Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
TPO016
S COMMISSIONERS *n 7, 1965C MINUTES x x Co v � y m z c m > m z z A z 9 a T m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX { b—the—eatabd,isnmernt.�maaaxtena�aoeg �-' ^� structure on the subject property which exceeds the permitted floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area will, under the circumstances of Nth e particular case, be detrimental to the health, fety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of p sons residing or working in the neighborhood of suc proposed use and be detrimental or injurious to p perty and improvements in the neighborhood and th general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That development hall be in substantial confor- mance with the ap• oved plot plan, floor plans, elevations and sect s, except as noted below. 2. That the structure sha 1 be redesigned so as to conform to the permitte floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area 957.5 sq. ft.) . 3. That no encroachments into t required front and side yard setback areas shall a allowed, except for those encroachments perm ted by Section 20.10.025 of the Municipal Code. 4. That the landing encroaching into t required 3 foot side yard adjacent to Fernleaf enue shall be no higher that 3 feet above natural ade. The proposed handrail on the stairway an landing shall be no higher than 6 feet above t atural grade, and shall be of open, wrough i or wooden construction. 5. This modification shall expire unless exercise within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.81.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Item No.4 Request to consider a revised traffic study for a 15,000 square foot office building so as to allow a 23 COMMISSIONERS *h 7, 1985 MINUTES a 0 o c o = F C v > v m Z m > m z p z a = T m City of Newport Beach c z w o s 0 0 a ROLL CALL INDEX portion (7500 square feet) of the building to be used Traffic for a savings and loan facility whereas previously the Study entire building was designated for general office and corporate office use. Approved ondition- LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 152-17 ally (Resubdivision No. 616) , located at 1100 Newport Center Drive, on the southeasterly corner of Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive, in Newport Center ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: Carver Development OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Chairman Winburn commented that a portion of the office building previously approved on the subject site is now designated for savings and loan purposes, and on the basis that there would be additional traffic other than had been projected, it was necessary for the applicant to amend the traffic analysis. Chairman Winburn opened the public hearing. The applicant or his representative were not in the audience to speak on behalf of the traffic study. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Chairman Winburn made a motion to approve the Traffic All Ayes x x C x x x x Study for 1100 Newport Center Drive, subject to the Findings for Approval. MOTION CARRIED. FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study on the proposed project has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code and City Policy S-1, and; 2. That based on that Traffic Study, the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified", or "primary" street. 24 0 Planning Commission Meeting March 7, 1985 Agenda Item No. 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to consider a revised traffic study for a 15,000 square foot office building so as to allow a portion (7500 square feet) of the building to be used for a savings and loan facility whereas previously the entire building was designated for general office and corporate office use. LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 152-17 (Resubdivision No. 616) , located at 1100 Newport Center Drive, on the southeasterly corner of Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive, in Newport Center ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: Carver Development, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach TRAFFIC ENGINEER: Herman Kimmel and Associates, Inc. , Newport Beach ACTION: Application This application is a request to consider a revised traffic study for a 15,000 sq. ft. office building so as to allow 7,500 sq. ft. of the building to be used for savings and loan purposes, whereas previously the entire buildinq was designated for general office and corporate office use. The revised traffic study has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("Traffic Phasing Ordinance") and City Policy S-1 ("Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic Phasing Ordinance") . A copy of the traffic study prepared by Herman Kimmel and Associates, Inc. is attached for the Planning Commission's information. t I , TO: Planning Commission -2. Background At its meetinq of January 5, 1984, the Planning Commission approved a traffic study in conjunction with the subject development. Use Permit No. 3077 was also approved which allowed the subject building to exceed the 32 foot basic height limit in the 32/50 Foot Heiqht Limita- tion District. The approval also included a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact size parking spaces for a portion of the required off-street parking. Attached for the Plan- ning Commission's information is an excerpt of the Planning Commission minutes dated January 5, 1984 which outlines the findings and con- ditions of approval for the subject project. Environmental Significance All significant environmental concerns for the proposed project have been addressed in a previously approved environmental document, and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document for the above noted project. It has been further determined that there are no additional reasonable alternative or mitigation measures that should be considered in conjunction with said project. Subject Property and Surrounding Land Use The proposed office and savings and loan building is presently under construction on the subject property. To the north and east are office uses; to the south is vacant land; and to the west is the Balboa Bay Racquet Club. Analysis The applicant is now requesting approval of a revised traffic study so as to allow 7,500 sq. ft. of the subject building to be used for savings and loan purposes. The necessity for a revised traffic study is due to the greater trip generation figures associated with saving and loan operations as compared to general or corporate office use. The City Traffic Engineer has identified the following critical intersections as requiring a 1% analysis based on the size and lo- cation of the subject development. Said intersections are the same as those considered in the previous traffic study. 3 TO: Pling Commission -3. Coast Highway @ orange @ Prospect @ Balboa/Superior @ Riverside @ Tustin @ Dover/Bayshore @ Bayside @ Jamboree @ Newport Center @ Avocado @ MacArthur Jamboree Road @ Goldenrod i, @ Marguerite @ Santa Barbara i @ San Joaquin Hills „ @ Eastbluff/Ford @ Bison @ Eastbluff N. @ MacArthur @ Birch � @ Campus MacArthur Blvd. @ San Miguel 'r @ San Joaquin Hills f @ Ford @ Bison I @ Birch ;•4 @ Campus Bristol Street @ Jamboree ,R Bristol Street North @ Jamboree 'S The analysis indicates that all intersections except MacArthur Boule- ' vard at San Miguel Drive and Jamboree Road at Santa Barbara Drive, will have project volume increases below one percent as a result of the proposed development. In accordance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and City Policy S-1, intersection capacity utilizations (I.C.u. 's) were calculated for each of the intersections which exceeded one percent volume increases. 7t was determined that the resulting I.C.u's will be less than a vehicle ^! capacity ratio of 0.90 before and after traffic increases from the subject development,and therefore, no further analysis is required. TO: Planning Commission -4. n Suggested Action Staff recommends approval of the revised traffic study and suggests that the Planning Commission take such action subject to the findings setforth in the attached Exhibit "A". PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, DIRECTOR • I'W. William Ward, (Senior Planner WWW:la MI Cl Attachments: Exhibit "A" Vicinity Map Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes dated January 5, 1984 Traffic Study dated February, 1985 I i I i I 1 t I TO: Planning Commission -5. EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC STUDY FOR 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE March 7, 1985 FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study on the proposed project has been prepared in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code and City Policy S-1, and; 2. That based on that Traffic Study, the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified", or "primary" street. YIG� IT`f MAP F fgNTA &RBARA Da. `yn JR.3S' CON CON 0-5 z R•.305 ' � F� $QT t 'oyq Q.t� MiyVP q C`{'vlE,p OW 2S2 v rN.c. _U' n F�i tXYA. . Z I 6ysvA 3S0 R.23j _ a ' A S 0 4 6 y s � I • � � Q^2� N�•A e F� ' pRALcaN'.D �2 P-C U- .ftt7C I ra. n PC M RC 0-S RC EAST COAST HIGHWAY R-1 I(L ME/ NO df sm Y1I NO SR -MAP—CITY—OF—NEWPORT—BEACH—CALIFORNIA AGGaw NO, II24 5-1-65 R29 5-29.65 nnivoxe NvnuN REVISIONS wrranrr ucNiox[ o.n wr.a.rn ucNa.e an urmonm —4Qc�noxa— oar we xo ue. mww[ Xnwr No�X.ncnN. nn-n exo Xo-uo e. n eD.R xo uao-lYls«uZvTr•>+w1'm Vav fu o-um [xDeWJr xo.X[[ w.i•uo a.rwrwn uM�X l..•rral u edam a T xe°"Yr.". uo xo o>. ewiuo w tx[wntxXrer e. n-n uwaixi iur.vaL.00.c roq¢nao wntxu-e �iil�'�u' M[ Xf C•Yft LMxt,r4W Mn y.`'�.�.remrnirnl .i.>. tr[.eR.i�1.C.XXr rN. yyrMel fl]t CO.R IMAr 0 Q�ainia pi(Mrp.�p 100 0 Xp Y00 yp MAP NO .+x++ w.r -u•ro rcuXfXXNXi w.oe! w%.a a.e eavewrxf XMM n u-» %r�o Ror.c `x�40.i�+o.a.w xur a uR nra°�"in -t-f.t- A o-x-rf.cllxi eXvf N.[anrx/r uttX eN- Sr•..ems'— �-�i=�1 `r •m I-L �111 OA X.Di1 XXn[N�LOR OVA 2PA000, ICE " ��. . COMMISSIONERS !-� MINUTES 1 January 5, 1984 X v m 8 ff a City of Newport Beach ROLL C INDEX Commissioner Person stated that he could not support a continuance on this item in that the proposed project s stantially • meets the requirements of the Zoning Code. Further, he stated that the applicant has previou met with the property owners association and has contac d adjacent neighbors with the proposed plan. Mr. Milligan stated that he would be willing to organize the adjacent ne' hbors and set up a meeting with the applicant and t ' affected associations. Planning Director Hewicker sugg ted that Mr. Milligan also contact Mr. Bill Ward, Senior anner, of the City staff. Ayes X X X X X X Commissioner McLaughlin's motion for a cont ance of Noes X this item to January 19, 1984, was now voted on, hich MOTION CARRIED. A. Traffic Study (Continued Public Hearing) Item #4 Request to consider a traffic study so as to allow the construction of a 15,000 sq. ft. (net) office building. AND TS AND UP 3077 B. Use Permit No. 3077 (Continued Public Hearing) Request to permit the construction of a 15,000 sq. ft. (net) office building on property located in the Unclassified District which exceeds the basic 32 foot BOTH height limit in the 32/50 Foot Height Limitation Zone. APPROVED The proposal also includes a'modification to the Zoning CONDI- Code so as to allow the use of compact size parking TIONALLY spaces for a portion of the required off-street parking, and the acceptance of an environmental document. LOCATION: Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 152-17 (Resubdivision No. 616) , located at 1100 Newport Center Drive, on the southwesterly corner of Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive, in Newport Center. -11- COMANSSIONERS MINUTES January 5, 1984 o x a W City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX ZONE: Unclassified APPLICANT: Carver Development, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach The public hearing opened in connection with this item and Mr. Patrick Scruggs, representing the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Scruggs stated that the proposed setbacks could change by approximately 5 percent during the final design stage. He requested that the Planning Commission allow for this flexibility. He also stated that they are currently working with The Irvine Company to determine the exterior facade which will be utilized on the structure. Mr. Scruggs stated that the proposed project will become the first building in Corporate Plaza West. He stated that the proposed project will follow the trend established for Newport Center. Chairman King asked if a provision for plus or minus 10 feet on the proposed setbacks would be adequate. Mr: Scruggs stated that this would be acceptable. In response to a question posed by Chairman King, Planning Director Hewicker stated that the proposed project will be located just below the northerly edge of the view plane. Planning Director Hewicker suggested that an additional condition be imposed as follows, "That the structure shall not exceed the height limit established by the westerly extension of the sight plane over Corporate Plaza as adopted by the City Council in Ordinance No. 1596." He stated that this condition has been applied to other developments within the area. Planning Director Hewicker stated that a total of 126,974 square feet is remaining for development in Newport Center under the City's General Plan. He stated that 80,000 square feet has been allocated for Block 400 and 15,000 square feet has been allocated for this project, which leaves a balance of 31,974 square feet remaining to be built in Newport Center. -12- b ' COMMISSIONERS r� MINUTES \ ' January 5, 1984 �. � r v m m m � City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX Motion X Motion was made for approval of the Traffic Study and All Ayes X X X K X X X Use Permit No. 3077, subject to the findings and conditions of Exhibit "A", with additional conditions relating to the applicant determining the exterior surface of the structure, provision for plus or minus 10 feet shall be allowed for the proposed setbacks, and condition relating to the height limit, which MOTION CARRIED, as follows: FINDINGS: Traffic Study 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport &each Municipal Code and City Policy S-1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project-generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major', 'primary-modified' , or 'primary' street. FINDINGS: Use Permit No. 3077 1. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and Adopted Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. The increased building height will result in more public visual open space and views than is required by the basic height limit, inasmuch as open areas are provided throughout the site. 3. The increased building height will result in a more desirable architectural treatment of the building and a stronger and more appealing visual character of the area than is required by the basic height limit. 4. The increased building height will not result in undesirable or abrupt scale relationships being created between the structure and existing developments or public spaces. -13- C COMMISSIONERS 0 MINUTES C January 5, 1984 a m City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 5. The structure will have no more floor area than could have been achieved without the use permit for the building height. 6. Adequate off-street parking spaces will be provided for the proposed office building. 7. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and that their contents have been considered in the decisions on this project. 8. The proposed use of compact parking spaces will ' not, under the circumstances of this particular i case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or I working in the neighborhood of such proposedluse or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of this Code. 9. The proposed number of compact car spaces constitutes 25 percent of the parking requirements which is within limits generally accepted by the Planning Commission relative to previous similar applications. 10. That the design of the development or the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed development. 11. The approval of Use Permit No. 3077 will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. -14- i COMMISSfONERS MINUTES January 5, 1984 a z = City of Newport Beach ROLL CALL INDEX CONDITIONS: 1. That development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor a plan, and elevations, except as may be noted below. 2. That the total net floor area of the subject building shall not exceed 15,000 sq.ft. 3. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 4. That the on-site parking areas including handicap and compact spaces, and parking circulation and pedestrian circulation systems be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 5. That special textured pavements be allowed within the public right-of-Way or Granville Drive eisement if a non-standard improvement agreement is executed by the Developer, requiring the Developer to maintain the non-standard improvements. 6. That the driveways intersecting the private street be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 25 miles per hour. Slopes, landscaping, walls and other obstructions shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight distance line shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. The sight distance requirement may be approximately modified at non-critical locations, subject to approval of the Traffic Engineer. 7. That a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities be provided for the on-site improvements prior to issuance of any building permits. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer. 8. That all vehicular access to the site be from Granville Drive. -15- ll COMNNSSK)NERS C• MINUTES January 5, 1984 x � r v w w 4 a x o m City of Newport Beach u ROLL CALL INDEX 9. That 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk be constructed adjacent to the curb along Granville Drive and that the sidewalk along the Newport Center Drive frontage be widened to 8-foot. All work within the public right-of-way shall be constructed under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. 10. That no non-standard improvements be constructed over the existing storm drain easements, located ' within the boundary of the development, without prior approval of the Public Works Department. 11. That a maximum of 25% compact parking spaces are permitted. 12. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 13. That a grading plant if required, shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 14. The grading permit shall include, if required, a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 15. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 16. The velocity of concentrated run-off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. 17. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. -16- COMMSSiONERS MINUTES January 5, 1984 � r N a City of New rt Beach ROLL CALL INDEX 18. That erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or h as approved by the Grading Engineer. 19. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the John Wayne Airport shall be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions which may be recorded against any undeveloped site. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, herein, acknowledge that: a.) The John Wayne Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; b.) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the John Wayne Airport; c.) The City of Newport Beach will continue to oppose additional commercial area service , expansions at the John Wayne Airport; ( d.) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the John Wayne Airport. 20. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan) . -17- COMNNSSIONERS C� MINUTES •� January 5,. 1984 o F a u. City of Newport Beach m � ROLL CALL INDEX a 21. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and the approval of the Planning Department. 22. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and a pesticides. i 23. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on the use of drought-resistant native vegetation and be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over-watering. 24. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire-retardant vegetation. 25. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 26. Prior to issuance of any building permits authorized by the approval of this use permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City Finance Director the sum proportional to the percentage of future additional traffic related to the project in the subject area, to be used for the construction of a sound attenuation barrier on the southerly side of West Coast Highway in the West Newport Area, in the Irvine Terrace and Jamboree Road areas. 27. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 Dba at the property line. t, 28. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist shall evaluate the site prior to commencement of construction activities, and that all work on the site be done in accordance with the City's Council Policies K-5 and K-6. I i 29. All proposed development shall provide for vacuum i sweeping of parking areas. i 30. Prior to occupancy of any building, the applicant shall provide written verification from the Orange County Sanitation District that adequate sewer capacity is available to serve the project. -18- COMIWSSIONERS MINUTES t January 5, 1984 � x • � > u a tea '-` i; = Cityof Newport Beach > m b ROLL CALL INDEX 31. That prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall provide the Building Department and the Public works Department with a letter from the Sanitation District stating that sewer facilities will be available at the time of occupancy. 32. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using facilities. 33. Prior to the issuance of any Building and/or Grading Permit, the applicants shall pay their "fair-share" of Circulation Systems Improvements for the ultimate circulation system. 34. That handicapped parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with State standards. i 35. That all proposedrsigns shall be in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 20.06 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code for the C-O District. 36. That the applicant shall determine the treatment of the exterior surface of the structure. 37. That the proposed setbacks shall be allowed to be revised within 10 feet ± of the approved plans. 38. That the structure shall not exceed the height limit established by the westerly extension of the sight plane over Corporate Plaza as adopted by the City Council in Ordinance No. 1596. i -19- } NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEART :T Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing on the application of Carver Development for a Traffic Study on property located at 1100 Newport Center Drive. Request to consider a revised traffic study for a 15,000 square foot office building so as to allow a portion (7,500 square feet) of the building to be used for savings and loan purposes whereas previously the entire building was designated for general office and corporate office use. This project has been reviewed, and it has been determined that it is categorically exempt under the requirements of the California Environmental Qualities Act. Notice is hereby further given that said public hearing will be held on the 7th day of March 1985, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. For information call (714) 640-3200. John Kurlander, Secretary, Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach NOTE: The expense of this notice is paid from a filing fee collected from the applicant. r ' ,' 0 NEGATIVE DECLARATION TQ 2 0/ 6 TO: L?q Secretary for Resources FROM: Planning Department 1400 Tenth Street City of Newport Beach Sacramento, CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Clerk of the Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 687 NAME OF PROJECT: GRANVILLE OFFICE PROJECT PROJECT LOCATION: 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The construction of a 15,000 sq.ft. (net) office building on property located in the Unclassified District which exceeds the 32 foot basic height limit in the 32/50 Foot Height Limitation Zone. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the use of compact size parking spaces for a:,portion of the required off-street parking, and the acceptance of an environmental document. FINDING: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. MITIGATION MEASURES: SEE ATTACHED INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: Fred Talarico, Environmental Coordinator Date: 1112aeh '' • MITIGATION MEASURES • ° GRANVILLE PROJECT 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. That a grading plan, if required, shall include a complete plan for temporary and permanent drainage facilities, to minimize any potential impacts from silt, debris, and other water pollutants. 3. The grading permit shall include, if required, a description of haul routes, access points to the site, watering, and sweeping program designed to minimize impact of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan, if required, shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department and a copy shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. The velocity of concentrated run-off from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. 6. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans on standard size sheets shall be furnished to the Building Department. 7. That erosion control measures shall be done on any exposed slopes within thirty days after grading or as approved by the Grading Engineer. 8. The following disclosure statement of the City of Newport Beach's policy regarding the John Wayne Airport shall be included in all leases or sub-leases for space in the project and shall be included in any Covenants Conditions, and Restrictions which may be recorded against any undeveloped site. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT The lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, herein, acknowledge that: a.) The John Wayne Airport may not be able to provide adequate air service for business establishments which rely on such service; GRANVILLE PROJECT • -2. b.) When an alternate air facility is available, a complete phase out of jet service may occur at the John Wayne Airport; c.)The City of Newport Beach will continue to oppose additional commercial area service expansions at the John Wayne Airport; d.) Lessee, his heirs, successors and assigns, will not actively oppose any action taken by the City of Newport Beach to phase out or limit jet air service at the John Wayne Airport. 9. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of any structure, the licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan) . 10. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department and the approval of the Planning Department. 11. The landscape plan shall include a maintenance program which controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. 12. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on the use of drought-resistant native vegetation and be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over-watering. 13. The landscape plan shall place heavy emphasis on fire-retardant vegetation. 14. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 15. Prior to issuance of any building permits authorized by the approval of this use permit, the applicant shall deposit with the City Finance Director the sum proportional to the percentage of future additional traffic related to the project in the subject area, to be used for the construction of a sound attenuation barrier on the southerly side of West Coast Highway in the West Newport Area, in the Irvine Terrace and Jamboree Road areas. V GRANVILLE PROJECT -3 16. That any roof top or other mechanical equipment shall be sound attenuated in such a manner as to achieve a maximum sound level of 55 Dba at the property line. 17. A qualified archaeologist or paleontologist shall evaluate the site prior to commencement of construction activities, and that all work on the site be done in accordance with the City's Council Policies K-5 and K-6. 18. All proposed development shall provide for vacuum sweeping of parking areas. 19. Prior to occupancy of any building, the applicant shall provide written verification from the Orange County Sanitation District that adequate sewer capacity is available to serve the project. 20. That prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall provide the Building Department and the Public Works Department with a letter form the Sanitation District stating that sewer facilities will be available at the time of occupancy. 21. Final design of the project shall provide for the incorporation of water-saving devices for project lavatories and other water-using facilities. 22. Prior to the issuance of any Building and/or Grading Permit, the applicants shall pay their "fair-share" of Circulation Systems Improvements for the ultimate circulation system. OFRAFFIC ENGINEERINS ® erman CONSULTANTS Kimmel and Associates , Inc. 3300 IRVINE AVENUE,SUITE 180. NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92660 (714) 546-9814 November 7, 1983 i R City of Newport Beach Community Service Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca . 92663 Attention Fred Talarico Granville Office Project Traffic Phasing Analysis City of Newport Beach Gentlemen: The planned Carver Development, Granville Office Project, has been analyzed in accordance with the Citys ' "Traffic Phasing Ordinance" . The intersections analyzed are those identified as critical locations by Richard M. Edmonston, Newport Beach Traffic Engineer. Project Description The planned office site is located on Granville Drive at Newport Center Drive, within the "Newport Center" area (see Location Map) . The office development is proposed to contain 15 ,000 square feet of building area. Access is only from Granville Drive . Traffic, Generation and Distribution Traffic generation rates for office uses, as established by the Citys ' Traffic Engineer, are as follows : Average Daily Traffic Generation Rate = 13 T.E.*/1000 S .F. Project Average Daily Traffic Volume = 13 x 15 = 195 T.E. Total 2 .5 Hour Generation Rate = 4. 6 T.E./1000 S .F. Total Project 2 .5 Hour Volume = 4 .6 x 15 = 69 T.E. Inbound 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 1.2 T.E./1000 S .F. Inbound Project 2 .5 Hour Volume = 1. 2 x 15 = 18 T.E. Page 2 Nov. 7, 1983 • Newport Beach Outbound 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 3.4 T.E./1000 S .F. Outbound Project 2.5 Hour Volume = 3. 4 x 15 = 51 T.E. Peak Hour Generation Rate Equals 50% of 2 .5 Hour Rates *T.E. (Trip End) = A trip end is the arrival or departure 1 of a vehicle at the project site. Exhibit 1 shows the percentage of total site traffic volumes that will use each major street serving the project. It is estimated that 10% of the traffic will circulate internally within the "Newport Center" area. Intersection Analysis 1% Test The critical intersections,identified by the City as requiring a 1% analysis, include: Coast Highway @ Orange @ Prospect @ Balboa/Superior @ Riverside @ Tustin @ Dover/Bayshore @ Bayside @ Jamboree @ Newport Center @ Avocado @ MacArthur @ Goldenrod @ Marguerite Jamboree @ Santa Barbara @ San Joaquin Hills @ Eastbluf£/Ford @ Bison @ Eastbluff N. @ MacArthur @ Birch @ Campus MacArthur @ San Miguel @ San Joaquin Hills @ Ford @ Bison @ Birch @ Campus Bristol @ Jamboree Bristol N. @ Jamboree Page 3 • . Nov. 7, 1983 Newport Beach Existing and projected 2.5 hour traffic volumes , for each inter- section, are shown on attached forms . Regional traffic increases, for a two year period, were calculated from factors shown on Table 1. Traffic from other approved development was provided by the City Traffic Department. This traffic generation is based on development and occupancy shown on Table 2. L The analysis indicates that all intersections , except MacArthur at San Miguel, will have project traffic volumes below 1% of the total of other traffic shown on attached forms . v I .C.U. Test Intersection capacity utilization (I.C.U.) was calculated for the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive. Peak hour volumes from other approved development was provided by the City Traffic Department (see attached I.C.U. form) . The resulting I .C.U. will be less than a vehicle capacity ratio of 0 .90 before and after traffic increase from the planned office project. Interior Site Analysis The site will have a single access from Granville Drive. The "L" shaped parking lot provides about 60 spaces . In order to insure a turn-around area if all spaces are occupied, parking should be prohibited in one of the spaces at the terminus of the parking area. Conclusions Project traffic at all intersections, except MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive, will be less than 1% of the total volume. An I .C.U. calculation for MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive resulted in a vehicle/capacity ratio below 0 .90 before and w after traffic increase from the proposed office project. If you have any questions or need additional data, please contact our office . Respectfully submitted, HERMAN KIMMEL & ASSOC. , INC. H. William Dickson, P.E. RCE No. 19417 RTR No. 39 \ BIG CANYON . . f\���p..��SMIJOAWIN MLL^gpAO ^'� O FINANCIAL PLAZA 2 ,,,AWMMIIS pa� fl o CIVIC PLAZA o� I INSURANCE ^I'(�\ PLAZA k PLAZA al II l y. O �"� Il/�lU/ �8'c 0 �M�I • El 1 (� II�OI �❑ Q MEDICAL PLIAZA(��,Is Ilu\\IIIIIIFASHION ISLAN Qqc Q M�c`Fl 1 �✓� OgryE HARBOR VIEW r _ o W LLS DESIGN lk 12 LWFL `a1GATEWAYOe -= IflVINECOAST COUNTRY CLUB PROJECT ``yfq�Zfo �oA=R Qo = o OLL LOCATION 0 UPPER --=_ C� O C O O NEWPORT BAY pAnr6coAsi xicxwAr P IRVINETERRACE VtH� DLO o NEWPORT f��CENTER by7m vmcoh lANY LOCATION MAP 10 s h 10 'SroC �QJ G 10 ST 10 30 U � NO SCALE OPG'RCENT 'DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC VOLUME J DISTRIBUTION 25 TRAFFIC 25 GRANVILLE OFFICE a PROJECT Q S ti 00, �' J GRANVILLE OQ 10 �s 25 5 20 40 Fgq,'LCON I$ 10 25 PROJECT IOCATIO� 5 ® I,M TRAFFIC, ,,. �,:�s.�. 5 EXHIBIT 1 TABLE 1 • REGIONAL TRAFFIC • EXISTING CONDITION Coast Highway East City Limit 25% MacArthur Blvd 18% Jamboree Road 7% Dover Drive 12% West City Limit MacArthur Boulevard Coast Highway 8% San Joaquin Hills Road 5% Jamboree Road 2% North City Limit Jamboree Road Coast Highway 2% MacArthur Blvd 5% North City Limit Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive Santiago 20% Bristol Street (N & S) 35% MacArthur Bristol Street & Bristol Street North Jamboree Road 18% Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive Annual Growth Rate for Regional Traffic* Present to 1983 2.4% 1984 to 1988 2.3% * From Orange County Administrative Office Forecast Analysis Center • TABLE 2 • Traffic phasing ordinance report on approved project volumes: Proj . Approved Volume is No. All Projects on File Weighted by 001 Hughes Aircraft #1 100% occupancy 002 Hoag Hospital 000% occupancy 003 Far West Savings & Loan 100% occupancy 004 Pacesetter Homes 000% occupancy 005 Aeronutronic Ford 008% occupancy 006 Back Bay Office 000% occupancy 007 Boyle Engineering 100% occupancy 008 Cal Canadian Bank 100% occupancy 009 Civic Plaza 035% occupancy 010 Corporate Plaza 030% occupancy Oil Koll Center Newport 000% occupancy 012 Campus/MacArthur 025% occupancy 013 National Education Office 000% occupancy 014 North Ford 000% occupancy 015 Orchard Office 100% occupancy 016 Pacific Mutual Plaza 075% occupancy 017 3701 Birch Office 100% occupancy 018 Newport Place 058% occupancy 019 Shokrian 000% occupancy 020 Bank of Newport 100% occupancy 021 Bayside Square 100% occupancy 022 Sea Island 000% occupancy 023 Baywood Apartments 000% occupancy 024 Harbor Point Homes 000% occupancy 025 Roger's Gardens 100% occupancy 026 Seaview Lutheran Plaza 100% occupancy 027 Rudy Baron 000% occupancy 028 Quail Business Center 100% occupancy 029 441 Newport Blvd. 100% occupancy 030 Martha's Vineyard 000% occupancy 031 Valdez 000% occupancy 032 Coast Business Center 000% occupancy 033 Koll Center Npt No. 1 TPP 000% occupancy 034 See Projects 340 to 343 000% occupancy 035 Ross Mollard 000% occupancy 036 Banning/Newport Ranch 000% occupancy 038 Park Lido 000% occupancy 039 Hughes Aircraft #2 000% occupancy 040 Heritage Bank 000% occupancy 041 Flagship Hospital 000% occupancy 042 Big Canyon 10 000% occupancy 043 Fun Zone 000% occupancy 044 Marriott Hotel 000% ,occupancy 045 St. Andrews Church 000% occupancy 046 YMCA 000% occupancy 047 Allred Condos 000% occupancy 048 Morgan Development 000% occupancy 049 Four Seasons Hotel 000% occupancy 051 Block 400 Medical 000% occupancy 340 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 100% occupancy 341 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 342 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 343 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy �I_ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Miguel Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved ± Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected M of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1634 6 305 1945 19 — Southbound 2834 10 346 3190 32 5 Eastbound 1286 — 43 1329 13 20* Westbound 533 — 31 564 6 ' 1 Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected * ® Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 11 2 DATE.. 83� � PROJECT: G RANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT INTERSEC#N CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIO Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Miguel Dr. ( Existing Traffic Volumes Bases on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 1933) EXISTING PROPOSED EXIST. EXIST.• REGIONAL COMMITTED PROJECTED Movement PK.HR. V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio PROJECT PROJECT Lanes Cap. Lanes Cap. Vol. Ratio Volume Volume w/o Project Volume V/C Ratio Volume NL 1600 35 .0219* - - .0219* - .0219* NT 3200 498 .1922 3 127 .2419 - .2419 NR 117 - 29 SL 1600 5 .0031 - - .0031 - .0031 ST 3200 1202 .4019* 5 170 .4578* - . 4584* SR-3 84 - 4 2 EL 3200 288 .0900 - 12 .0938 6 .0956 ET 3200 178 .1084* - 10 .1116* 4 .1128* ER 169 - - - WL 1600 100 .0625* - 13 .0706* - .0706* WT -3200 1 66 .0225 - 3 .02' 6 1 .0219 WR _ _ - YELLOWTIME .1000* :1000* j i.1000* ' EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION .6947 EXISTING PLUS d"ITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH W/PROPOSED INPROVEMENTS I.C.U. .7 6 19 EXISTING PLUS COMMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. ® Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I .C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. with systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 e - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Description of system improvement: - DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM II 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy../Orange Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2k. Hour Peak 2�- Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound P11 — — 211 2 — Southbound 132 — 132 1 — Eastbound 2802 16 501 3319 I 33 4 i Westbound 4723 27 735 5485 55 ' 10 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11 C2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Prospect Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Averagewinter/Tp—ri—n—gFTUF _ Peak 2+* Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1/, of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 21l Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 113 — — 113 1 — Southbound 215 — — 215 2 — Eastbound 2882 16 501 3399 34 4 Westbound 5159 29 735 5923 59 10 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11 /2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast H ./Balboa B1 .-Su erior Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 1-9-877 Peak 21, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2)5 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1495 74 1569 16 j Southbound 2655 - • 140 2795 28 i Eastbound 3i98 18 513 3729 37 4 i Westbound 3516 L 20 621 4157 42 ' 10 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Riverside Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2', Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 38 — — 38 1 — Southbaund 1243 — 58 1301 13 — Eastbound 4509 26 668 5203 I 52 i 4 Westbound 4834 27 776 5637 T56 10 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. e DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Tustin Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 21, Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2; Hour j Peak 21s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 12 — — 12 — — Southbound 281 — 6 287 3 — Eastbound 4013' 23 647 4683 j 47 4 Westbound 5878 33 789 6700 67 10 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE• 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Dover Dr.-Bayshore Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 1983 Peak 2h Hour Approved i Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 235 Hour Peak 23g Hour Peak 2�- Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 236 - 1 237 2 - southbound 2655 - 19 2674 27 - Eastbound 4025 23 646 4694 I 47 4 i ! Westbound 6191 20 738 6949 70 ! 10 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. . 1 DATE: 11 /2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Bayside Dr. -(Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1481 — 2 1483 15 — Southbound 155 — — 155 2 — Eastbound 5312 18 623 5953 j 60 4 Westbound 6054 2,9 727 6801 r68 10 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Jamboree Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1R of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 21, Hour j Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 929 _ 4 933 9 — Southbound 4167 4 451 4622 46 — Eastbound 3899 13 622 4534 j 45 4 Westbound 3759 32 336 4127 41 10 © Project Traffic is estimated to be_ less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 232 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Newport Ctr. Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2)1 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2u. Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound _—__ — — — — Southbound 2181 — 158 2339 23 13 Eastbound 3585 1 30 400 4015 40 4 Westbound 2855 24 295 3174 32 1 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected � Peak 2i Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. r DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Avocado Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2)* Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2-, Hour Peak 2� Hour j Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 442 _ 109 551 5 Southbound 27 — 48 75 1 — Eastbound 3049 26 382 3457 35 3 Westbound 3363 29 289 3681 37 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23-, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: ��a� PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / MacArthur B1 . (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume volume Volume Volume i Volume Northbound ____ _ _ _ _ South bound 2510 10 .361 1 2881 29 — Eastbound 3326 28 483 3837 38 3 Westbound P957 ' 12 449 3418 34 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 23-, Hour Traffic Volume O Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11 /2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Goldenrod Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1983 Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2+1 Hour Growth Peak 2;1 Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 21s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 231 — 5 236 2 Southbound 205 — — 205 2 — Eastbound 4602 55 687 5344 I 53 3 Westbound 2858 34 423 3315 T,33 1 Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. x • r DATE: 11L/Ri PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Marguerite Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10, of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2�- Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Nbrthbound 616 — — 616 6 southbound 719 — 7 726 7 — i Eastbound 4023 47 695 4765 I 48 3 i Westbound 2556 30 458 3044 30 1 © Project Traffic is estimated to be .less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is 'estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11 /2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT • w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd.' / Santa Barbara Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average winter Spring 19 _ ^ Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2 260 2427 24 — 2165 Southbound 3511 1 3 444 3958 40 5 Eastbound Westbound 1625 _ 269 1894 19 13 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected 0 Peak 2-;g Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected El Peak 2? Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ma y_ )/2/83 b - PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / San Joaquin Hills Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83) _ Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11; of Projected ( Project Direction Peak 2;1 Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour j Peak 2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume. Northbound 2167 2 312 2481 25 13 Southbound 4697 4 •540 5241 52 5 Eastbound 466 — 7 473 5 — Nestbaund 556 _ _ 332 888 9 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd / Eastbluff Dr.-Ford Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 8 Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11Z of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4106 4 569 4679 47 13 Southbound 3898 4 1 540 1 4442 44 5 Eastbound 1213 - - 1213 I 12 - Nertbound 796' _ _ 796 8 - 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21a Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected • El Peak 2-Al Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Bison Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 9 _ " Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour i Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4216 4 569 4789 48 13 Southbound 3758 4 615 4377 44 5 Eastbound 198 _ — 198 2 — � Westbound 583 — 119 702 7 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Eastbluff Dr. N. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2+2 Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 231s Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4524 4 791 5319 53 13 South bound 5080 5 •708 5793 58 5 Eastbound 468 — — 468 I 5 Westbound © Project Traffic is estimated to be.less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. R DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree B1 ., / MacArthur Bl . (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected N of Projected Project Direction Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 235 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peek 2, Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1632 2 375 2009 20 5 southbound 3086 7 516 3609 36 2 Eastbound 1895 2 225 2122 I 21 2 Westbound 3320 8 L 162 34.90 35 10 a Project Traffic is estimated to be_ less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of'Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT l w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree 31 . / Birch St. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 24 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound P719 7 224 2950 30 5 ' Southbound 2357 5 •393 2755 28 2 Eastbound 867 _ I 394 1261 13 Westbound 30 _ _ 30 — — o Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Campus Dr. (Existing Traffic Vol-um—es--'E-ased on Average inter Spring 19 83 Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2;, Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2995 7 618 3620 36 ! 5 Southbound 2442 6 464 2912 29 2 Eastbound 1806 - 335 2141 I 21 - westbound 1484 - 72 1556 16 ! - 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San'Joaquin Hills Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 83 Peak 2', Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1:, of Projected Project Direction I Peak 2> Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1789 7 275 2071 21 13 Southbound 3502 8 •554 4064 41 5 Eastbound 1111 — 385 2274 I 23 — Westbound. 900 — 78 978 10 — MR Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. r DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Ford Rd. (Existing Traffic Vol-u—m-e-s-Yased on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2u Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2+ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volune Northbound 3086 7 570 3663 37 13 Southbound 5045 12 366 5623 56 5 Eastbound 919 _ _ 919 { 9 - Westbound 1056 - - 1056 11 - © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. y I DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT it w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Bison Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1983 Peak 21s Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Volume Northbound 4096 10 570 4676 47 13 Southbound 5400 13 780 6193 62 5 Eastbound 958 — 457 1415 14 — Westbound i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Birch St. (Existing Traffic Volumes base—don—Average inter pring 19 83 Peak 2)1 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project Direction Peak 21� Hour Growth Peak 215 Hour Peak 2-, Hour Peak 23; Hour Peak 21s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2373 2 316 2691 27 5 Southbound 2530 2 468 3000 30 2 Eastbound 1352 — I 605 1957 20 — f Westbound 1130 1220 2350 24 — ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. T DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Campus Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1983 Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11,; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 23s Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2§ Hour Peak 2$ Hour • Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2881 3 717 3601 36 5 Southbound 3044 3 .504 3551 36 2 Eastbound 1730 — 98 1828 18 — Westbound 1976 — 328 2304 23 o Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. • q DATE: 11 2 83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Bristol St. / Jamboree Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2§ Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2+ Hour j Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume- Northbound 5362 5 794 6161 62 13 South bound 1703 14 .267 1984 20 — Eastbound 5499 57 764 6320 63 6 Westbound Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Bristol St. N. Jamboree Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 83 ) _ Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project • Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume.` Northbound 5705 5 794 6504 65 13 Southbound 2707 3 271 2981 30 — westbound 1531 13 304 1848 18 ! 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be, less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. H ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT i THE IRVINE MMPAWY 550 Newport Center Drive, P.O. Box I /p/2 Newport Beach, California 92660.0015 (714)720.2000 Q��q( T3oa No Nctc�� `Ratio{c(' — 5a4�- October 13, 1983 Mr. James Hewicker Director of Planning City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject: Granville Office Site Dear Jim: This letter is to inform your department that The Irvine Company has authorized Carver Development Company to apply for development permits to build up to 15,000 square feet of "parking code net area" as defined by the City of Newport Beach, on our property located southwesterly of the intersection of Farallon Drive and Newport Center Drive. This square footage is a portion of the development allocated by the Newport Beach General Plan to the "Corporate Plaza West" site. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincere] ✓, A Ronald W. Hendrickson Director, Planning and Design Commercial Division RWH:ta cc: Mr. Patrick Scruggs, Carver Development 0) pC�Vr,z . w CARVER DEVELOPMENT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS •INVESTMENT BUILDERS October 12, 1983 Mr. Fred Talarico City of Newport Beach Planning Dept. . 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Mr. Talarico: Pursuant to our previous discussions, please indicate the traffic study for the proposed 15,000 sq. ft. office building to be located at the intersection of Newport Center Drive and Grandville Ave. Sin/cerell , Patrick M. Scruggs Chief Financial Officer PMS/ap Enclosure: Check #1057 cc: Roy Carver P.O. BOX 7070. NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92658.0070 - (714) 644.9040 7 RESUBDIVISION NO. 414 SHEET 3 DF 45NEET8 PARCEL MAP NO. 7 /Q• I O� NOV +NII t:6'Z 9 SCALE: 1'f!00' l 3PARCELS IEuaT}} uvR Las ...1 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH COUNTY OF ORANGE,STATE OF CALIFORNIA. prAntWnwNnnL+LFeeplFDyt 132.8f0 ACRES I aftOwtvpwnpnnu WILLIAM J.FROST,+L.S.3109" IrtAFwnix..re.,r DATE OF SURVEY:JANUARY AND APRIL 11980 HIM .$fir \FyrF'P "•'/ hR ry��%iiHrfpt Nry,Ebe kr[S`��WP!/I].)t) 1Dt� Do' . a •�• " )Nr CITY�H�xIt OR �Ii''N4u 'N4� I N11'D° R.lOO W• ff.! WPoRra 10 asES I�r t �• T Se E)• • 1��J �Nl l'2 \ R�MCf4'LN �� PggCE, �� , ,,4.r°WOc . J?a :/ l W4l Ep�Di/S<w��GpDFOD 8 DBIp'�) f R • R l�Sl,.r�4` ' IfR M �\ i J °w 8. tt2lt PrC} •_ /. 2/q.tf/ N/!•IP•°YW ! ���5 <��WpYo.n PCL..i TA06ED11 �Inz NORP 31o1 / �� FIjY�O"r'0 1. FDI%1'I V.NOIAG. `'J.:\,I. o ^ ,ND P.RE'd�isTAG 11-0 - 1°)By *y Ntp�yL �ii,tb'rr•! flies/ ., ��� ° yyk '�5�// j10N0 JN 00 N�Ni`HEOf N PARCEL / wty°°ly st SO 1 kG AT 12e.TCe ACRES OR, b ,N 9y ;LA�yA 4J'fA'Rt� I-SfPS Dc?�° W 12e 532 ACRES NET 4E�!(r� T��4 Pt�ttk fSTODSNLgf'10. T W ,y br. fis.. st it �Lt1N P.W \ C NE i ft DO W , "IL'4t:it_wy=°_I _ S*yb 3�2°n'a CEN N 1`•>�)3't tNP05t! I PD kt�;��NH1�yY1LkJ1 P NlAil 5t tf°5`GNotWRp /y LOyyDD �\ nw�ki51 NGNE02y9DI4 4. ,/ ofiA°n y�E y�>Y)'Ifi 05 Nye 0s, 10°tt .AII y91 A sCs'`Pt°�No✓aiist v1 f1AY�^ic O, Pi.��A;b'S(D kyttl0Njt1 . N�•A)40'tA` 5Lt))AYN ND,tA• • cck AlLL N} sc se ,•'p it{� ytc G¢I i 1t`+Ot' "t0tjrl'H�Y }l0 µ°k tlIII NEE1-at t�R. 1 'PtPp50R 1T50N9T� tMN4 AH(AH1 IN4tt "EkN 5C f°i ND;S to t III C0 5 11 WNIu w yDw loT�'"` ��s�` ;ka*,°t ,g. CEE,9SPI CII10 MONUMENT NOTES �� EAAN,LAtH • INDICATES FD CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 510 MON.(2•BRASS CAPIN WELLY t5PE41O 45) "I`puit Lt•ttt r PER CE TO M,PGS.21.22.UNLESS OTHERWISE REFERENCED �Pto,µPyrL/+tEM't"T s,•� • INDICATES FO 2ITPTAGOFDL S.3241 PER PMTS/i1 T4f3°tNEAN'IL[NOiFO IVDICAIES FD 2•IP TAGGEDL S 3I09PERFM 41,'(4. O INOICATES SET L47YAGOED L531Df. • INDICATES FOUNDASNOTED BASIS OF BEARINGS THE BEARINGS SHOWN NEREONARE BASED OHTNE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE i OF BLOCK SS,IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION,MRM I-ee,6EINGH49'El'21'WAS SHOWN ON RECORD W SURVEY FILED IN BOOK Se,PAVES 31-41.RtCORDS OF CR ORANGE COUNTY,ULIFORNiA. IO' fr - tN ntSf ' M • �7c,ece7 mad 77 -70r. . Parcel 2 of Book 152, Pages 17-20, inclusive, recorded in the office of the Orange County Recorder of Parcel Maps on November 119 1980, • t 1. 6,L 4-- �c CARVER DEVELOPMENT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS .INVESTMENT BUILDERS September 20, 1983 Mr. James Hewicker Director of Planning PLANNING DEPARTMENT 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884 RE: Proposed 15,000 square foot office building Southwest corner of Newport Center Drive and Granville Lane Dear Mr. Hewicker: Thank you very much for the time your staff spent Wednesday with us outlining the development procedure in the City of Newport Beach. We have been granted an option by The Irvine Company to purchase a 34,000 square foot site in Newport Center (please see attached plot) and propose to construct thereon a two-story, low-rise cor- porate headquarters office building. The building will be no greater than 15,000 square feet floor area as defined by the City of Newport Beach. Pursuant to our agreement with The Irvine Com- pany, the square footage of this building is to be deducted from their approximately 46,000 square feet of office building develop- ment rights remaining in Newport Center. We would appreciate your advice on how to best proceed through the development process with the city and also what documentation you will require. Thank you for your consideration and help. Sincerely, CARVER DEVELOPMENT U AD � Roy Carver, III R � � RCIII/msjpP 8� attachment CA-IF fw N � P.O. BOX 7070, NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92658.0070 • (714) 644.9040 - 1 BIG CANYON SANJOAOUINNILLSROAO 0 " �✓ O FINANCIAL L O J O 9ANJOAOUIN WUS RO n AO CIVIC PLAZA of t/ �tE�`Jt. 9yf 1 t' FINANCIAL INSURANCE PLAZAI \\/) PLAZA \v) O 9(� O 5'131NI�gry� oTy � gm� R �vo9 uL MEOICALPLAZA FASHION IS LA ^ 09 �Jff It31 / ftE =�� HARSORVIEW HILLS h�� o ® DESIGN PLAZA 12 pp11��G,ATEWAY tOPLAZA, O 0 c l9 =- IRVINE COAST COUNTRY CLUB 0 ` t'RAttON2.�$® 0 p� Q q, OE p qy \/ U PLA2AD f L1�( o U P P NEWPORT BAY '—_ - _ PAOFM WAST HIGHWAY p1 IRWNETERRACE p NEWPORT j�-OCENTER ` ^ by THE Fwma a*w i 1 TRAFFIC PHASING 1 ANALYSIS ADDENDUM 1 1 GRANVILLE OFFICE PROJECT ' CARVER DEVELOPMENT 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1 1 1 FEBRUARY , 1985 1 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 1 ®Flerman C%5ULT^NTS kimmel arM Assmiates.w c. 1 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ® lierman CONSULTANTS Kimmel and Associates , Inc. ' 3300 IRVINE AVENUE,SUITE 180. NEWPOATEE fiJeA 92660 tii SS Ll kkii February 6 , 1985 City of Newport Beach Community Service Department 330'0 Newport Blvd. iNewport Beach, Ca. 92663 Attention: Pat Temple Granville Office Project Traffic Phasing Analysis Addendum ' City of Newport Beach Ms . Temple: In November of 1983, Herman Kimmel & Associates performed a Traffic Analysis for the planned Carver Development, Granville office project, in accordance with the city"s- "Traffic Phasing Ordinance" . That analysis was- based on 15,00Q square feet of office development building area. Since the time, of that report, the type of use has- changed to 7500 square feet of office develop- ment and 750.0 square feet of savings 'and loan development. This addendum reflects the aforementioned changes-. The. intersections analyzed are those identified as• critical locations by Richard M. Edmonston, Newport Beach Traffic Engineer, ' Project Description The planned office site is located on G ranvi.11e_ Drive. at Newport Center Drive, within the "Newport Center"' area (see Locatkon Mapl . The development is proposed to contain 7 ,500 square feet of office use and 7,500 square feet of savings and loan use., Access is only 1 from Granville Drive. The project is anticipated to have occupancy in 1985 . Traffic Generation and Distribution Traffic generation rates for office and savings and loan uses, as t established by the city' s traffic engineer, are as follows : Office ' Average Qaily Traffic Generation Rate = 13 T.E, */10'aa S ,p., Average Daily Traffic Volume = 1'3 x7 .5=• 58 T .E. Total 2.5 Kour Generation Rate = 4 .6 T.E./1000 S .F. Total 2.5 H:our Volume = 4 .6 x 7 ,5 = 35 T.E . ' Inbound 2.5 Four Generation Rate = 1.2 T.E./1000 S.F. Inbound 2.5 Hour Volume = 1 .2 T.E. x 7 .5 = 9 T.E. Page 2 February 6, 1985 Newport Beach Outbound 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 3.4 T.E./1000 S .F. Outbound 2.5 Hour Volume = 3 .4 x '7 .5 = 26 T.E. Savings and Loan Average Daily Traffic Generation Rate = 164 T.E./1000 S.F. Average Daily' Traffic Volume = 164 x 7 .5 = 1230 T.E. Total 2.5 Hour Generation Rate =17!.6 T.E./1000 S.F. Total 2.5 Hour Volume =17 .6 x 7 .5 = 132 T.E . Inbound 2 .5 Hour Generation Rate = 10 .6 T.E./1000 S .F. Inbound 2.5 Hour Volume = 10 . 6 x 7.5 = 80 T.E. Outbound 2 .5 Hour Generation Rate = 7 T.E./1000 S .F. Outbound 2 .5 Hour Volume = 7 x 7 .5 = 53 T.E. TOTAL ' Project Average Daily Traffic Volume - '1','32'8 T.E. Total Project 2 .5 Hour Volume = ' 1'67 T.E . Inbound Project 2.5 Hour Volume = - •, 89 T.E. Outbound Project 2.5 Hour Volume - 79 T.E. ' * T.E. (Trip End) = A trip end is the arrival- 'or departure of a vehicle at the project site. EXHIBIT 1 shows the percentage of total '_ site traffic volumes that will use eacF1 major street serving the project. It is estimated that 1R% of the traffic will circulate internally within the «Newport Center" area. Intersection Analysis 1% Test The critical intersections, identified by, the city, as- requiring a 1% analysis, include: Coast Highway, @ Orange @ Prospect @ Balboa/Superior @ Riverside @ Tustin @ Dover/Bayshore @ Bayside @ Jamboree @ Newport Center '- @ Avacado @ MacArthur @ Goldenrod @ Marguerite ' Page 3 February 6, 1985 Newport Beach Jamboree @ Santa Bargara @ San Joaquin Hills @ Eastbluff/Ford ' @ Bison @ Eastbluff N. @ MacArthur @ Birch @ Campus -' MacArthur @ San Miguel @ San Joaquin Hills @ Ford @ Bison ' @ Birch @ Campus Bristol @ Jamboree Bristol N. @ Jamboree ' Existing and projected 2.5 hour traffic volumes, for each intersection, are shown on attached forms. Regional traffic increases were calculated from factors shown on Table 1. Traffic from other approved development was provided by the City Traffic Department. This traffic generation is based on development and occupancy shown on Table 2 . The analysis indicates that all intersections, except MacArthur @ San Miguel and Jamboree @ Santa Barbara, will have project Volumes below 1% of the total of other traffic shown on attached forms . I.C. U. Test Intersection capacity utilizations (;I".C.U. ks-1 were calculated for the intersections• of MacArthur Boulevard @ San Miguel Drive and Jamboree Boulevard @ Santa Barbara Drive. Peak hour volumes from other approved 1 development was provided by the City Traffic Department Csee attached I.C.U. formsl . The resulting I .C.U. "s will be less- than a vehicle capacity ratio of 0.90 before and after traffic increase from the planned office project. Interior Site Analysis L' The site will have a single access from Granville Drive; The •'L•' shaped parking lot provides, about 60 spaces-.In order to insure a turn around area if all spaces are occupied, parking should be prohibited in one of the spaces at the terminus of the parking area. 1 Page 4 February 6 , ; 1985 1 Newport Beach Conclusions ' Project :traffic at all intersections, except MacArthur Boulevard at San Miguel Drive and Jamboree Boulevard at Santa Barbara Drive, will be less than 1% of the total volume. An I .C.U. calculation for the above two intersections resulted in a vehicle/capacity below 0 .90 before and after traffic increase from the proposed office project in each case. If you have any questions or need additional data, please contact our office. Respectfully submitted, HERMAN KIMMEL & ASSOCIATES, INC. H. William Dickson, P .E. RCE No. 19417 RTR No. 39 1 'BIG CANYON SANJCAOMNHAtSROAG .. D O FINANCIALS N 2 PLAZA SANJOACCINML -✓ s� Q c� clvlc PLAZAL$RCADza �� � I 0 r �Eo �F � FlNANCUL .� eS4'� INSURANCE h� O Oa� ry$t0 O mco�vI� ao MEDIC�LP AZA FASHION ISLAN __ oqr QO OMVE M� HARBOR EW o ® DESIGN 1Y "IGATEWAY Q6P '°�oO `LAZZ G IRVINECOAST COUNTflYCLUB $ z � vAaATioN OO u ® PROJECT © 'oyrOFNlFgo O �O O, 1NPOR TE a _ � < 2if � Ou PLA2� UPPED NEWPORT �_ =;•-� BAY — PACIFIC COAST MOHWAY IRVINETERRACE eFtTT p° NEWPORT>l CENTER bUTIE LOCATION MAP 1 10 a �h 10 STp� P�Q G 10 ' 10 `ST i 3 1 NO SCALE ' O PERCENT DIRECTIONAL TRAFFIC VOLUME. DISTRIBUTION ' 25 TRAFFIC 25 GRANVILLE.OFFICE Glyn PROJECT Q GRANVILLE UR 1020 � 5 20 qp FgQy«ON � 15 10 25 a PROJECT IOCam 5 �C TRAFFIC ENGINEERING �J ® klFiMafeI andNAssmiatOs.lnc. EXHIBIT 1 TABLE 1 REGIONAL TRAFFIC EXISTING CONDITION Coast Highway East City Limit 25%' MacArthur Blvd 18% Jamboree Road 7% Dover Drive 12% -' West City Limit MacArthur Boulevard Coast Highway 8% 1 San Joaquin Hills Road 5% Jamboree Road 2% 'North City Limit Jamboree Road 1 Coast Highway 2% MacArthur Blvd : 5% North City Limit Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive Santiago 20% ' Bristol Street (N & S) 35% MacArthur Bristol Street & Bristol Street North Jamboree Road 18% Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive Annual Growth Rate for Regional Traffic* ' Present to 1983 2.4% 1984 to 1988 2.3% * From Orange County Administrative Office Forecast Analysis Center 1 TABLE 2 Traffic phasing ordinance report on approved project volumes: Proj . Approved Volume is No. All Projects on File Weighted by 1 001 Hughes Aircraft #1 100% occupancy 002 Hoag Hospital 000% occupancy 003 Far West Savings & Loan 100% occupancy 004 Pacesetter Homes 000% occupancy 005 Aeronutronic Ford 008% occupancy 006 Back Bay Office 000% occupancy 1 007 Boyle Engineering 100% occupancy 00,8 Cal Canadian Bank 100% occupancy 009 Civic Plaza 035% occupancy 1 010 Corporate Plaza 030% occupancy Oil Koll Center Newport 000% occupancy 012 Campus/MacArthur 025% occupancy 013 National Education Office 000% occupancy 014 North Ford 000% occupancy 015 Orchard Office 100% occupancy 016 Pacific Mutual Plaza 075% occupancy ' 017 3701 Birch Office 100% occupancy 018 Newport Place 058% occupancy 019 Shokrian 000% occupancy 020 Bank of Newport 100% occupancy 021 Bayside Square 100% occupancy 022 Sea Island 000% occupancy 023 Baywood Apartments 000% occupancy 1 024 Harbor Point Homes 000% occupancy 025 Roger's Gardens 100% occupancy 026 Seaview Lutheran Plaza 100% occupancy 027 Rudy Baron 000% occupancy 028 Quail Business Center 100% occupancy 629 441 Newport Blvd. 100% occupancy 030 Martha's Vineyard 000% occupancy 031 Valdez 000% occupancy 032 Coast Business Center 000% occupancy 033 Koll Center Npt No. 1 TPP 000% occupancy 034 See Projects 340 to 343 000% occupancy 035 Ross Mollard 000% occupancy 036 Banning/Newport Ranch 000% occupancy 038 Park Lido 000% occupancy 1 039 Hughes Aircraft #2 000% occupancy 040 Heritage Bank 000% occupancy 041 Flagship Hospital 000% occupancy ' 042 Big Canyon 10 000% occupancy 043 Fun Zone 000% occupancy 044 Marriott Hotel 000% occupancy 1 045 St. Andrews Church 000% occupancy 046 YMCA 000% occupancy 047 Allred Condos 000% occupancy 048 Morgan Development 000% occupancy 049 Four Seasons Hotel 000% occupancy 051 Block 400 Medical 000% occupancy 340 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 100% occupancy ' 341 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 342 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 343 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Miguel Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2i1 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1634 6 305 1945 19 — Southbound 2834 10 346 3190 32 22 Eastbound 1286 — 43 1329 13 31 * i Westbound 533 — 31 564 T 6 • 1.3 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' * Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 DATE 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT • FORM I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS ' Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Miguel Dr. ( Existing Traffic Volumes Bases on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 1933 ) EXIST. EXIST., REGIONAL COMMITTED PROJECTED Movement EXISTING PROPOSED PK.HR. V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio PROJECT PROJECT Lanes Cap. Lanes Cap. Vol. Ratio Volume Volume w/o Project Volume V/C Ratio Volume NL 1600 35 .0219* - - .0219* - .0219* ' NT 3200 498 .1922 3 127 .2419 - •2419 NR J 117 - 29 ' SL 1600 5 .0031 - - .0031 - . 0031 ST 3200 1202 .4019* 5 170 .4578* . 4606* SR 84 - 4 •9 EL 3200 288 .0900 - 12 .0938 9 . 0966 ET 3200 178 .1084* - 10 .1116* 6 . 1134* ' ER 169 - - - WL 1600 100 .0625* - 13 .0706* - .0706* ' WT •3200 66 .0225 - 3 .02' 6 5 . 0231 WR _ 1 YELLOWTIME ^ .1000* :1000* j i.1000* t EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION .6947 EXISTING PLUS COMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH W/PROPOSED INPROVEMENTS I.C.U.t 76 19 i EXISTING PLUS COMMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GRO'vITH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. 7 6 65 ® Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. 'will be greater than 0.90 1 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. with systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Description of system improvement: DATE: 2/6/85 IPROJECT GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM II 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Orange Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring NLTT 1 Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2, Hour Peak 2.12 Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume. '. Northbound 211 — — 211 2 — Southbound 132 — 132 1 — ' Eastbound 2802 16. 501 3319 I 33 18 Westbound I 4723 27 735 5485 55 1,6 ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be• less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85. ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1 • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Prospect Ave. 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ 1 Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1', of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 113 — — 113 1 — Southbound 21.5 — — 215 2 1 Eastbound 2882 16 501 3399 ' 34 18 Westbound 5159" 29 735 5923 59 16 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2,1, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. i 1 1 1 1 ' i 1 DATE: 2/6/85 _ PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1 _ w 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Balboa B1 .-Su erior Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 8 Peak 2h Hour Approved j Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10; of Projected Project j ' Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2-, Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ! ' Northbound 1495 - 74 1569 16 ! ' Southbound 2655 - . 140 2795 28 ' Eastbound 3198 18 513 3729 I 37 i 18 ' Westbound 20 621 3516 4157 42 1 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I t1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Riverside Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ ' Peak 23� Hour Approved Approach • Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 23, Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2�, Hour Volume Volume Yolume Yolume Volume Volume Northbound 38 — — 38 1 r Southbound 1243 — 58 1301 13 — ' Eastbound 4509 26 668 5203 I 52 j 18 ' Westbound 4834 —27 776 5637 T _� 56 16 ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 ' DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Tustin Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ Peak 2), Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1 of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2), Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 12 — — 12 Southbound 281 — 6 287 3 — ' I Eastbound 4013 23 647 4683 I 47 18, Westbound 5878 33 789 6700 67 16 M Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 r 1 ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRMDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORt4 I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Dover Dr.-Bayshore Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 83 Peak 21� Hour Approved ! Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2�-,Hour I Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 236 - 1 237 2 - Southbound 2655 - 19 2674 27 - Eastbound 4025 23 646 4694 47 18 i Westbound ' ! 6191 ' " 20 738 6949 70 16 ! ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT ,' FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Bayside Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 21, Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1'. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2-, Hour Peak 2--; Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1481 — 2 1483 15 — Southbound 155 — — 155 2 ' Eastbound 5312 18 623 . 5953 j 60 18 i Westbound 6054 20 727 6801 ; 68 16. ' MX Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume 'Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected n Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Jamboree Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes base on Average Winter/Spring 1983 Peak 2h Hour Approved i ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2-, Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound — 4 933 9 929 Southbound 4167 4 451 4622 46 — Eastbound 3899 13 622 4534 45 18 Westbound 3759 ' 32 336 4127 41 16 ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is 'required. 1 DATE: 2/•6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1 I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Newport Ctr. Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based onAverage Winter Spring 19 83 ' Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 25 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound — — — — — Southbound 2181 — .158 2339 23 2Q Eastbound 3585 30 400 4015 40 18 Westbound 2855 24 295 3174 32 ' ' .. 4 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C..U.) Analysis is required. I DATE 2/6/85 - ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I i 1% Traffic VolumelAnalysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Avocado Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 3 Peak 2� Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2� Hour ' Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 442 — 109 551 5 — Southbound 27 — 48 75 1 — Eastbound 3049 26 382 3457 35 4 , Westbound 3363 29 289 3681 37 4 ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. t i ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / MacArthur B1 . ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 231; Hour Peak 2u Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound ---_ Southbound 2510 10 •361 2881 29 — Eastbound 3326 28 483 3837 38 4 Westbound 2957- 12 449 3418 34 ' 4 ' 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Goldenrod Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 1983 Peak 215 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2> Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 2> Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 231 — 5 236 2 — Southbound 205 — — 205 2 — ' Eastbound 4602 55 687 5344 I 53 4 Westbound 2858' ' — 34 423 3315 33 ' 4 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected 0 Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' M Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Marguerite Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 231 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2J1 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Nbrthbound 616 — — 616 6 — I5outhbound 719 _ 7 726 7 Eastbound 4023 47 695 4765 I 48 i 4 ' Westbound I I 2556 30 458 3044 30 4 ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 y 1 DATE: 2%6'/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1 FORM T 1 w ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Santa Barbara Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2� Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2; Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2-� Hour Peak 2�- Hour j Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2165 2 260 2427 24 — southbound 3511 3 444 3958 40 22 ' Eastbound i Westbound ' 1625 =_ 269 1894 �19 20* ' Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Q Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 856 2 DATE: / / ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Santa Barbara Dr. ( Existing Traffic Volumes Bases on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring- 19 84 ' EXIST. EXIST. REGIONAL LoMM[TTED PROJECTED Movement EXISTING PROPOSED PK.HR. VIC GROWTH PROJECT VIC Ratio PROJECT PROJECT Lanes Lap. Lanes Cap. Vol. Ratio Volume Vol we w/o Project Volume VIC Ratio Volume ' NL — NT 4800 776 .1617 1 145 .1921 .1921 1 NR 1600 1 102 .0638 - 32 .0838 - 0838 SL 3200 198 .0619 - 44 .0756 11 .0791 ' ST 3200 1442 .4506* 1 199 .5131* - .5131 SR _ ' EL ET ER WL 3200** 539 .1684* 82 .1941* .1941- - ' WT . ._. - . WR 3200 344 - .1075 55 .1247 10 .1278 YELLOWTIME .1000* 1 1 1 EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION • .7190 1000* ; ; .1000 EXISTING PLUS CCMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH W/PROPOSED INPROVEMENTS I.C.U. .' 8 0 7 2 EXISTING PLUS CC�!MITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. 8 0 7 2 ** Considers optional left-turn lane is 100Z occupied by left-turning traffic. Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90, . ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ' ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. with systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Description of system improvement: DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT FORM II I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / San Joaquin Hills Rd. 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2�- Hour j Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2167 2 312 2481 25 20 5outhbound 4697 4 •540 5241 52 • 22 tEastbound 466 — 7 473 5 — Westbound 556 _ 332 888 9 ! _ 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT • FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd / Eastbluff Dr.-Ford Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Tvierage Winter Spring MIT Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 101; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2 Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume YoT2 Volume Northbound 4106 4 569 4679 47 20 South bound 3898 4 540 4442 44 " 22 ' Eastbound 1213 - - 1213 I 12 Westbound 796. _ _ 796 8 - i - - Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 212 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. w 1 DATE: • 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM, I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Bison Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ ' Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4216 4 569 4789 48 20 South bound 3758 4 615 4377 44 ' — — 22 Eastbound 198 198 ' 2 � Westbound 583 119 702 7 — ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I w 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. /. Eastbluff Dr. N. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 .83) Peak 2;1 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing .Regional Projects Projected 1: of Projected Project Peak 2� Hour Direction Peak 2+s Hour Growth Peak 2;, Hour Peak 2� Hour ! Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 4524 4 791 5319 53 20 " Southbound 5080 5 708 5793 58 22 ' Eastbound 468 _ 468 I 5 — Westbound Q Project Traffic is estimated to be,less than 1% of Projected Peak 21-2 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree B1 . / MacArthur Bl . ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 235 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour- Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' . Northbound 1632 2 375 2009 20 8 Southbound 3086 7 516 3609 36 9 ' Eastbound 1895 2 225 2122 i 21 i 9 Westbound 3320 8 162 3490 35 8 ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 1 DATE: /6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection Jamboree B1 . / Birch St. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 11, of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2;1 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2719 7 224 2950 30 8•• southbound 2357 5 393 2755 28 Q• ' Eastbound 867 _ 394 1261 13 1 Westbound 30 _ — 30 _ ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. T III ' DATE: 2/6/85 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Campus Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 83 ' ' Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2J1 Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2995 7 618 3620 36 8 5outhbound 2442 6 464 2912 29 9 ' Eastbound 1806 — 335 2141 I 21 Westbound j 1484 _ 72 1556 16 — ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 , DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT • FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Joaquin Hills Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 83 Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1"> of Projected Project Directton Peak g Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 212 Hour Peak 2§ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound 1789 7 275 2071 21 20 Southbound •3502 8 •554 4064 41 22 ' Eastbound 1889 — 385 2274 I 23 — Westbound 900 — 78 978 10 — ' 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Ford Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1g 83 Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' . Northbound 3086 7 570 3663 37 20 Southbound 5045 12 566 5623 56 22 ' Eastbound 919 _ _ 919 9 — Westbound 1056 — — 1056 11 — ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21g. Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM-I 1 • i 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Bison Ave. 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 1983 Peak 2$ Hour Approved 1 Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected ( Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peek 2h Hour I Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 1 Northbound 4096 10 570 4676 47 20 Southbound 5400 13 780 6193 62 22 1 Eastbound 958 _ 457 1415 14 — Nestbound i Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 1 i III DATE: 2/6/85 1 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I i ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysi's Intersection MacArthur B1 . / .Birch St. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 83 Peak 211 Hour Approved i i Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected L, of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2;1 Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i ' Northbound 2373 2 316 2691 27 g Southbound 2530 2 468 3000 30 9 iEastbound 1352 — 605 1957 20 Westbound I 1130 — 1220 2350 24 — ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' O Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 - 1 1 DATE: 2/6/85 i PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1. / Campus Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter Spring 19 g3 ' Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2�, Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 3 717 3601 36 8 2881 Southbound 3044 3 .504 3551 36 g ' Eastbound 1730 — 98 1828 18 i i Westbound 1976 328 2301 23 ! — ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 23-, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 2/6/85 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Bristol St. / Jamboree Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected L, of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 23, Hour Peak 23. Hour Peak 211 Hour I Peak 2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume �. "Volume- Northbound { 5362 5 794 6161 62 . 20 Southbound 1703 14 267 1984 20 —, ' Eastbound 5499 57 764 6320 I 63 27 Westbound ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C:U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 2/6/85 " ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' J � v r. 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Bristol St. N. Jamboree Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes ased on Average Winter/Spring-1-9 MT _ Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected N of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume �• Volume` Northbound ! 5705 5 794 6504 65 20 5outhbound 2707 3 271 2981 30 — ' Eastbound i Westbound 153E ' 1 13 304 1848 18 12 ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be Tess than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 1 DATE: 246485 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORt4 I I 1 1 i 1 1 TRAFFIC PHASING ANALYSIS 1 1 1 GRANVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1 CARVER DEVELOPMENT 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1 ' NOVEMBER,, 1983 1 TRAFFIC ENOINEENMIO ®F�rFnin CONBULTANT9 kk=end AssoGaHs,Inc. 1 � 1 1 1 1 1 TRAFFIC PHASING ANALYSIS 1 1 1 GRANVILLE OFFICE PROJECT 1 CARVER DEVELOPMENT 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 1 1 1 NOVEMBER,, 1983 1 7 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ®► xrtta� CONSULTANTS kkm» and wssoUstes,Vnc. 1 I ' TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ' erman CONSULTANTS ® Kimmel and Associates , Inc. ' 3300 IRVINE AVENUE, SUITE 180, NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92660 (714) 546.9814 November 7, 1983 I City of Newport Beach ' Community Service Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 ' Attention Fred Talarico Granville Office Project ' Traffic Phasing Analysis City of Newport Beach ' Gentlemen: The planned Carver Development, Granville Office Project, has been analyzed in accordance with the Citys ' "Traffic Phasing ' Ordinance" . The intersections analyzed are those identified as critical locations by Richard M. Edmonston, Newport Beach Traffic Engineer. ' Project Description ' The planned office site is located on Granville Drive at Newport Center Drive, within the "Newport Center" area (see Location Map) . The office development is proposed to contain 15,000 square feet ' of building area. Access is only from Granville Drive. The project is anticipated to have occupancy in 1985 . ' Traffic Generation and Distribution Traffic generation rates for office uses, as established by the Citys ' Traffic Engineer, are as follows: Average Daily Traffic Generation Rate = 13 T.E. */1000 S.F. ' Project Average Daily Traffic Volume = 13 x 15 = 195 T.E. Total 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 4.6 T.E./1000 S.F. ' Total Project 2 .5 Hour Volume = 4 .6 x 15 = 69 T.E. Inbound 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 1.2 T.E./1000 S .F. ' Inbound Project 2.5 Hour Volume = 1.2 x 15 = 18 T.E. ' Page 2 Nov. 7, 1983 Newport Beach Outbound 2.5 Hour Generation Rate = 3.4 T.E./1000 S.F. ' Outbound Project 2 .5 Hour Volume = 3. 4 x 15 = 51 T.E. Peak Hour Generation Rate Equals 50% of 2 .5 Hour Rates ' *T.E. (Trip End) = A trip end is the arrival or departure of a vehicle at the project site. ' Exhibit 1 shows the percentage of total site traffic volumes that will use each major street serving the project. It is estimated that 10% of the traffic will circulate internally within the ' "Newport Center" area. Intersection Analysis 1% Test The critical intersections,identified by the City as requiring a ' 1% analysis, include: Coast Highway @ Orange @ Prospect ' @ Balboa/Superior @ Riverside @ Tustin ' @ Dover/Bayshore @ Bayside @ Jamboree ' @ Newport Center @ Avocado @ MacArthur @ Goldenrod ' @ Marguerite Jamboree @ Santa Barbara ' @ San Joaquin Hills @ Eastbluff/Ford @ Bison @ Eastbluff N. ' @ MacArthur @ Birch @ Campus MacArthur @ San Miguel @ San Joaquin Hills ' @ Ford @ Bison @ Birch @ Campus ' Bristol @ Jamboree ' Bristol N. @ Jamboree ' Page 3 Nov. 7, 1983 Newport Beach Existing and projected 2 .5 hour traffic volumes , for each inter- section, are shown on attached forms . Regional traffic increases, ' for a two year period, were calculated from factors shown on Table 1. Traffic from other approved development was provided by the City Traffic Department. This traffic generation is based on development and occupancy shown on Table 2. The analysis indicates that all intersections , except MacArthur at San Miguel, will have project traffic volumes below 1% of the ' total of other traffic shown on attached forms . I .C.U. Test Intersection capacity utilization (I.C.U.) was calculated for the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive. Peak hour volumes from other approved development was provided by the City Traffic Department (see attached I.C.U. form) . ' The resulting I .C.U. will be less than a vehicle capacity ratio of 0 .90 before and after traffic increase from the planned office project. ' Interior Site Analysis ' The site will have a single access from Granville Drive. The "L" shaped parking lot provides about 60 spaces . In order to insure a turn-around area if all spaces are occupied, parking ' should be prohibited in one of the spaces at the terminus of the parking area. ' Conclusions Project traffic at all intersections, except MacArthur Boulevard ' and San Miguel Drive, will be less than 1% of the total volume. An I.C.U. calculation for MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive resulted in a vehicle/capacity ratio below 0 .90 before and ' after traffic increase from the proposed office project. * * ' If you have any questions or need additional data, please contact our office . ' Respectfully submitted, HERMAN SIMMEL & ASSOC. , INC. H. William Dickson, P.E. RCE No. 19417 ' RTR No. 39 BIOCANYON r FlNANCIAL 7 uU a SANJO.10Ux CIVIC PLAZA- MltsgoAo ° nod a � i f� you FINANCIAL INSURANCE II1(�\>/ PLAZA PLAZA _ N _- El MEDIC_ I1L PL11Z11 'o-' •�1 '<f O ' \FASHIONISLAN HARBDRVIEW HILLS DESIGN PLAZA 4 T'GATEWAY ��OO 9 TZ m PLAZA,% Q 2 p 7 2 IRVINECOASTCOUNTRYCLUB 5 O v f g PROJECT �o � a = a ofyQ ORPORATE PL � W LOCATION F � d A 0 O UPPER '=- = O Q O NEWPORT — DAY PACxICCOAST IPGHWAY IRVINETERRACE 4O,S 0 r'LT& o NEWPORT j CENTER by THE Rwapsm" LOCATION MAP i to 50 to O� p 1 $,, 10 so 1a 0o PERCENT 'DIRECTIONAL ' TRAFFIC VOLUME J ' DISTRIBUTION 25 TRAFFIC 1 � — �tu GRANVILLE OFFICE j PROJECT 25 1 Ge"VILLE OQ 10 5 Zo 25 5 1 40 Q a«ON� IS p 1 PROJECT LOCA110fJ 5 ' TRAFFIC ENGINEERING rJ ® LTANTS IrNTmir,,.nd n wssoastes.W c. EXHIBIT 1 � 1 ' TABLE 1 REGIONAL TRAFFIC EXISTING CONDITION ' Coast Highway ' East City Limit 25% MacArthur Blvd 18% Jamboree Road 7% Dover Drive 12% ' West City Limit MacArthur Boulevard Coast Highway 8% ' San Joaquin Hills Road 5% Jamboree Road 2% ' North City Limit Jamboree Road ' Coast Highway 2% ' MacArthur Blvd 5% North City Limit ' Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive Santiago 20% Bristol Street (N & S) 35% MacArthur ' Bristol Street & Bristol Street North ' Jamboree Road 18% Irvine Avenue/ Campus Drive ' Annual Growth Rate for Regional Traffic* ' Present to 1983 2.4% 1984 to 1988 ' 2.3% I ' * From Orange County Administrative Office ' Forecast Analysis Center TABLE 2 Traffic phasing ordinance report on approved project volumes : ' Proj . Approved Volume is No. All Projects on File Weighted by 001 Hughes Aircraft #1 100% occupancy 002 Hoag Hospital 000% occupancy 003 Far West Savings & Loan 100% occupancy ' 004 Pacesetter Homes 000% occupancy 005 Aeronutronic Ford 008% occupancy 006 Back Bay Office 000% occupancy ' 007 Boyle Engineering 100% occupancy 008 Cal Canadian Bank 100% occupancy 009 Civic Plaza 035% occupancy O10 Corporate Plaza 030% occupancy Oil Koll Center Newport 000% occupancy 012 Campus/MacArthur 025% occupancy 013 National Education Office 000% occupancy 014 North Ford 000% occupancy 015 Orchard Office 100% occupancy 016 Pacific Mutual Plaza 075% occupancy ' 017 3701 Birch Office 100% occupancy O18 Newport Place 058% occupancy 019 Shokrian 000% occupancy 020 Bank of Newport 100% occupancy ' 021 Bayside Square 100% occupancy 022 Sea Island 000% occupancy 023 Baywood Apartments 000% occupancy ' 024 Harbor Point Homes 000% occupancy 025 Roger's Gardens 100% occupancy 026 Seaview Lutheran Plaza 100% occupancy ' 027 Rudy Baron 000% occupancy 028 Quail Business Center 100% occupancy 029 441 Newport Blvd. 100% occupancy 030 Martha's Vineyard 000% occupancy ' 031 Valdez 000% occupancy 032 Coast Business Center 000% occupancy 033 Koll Center Npt No. 1 TPP 000% occupancy ' 034 See Projects 340 to 343 000% occupancy 035 Ross Mollard 000% occupancy 036 Banning/Newport Ranch 000% occupancy 038 Park Lido 000% occupancy 039 Hughes Aircraft #2 000% occupancy 040 Heritage Bank 000% occupancy 041 Flagship Hospital 000% occupancy 042 Big Canyon 10 000% occupancy 043 Fun Zone 000% occupancy 044 Marriott Hotel 000% occupancy 045 St. Andrews Church 000% occupancy 046 YMCA 000% occupancy 047 Allred Condos 000% occupancy ' 048 Morgan Development 000% occupancy 049 Four Seasons Hotel 000% occupancy 051 Block 400 Medical 000% occupancy 340 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 100% occupancy ' 341 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 342 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy 343 Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 000% occupancy ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Miguel Dr. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected It of Projected � Project t ' Direction Peak 21. Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1634 6 305 1945 19 — Southbound 2834 10 346 3190 32 5 Eastbound 1286 — 43 1329 13 20* ' Westbound 533 — 31 564 6 1 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' * ® Peak 23-, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM, I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Intersection MacArthur Bl . / San Miguel Dr. ' ( Existing Traffic Volumes Bases on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 1933 ) EXIST. EXIST.• REGIONAL LOR41TTED PROJECTED EXISTMovement Lanes Cap. LanesS11)Cap. R11Catio GROWTH PROJECT w/o Protect VoC Ratio lume V/CJECT Ratio Vol.Yot. Ratio Volume Volume Volume NL 1600 35 .0219* - - .0219* - .0219* ' NT 3200 498 .1922 3 127 .2419 - .2419 NR J 117 - 29 ' SL 1600 5 .0031 - - 1 .0031 = . 0031 ST 3200 1202 .4019* 5 170 .4578* . 4584* SR 84 - 4 2 EL 3200 288 .0900 - 12 .0938 6 .0956 ET 3200 178 .1084* = 10 .1116* 4 .1128* ER 169 WL 1600 100 .0625* - 13 J .0706* 1 .0706* ' WT '3200 66 .0225 - 3 .0216 1 .0219 WR - ' YELLOWTIME .1000* .1000* i 1.1000* EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION -6947 ' EXISTING PLUS COMMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH W/PROPOSED INPROVEMENTS I.C.U.1 7 6 1 9 i EXISTING PLUS COMMITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. ® Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ' ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. with systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 a ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Description of system improvement: DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM II ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Orange Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring _ Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10, of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 211 — — 211 2 — Southbound 132 — 132 1 — Eastbound P802 16 501 3319 33 4 Westbound 4723 27 735 5485 55 10 ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be- less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2183 III ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT • FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Prospect Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2� Hour Approved I ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1'. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2+ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 113 — — 113 1 — Southbound 215 _ — 215 2 — ' , Eastbound 2882 16 501 3399 34 i 4 Westbound 5159 29 735 5923 59 I 10 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. r -- DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT �I FOP.;1 I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hw ./Balboa Bl .-Su erior Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes ased on verage inter Spring 19 8 ' Peak 215 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1'. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2;1 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1495 — 74 1569 16 Southbound 2655 — • 140 2795 28 — Eastbound 3198 18 513 3729 j 37 4 j Westbound 3516 _ 20 621 4157 42 10 ' © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23-2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORI+1 I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Riverside Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 21, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10 of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2u Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 38 — — 38 1 ! — ' Southbound 1243 — 58 1301 13 — Eastbound 4509 1 26 668 5203 ' 52 i 4 i Westbound 4834 27 776 5637 T56 10 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak Zj Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 � DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1 . 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Tustin Ave. 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 3_ Peak 2k Hour Approved 1 Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour j Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 1 Northbound 12 — — 12 — 1 ( Southbound 281 — 6 287 3 — Eastbound 4013 23 647 4683 I 47 4 1 i Westbound 5878 —33 789 6700 67 10 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 21� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 i ' 1 '11 DATE: 11/2/83 II PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy./Dover Dr.-Bayshore Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 211 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1; of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 21g Hour Peak 2�- Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ; Volume ' Northbound 236 - 1 237 2 - Southbound 2655 - 19 2674 27 - Eastbound 4025 23 646 4694 j 47 4 Westbound 6191 20 738 6949 70 10 1 • ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE 11 /2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Bayside Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 21s Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 24 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1481 — 2 1483 15 — Southbound 155 — — 155 2 — tEastbound 5312 18 623 5953 j 60 4 Westbound 6054 20 727 6801 �68 10 ' O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 23� Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23-2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Jamboree Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2> Hour Approved I ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected I% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2$ Hour Peak 211 Hour I Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 929 — 4 933 9 — Southbound 4167 4 451 4622 46 — Eastbound 3899 13 622 4534 I 45 4 Westbound 3759 32 336 4127 41 10 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ' Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' [] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRMDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FOB:; I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Newport Ctr. Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1i; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2N Hour Peak 2u, Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound —_—_ — — — — — southbound 2181 — 158 2339 23 13 ' Eastbound 3585 30 400 4015 40 4 Westbound 2855 24 295 3174 32 ' 1 ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' r DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Avocado Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 — Peak 2's Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2;1 Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 442 — 109 551 5 Southbound 27 — 48 75 1 — ' IEastbound 3049 26 382 3457 ! 35 3 Westbound 3363 29 289 3681 37 1 ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21� Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.,) Analysis is required. ' DATE: ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / MacArthur B1 . ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected N of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 22 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound __—_ _ _ _ _ Southbound 2510 10 •361 2881 29 — ' Eastbound 3326 28 483 3837 , 38 3 Westbound 2957 12 449 3418 34 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' ❑ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11 /2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Goldenrod Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1983 Peak 21s Hour Approved I Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10 of Projected I Project Direction Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 21s Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 21i Hour Peak 21s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 231 — 5 236 2 — ' Southbound 205 1 — — 205 2 — ' Eastbound 4602 55 I 687 5344 I 53 3 Westbound 2858 ' — 34 423 3315 ,r 33 '• 1 a Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' ❑ Peak 2i Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: it/3/g-4 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Coast Hwy. / Marguerite Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 616 — — 616 6 — Southbound 719 — 7 726 7 — i ' Eastbound 4023 47 695 4765 I 48 3 i Westbound 2556 30 458 3044 30 ' 1 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORt4 I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Santa Barbara Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2c Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2)j Hour Peak 2§ Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2165 2 260 2427 24 ! — Southbound 3511 3 444 3958 40 5 ' Eastbound I i Westbound 1625 _ 269 1894 �19 13 Q Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 . ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / San Joaquin Hills Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2k Hour Approved I Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected It of Projected Project Direction Peak 2> Hour Growth Peak 24 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2�- Hour j Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2167 2 312 2481 25 13 Southbound 4697 4 540 5241 52 5 Eastbound 466 — 7 473 5 — i Westbound 556 _ 332 888 9 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected a ' Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 II ' ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd / Eastbluff Dr.-Ford Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 8 1 Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1" of Projected � Project Direction Peak 24 Hour Growth Peak 2h. Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 4106 4 569 4679 47 13 Southbound 3898 4 540 4442 44 5 ' Eastbound 1213 — — 1213 I 12 Westbound 796 _ _ 796 8 O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume ' El Peak Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23-, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Bison Ave. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 21, Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1", of Projected ! Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2u Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 4216 4 569 4789 48 13 Southbound 3758 4 615 4377 44 5 ' Eastbound 198 — — 198 , 2 — Westbound 583 — 119 702 7 — ' ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23-2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM, I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Eastbluff Dr. N. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 211 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 12; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h, Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume- Volume ' Northbound 4524 4 791 5319 53 13 Southbound 5080 5 .708 5793 58 5 Eastbound 468 — 468 I 5 ; Westbound T• ® Project Traffic is estimated to be,less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree B1. / MacArthur B1 . ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter Spring 19 _ Peak 21s Hour Approved 1 1 Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project Direction Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 23, Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1632 2 375 2009 20 5 Southbound 3086 7 516 3609 36 2 ' Eastbound 1895 2 225 2122 I 21 2 Westbound 3320 8 1 162 3490 35 10 ' a Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization 1 (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. r 1 1 ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree B1 . / Birch St. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 211 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2+1 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h, Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2719 7 224 2950 30 5 Southbound 2357 5 •393 2755 28 2 Eastbound 867 394 1261 13 Westbound 30 _ 30 MR Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected ' [] Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Jamboree Rd. / Campus Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter Spring 9 83 Peak 2� Hour Approved 1 Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected N of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2995 7 618 3620 36 ! 5 Southbound 2442 6 464 2912 29 2 Eastbound 1806 — 335 2141 I 21 — Westbound 1484 — 72 1556 16 — © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FO RM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / San Joaquin Hills Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10, of Projected Project Direction I Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Houthbound 1789 7 275 2071 21 13 Southbound 3502 8 554 4064 41 5 ' Eastbound 1889 — 385 2274 23 — Westbound 900 — 78 978 10 I 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. I . i 1 1 ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT fCRi4 I i - 1 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Ford Rd. 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on verage inter pring 9 83 Peak 2� Hour Approved 1 Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Vol Line iNorthbound 3086 7 570 3663 37 13 Southbound 5045 12 566 5623 56 5 1 Eastbound 919 — — 919 9 — Westbound 1056 — — 1056 11 — 1 1 © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization i (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. i 1 1 . 1 1 1 DATE: 11/2/83 1 PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FOR.M. I ,- 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Bison Ave. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2� Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4096 10 570 4676 47 13 ' ISouthbound 5400 13 •780 1 6193 62 5 Eastbound 958 — 457 1415 14 — Westbound © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected �] Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. t DATE: 11/2/83 !I , PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FOP`; I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Birch St. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 83 Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected i Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2373 2 316 2691 27 5 ; Southbound 2530 2 468 3000 30 2 ; ' Eastbound 1352 — 605 1957 20 — Westbound 1130 — 1220 2350 24 — ERProject Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater.than 1% of Projected ' ❑ Peak 2-11 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I 1 - ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur B1 . / Campus Dr. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter pring 19 $3 Peak 2§ Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2�'Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2881 3 717 3601 36 5 Southbound 3044 3 .504 3551 36 2 L' Eastbound 1730 — 98 1828 18 — Nestbound 1976 — 328 2304 23 ' — ' O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' DATE 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Bristol St. / Jamboree Rd. ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 _ Peak 2y Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected I Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 21, Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume; Northbound 5362 5 794 6161 62 13 Southbound 1703 14 267 1984 20 — ' Eastbound 5499 , . I 57 764 6320 I 63 6 Westbound Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ' Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [] Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis • Intersection Bristol St. N. Jamboree Rd. (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage winter/Spring 9 _ Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2)1 Hour Peek 2�, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume- ' ' Northbound 5705 5 794 6504 65 13 Southbound 2707 3 271 2981 30 — Eastbound + Westbound 1531 13 304 1848 18 3 t .. ' 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be. less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. I ' ' DATE: 11/2/83 ' PROJECT: GRANDVILLE OFFICE PROJECT FORM I