -SITE CIRCULATION Access to the project will be provided via one driveway off Old Newport Boulevard. The location of the driveway is the same as the location of the driveway currently providing access to the site, approximately 100 feet north of Hospital Road. Parking is not allowed on Old Newport Boulevard adjacent to the site. No changes to the site access are proposed; therefore, no access - related impacts are anticipated. The project includes 66 parking spaces. Consistent with Newport Beach City Standard STD- 805 -L -A and STD - 805 -L-B, the parking spaces are 8'6" x 17'. A 26 -foot drive aisle is provided throughout the site. Review of the site plan indicates no areas where maneuvering space is limited or where a drive aisle dead ends. Therefore, adequate on -site maneuvering and circulation area will be provided for passenger cars and small delivery vehicles. ON -SITE PARKING The project will provide 66 on -site parking spaces. Section 20.66.030 of the City of Newport Beach Zoning Ordinance requires one space per 250 square feet of medical office or general office. Application of this requirement to the proposed 16,500 square feet of medical and general office results in a requirement of 66 parking spaces. As a result, the project will provide the required number of parking spaces and will meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. CONCLUSIONS Off -Site Circulation Potential impacts to the surrounding intersections were analyzed using the methodology required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The project is forecast to contribute one percent or more to the traffic volume at two intersections: Newport Boulevard/Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard/Coast Highway. Baseline and plus project level of service analyses were conducted for these two intersections for the existing plus background and existing plus background plus cumulative projects scenarios. Based on these analyses, the project is not forecast to create a significant traffic impact at either intersection. On -Site Circulation The project site has been analyzed to identify any constraints to access or to on -site circulation. The project will not change the existing access to the site; therefore, no impacts to site access are PACnb430Gmffic SWdy(fina1).wpd 0311W04H 20 (� LBA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 1004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA anticipated. The site plan was evaluated to determine if adequate parking and maneuvering area would be provided. It was determined that the parking spaces and drive aisles meet the standards set forth by the City and would provide adequate maneuvering space for a passenger car or small delivery vehicle. Parking The proposed project will provide 66 parking spaces, the same number required by the City Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, adequate on -site parking will be provided. MITIGATION MEASURES No impacts are forecast at study area interactions or on the project site; therefore, no mitigation is required. P:1Cnb43MTraffic Study(final).wpd ((3/19/00) 21 a l LSA ASSOCIATES, INC, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2004 101 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA APPENDIX A TRAFFIC VOLUMES FROM APPROVED PROJECTS PACnb430\Traf B $tudY.wpd K319/04)) 6b Traffic Phasing Data 15- DEC-03 Projects Less Than 100% Complete page' 1 Project Number Project Name Percent 147 BALBOA BAY CLUB EXPANSION 0% 148 FASHION ISLAND EXPANSION 36% 154 TEMPLE BAT YAHM EXPANSION 65% 157 FORD REDEVELOPMENT 95% 167 CANNERY LOFTS VILLAGE, 0% 168 HOAG HOSPITAL PHASE II 0% 555. CIOSA- IRVINE PROJECT 91% 910 NEWPORT DUNES 0% 935. IRVINE DEVELOPMENT 1999 0% 936 1401 DOVE STREET 0% 937. NEWPORT AUTO CENTER EXPAN 0% 938 OLSEN TOW NHOME PROJECT (1 0% 61 A L § ■ @§ cc k)o 0 CL 0 @ c■2 \�k EL *0 � § . � / K; \ /a® \, \ 7 W, � }/ :) CD k �E $; \;� ) k� M: .W; e W. §�e\ Z. , k L) Z. .§ k� % yz a a: A : �k ƒƒ�ca: /C4 Z <a. \ /e§ f \ W=E �.. }\2 k; ■; £ -_ �§ ; % \ '° V k' Lu, k 2 � Z. . k ■.0 ;2 2 £L. ■ k §a /moo ]w /)f/ : \k z �k t . z ;� z Z: / �� °, �E $; \;� ) k� M: .W; e W. §�e\ Z. , k L) Z. .§ k� % yz a a: A : �k ƒƒ�ca: /C4 Z <a. \ /e§ f \ W=E �.. }\2 k; ■; U $�. Kim . ;. » ; % \ k' Lu, u + k ■.§ ;2 2 2 ;� ■ k §a /moo ]w : \k $ ° Z. }) �; t . U $�. Kim . E :° p^ Lu, % \/ \� km 6 \ « / / �� °, CO) k a :m F . }� #a .;� � , z�.# §f 2 ] g .. § ■ ■§ § §0 2 »® IM CO IOL 2 � a . � § § $; co co 0 ); " § � �\ �n= k � a2 K; K; Wl a \K ■; Z: § . ;_ \aR . � OD CO E_J; 2. © ) z° / Z. � a k( £ \�.\ f ■./ } ;? $ f> _: — =2\ a LU: § . ■. Z: • J @, z.A 2;) § #; Z: a2 K; K; Wl a \K ■; !! K� &�# G / :_ § C-4 ;_ .§ � OD CO 2. ; } / }° / Z. R a it £ \�.\ 7® ■./ } 0 co . * f> — =2\ . § Z, ■. Z: • J @, E;; , fpm Z: co: to !�� ± !! K� &�# G / :_ aCL K. W. / W. �,. E\ . ©R k� \ \ � OD CO } / }° � R a 2 £ \�.\ 7® \ `) } 0 z E § Z, ■. Z: .K f'� f m :G ; co: to !�� ± E : . Z'o C4 CQ aCL K. W. / W. �,. E\ . ©R k� !! \� \ � OD CO \�.\ \ `) L; •.e : f;2 Z: !! \� LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 9004 001 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA APPENDIX B ONE- PERCENT TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS PACnb430\Tletiic_Study.wpd «3/9/00) J I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• SUPERIOR AVE (E&W) & PLACENTIA AVE (N &S) 2565 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 AJW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Nordibmind 346 0 16 362 4 0 Southbound 858 0 10 868 9 1 Eastbound 1521 0 0 1521 15 0 Westbound 316 0 10 326 3 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. 1% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• SUPERIOR AVE (E&W) & PLACENTIA AVE (N&S) 2565 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 1003 PAO APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR APPROVED PROJECTS REGIONAL GROWTH WTH PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME i %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME. Northbound 842 0 26 868 9 2. Southbound 904 0 6 910 9 1 Eastbound 1532 0 0 1532 15 0 Wesd,omd 929 0 6 935 9 0 CX _I Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. C� Project Traffic Is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd. DATE. March 4, 2004 64 I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• SUPERIOR AVENUE & HOSPITAL ROAD 2490 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 AAA ACH TION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAKHOUR APPROVEDPROJECT REGIONAL GROWTH PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUME PROJECTED PEAKHOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTF.D PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME tNorthboun d 1764 0 . 4 1768 18 1 ound 506 0 0 506 5 0 urd 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 87 0 3 90. 1 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than I% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• SUPERIOR AVENUE & HOSPITAL ROAD 2490 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 PJW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR APPROVED PROJEC REGIONAL GROWTH PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT. PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 702 0 2 704 7 1 Southbound 873 0 0 873 9 0 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbou6d '536 0 5 541 S 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. PROJECT: 401 old Newport Blvd DATE: March 4, 2004 1% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• COAST HIGHWAY & BALBOA / SUPERIOR 1855 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 Add APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOAR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME I%OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT' PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 729 0 2 731 7 0 Southbound 568 0 3 571 6 0 Eastbound' 3270 66 53 3389 34 4 Westbound 859 18 35 912 .9 I �^ J Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. L� Project Traffic Is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes.. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. 1 % TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• COAST HIGHWAY & BALBOA / SUPERIOR 1855 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 PJW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVEDPROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAKHOUR VOLUME 1%OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 618 0 2 620 6 0 Southbound 1116 0 5 1121 11 2 Eastbound 1572 32 40 1644 16 3 Westbound 1930 39 63 2032 20 4 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. L� Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd DATE: March 4, 20014 1 % TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION. PLACENTIA/HOAG & HOSPITAL ROAD 2485 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 AIW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR APPROVED PROJEC REGIONAL GROWTH PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1%OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 106 0 101 207 2 0 Southbound 383 0 22 405 4 1 Eastbound 365 0 4 369 4 1 Westbound 649 0 108 757 8 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis Is required. I% TRAFFIC VOLUMEANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• PLACENTIA/HOAG & HOSPITAL ROAD 2485 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based an Average Daily Traffic 2003 PJW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAKHOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR APPROVED PROJECT REGIONALGROWTH PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUME PROJECTED PEAKHOUR VOLUME 1a/o OFPROIECTED PEAKHOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 172 0 161 333 3 0 Southbound 407 0 11 418 4 1 Eastbound 329 0 2 331 3 1 Westbound 650 0 56 706 7 4 L_J Project Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. C� Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysts is required. PROJECT: 4 09 Old Newport Blvd DATE: March 4, 2004 1 % TRAFFIC VOLUMEANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• NEWPORT BOULEVARD & HOSPITAL ROAD 2480 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 Atli APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 1736 35 36 1807 18 5 Southbound 1526 31 134 1691 17 14 Eastbound 616 0 82 698 7 1 3 Westbound 350 0 1 351 4 7 Project Traffic Is estimated to be less than 11% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. OX Project Traffic Is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• NEWPORT BOULEVARD & HOSPITAL ROAD 2480 (Existing TraKk Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 P30 APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAKHOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME I %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 1443 29 40 1512 15 3 Southbound 1956 39 98 2083 21 8 Eastbound 849 0 130 979 10 2 Westbound 379 0 0 379 4 40 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. L�J Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd DATE: Feb 25, 2ow 660 I % TRAFFIC VOL UME ANAL YSIS INTERSECTION.• COAST HIGHWAY & NEWPORT BLVD 2620 (Ezisdng Traffk Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 AAV APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAKHOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONALGROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAKHOUR VOLUME Northbound 0 Southbound 651 13 10 674 7 2 Eastbound 2348 1 47 41 2436 24 1 0 Westbound 1106 22 43 1171 12 0 r Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than I % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & NEWPORT BLVD 2620 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 PJW E OACH CTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAKHOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVEDPROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED' PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 0 Soutlibautd 853 17 6 876 9 12 Eastbound 1346 26 1 65 1437 14 0 Wmtbotud 2244 45 22 2311 Z3 0 C� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than I % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. C� Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 11% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd DATE: March 4, 2004 I % TRAFFIC VOL UME ANAL YSIS INTERSECTION.• .. NEWPORT BOULEVARD & VIA LIDO 1415 (Existing Traffic Vahwzes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 AAO APPROACH DIRECTION E='n NG PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 °h OF PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 1538 0 18 1556 16 1 Southbound 1092 0 8 1100 11 0 Eastbound 0 Westbound 328 0 2 330 3 1 0 Project Traffic Is estimated to be less than I% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic Is estimated to be equal to or greater than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. . I % TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION. NEWPORT BOULEVARD & VIA LIDO 1415 (Existing Traffic Volames Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 PM APPROACH DIRECTION. EXISTING PEAKHOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONALGROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 926 0 6 932 9 1 Southbound 1779 0 33 1812 18 4 Eastbound 0 Westbound 398 0 0 398 4 1 L.� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than t% of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than t % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd. DATE: March4,2004 61 I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• COAST HIGHWAY & RIVERSIDE AVENUE 2630 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily, Traffic 2003 AIW APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAR HOUR VOLUME 1% OF PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 5 0 0 5 0 0 Southbound 355 b 0 355 4 0 Eastbound 2364 1 47 79 1 2490 25 1 Westbound 1345 27 66 1438 14 S Project Traffic Is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Project Traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. I% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS INTERSECTION.• COAST HIGHWAY & RIVERSIDE AVENUE 2630 (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic 2003 P1W APPROACH DIRECTION EXISTING PEAK HOUR VOLUME PEAK HOUR REGIONAL GROWTH VOLUME APPROVED PROJECTS PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 %OFPROJECTED PEAK HOUR VOLUME PROJECT PEAK HOUR VOLUME Northbound 37 0 0 37 0 0 Southbound 384 0 0 384 4 0 Eastbound 1776 35 90 1901 19 8 Weslbotmd 2342 47 83 2472 25 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. C� Project Traffic Is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1 % of Projected Peak Hour Traffic Volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: 401 Old Newport Blvd DATE: March 4, 2004 6D LEA ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 2004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA APPENDIX C TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ICU ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS PACnb430\Tlafc_SNRty.wpd ((3/9/04)) ID SU2565AM 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ....... ............................... ......................... ............................... Description of system improvement: ..................... ............................... .................. .......... .............. PROJECT SU2565AM ............................... FORM It 0 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS �<rFOFN,P INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVE (E &W) &. PLACENTIA AVE (N &S) 2565 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 AM .............................................................................................................................................. I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED ............................... . I PROJECT I PROJECT I I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I. WC . I i I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I ............................................................................................................................................ I NL I I 19 I I ............................... I I 1 ............... } . .................. . ........... .... ) . .................. ..................... } ............... } 1 NT 3200 1 1 284 0.108 1 1 1 j I...............} . .................. . ............... } . ........ . ........:. ........... .. ....... } . .............. } i NR 1 1 43 1 1 1 I ............................................................................................................................................. I SL 1 1600 1 1 18 1 0.011 1 1 1 ............................... 1 1 1 I i............... . .............. . I ST 1 1600 1 .................. . ............... 1 556 . .............. . .................. . ..................... 1 0.348 * I . .................. I . .............. ................. 1 I I ............... . .............. . I SR 1 1600 1 .................. . ............... 1. 284 . ..... : ........ .. .................. . .................... 1 .0.178 1 1 : . .................. 1 . ... ........... ................. 1 1 1 I ............... . .............. .. I EL 1 1600 1 ................... . ............... 1 415 . .............. .................. . ...... .............. 1 0.259 1 1. . .................. 1 . .............. ................. I. 1 1 I ............................................................................................................................................ ET 1 1 1085 1 1 ............................... { 1 ............... } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.346 * ........ .......................7....... } ............... ER 1 1 21 I 1 1 1 .............................................................................................................................................. I WL 1 1600 1 I 61 1 0.038 * I I ............................... 1 I I I 1 ............... . .............. . I WT 1 ................... . ............... 1 243 . ............... . .................. . ....... ............. 1 1 . .................. . .............. ................. I 1 I 1 ............... } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.080 .....:............. ..................... } ............... } I WR I 1 1 12 1 I 1 I ............... . .............. . I EXISTING I.C.U. .................. . ............... ...................:..................: ................ 1 0.732 1 . .................. . .............. ................. I . I . ............................................................................... ............................... EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I I I I. ............................................................................................................................................ EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + .............................................................................................................................................. PROJECT I.C.U. ............................... I I ............................... . 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ....... ............................... ......................... ............................... Description of system improvement: ..................... ............................... .................. .......... .............. PROJECT SU2565AM ............................... FORM It 0 SU2565PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS cgtP INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVE (E &W) & PLACENTIA AVE (N &S) 2565 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM . ............................... . . .......................................................................................................................................... I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I .PROJECTED I PROJECT 1 PROJECT I': Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I WC I I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio . I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I. I I Volume .I . I I ....... ........................ .............. I .................................................................... ............................... ......................... 79 I I . ......... -- ...... ............................... } NL .,.... } .................. ... } . } I NT 3200 1 1 573 0.263 " I I I ................ } . .................. . ........ ,...... } ................... } ............... } I I 190 NR....... I .......................... ............................... I ............ ............ ...... ....... SL I ..1600 1 1 57 I 0.036 1 ....................................... ............................... I........... j ST I 1600 I . 349 I 0.218 1 .................. ........ I ..................... , .............. ...... SR 1 1600 1 1 498 1 0.311 1 1 I ................ . .......... :........ ................... .............. 1. ,.,,,..,,.... j 1 ................................................... ............................... 1 EL 1 . 1600 1 1 514 1 0.321 I ............. .... ....... ............. , ..........,.., I ............. ...................................................................... ........................ I ET 1 1 954 1 1 1 I I................ } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.318 . ................ .................... } . ...... ,:...... } i ER I 1 fi4 1 ................... .,., j ...................... 1 WL 1 1600 1 1 101 1 0.063 ..... .............. 1 ................... 1 .............. ............. I ............................................... ............................... . ................ 1 WT I 1 732 1 1 1 I ......�R..... } 3200 .................. . ... ......� } 0.259 i .............. -- .- .- .- ............. } ............... } i i ...... . . ................... . ................... . ....... ....... ............. j ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . ...... .. ................. 1 EXISTING I.C.U. 1. °843 1 , ....... ............................... .. , I ............................... . ... ... .. .... ........ -.. ................ EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I . .. ........ .......... :. I I ................. ............................... ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. ................ 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ... ....... . ..... .... .............. . .................. . ............... .... ........... . ................ .. ................... . I I ..... : ............. . .............. .............. . 1 -1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ................................................................................ ............................... .. Description of system improvement: .................................................................................. ............................... PROJECT SU2565PM .. .................. :.. . ................ .. ............ . FORM 11 SU2565PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION.ANALYSIS cq <re• INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVE(E &W) & PLACENTIA AVE(N &S) 2565 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM .. ........... . ... ................ . .............. . .................. ...........................:.............................................. I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I ............................... .PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT 1: Movement I Lanes I .Lanes I . PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume j w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume 1 . j ...... .. ........... NL 1 79 I. I ...... ............ .._. .... I I ............... ............. ........... NT 3200 1 1 573 0.263 * I I I I.......... ...... } . ............. ..... ................ } ...... ............................... } ............... } 1. 1 NR I 1 �. ......... •- --- .......... -. ...- ...............- .- ...... ............... . ....................................... ..... SLI 1600 1 57 I 0.036 I I I ...... I-.. .........- ..................... I ............. ....... ........... ......... ...........-- 1 ST 1 1600 1 1 349 1 0.218 1 1 1 1 1 I ................... . .............. . ............. I I• ..................•----....................-.................-... ..- .........................--- . - ..- ................ I SR 1 1600 1 1 498 1 0.311 1 1 1 1 I. I ..... ........ ............ .... .. .... ............. I •••• ................. .......... . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ ............:.. ...... EL I . 1600 I I 514 1 0.321 * . : : I .............. I .............. . ........... .. ................ ....... .......... ET 1 1 954 1 1 1 1 ................ } 3200 . .......... :....... . ............... } 0.318 ................. .....- .......- -..... } . ....... : ...... } j ER I 1 64 E I 1 ........ I ................ ........................................... ........ .. ............ WLI 1600 1 101 I 0.063 1 . I ................... . ..... :........ I..- .:........ I .... .............. ................ ................... I WT 1 1 732 1 1 1 I .:...... ........ } 3200 . .................. ................ } 6.259 * ................ ................. } - .............. } 1 WR I 1 96 :........ . .................... . . ................. ...... ... ..................... j .... ................ EXISTING I.C.U. _ I 0.843 1 - ................... . .. ...... ........ . ... ........•.. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ .................... I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I :. I I .................... ............... .............. - • ..........................• .............-.............-................ .......- ... .................. I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ... ................ . ............. .................... - .............. . -•------° --- - ................ .. ................... .. I I ..... :............. . .............. .............. . 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ... • ......................... ................... ........... Description of system improvement: ... •••• ..................... ................. ....... ....... PROJECT SU2565PM -• ............... ................... . . .................... -. ................. .:. .. ... :........... .............. FORM II SU249QAM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS �CI INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVENUE & HOSPITAL ROAD 2490 pp 0.N�P EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC : 2003 AM ... ................. . ............... . .............. .... . ................ . ......... ...... . .................. . I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I ..................... COMMITTED . ................... I PROJECTED . ............... .................. I PROJECT I . PROJECT 'I I Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio 1, Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I i I I I I I Volume I I I 1 ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 NIL 1 16001 1 0 1 0.000 1 I I ............................... I 1 I 1 ......:.......... . ... ............ . ................... ................. ............................................................................... I NT 1 I 1390 1 1 ............................... I 1 I ................. } 3200 . ................... ................. } 0.551 • ......... ............................... } ................ } 1 1 NR 1 1 374 I 1 1 I 1 ........................................................ ............................... ............................................................... SL 1 1600 1 1 72 1 0.045 ............................... i...................................................................................................................................................... I ST 1 1 434 1 1 ............................... 1 j I ................. } 3200 ...... ............................... } 0.136 . ............ 7..... ....................... ................ } I I SR I 1 0 1 1 1 I 1 ...................................................................................................................................................... i EL I I 0 I I ............................... I 1 ................. } . ................... . ................ } . .................. . ..................... } . ............... } 1 I ET 16001 1 0 0.000 1 1 1 I j................. } ....... ..............................} . .................. . ..................... } ................} 1 ER i 1 0 1 1 1 I ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 WL 1 24001 1 321 0.013 1 1 1 1 ............................... 1 1 . 1 I ................. . ............... . ................... . ................ . ............... . .................. . I WT I - 1 0 1. 1 ................. .... . ................... . .... .......... . 1 ................. .I I ................. } 800 . ................... ................. } 0.069 • ........: ............................... } } I WR 1 I 55, I 1 1 I ................. ...: ............ . ................... . ................ . ............... . .................. . I EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.665 1 ..................... . ................... . ............... .................. 1 1 .................................................................. ............................... I EXISTING + REG GROWTH +, COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. .......... I I 1 I 1 ................. . ............... . ................... . ................ . ............... . .................. . EXISTING +.COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ......................................................................................................................................................... ..................... . ................... I . ............... .................. I I ............................... 1 I . 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without.project Description of system improvement: PROJECT SU2490AM FORM II, 4 SU249OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS c '9<rF��S^ 00. INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVENUE & HOSPITAL ROAD 2490 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ............................... 2003 PM . ......................................................................................................................................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I 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 I Capacity .1 Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume .............. .............. 1 ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ .. .......... : ........ . ................... I NL I 16001 1 0 1 0.000 1 1 1 ............................... . 1 1 1 1 ........................................................................................................................................ 1 NT 1 I 600 1 1 I I I 1 ................ } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.219 • ..... ............................... } ............... } NR 1 1 102 I 1 1 I 1 SL 1 16001 I .761 0.048 ................ I ................... .. ................... ................ I I 1 $T 1 1 797 1 1 1 1 1 ................ } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.249 ................. ..............,..... } ............... } I SR I 1 0 1 1 ............................... 1 1 1 ........................................................................................................................................ EL I 1 0 1 1 1. I .... ............................... ............... ET 16001 1 0 0.000 1 1 1 I ................} . .................. . ............... } . ................ . ................... } ..............} I ER I 1 0 1 . ............... ......... .......................... ............... j WL 1 24001 1 4481 0.187 I I ............................... I I. I ........................................................................................................................................ 1 WT I 1 0 1 1 1 1 ................} 800..... ..............................} 0.110 -................ . ................... } ...............} I WR I I as I I ............................... I I i......................................................................................................................................... 1 EXISTING I.C.U. I ------- j ...................... ..........................0.454 ,........... I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ............................... I 1 1 .......................................................................................................................................... EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 1 ... ................ . ....... ....... . .............. .... . ............... . .............. . ................ .. ............ ....... . ................... 1 1 1 . .............. . .......... ... . I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_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 11 SU249OPM SU249OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS ��7F0 ANNA INTERSECTION: SUPERIOR AVENUE & HOSPITAL ROAD 2490 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM . .......... :. .............. .. .................. . ..... .. ........ . ........... .................... .. ................... . ................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED . ............... .............. I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume 1 Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Project I I Ratio I I. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Volume I I 1 1 .............. .. . .............. . .................. .... ............ . .............. . ................ .. .... ....... :....... . ................... NL 1 16001 1 01 0.000 1 1 1 :... . .............. . .... ......... 1 1 I .............. 1 ................ . .......... . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ................... I NT I I. 600 1 1 . .............. 1 .. ................ } 3200 .... ............................... } 0:219 * ................ . .... ............... } ............... } I NR I I I I ............................ ..... ....... ............ ...•-----102 .............. ................ ........ .............-----.......---... 1 SL1.....1600 I 0.048 I........ ............ I............. I 1 . .................1..---- °•--76I ................ ...........I ....... ST 1 1 797 1 1 1 I 1 ................ } 3200 - ---- -------- ------ • --••----- - - - - -- } 0.249 • --••------ - - - - -- .................... } ............... } I SR I 1 0 1 1 .................... 1 I . .............. .............. 1 ................ . ....... ...... . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... I EL I 1 0 1 1 1 I I E.. 16001 0.000 I I I 1 .. ................. .. ............. 1 ER....... I I 0 I :- .................. .......... ............... - ---------- - - - - -- ................. .................. ............................... I WL I 2400 I I 448 I 0.187 ' I ........:....................... 1 ................................. I WT I 1 0 1. I I I 1 ................ } Boo .... ............................... } 01130 ................. . ------------------- y ............... } I. wR I I as I 1 .............................. i .. -. ... EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.454 1 --.... -:. I I 1 ................ . ........ . . . ... • - --- -------- - - -- -- - ---- ----- - -- - -- - -------- - - - - -- - - -- -- ............................... ....- 1 EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I . ................ ... I I . .............. .............. 1 1 ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ .. ................... EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C:U. I ... ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ......... ....... .. ................... . ................. ... I I I .............. . .......... ... . I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_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 SU249OPM 65 CH1855AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS r �C ML INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & BALBOA / SUPERIOR 1855 /FO EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 AM ' ... ................ . ............... ... .............. . ......... : ...... . .... . .......... . .................. . .......... . . ..... .... i. I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING 1 REGIONAL I COMMITTED . ................... . ............... . ............. :... . I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I. I Movement I 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 I Capacity. I... Volume I Ratio 1 Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio .. I I. I I I I I I I Volume 1 1, 1 1 .........:.....: 1................................................................................................................................... I NL 1 1 199 1 I ............................... I . I I I I i ................} . ..... ... .......... . ................ y . ......... . ........ ...................... . .................... . ............... . .................. I { NT 4800 1 1 454 0.152 * l I i ...:............ } }.... .................. . ................... . ............... .................. 1 i NR I I 76 1 1 1 1 I .................................................................................................................................................... I SL 1 1 193 1 1 ............................... 1 1 1 1 ................ } 4WD ..... ............................... y 0.065 * ............................................................... ............................... I ST 1 1 121 I 1 1 1 1 ................ . ............... . .................. . ................ . ............... . .................. . .................... , SR 1 32001 1 2541 0.079 1 1 ....................... ..........................:.... 1 1 . 1 1 I ...................................................... ............................... .................. . ..................... I EL 1. 32001 1 9931 0.310 1 1 . ................... . ............... .... ............ :: 1 I I I .................................................................................................................................................... I ET 1 4800 1 1 1979 1 0.412 I ............................... I I I I 1 .................................................................................................................................................... I ER 1 16001 1 2981 0.186 1 1 :. . ................ ............................... I. 1 1 1 I : ................ . ............... . ................. ................ . ............... .................. . ..... I WL 1 1600 1 1 78 1 0.049 * I : . ........ .......... . ............... .................. I I I I :.......... ........ ....... . ............... . .................. . ................ . ................. .................. . ..................... I WT 1 1 588 1 1 . ................... . ............... . ...... I . 1 1 1 I. 1 ................ } 6400 ..... ............................... } 0.122 .................., . ..................... . ................... .: .............. .................. 1 I WR I I 193 I I I I I I .........:...... . ............... . .................. . ..... .......... .. ............... . .................. . ..................... 1 EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.678 1 . ................... . ............... .................. 1 I ........ . ....... . ............... . .................. . ................ . ............... . .... : ............. . ..................... I EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH +.COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. ... ................. I ( I 1 .................................................................................................................................................... I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ............................... I . { { .......................................................................................................................................................... Split Phase N/S Direction ............................... 1_I Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.O.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic LQU. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project . .................. ................ . ................... . ................ .. ............... . .................. . ..................... . .................... . ................ . ................. . Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM.II CH1855AM 0 CH1855PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS cy�rS INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & BALBOA / SUPERIOR 1855 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM ............................. .. .. I I EXISTING I PROPOSED 1 EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED 1 PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I j Ratio I I I I I 1 I I I Volume I I I 1 ................ 1.............. . .................. ................ . ............ ... ............. ... . ................... . ................... . .............. .............- i NL I I 293 I 1 ................. . ... 1 ............ . ............. j 1 ................ } ..........293 } ... NT 4800 1 1 270 0.129 " I ................. I .............. ............. �. 1 ................ } .... ............................... } ............ INR I I 55 ..... I ................ I ........... I I .............. ! ............. 1 ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... .......... SL I I 168 I I ................ 4800 .... ............................... 0.104 • ................. I ......................... ............................. .. _......... 1 I ST I I 330 .............................................. . ................. .......... . ................... j I SR I 3200 I 1 618 I 0.193 .................. I ................... I ... ............................... ! ............. j. ELI 32001 .................. . .............. 3111 .............. . ................. ................... I 1............................ 1 ET I 4800 1 ......................... 984 I 0.205 1....................... ............................... 1 ....................1 . I ER I 1600 1 I 277 I 0.173 1 . ..... .............................. I ................... I .............. I ............. j WL 1 16001 1 1821 0.114 1 1 1 1 1 I .... ............... . .............. . ................ . ....... :. .......... . ................... . .............. .............. I WT I I 1628 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 ...... . ........ } 6400 .... ............................... } 0.273 • ................ . ................... . ................... . ....... ....... ............... 1 WRI I 120. .............. I ................ .:................. . ................... ............... I I 1 EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.603 1 ................ . .............. : .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ .. ................... .................... I I EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 I I I 1 ......................................................................................................................................... ............................... 1 . I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I I ............................................................................................................................... ............................... . split Phase N/S Direction 1_I Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project . ... ............................................................................................................................................... ............................... . Description of system improvement: Description of system improvement: Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 CH1855PM CH1855PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & BALBOA / SUPERIOR 1855 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM :. ... ........... . .... I . .............. . I EXISTING I .................. . .......... ..... . ... ........... . ............. ..... ... :............... . PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I ................... PROJECTED . ............. ... .......... . I PROJECT I PROJECT I I Movement I Lanes J Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH { PROJECT I' V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I I. I Capacity I Capacity I Volume 1: Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I................ I NIL I .............. . 1 .................. . ............... . .............. 1 293 . ................ . ................... . 1 1 1 ................... . .............. .............. I 1 1 I I------ -- --- - - - -- } . ........ I ......... . ................ } ...................................................:... ..............I................ I NT 4800 1 1 270 0.129 * I I I I I I................ } .... ............................... } . ................ . .................. .. ................... . .............. .............. I I NR 1 1 55 I I I I I I ..............................................................................................................>......................... I SL I I 168 1 1 1 ............................... 1 1 I I................ } 4800 . .................. ................ } 0.104 . * ................ . ................... . ................... . .............. I I ST 1 1 330 1 1 1. 1 1 ................ { SR . ................................................... { 3200 I ......... { 618 { ...................... ........... ........ .. 0.193 1 1 1 ............ ., ........ ... ,...:...... .............. 1 1 I ................ I EL . .............. . 1 3200 1 .................. . ........... . ... . .............. 1 311 1 . ................ . ........... ........ . 0.097 * I I ......... :: ........ . .............. .............. I I I ..........---• ....................................................... ET 1 48001 1 9841 : ............................... . ................... ................:. 0.205 1 1 1 . ............................... I 1 I I I................ I ER . ...... ........ . 1 16001 .......... ....... . ............... . .............. 1 2771 ................ . ................... . 0.173 1 1 1 ................... . ........ ...... .............. 1 1 I ................................... I WL 1 16001 ............................... • .............. 1 1821 ................................... . ................ . ................... . 0.114 1 1 1 ................... . .............. .............. I 1 1 I ................ I WT ............... . I .................. . .......... I 1628 .......... . :........... 1 I 1 ... ................ . .............. .............. I 1 1 I I ...... .......... } 6400 .... ............................... } 0.273 * ................ .................... . ............. .. .... . ....... ....:... I WR 1 1 120 I 1 1 1 I .................................... ............................... ....... : ...... . ................ ..:.......... ......... ................... ............. - . I EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.603 1 ..........:..........................................:.:............................................. .............. .I...............: EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.0 I I ...... .................... .......:....:....................I.......................................:.-------........:.. ............................... . EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I ... .................... ............................... I .............. . .............. . ................ .. . :............. . ................... ..._ ...... :... . Split Phase.N /S Direction 1_I Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 {_{ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic" I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project Description of system improvement: Description of system improvement: Description of system improvement: PROJECT CH1855PM FORM II �5 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: PUVCENT|A/HO&G&HDSP�AiROAD 2485 --=°~- EXISTING TRAFFIC YOLV�NE8BASED 0N AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2o63 Am ................... ................ .'-.~..-.~� ... ................. ................ .~.....-.. .. ............. . ............... , .................. ...................... | | EXISTING \ PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING | REGIONAL \ COMMITTED . i PROJECTED PROJECT PROJE�T � PROJECT \YWwwemwnt| Lanes | Lanes \ PKHR | Y/C GROWTH | PROJECT I V/CRoVn Volume Y/C | | |Capudty Capacity | Volume I Ratio | Yo|vm* | Yn|umo | w/o Project | I Ratio \ | | ( ( | | I Volume 1 ) ! ....-..~.,'.~.-.-. ..'.^...~... .....~.^-.-.-...~.-~...,^.~.~.~..^.~... / NL / } 15 | 1 .-.-.^..--.,~...-~..`-..,~^.../ | |...`^^~~.} 1�Do .~~~--~~--.^^-~'~~'} V�2z°.~..-^.~~. .~~~~^~^~^-.'~^~~~~^~.~.~^~~-~-. ' .~~--~^~~| NT | | 20 | 1 \ | ................. . ............... . ................... . ........... ..... . ...... ; ........ . .................. . .... ~-............. ^.^~~-^~~} | NR | 1600 1 7l1 OJ}44| �� 1 ...^^~~.^...~~..-.~~~~~~--.. 1 \ '.~~~.~,.. .~.....^.-.~[ .-^..~...��.~..~_~^.-~-~~.~...~~.^.-~.^-..~.~.^^..~ / OL | | 3ll | | \ ~~ ' � .^~~~-~^~) .`~~~^~^'~�^~~-^'.~~^~. ~~-~^~~'^~`-'^.-~~'. '~~.-'^~~~ | |'-~~'^~~~. } '^'~~-^^`~. ST 320U| | 41 0.12V* | i / | I ~~-^~~-^� .^~~^~~~'-.^~~'~~~} .-^~--^^~. .^~-`^~'r^~~.^~~~-^'~~. ' .'-~~-~~~.~~~�^~~`~| @R | / 31 1 | .-~~`-~~~-~.--~^-^~^~-^. ! 1 | 1 | .~~~~~'~~~~~^`~~�.'^�~~~~'-^~~^^~. \ _^� ,_,,~..,'^,__,. . ................... . ................ . ............... ................... EL | 1600,1 1 61| V1D8° I . ~...^..^'-^~~~-~~~~'~^^'~~~ .. | | | ~'~. | _,,,^' ............... .............. .... . ................ . .. ET | | 264 | | ~- �2*�.-~`.~^`^~.^-^~-^-^} {\O95.^~..~-~~^~^~_^~~~°^� � | '-^^°~~~.} | | 0R | | 40 | | ^~.,~,^.~.. ..................... | _ . ................... , ............... . ............. ................. . ............. -.................... . ................ . ............... VVL 1 1600 \ l441 V.090| | ................... . ....... ~~-~^~��.-^~~^~~~~. | | \ | .^~--~-~~.~^^.~^'~~-| �,_`~,_,,^................ .,, .............. . ................ . ............... WT ( 1 145 | 1 ' (\l5G� *~'~'^^~~'^ .-^~~'-~~~... } 1 � �^__^.~^~~� \ -~...,-~^~} 3200 ..-.-~~-.^. .-'~~`~-;} ` YM > | 360 | | . .-^.'^~~^^~. | | .-^~~~ ........ .-~~~~~'-^~~~~^^~~.| ........ . ...... .,,,_,~^. . ................... . ................ ................ .................. �N�T��� I.C.U. V��3D | . -~� | � /~~-.~~.~��...----� . ................... ....~~~...~..~--.^~.-..~~_.-......~.~....-~..... | EXISTING +R[G GROWTH + COMMITTED WYPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS |.CU. I .....-.~~.^~.,..~^.^~-..^_..^.~.. | | | . ^..~..~~^�\ .^.~,-~^^~,.~`~,-.~^, ................... ..^.~-~...~..-~...^.~.`~-~.. /EXISTING +COh1Y0|TTEn+ REGIONAL GRVV�RH+PR0JECT|.C.U. . `~~.. ..... ....... . .................. . ..................... | | \ \ . ......... ......... . ............... . .... ............. . -.^.`~.~^-,. . ............... . ................... ......... Split Phase N/S Direction � ~( Projected + project traffic � I.C.U. will beless than or equal h/0.90 ^| Projected + project traffic |.C.U. will bo greater than 0.90 � ~1 Projected +,project traffic |/C.U.w/syst*msimprovement will be less than vr equal tu0.90 - mNh*�o���m\�:l)��hm^pn�*�� L|Pn�on�d+pr��t tra�c|��V.w�hp,�octimpmvemeot | .�unmo ^.~^-'~^~-.--~'^^~. .'~.~^-'~~- Description of system improvement: ...`~..'`...~.... .~^~...'..'. .'.^'~~..''... . ...~~`~~... . ...~.....^..`~^^........^.. .^`~~����� FORM 11 rnvJo^. PL2485PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS ° C9C! FO RN�P INTERSECTION: PLACENTIA /HOAG & HOSPITAL ROAD 2485 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM ... ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. ..: .............. .. ................... . ................... . .............. ( I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT .............. . I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I .WC Ratio I Volume I V/C I ( I Capacity I Capacity j Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio. I I I I I I I I Volume I I I ................ . .............. . ................... . ............... . .............. . ................ .. ................... . ................. ... .............. NL 1 1 27 1 1 1 1 . ....... ... -.. I 1 1 1 ................ } 1600 . -.- . .............. ................ } 0.046 • ............... ..................... I................ . .............. .. .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . .............. ..... } ................... ............... } ............. I NR 1 16001 1 981 0.0611 I I c..........- ( ..... ........................ .. . .................. . ............ .... .............. . ................ . ........... ........ ...... ... .............. I SL 1 1 307 . I I I I .............. I I' ..... ........... } . .................. ................ } . ...... .......... . ................... . ................... . .............. . ............ . I I ST 3200 1 1 25 0.127 " 1 1 1 1 I 1. I.....: ........ . ... ...................- .:.... - -... } . ................ . ................ .... ................... ............... - ............. I SR 1 1 75 1 1 1 1 ._- 1 I --°-° ............................. ....:.. .. ......... ...... ....... .:. -. - ---------------- - -- °....- °-.-- -. -. - ................... • .............. EL 1 1600 1 1 99 1 0.062 " I I I :.............. ............. I I ................ . .................. . ............... . .............. . ....... ........ .. ................... . ................... . .............. I ET i I 206 I 1 I .............. I .............. .. } 3200 . ............. : .... ................ } 0.072 ..-- ............. ...- ......- .:- ...... } ................... ............... } ............. I ER 1 1 24 1 1 1 I I. ... ....... ... .................. . ...... ......... .. ...... ........... ............................... ................. ..................... ....... .... .................... I WL 1 16001 1 1081 0.0681 1 1 1 : I 1 I .................... ....... ................. ....... . ............................. . ......... ...... . ........................ .................... ........... 1 WT 1 1 174 1 1 1 . .:.......... I . I I................ } ' 3200 . .............. I ... . ....... -....... } 0.169 • ................ .......- ............ } ................... ............... } ............. I WR I 1 1 368 I 1 I I........... .. .... . .: ........... . .................. . ............... .. .............. . ................ .. ................... .: .................. . .............. EXISTING. I.C.U. 1 0.404 1 .............. I ................ . .............. .................................... . ....... . ...................... .......... .. ......... I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I I I. ...........I ........ .... ....... .................. . ............. I.. .............. . ....... . ........ .. ................... . .... ............... . .............. I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I I : . ............. I I . .. ....... ........ . .............. . .................. . ............... . ..... ......... . .......... ...... .. ................... . ................... . .............. Split Phase N/S Direction . ... .......... . 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems Improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ... ................ . .............. . ............... :... ................ . .............. . ................ ..................... - ................... . .... .:........ .............. . Description of system improvement: ............. I... .............. ................... - ............... - .............. . ................ .. ................... . ............ ........ - .............. ............. - PROJECT FORM 11 PL2485PM PL2485PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: PLACENTIA /HOAG & HOSPITAL ROAD 2485 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM ... _ .............. . ............. . .................. . ..... I ......... . .............. . -: .............. :. ................... . ................... . .............. .............. . I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING (,EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I j Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 'I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I f I I Volume I I 1 ..........................................................................................:............................. ............................... I 1 NL I I 27 I I I .. I .... ............ } 1600 . .................. ................ } 0.046 • ................ . ................... . ...:............ ... ......_...... ............. NT 1 1 47 1 1 1 N ................... ............................... . NR 1 1600 1 1 .......... ...... ............................... . SL I I ................ } . .................. . ST 3200 1 I ................ } .........- -...:. . SR I I . ............................... . ................. . EL 1 1600 1 I ............ : .............. . ...... ............ . 98 1 0.061 1 307 . I ... } ................. 25 0.127 " ...... } ................. 75 1 ...... . .............. ..:.............. 99 1 0.062- ...... . .............. . .. I ............. .................... } .......................... } ............. I I I I I .... ... -.... I 1 .......... I I I . .............. ..... . ................. :.. ............. ............... I I I I ET I I 206 I I ................ } 3200 . ............. : .... ................ } 0.072 ................. ............1....... } ................... ER 1 1 24 1 1 I................................................... ............................... ......................... .......I................:...... 1 WL 1 16001 1 1081 0.0681 1 1 1 ....................... ................ .... .............. . ......... a ...... . ......... .......... .................... 1 WT 1 1 174 1 1 ................ } 3200 .... ............................... } 0.169 ................. .................... } ................... i WR 1 1 368 1 1 ................ ...:........... . .... .............. ................ . .............. . ................. .. ................... . ........... 6....... I EXISTING. I.C.U. 1 0.404 1 ........................................................................................ ............................... ................... I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I I................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ .......... ........ .... .................... EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I ...................................................................................................... ..................... .......... Split Phase N/5 Direction I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project .................... ..... ° - --- -- Description.of system improvement: ...................... ............................... . PROJECT PL2485PM ............... I ............................. } ............. I ...............� I I ................ ............. 1 . I I I I I FORM it 61 NE2480AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD.& HOSPITAL ROAD 2480 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 AM I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I Capacity i Capacity I Volume I Ratio, I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I i Ratio Volume NIL I 1600 I I 1401 0.088 3 1. 10 1 0.096' 1 0 1 0.096 '1 NT 1 4800 1 1 1501 I 0.313 1 30 1 26 0.324 1 0 } 0.324 1 NR - - I 1600 I I 95 - — - 1 0.059 I 2 - 0 } I 0,061 1 5 0.054 1 SL � � 1 1600 1 1 57 1 0.036 1 .1 � 1 0 1 0.036 1 14 1 0.045 1 1 ST 1 1 1083 1 22 1 37 1 } 4800 - -- -- — } 0.306 } 0.34(' • 0.340 ' 1 SR i I 386 1 8 1 97 ( 0) 1 1 EL I 3200 I I 194 I 0.061 0 1 74 I 0.084' 1 0 ET I . 1600 I I 183 1 0.114 1 0 1 0 I 0.114 .I 3 1 0.116 ! ER 1 1600 I I 239 1 0.149 1 0 1 8 1 0.154 1 0 1 0.154 I WL 1 1600 1 1 68 1 0.043 1 0 1 0 1 0.043 1 3 1 0.044 I WT 1 1 264 1 0 1 I ) 3200 - } 0.088 ' - ) 0.088' - } 0.090 ' 1 WR 1 1 18 1 0 1 0 1 3 I EXISTING I.C.U. - I O.543 - EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH+ COMMITTED WJPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I .C.U. 1 0.6081 - I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.0 -U. - - - I 0,W9 i IXI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI 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 NE2480AM NE24SOPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD & HOSPITAL ROAD 2480 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C 1' I I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I NL I 1600 i I 143 I 0.089 3 1 6 1 0.095' I 0 1 0.095 ' 1 T 1. 4800 I I 1235 I 0.257 I 25 I 34 I 0.270 .1 0 1 0.270 1 NR I. 1600 I 1 65 1 0.041 I 1 '1 0 1 0.041 1 3 1 0.043 i SL I 1600 I. I 43 I 0.027 1 1 1 0 1 0.028 1 8 1. 0.033 1 ST I 1 1701 134 1 38 I I 0 1 I 1 ) 4800 - } 0.399 " ) 0.425' - } 0.425 -1 SR. I I 212 I 4 1 50I I 0l I I EL f 32W I I 471 1 0.147 9 1 117 j 0.187` 1 0 1 0.187 ` 1 ET 1 1600 I I 152 1 0.095 1 3 1 0 1 0.097 1 2 1. 0.098 I 1 ER 1 1600 1 1 226 1 0.141 1 5 1 13 I 0153 1 0 1 0.153 1 1 W L 1 1600 1 1 151 1 0.094 I 3 1 0 1 0.096 1 16 I 0.106 I I WT I 1 179 i. 4 1 0 1 I 4 1 I 1 ) 3200 - ) 0.071 - } 0.073' - } 0.080 •1 I WR I I 49 I 1 1 D I i 20 11 1 EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.706 1 EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. IX1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 LI Projected +project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 L1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project Description of system improvement: PROJECT — NE2480PM I 0.780 I 1 I 0.787 1 FORM II NE2480PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD & HOSPITAL ROAD 2480. —� EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT 1 J Movement I Lanes 1 Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH 1 PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I' I I Capacity I' Capacity I Volume 1 Ratio I Volume 1 Volume I wlc Project I 1 Ratio J I ! I I I I I I Volume I I I NL J 16DO I 1 143 J 0.089 3 J 6 I 0.095' 1 0 1 0.095 ' 1 NT I 4800 1 I 1235 I 0.257 1 .. 25 1 34 I 0.270 I 0 1 0.270 I NR 1 1600 I I .65 ( 0.041 ( 1 1 .0 1 0.041 1 3 1 0.043 I 1 SL 1 1600 I I 43 1 0.027 1 1 1 0 1 0.028 I 8 1. 0.033 1 i ST I I I 1701 1 34 I 38 1 I 0 I I } 4800 - - } 0.399 - ... ). ... 0.425' - i 0.425 ' I SR 1 I 212 I a 1 50 1 I 0 I 1 EL I 3200. 1 I 471 I 0.147 ' 9 1 117 1 0.187.1 0 1 0.187 ' 1 t ET 1 1600 1 J 152 1 0.095 1 3 1 0 J 0.097 1 2 j 0.098 ER, 1 1600 I 1 226 I 0.141 I 5 1 13 1 0.153 1 0 1 0.153 I WI. 1 1600 J 1 151 I 0.094 I 3 1 0( 0.096 1 16 1 0.106 I 1 WT I I 1 179 1 41 01 1 41 I } 3200 0.071 - } 0.073" - } 0.080 ' J I WR I I 49 I 1 1 0 l I 20 I I EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.706 1 I 1 EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH+ COMMITTED WIPROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I .C.U. I 0.7801 ( EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. J 0.787 1XJ Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. v4ll be greater than 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. wisystems improvement Will be less than or equal to 0.90 U Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project Description at system improvement: PROJECT NE2480PM FORM II CH2620AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & NEWPORT BOULEVARD 2620 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 AM I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PKHR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I VIC Ratio I Volume I V/C I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio 1 1 I I I I F I Volume NL NT NR SL 1 3200 1 1 436 1 0.136 9 0 1 0,139 1 1 1 0.139 1 Sr 1 I I ! I I I I SR I 1600 1 1 215 1 0.134 I 4 1 10 1 0.143' 1 1 1 0.144-1 EL ET 1 3200 1 1 2181 I 0.682 44 1 41 I 0.708. 1 0 1 0.708 ' I ER I N.S. 1 1 167 1 I 3 1 0 I 1 0 1 WL WT 4800 1 1 766 I 0.160 1 is 1 43 1 0.172 I 0' I 0.172 1 WR I N.S. 1 I 340 1 1 7 1 a 1 I 0 l I - I I EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.818 1 1 EXISTING +REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W !PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0.851 I - I I 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I 0.852 I IXI Projected .+ project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 U Projected + Project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. wlsystems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project Improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project Description of system improvement: PROJECT v FORM II CH2620AM CH2620PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS �GlFOFLN`A INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & NEWPORT BOULEVARD 2620 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM I I EXISTING 1 PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT 1 1 Movement I Lanes I Lanes 1 PK HR ( V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume 1 V/C I I I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Rata I I i I I I I Volume I I I NIL I I I I I I I I I I I NT I I I I I I I I I i NR I I I I I I I I I I SL I 3200 I 1 457 I 0.143 1 9 .I 0 1 0.146 I 8 1 0.148 1 I ST I I I I I I I I I I SR I 1600 j 1 396 I 0.248 8 1 6 1 0.256. 1 4 1 0.259.1 I EL ET 1 3200 1 1 1222 I 0.382 24 I 65 1 0.410' 1 0 1 0.410.1 ER I N.S. I I 124 I I 2 1 0 1 WL I I I I I I I I I I 1 WT 1 4800 1 1 1765 1 0.368 1 35 1 22 i 0.380 ( 0 1 0.380 I 1 WR I N.S. I 479 I I 10 I 0 1 EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.630 I . 1 EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0.666 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I 0.668 1 1X1 Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI Projected + project tratfic I.C.U. with project improvements wiA be less than I.C.U. without project Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM II CH262OPM CH262OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & NEWPORT BOULEVARD 2620 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/G 1 I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume 1 Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio 1 I I I I I I I I Volume I I I NL I NT I I I I I I I I I NR I I I I I I I I 1 — - - - - - - I SL j 3200 I 1 457 I 0.143 I 9 1 0 l 0.146 1 8 1 0.148 1 _ I ST I I I I I I I I I I - - ---- -- - - - - SR 1 1600 I I 396 1 0.248 B I 6 1 0.256' 1 4 - 1 0.259-1 _ I EL I I I I I I I ! ! ET 1 3200 I I 1222 I 0.382 ' 24 I 65 1 0.410" I 0 1 0.410-1 1 ER I N.S.1 1 124 1 I 2 1 0 I 1 1 1 WL I I I I I I I ! 1 WT I 4800 I I 1765 I 0.368 1 35 1 22 I 0.380 I 0 1 0.380 1 WR I N.S. I I 479 I I 10 1 0 1 I I EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.630 I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I 0.666 I 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I 0.666 1 IX1 Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 LI Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 LI 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: FORM II ' PROJECT _ CH262OPM �q NE1415AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD & VIA LIDO 1415 ........- .. .... ............... •-r•... -.- .... .- ...............- ............. •................... . ................... .. ............... . .............. ... NR..... EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 6.................... 2003 AM . .... ............................... ....... .... - ............... - ........... -......................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL ............................... I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I VIC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C I' I I Capacity I .Capacity I Volume I Ratio I. Volume I Volume, I w/o Project I I Ratio 1 II I I -- I ...volume................... � - .............:.. j .. . .................... .... ........... ................. .. ....... ....... NIL I I I I I . .................. I I I I . ........ ............ . ................... . ............... .................. I 1 ............... :.. ............... . .................. . ................ . ............... NT 1 4800 1 1 1511 1 0.315 ................. ................... ..... ...... N I EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.456 1 I................. . .......... ....................................................................... . .... . ... — ....... ....... ..----.............. EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I .. ...... ......................... . ................................................................................ ............................... I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ...................................... ................... ............ ............................................ ............................... I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic LC.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project, Description of system improvement: PROJECT NE1415AM FORM.II ., ........- .. .... ............... •-r•... -.- .... .- ...............- ............. •................... . ................... .. ............... . .............. ... NR..... i N.S. I 27 I . .................. . ............ :........ ................... . ............... .................. 1 ....... .......... SL . .... ............... .................... I 3200 I ..........• . I 415 1 ............... . 0.130... .................. I ............................ I .......... I.... ! ................. . I ST 1 4800 1 .. 1 677 1 ......................I........ 0.141 I .....:.......... .. ............ 1 1 1 1 ....................--......... .................. -- ........... ....................................................... ........... ....... ............. � ....... I .................... � I ............................. I . ........ -.. ............... .... . .... ..... -SR ........................................... ELI t I I. ................. ................... ..... ...... ................................:......................:..... ..............................I ETI I ...... . .. .......... . I I ........... I--•. ..-- ..- .....................:.. I I. .........: I - ...- ........... - ...... -.... ............... .......- ...................... .ER . ................ I I I I I I I I I I . ... . ...... :............... ............ ........ ......... ........................ ....................................... WL ... ............................ I 1600 1 1 I 17 1 ............... ............... 0.011 ....... - -.. I .................... ! .....- ............... .......... I .. j WT I I I I I I 1 I �. ........... ...... j .................. . .................... . ................... ................ ................. � ..... .... .......... . ............... .. .................-.. �j .................... ................ ...-- 311 I... ...... ........... . 0971 I 1 . .. . .................... I ........I..... I ................. I EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.456 1 I................. . .......... ....................................................................... . .... . ... — ....... ....... ..----.............. EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I .. ...... ......................... . ................................................................................ ............................... I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ...................................... ................... ............ ............................................ ............................... I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic LC.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project, Description of system improvement: PROJECT NE1415AM FORM.II ., NE1415PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS c"r�r Fo wN�r INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD & VIA LIDO 1415 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM ...................... ............................... . ................ . ...... ........ ....................................................... ............... ................ . 1 I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I I Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I. I i................ .. .............. . .................. . ............... . .... :......... . ................ .: ................... . ................... .. ............. . .... _....... 1 1 NIL I I I I I I 1 I I I 4 1 ................ . .............. . .................. .. ............... . .... ,......... . ................ . ...... : ............ . ............. : ..... ... ............ .............. 1 NT 1 4800 I. I 891 1 0.186 * I I I I I I 1 ................................................................... ....................... ..... . .. . ..: ............ .... . ................... . .............. .............. 1 1 NR I N.S.1 1 35 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ............ ..... .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ................... . .............. .....:........ 1. . 1 SL 1 3200 1 1 464 1 0.145 I I 1 1 1 1 ............... . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . .... .. ............. .................... ............................. 1 ST 1 4800 1 1 1315 1 0.274 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 ................ . ............... . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ................. a.. .............. . .......... :.. 1 1 SR I 1 ................... ............................... . ............... . .............. . ................. . ................... . ................... . .............. . . ............ I . I EL I I I I I I I I I' I 1 ............... :............... - .................. - ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ............... : ... . .............. . ........ ..... 1 i ET I 1 ............ ............:............... ....... ........................ ..........................:................................... .......... ..................... 1 1 ER I I I I I I I I I I I................ . .............. . .................. . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ........ : .......... . .............. .............. 1 I WL 1 1600 1 1 26 1 0.016.* i ................ . .............. .. .................. . ............... . ............ .. .... .. ......... .. ...................................... ............................... I . i WT I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ....................... ........ . .................. . ....... .:...... ................ ........................... ............................... I ............. . ........ ..... 1 WR I 3200 I 1 372 1 0.116 1 1 1 1 I I 1 .. ... ............ .............. . .................. . ............... .. .............. . ................ . ................... :................... . .............. .............. I EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.347 1 I 1 ................................................... ..... .................. ........ ................ . ................... . ............ :. I EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I I I 1 ................ . ........................................................................................................................ ........................ ....... 1. 1 EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I I 1 ................... ..............................• . ............... . .............. . ...... ....... ..... ................... . ................... . .............. .............. 1 I_I 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 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1 I. I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project 1 Description of system improvement:. .......................... ................... ............ .... ....................... ........ .. ................................................................. ............................... PROJECT FORM If NE1415PM NE1415PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS cq<P INTERSECTION: NEWPORT BOULEVARD & VIA LIDO 1415 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC 2003 PM ..... ........... ............... . __ . ............ :.. . ........ ....... ....................................................... I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH 1. PROJECT -I V/C Ratio 1, Volume I V/C I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I : -. ................... - Volume I I I ... : ............... .... ........... . .... _....... i._......---. . .................. .................. . ... - .......... . .... ......... . _.- ........ NLI .. ... I I .._.._._....:... ... 1 ..._.......... . _.._._....... I ..... ........... . .. ............ .......... ........ . ..... ......... .............. NT I 4800 I 891 I ............... . ................... I -••................ ! ..._ I ............. ....... ......... .._0.186 ...... .... .. N.S. NR i N.S. I I 35 I I ........... ....... I ..... 1 -:..- ............ ......... ......... . ........ ... ------------- . ........ .----- i....... ... .... . ....... SL 1 3200 I I 464 1 0.145 ". .._- . .. I .... .... ... ........ I .- ....--•.- _- ...... I ...._.... -._.. I _ ST 1 4800 1 1 1315 1 0.274 1 1 1 _..._- ........._.. ..::...._...... .._..- ...... -. .._- ..- ..... -..- ._-- ..._ ..... .. 1 1 I ..._.- ...__..:_ - ........._..._ . .......... :.. 1 _- ....... . i ....... ....... i .SR_ i i i i .......... :..... ............................... ........... .. . ... ....... ......... . ..:.. 1 - ...- .....--- I - ._......- ._.... . - ....._.. 1 EL I...... I .._...._..... ............. j ........ 1 ET I I I ............... .............. ..:...... ....... I 1.- ._..._... - -. .....- ....... j ER I I . I ..... . .... . .... - ........... . . ........ I I I 1 ................. .............. .. .............. .. . ..... ..... .......... 1 WL 1 1600 1 1 26 1 0.016 " I I . ..... ............. . ............... . _.._._._.._._., .._.._.._......... _............ - ..... .....--: I. I i ...... ...... . ...... - ....... . ..... :....... 1 1 ... .... ......... . .......... •--• 1 .wT 1 I . . .......... ...... I ------------------- I ------- •- ......... . .............. .............. j - __- __-• -• --------- ......... ... ..... .:..... .............. 1 WR 1 3200 I 1 372 1 0.116 1 1 1 ........ - _.....-...-..._.... . 1 1 1 .............. •••-.. ......... ..... . ............. ..............•• - -- -• .......... . .... - ............ ............... •• - ............. EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.347 I ........- ............._........ . .......... ...... . ...... .......• - ........ • ------ -.- . ............... ...... - ...... .. _.-.._.._.............._. I . EXISTING + REGIONAL GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. ......._... I I .........,.......__ . ... ............... 1 .. ......... .. . .................. .................. ...... ....... . .....•••-..__........._-.........._.......-......- I EXISTING + COMMITTED+ REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. - - ......... . .... .._.-........ - • ...:.......... . ...... ........ . ...... ... ....... .. ................... I . ..... - ............. - ......._._......_......._._. I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1 I_I Projected + project traffic LC,U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0,90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ........ ..... .......................... ........ ............ ................ .. ............... .- ............ -.... .. .......... . ......... ...................... _. ............... .. .............. .. Description of system improvement: __ ..... ......... .•_-.........---.:...--..--......---.._.....••---'--............_.-_......---...............-.......-..-....._......._......--.. ............._..- .............. FORM II PROJECT NE1415PM 0 CH2630AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS cwt INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & RIVERSIDE AVENUE 2630 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ............................... . ................... ............... ......:............. ...........................................:.......................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED I PROJECTED I PROJECT I Movement I Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I I I Capacity I Capacity I Volume I Ratio 'I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I i I I I I I I I Volume I I ....... NL ..... . ............... .I................... i............................... i .................. . I ..................... 1 ...........:..... } .................. ................. } . ............... I... ......... ,.,......... .................... i ............... . } ........... } NT 1600 1 1 1 0.003 1 1 .................} . ................... . ............... ,} . .................. . ...... .. ..... ......... I } ................} NR 1 1 2 1 1 ........... ............................... 1 ............... ......- SL ......................... .............................79 .... ............................... i ................. } 1600 . ....... :........... ................. } 0.053 " .................. ...................... } ................ } I ST 1 1 6 I 1 . ..................... 1 . ................... ................ . j......... : ....... .... ............ . ................... . ................ . ............... . .... .............. SR 1 1600 1 1 270 1 0.169 1 1 1 1 1 ..........................:.... . ... ............................... •.................................................................:............................... EL 1 1600.1 1 294 1, 0.184 1 1 :. . ............ : ..... . ..................... 1 1 I . ................... ................ . ......... . ....... . ............... . ................... . ............... ............... ET 1 I 2066 1 1 1 1 ................. } 3200 . ........... _ ...... ................. } 0.647 .......... ............................... } ................ } ER 1 1 4 1 1 ............................... . 1 .................................................................................................................................... i WL 1 1600 1 1 11 1 0.007 I I . ..................... I I I . ................... ........: ....... . . 1 ................. . ............... . ................... . ................ . ............... . .................. I WT 1 4600 1 1 1279 1 0.266 1 1 1 1 1 ............................... . 1 ..................................................................................................................................... WR 1 1600 1 1 55 1, 0.034 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . ................... . ................ .. 1' ................. . ............... . ................... ... .............. . ............... . .............. _.... ..................... (.EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.707 1 . ............. ........ . ........ ........... . 1 .............. :... ............... . ................... . ................ . ............. ... .................. EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I I ............................... . .................................................................................................................................... I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH +PROJECT I.C.U. ..... ............................... . ................... . ......... w ...... . ............... . .................. . ................ , .... . ................... . .............. . . 1_I Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ... ......... ........ . ............... ....... I............ Description of system improvement: ........................................... ............................... '............... PROJECT CH2630AM 2003 AM ............... . PROJECT I V/C I Ratio I I ................. 1 I FORM II -- CH263OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS cam` '9Cl �'�r FO RN INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & RIVERSIDE AVENUE 2630 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ............................... 2003 PM . .... ............................... .................................. ............................... ....................................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED I EXISTING I EXISTING 1 REGIONAL I COMMITTED.] PROJECTED I PROJECT 1 PROJECT f Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I Volume I I I ......................................................................................................................................... ............................... NL 1 1 12 1 1 1 I ................ } . .................. . ............... } . ................ .................... } . ...... .. ..... .} I I NT 1600 1 I 13 0.023 I I 1 I I................} . .................. . ............... } ....... . ................... } .........} I I NR I I 12 1 . .. .............. ................ . .............. ......................... ............................... 1 I ............................... ................... 1 SL I 1 110 1 1 1 1 1 ................ } 1600 . .................. ................ } 0.072 . ................ .................... } ............... } ST 1 1 5 1 1 ........ ........................................... .......................:....... .. 1 I ................ . .............. . ...... I'll ........ .: .............. ............... . SR I 1600 1 1 269 1 0. 168 + ................ .................... ................... � .............. � ............. I .................. ............... I EL I 1600 . . 245 I 0.154 . ............... . ..........I.................... ..............................: j . ......................... ET 1 1 1511 1 1 1 1 1 ................ } 3200 . .................. ................ } 0.478 . ................ .................... } ............... } I ERI 1 19 . ................ 1 ........ ._ .... ............... I ............ WL I 1600 I 44 i 0.028 I.......................... ............................... ........ I.. ...... .......................... WT I. 4800 I 2256.1 0.470 ................ I ...................1......: ..... I ...:.......... I ............. j ............1.. I WR 1 1600 1 1 42 1 0.026 1 . I ............................... ................... ................. ............. . ................................................................................... EXISTING I.C.U. ..0.792 I ..... ................ . ......... . ......... . ...... ............. . j ................ .............. ...... ............. ..........._ . .... i EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ................................................ ............................... I I ...................... . ............................... .... ............................... EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH +. PROJECT I.C.U. I I ............................... I I ...................................................................................................................... *"Assumes SBR as critical since > SBL + EBL (concurrent w /SBR) 1-1 Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems Improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ... ................. .. ............ .....: ................. ... .............. ... ............... .. ................. ........................ ........................ ............................... . Description of system improvement: .............................. ...... ............................... ......................... ............................... ................................... ............................... PROJECT FORM It CH263OPM CH263OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS�P ��r FO RN INTERSECTION: COAST HIGHWAY & RIVERSIDE AVENUE 2630 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ............................... 2003 PM . .. ... ............................ ...... . ....................................................................... I I EXISTING I PROPOSED i EXISTING I EXISTING I REGIONAL I COMMITTED.] PROJECTED I PROJECT I PROJECT I Movement I 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 I Capacity I Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume I w/o Project I I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume ............................... I I I I ....................................................................................................... NL 1 1 12 1 1 1 ................ } ... ............................... } • ................ . .............. .. -.. } ............... } I I NT 1600 1 1 13 0.023 1 1 1 I I. ............... } .... ............................... . ........... : .... ................ .. } ............... } NR I . 12 1 I _.....- ......_ .. .........-.......... ..................- I I ............ - .- ...- ...... I I ...- ..... :......... ... ..... .... . .................. .......... SL I 1 110 1 1 1 } ................ } 1600 .... ............................... } 0.072 ................. .................... } .............. I. ST 1 1 5 1 1 .............. ................ . ................... . ... : ............... 1 I . .............. .....:........ I.............................. . .............. .... . ............... . . SR 1 1600 1 1 269 j 0.168 * I I ............................... ........... ........ ! ......- ...... .............. ................ ....................... ............:............................ EL 1 1600 1 1 246 I 0.154 I I . ............... . .............. . ................ . ................... . ................... I I I . .............. . ............ : I ................. .._ ........... . ... ............... . 1511 1 1 1 I ... .............................. } 0.478 ........-- ....... .................... } ................ } 3200 I ............... } I ER 1 1 19 1 1 . . ................ . .......... : ........ . ................... 1 I . .............. .............. I ................ . .............. . .................. . ............... .............. WLI 1600 I I ............... I ................... I: .................. ............... I. I .................. ........_................. WT I. 4800 1 1 2256 I 0.470 I I . ................... .... ................ I ............... .............. I .................. .: .............. . .............. . ................ I wR I 1600 I 42 I 0.026 I I I ... ............... - -. I 1 ...- --.... -- -.. .............. j ................. . EXISTING I.C.U. 0 1 0.792 I . ......... :......... ........- ..- .....:... 1 I i .............. . . .............. ................... . ............... . .............. . ................ I EXISTING + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W /PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I ................ I ................................. ............................... I EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. . .............. . ................ .. ................... . ............... .... I I . .............. ...... ... ............ : ... . ....... ....... . .................. . ............... "*Assumes SBR as critical since > SBL + ESL (concurrent w /SBR) 1-1 Projected + project traffic will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w /systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project .......................................:..............................................................:...................................... ........................... ...: ................ Description of system improvement: ... ................. .. .................. ... ............... .. ....... I ........ .. ............... .. ................. .. ...................... .................... :... ............. .... ......... ..... PROJECT FORM 11 CH263OPM 13 LEA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 5004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA APPENDIX D REASONABLY FORESEEABLE PROJECTS - LOCATION, TRIP GENERATIONS AND DISTRIBUTIONS P:1Cnb4MTratric_Swdy.wpd ((3/9/04» �a M Z m W H N CL �i i 0. N O v F- O '� l 3 -5 G W 6 Q W O F n Z 1P W 6 0 PI Db TABLE 3 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITS2 PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM I IN OUT IN OUT Residential - Apartments DU 0.90 0.42 0.43 0.20 6.47. Commercial Retail TSF 0.60 j 0.50 1.90 2.00 45.00 General Office TSF 2.60 1 0.35. 1.49 7.26 22.44 ' Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates, Institue of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, Sixth Edition, 1997, Land Use Category 710 2 DU = Dwelling. Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet U: VUcJobs1006361Exceft [00636.02AsiT 3-1 3 -2 9: TABLE 3 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE QUANTITYJ UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Existing Credits Commercial Retail 3.8 TSF 2 2 7 8 171 Commercial Office. 10.4. TSF 27 4 15 76 233 TOTAL CREDITS 29 6 23 . 83 404 Proposed Pro ect Residential - Apartments . 28 DU 25 12 12 6 181 Commercial Retail 19.6 TSF 12 10 37 39 882 Commercial Office 10.4 TSF 1 27 4 15 76 233 OTAL 64 26 64 121 1,296 NET NEW TRIPS 35 20 41 1 38 892 ' DU = Dwelling Unit TSF =. Thousand Square Feet u:Wwobs100636�ExmRjo0636 -MxWT 3-2 3 -3 TABLE 3.2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Existing Credits Commercial Retail 3.8 TSF 2 2 7 8 171 Commercial Office 10.4 TSF 27 4 15 76 233 TOTAL CREDITS 29 6 23 83 404 Pro osed Project Residential -A artments . 28 DU 25 12 12 181 Commercial Retail 19.6 TSF 12 10 37 a39 882 Commercial Office 10.4 TSF 27 4 15 233 TOTAL 64 26 64 1296 11NET NEW TRIPS 35 20 41 38 892 ' DU = Dwelling Unit TSF = Thousand Square Feet U:IUc obs%006351E;KMN[00636-02.xls]T 3.2 3 -3 -1 Q Z m X m Wa N 0 1-0 W J IL 2 W 1M LWL 1� 1 4 -5 fl Lr WI D 0 a LL 0 r G z Z W 6 W A o Lr WI D TABLE 41 TRIP GENERATION RATES' WEEKDAY CONDITIONS LAND USE PEAK HOUR TRIP RATES DAILY RATE AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Morman Temple Rates Based on: 3.12 2.99 44.11 Thousand Square Feet 1 1.12 1 0.28 0.93 1 0.56 1 23.46 . WEEKEND CONDITIONS LAND USE PEAK HOUR TRIP I DAILY RATE IN t OUT Morman Temple Rates Based on: Thousand Square Feet 3.12 2.99 44.11 Source: Empirical data collection/trip generation analysis conducted by Solaegui Engineers, LTD (September 15, 2001) U:% UcJobs100636 1Excef1100636- 02.xisIT4 -1 4_2 �� TABLE 4 -2 NEWPORT BEACH MORMON TEMPLE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY WEEKDAY LAND USE Q UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Mormon Temple Thousand Square Feet 17.46 TSF 54. 52 770 Thousand square Feet 17.46 1 TSF 1 20 5 16 10 410 WEEKEND LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY IN OUT Mormon Temple Thousand Square Feet 17.46 TSF 54. 52 770 ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet U:%Uciobs100636' Exce11 [00636- 02ASIT4 -2 4' -3 TABLE 4.2 NEWPORT BEACH MORMON TEMPLE TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY WEEKDAY LAND USE QUANTI UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Mormon Tem le Thousand Square Feet 17.46 TSF 54, 52 770 Thousand Square Feet 17.46 TSF 20 5 16 10 410 WEEKEND LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY IN OUT Mormon Tem le Thousand Square Feet 17.46 TSF 54, 52 770 ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet U: WcJob $ %G063MxceK[00636- 02.xlsjT4-2 4 -3 a� a =Z La 0 F- O 5 m�� Z� LU0C "� W �0. N N 0 %0 NII� =0 O. c m Z Q H W 5 -5 0 a 0 zz z C m c W = 6 uN N N w I I m L-Wo m r X w Z R a In W CL #A a CL Z Y0 W W MO 5 O Z a H ra C O 0 S $ 3AY p. Vs .yi7 AddOd �i V 6 W W \ N 3AY .w a _ _ 311Y3fl�lltl V b S \ q LN B SAN MIGG Lu \ L \ t N ' \ GOUN3GA'IO \ o 5 -6 FA J g� TABLE 5 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITST PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Church TSF 0.08 0.03 0.34 Da care TSF 6.90 6.12 6.40 7.22 .79.26 ' Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates 2 TSF = Thousand Square Feet 8 N/A = Not Available U: 1Uciobs\006MExceRP0636- 02.XISTr 5.1 5 -2 TABLE 5.2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE OUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Church 34.8 TSF 3 1 12 10 N/9 Daycare 4.720 TSF 33 29 30 34 374 OTAL 36 30 42 44 NIA I TSF = Thousand Square Feet 2 N/A =Not Available U1UcJobs=636%ExcePION36-02.xlajT 5-2 5 -3 TABLE 5-2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Church 34.8 TSF 3 . 1 12 10 We Da care 4.720 TSF 33 28 30 34 374 OTAL 36 30 42 44 N1A ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet Y N/A = Not Available U:IUcJobsW0636lE DM0063M2.z18jT 5.2 5 -3 J Qil Q =Z "w O m =� XVm wN� LLI CL as H w 1 7 -5 G W C a D a Z � W 6' W J oj,ft Ej w W� TABLE 7 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITSZ PEAK HOUR DAILY AM I PM IN OUT IN OUT Church TSF 0.08 0.03 0.34 0.30 NIA Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates 2 TSF = Thousand Square Feet 3 N/A = Not Available U:1 Uciobs 100636VExcerx[00636-02.xlsjT 7 -1 7 -2 W TABLE 7 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM. PM IN OUT IN I OUT Church TSF 3 1 11 10 NIA ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet 1 NIA = Not Available . U. �Uejobs10063Mxcefl[00636-02.xls]T 7 -2 7 -3 TABLE 7 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM. PM IN OUT IN OUT Church TSF 3 1 11 10 NlA ' TSF = Thousand Square Feet 2 NIA = Not Available U: �Uciabst00636kExceft [00638.02.xIsIT 7 -2 7 -3 a1 a =Z coAj O =mm LU ON IL.. LU Z ~ W LU�/ S 8 -5 0� A MA (1 � o d G C SS N14. 3ntl O M yZ. 3Atl Z V 1 bl 9 BADWW W C SPN b16 ooaNimo o J e` �ry P � 8 -5 0� A MA (1 TABLE 8 -1. TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITS PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN I OUT IN OUT Resort Hotel ROOMS 720 0.10 0.20 0.30 6.00 ' Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates U:\U W obs \006361ExcekOO63"2.xISIT 41 s -2 q 9 TABLE 8 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS PEAK HOUR DAILY A PM OUT IN OUT Resort Hotel 156 1 ROOMS 1 31 1 1B 31 47 936 U: 1UWWS�00636IExceNG0636.02.xlsjT 41 8 -3 TABLE B-2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT. IN OUT Resort Hotel 156 . ROOMS 31 16 31 1 47. 11 938 U:1UcJobsi OSWEXCBNO0838-02.xls)T 41 j 0 O r L -- O r � V O N l8 12 -5 r j N z m Q .o O � W G Q m N SiClff G N {Nil N N Q U Q N V Z 0 u �a LL N N zta� --¢ aaia3n�n W m N � 8Atl O011N30 0 C N 0 m �6 101 m N N r W z mQW >< PM WHO to a_ z� CA a V N. F eL16 H FD IL Q I- V 1� d" O. 9L ra lit Z i 0 1 12 -6 N ■ A 0 aa- (-) mN � Luz � z mN�: w H d N J O V Y.� LL. N ick A. cc fa V Im 0 d W Z 0 0 ♦ 1 m 0 1z -7 Y 163 o et %A N � z W ~ E W =N4 LJJ � Z n Z� W� min � N � Q � V O CL A W Z 0 y -- i 0 1 le N 9- 12_8 N [a] '6y TABLE 12 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES LAND USE UNITS2 PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT CondominiumlTownhouse DU 0.17 0.49 0.47 0.36 8.10 Multi Family Dwelling DU 0.90 0.42 0.43 0.20 6.47 Single Famil Detached Residential DU 0.20 0.70 0.70 '0.40 11.00 State Park (gross acres AC 0.21 0.90 0.29 0.31 19.15 Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates 2 DU = Dwelling Units AC = Acres U:%UcJobST06361ExceR [00636- 02.xis]T 12 -1 12 -2 116.5 TABLE 12 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION DU = Dwelling Units AC = Acres �� ! % (• IiF' ��711I0t1i V (�i U: wuooswosse1Exeen (oos36-02.XISIT12-2 p\ S'f)aTe TP%1124- .!y E1� ►viz 12 -3 PEAK HOUR DAILY TAZ NNING REA LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' AM PM IN OUT IN OUT 1A P2A CondominiumfTownhouse 121 DU 21 59 57 44 980 1B Single Famil Detached Residential 36 DU 7 25 . 25 14 396 1C CondominiumfTownhouse 888 DU 151 435 417 320 7,193 1 Single Family Detached Residential 206 DU 41 144 144 82 2,266 13C Multi Family Dwelling 116 DU 104 49 50 23 751 13D 13E Multi Family Dwelling Multi Famil Dwelling 116 116 DU DU 104 104 49 49 50 50 23 23 751 751 TOTAL FOR TAZ 1 532 810 793 529 13,088 3A Single Family Detached Residential Single Family Detached Residential Single Family Detached Residential 347 DU 69 243 243 139 3,817 3B 4B 450 587 DU DU 90 117 315 411 315 411 180 235 4,950 6,457 2 13A ' Multi Family Dwelling 117 DU 105 49 50 23 757 138 Multi Family Dwelling 117 DU 105 49 50 23 757 14 17 Single Farr l Detached Residential State Park (gross acres) 26 2,807 DU AC 5 589 18 .2,526 18 814 10 870 286 53,754 TOTAL FOR TAZ 2 - 1,080 3,611 1,901 7 1,480 70,778 3 2B 4A Single Family Detached Residential Single Family Detached Residential TAZ 3 62 784 DU DU 12 157 169 43 549 592 43 549. 592 25 314 339 682 8,624 9,306 TOTAL FOR 2C Sin le Family Detached Residential 307 DU 61 215 215 123 3,377 5 Sin le Fami Detached Residential 300 DU 60 210 210 1.20 3,300 4 6 8 SI le Family Detached Residential Condominium/Townhouse 75 289 DU DU 15 49 53 142 53 136 30 104 825 2,341 TOTAL FOR TAL 4 185 620 614 - 377 9,843 OTAL FOR ALL ZONES 1,966 5,633 3,900 2,725 103 015 DU = Dwelling Units AC = Acres �� ! % (• IiF' ��711I0t1i V (�i U: wuooswosse1Exeen (oos36-02.XISIT12-2 p\ S'f)aTe TP%1124- .!y E1� ►viz 12 -3 TABLE 12 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION TAZ PLANNING AREA I LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' 1A Condominium/Townhouse 121 DU 18 Sin le Family Detached Residential 36 DU 1 1C 2A i CondominiumlTownhouse 888 DU Sin le Famll Detached Residential 206 DU 13C Multi Family Dwelling 116 DU 13D Multi Famil Dwellin 116 DU 13E Mutti Famil Dwellin 116 DU TOTAL FOR TAZ 1 3A Single Family Detached Residential Single Family Detached Residential 347 DU 3B 450 DU 48 ISingle Family Detached Residential 587 DU 2 13A Multi Family Dwelling 117 DU Multi Famil Dwelli 117 DU L313 4 l Residential 26 DU 7 Slate Park( ross acres 2,807 AC TOTAL FOR TAZ 2 28 Sin le Family Detached Residential 62 DU 3 4A Single Family Detached Residential 784 DU TOTAL FOR TAZ 3 il Detached Residential 307 DU il De tached Residential 300 DU MFORCTOA mil Detached Residential 75 DU lumrfownhouse 289 DU TOTAL FOR ALL ZONES DU = Dr welling Unfits AC = Acres U1Uciobsloo &M,ExceM140063e- 02.XISIT 12.2 12 -3 a ua c)WZ � Z � m~ w Vf cc N d � Z Z P cc = V m � F N H® o� oe O d 'S W z 0 0 O r N H O 13 -5 N rJ G a f I� 0 D i W 6 W J [a] m N h F- Z ao N 2 LU E 0 cc 2 Q � U6 _h W 9' a d z O O 13 -6 le If oi e ra i �b�S ;L - -1, bL , 1 0 m Q H 13 -7 Eka 2 109 TABLE 13 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITSz PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Multi Family Dwelling DU 0.90 0.42 0.43 0.20 1 6.47 Sin le Famil Detached Residential DU 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.40 11.00 Commercial TSF 0.60 1 0.50 1.90 2.00 45.00 Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates 2 DU = Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet U:1UWobs%006361Exoe 00636- 02.)dsIT 13-1 13 -2 Ito TABLE 13 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION DU = Dr— ' welling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet U: IUcJobs100636T FxMX00636-02.x15]7134 ?b/ t'�F R�5117EI�� 13 -3 J& brcoptez QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY TAZ PLANNING AREA LAND USE AM PM IN IN OUT 1A Sin le Family Detached Residential 93 DU 19 65 37 1,023 . 2 Sin le Famil Detached Residential 147 DU 29 103 59 1,617 3 Single Family Detached Residential 138 DU 28 N42 97 55 1,518 4 Single Family Detached Residential 125 DU 25 88 50 1,375 5 Multi Family Dwelling 100 DU 90 43 20 647 1 7 Multi Famil Dwellin . 63 DU 57 27 13 408 8 Mufti Famil Dwellin 112 DU 101 48 22 725 9 Multi Family Dwelling 112 DU 1 101 47 48 22 725 11 Single Family Detached Residential 323 DU 65 226 226 129 3,553 12 Commercial 102.959 TSF 62 51 196 206 4,633 12 Sin le Family Detached Residential . 200 DU 34 98 94 72 1,620 TOTAL FOR TAZ 1 611 890. 1,035 685 17,844 21 Single Famil Detached Resident al 350 DU 70 245 245 140 3,850 2 22 Sin le Famil Detached Residential 705 DU 141 494 494 282 7,755 TOTAL FOR TAI2 211 739 739 422 11,605 13 Multi Family Dwelling 347 DU 312 146 149 69 2,245 3 14 Single Famil Detached Residential 26 DU 5 18 18 10 286 15 Multi Fami Dwellin 547 DU 492 230 235 109 3,539 TOTAL FOR TAZ 3 809 394 402 188 6,070 TOTAL FOR ALL ZON I 1,631 2,023 1 2,176 - 1,295 35,519 DU = Dr— ' welling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet U: IUcJobs100636T FxMX00636-02.x15]7134 ?b/ t'�F R�5117EI�� 13 -3 J& brcoptez TABLE 13 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION TAZ PLANNING AREA LAND USE QUANTITY UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT 1A Single Family Detached Residential 93 OU 19 65 65 37 1,023 2 Single Family Detached Residential 147 DU 29 103 103 59 1,617 3 Single Family Detached Residential 138 DU 28 97 97 55 1,518 4 Single Family Detached Residential 125 DU 25 88 86 50 1,375 5 Multi Family Dwelling 100 DU 90 42 43 20 647 1 7 Multi Family Dwelling 63 DU 1 57 26 27 13 408 8 Multi Family Dwelling 112 DU 101 47 48 22 725 9 Multi Family Dwelling 112 OU 101 47 48 22 725 11 Sin le Family Detached Residential 323 DU 65 226 226 129 3,553 12 lCommerclal 102.959 TSF 62 51 196 206 4,633 12 ISingle Family Detached Residential 200 DU 34 98 94 72 1,620 TOTAL FOR TAZ 1 611 890 1,035 685 17,844 2 21 ISingle Family Detached Residential 350 DU 70 245 245 140 3,850 22 Single Family Detached Residential 705 DU 141 494 494 282 7,755 TOTAL FOR TAZ 2 211 739 739 422 11,605 13 Multi Famil Dwellin 7 DU 312 146 149 69 2,245 3 14 Sin le Family Detached Residential E26 DU 5 18 18 10 286 15 Multi Famil Dwellin 7 OU 492 230. 235 109 3,539 TOTAL FOR TAZ 3 809 394 402 188 6,070 TOTAL FOR ALL ZONES 1 1,631 2,023 2,176 1,295 35,519 .�VME -7Dl- OF 9VF ACSNnA-- Ao� SIG, pl DU =Dwelling Units TSF = Thousand Square Feet UA LkJ0bs1006361Ezcelu00636 -02z1s]T 13.2 13 -3 � \I acDZ �ZO XQia uj Cd H 0 W d N rg LU W_ . m 0 1. 1 15 -5 le ,r 6 LL 0 D � Z u W m 6 W � m \\1 TABLE 15 -1 TRIP GENERATION RATES' LAND USE UNITS PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT Elderly Residential 1 0.10 0.30 0.30 0.10 4.00 '. Source: City of Newport Beach Trip Generation Rates 2 DU = Dwelling Units 15-2 `\3 TABLE 15 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION 1 DU = Dwelling Units U:\ UcJohs \0063eExcer4OO636- 02.xfs]T 15-2 15 -3 PEAK HOUR DAILY . LAND USE UNITS' AM PM IN, OUT IN OUT Eldedy Residential DU 15 45 45 15 600 1 DU = Dwelling Units U:\ UcJohs \0063eExcer4OO636- 02.xfs]T 15-2 15 -3 TABLE 15 -2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION LAND USE UNITS' PEAK HOUR DAILY AM PM IN OUT IN OUT IE]defiy Residential DU 15 1 45 1 45 1 5 L 600 ' DU = Dwelling Units U: NJWobsV0063MExceK [00636.02.xls]T 15-2 15 -3 �1� IT@SI P +� 1 % 1 1 Superior Avenue/Plaoentia Avenue 2 a St 4 3 PROJECT SITE w 'OAST xal. Bt 0l! r ' "' "• '� e'' 2 Su erior AvenueMos ilel Road t IN c Z ' 0)2 014 014 4 M Ls F 2115. 111 J 1!t 3N f' y 3 Superior Avenue/Neal Coast Highway 4 Placentia AvenuelHospital Road 5 Newport Bouleverd'Hospdal Road a � FI 4 y 4 t 111 6 Newport Boulevard/West Coast Highway 7 Newport SoulevardNia Lido ' 8 Riverside Avenue/Wesl Coasl Highway TiTITTTT I^ 1 L S A LEGEND, 1231456 AM/PM Volnmee _ 4941496 01d Newport Boulevard AM and PM Peak Hour Project Trips P:\CNW33111ip_Aw4pmeaxle 2/17104 ,,1� LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS MARCH 3004 401 OLD NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA APPENDIX E EXISTING PLUS BACKGROUND PLUS CUMULATIVE (WITHOUT AND WITH PROJECT ICU WORKSHEETS PACnb4305Tmffic_SNdy.wpd «3/9/04» VN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION NO.: 5 NORTH/SOUTH: Newport Boulevard EAST/WEST: Hospital Road Notes: VIC - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right tum movement Free right turn lane L3AAaodata; Inc. 31IM4(P: \CNB430\ModeLxls\ICU) 1� 1 Existing plus Background plus Cumulative Projects plus Project plus Cumulative Projects Move- Move- Volume Volume V/C Ratio meat ment Lane capacity AM AM PM AM PM NBL 1 1,600 153 152 0.096 * 0.095 NBT 3 4,800 1,569 1,313 0.327 0.274 NBR 1 U 1,600 102 69 0.000 0.000 SBL 1 1,600 64 47 0.040 0.029 SBT 3 4,800 1,155 1,789 0.343 * 0.428 SBR 0 0 491 266 0.000 0.000 EBL 2 3,200 272 597 0.085 * 0.187 EBT 1 1,600 190 156 0.118 0.098 EBR 1 U 100 252 244 0.000 0.000 WBL 1 1,600 71 169 0.044 0.106 WBT 2 3,200 270 187 0.090 * 0.077 WBR 0 0 19 59 0.000 0.000 /S Critical Movements 0.439 0.439 0:523 Dw Critical Movements 0.177 0.175 0.264 'ght Tom Critical Movement 0.000 0.000 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.000 0.000 0.000 Cu 0.616 0.614 0.787 of Service (LOS) B . B G Notes: VIC - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right tum movement Free right turn lane L3AAaodata; Inc. 31IM4(P: \CNB430\ModeLxls\ICU) 1� 1 Existing plus Background plus Cumulative Projects plus Project Move- Volume VIC Ratio meat Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL 1 1,600 153 152 0.096 * 0.095 NBT 3 4,800 1,569 1,313 0.327 0.274 NBR 1 U 1,600 108 72 0.000 0.000 SBL 1 1,600 78 55 0.049 0.035 SBT 3 4,800 1,155 1,789 0.343 * 0.428 " SBR 0 0 491 266 0.000 0.000 EBL 2 3,200. 272 597 0.085 * 0.187 EBT 1 1,600 192 158 0.120 0.099 . EBR 1 U 1,600 252 244 0.000 0.000 WBL 1 1,600 73 185 0.046 0.115 WBT 2 3 ,200 271 191 0.092 * 0.084 WBR 0 0. 22 79 0.000 0.000 /S Critical Movements 0.439 0.523 Critical Movements 0.177 0.271 Right Tom Critical Movement 0.000 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.000 0.000 CU 0.616 0.794 Level of Service (LOS) B C Notes: VIC - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right tum movement Free right turn lane L3AAaodata; Inc. 31IM4(P: \CNB430\ModeLxls\ICU) 1� 1 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION INTERSECTION NO.: 6 NORTHISOUTH: Newport Boulevard EASTIWEST: West Coast Highway Notes:, V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right turn movement Free right turn lane 1SA Associata, Inc. 325104(P:1CN9470VAodelxlsUCUI ilj O Existing plus Background Move plus Cumulative Projects . Move- V/C Ratio Volume V/C Ratio . ment Lane Capacity PM AM PM AM PM NBL 0 0 0 0 0.000 0:000 . NBT 0 0 0 0 0.000 * 0.000 * NBR 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 SBL 2 3,200 447 478 0.140 * 0.149 * SBT . 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.060 SBR 1 U 1,600 229 414 0.004 * 0.109 * EBL 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 EBT 2 3,200 2,405 1,562 0351 * 0.488 * EBR I F 1,600 180 137 0.000 0.000 WBL 0 0 0 0 0.000 * 0.000 * WBT 3 4,800 1,058 1,996. 0.220 0.416 WBR 1 F 1,600 352 491 0.000. 0:000 /S Critical Movements 0.140 0.152 0.140 0.149 Critical Movements 0.751 0.488 0.751. 0.488 Right Turn Critical Movement 0.004 0:109 0.004 0:109 Clearance Interval 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 ICU 0.895 0.749 0.895 0.746 Lzvel of Service (LOS D C D C Notes:, V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right turn movement Free right turn lane 1SA Associata, Inc. 325104(P:1CN9470VAodelxlsUCUI ilj O Existing plus Background plus Cumulative Projects plus Pmject Move Volume V/C Ratio ment Lane Capacity AM PM AM PM NBL 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 NBT 0 0 0 0 0.000 * 0.000 NBR 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 SBL 2 3,200 449 486 0.140 "` 0.152 SBT 0 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 SBR 1 U 1,600 230 418 0.004 * 0.109.* EBL 0 . 0 0 0 0.000 0.000 EBT 2 3,200 2,405 1,562 0.751 * 0.488 * EBR 1 F 1,600 180 137 0.000 0.000 WBL 0 0 0 0 0.000 * 0.000 * WBT 3 4,800 1,058 1,996 0.220 0.416 WBR 1 F 1,600 352 491 0.000 0.000 /S Critical Movements 0.140 0.152 E/W Critical Movements 0.751 0.488 Right Tura Critical Movement 0.004 0:109 Clearance Interval 0.000 0.000 CU 0.895 0.749 Level of Service S D C Notes:, V/C - Volume to Capacity Ratio Right Turn Conditions: P U F Protected right turn movement Unprotected right turn movement Free right turn lane 1SA Associata, Inc. 325104(P:1CN9470VAodelxlsUCUI ilj O i It RMO O i. Sao