Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTPO039_EDWARDS THEATER EXPANSION TP0039 COMMISSIONERS • October 23IN 986 S yGc^ c^ GOA �' . CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX satisfactory to the City Attorney and the Planning D ctor, providing for a mutual easement for ingre , egress and parking on the subject lots. 4. That the me n island in Bayview Place at Crystal Bay Drive be m 'fied to remove the island from the crosswalk area conformance with plans to be approved by the Public rks Department. 5. That an agreement and acco anying surety be provided to guarantee satisfacto completion of the public improvements if it is'desi d to obtain a building permit prior to completio of the public improvements. A. Use Permit No. 1527 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.2 Request to amend a previously approved Use Permit which Use Permit permitted an expansion of the existing Edwards Theatre No. 1527A in Newport Center located on property in the C-O-H District. The proposed amendment includes a request to TS further expand the theatre so as to add two new audi- — toriums containing a total of 600 new seats. The Approved proposal also includes: a modification to the zoning Code so as to permit the use of compact parking spaces; the approval of an amended off-site parking agreement for a portion of the required off-street parking at the southeasterly corner of Newport Center Drive and San Miguel Drive and the approval of a new off-site parking agreement for a portion of the required off-street parking involving a portion of the Design Plaza parking area, located at the northwesterly corner of Avocado Avenue and Farallon Drive; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND B. Traffic Study (Public Hearing) Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the addition of two new auditoriums containing a total of 600 new seats at the existing Edwards Theatre complex in Newport Center. LOCATION: Parcel A of Parcel Map 25-1 (Resub- division No. 260) , and Parcel No. 1 of Parcel Map 60-36 (Resubdivision No. 454) (building site) ; and Parcel A of -4- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES A October 23, 1986 O N�yr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX Parcel Map 25-1 (Resubdivision No. 260) and Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map 60-36 (Resubdivision No. 454) (off-site parking lots) , located at 300 Newport Center Drive, on the southeasterly corner of Newport Center Drive East and San Miguel Drive, and a portion of Design Plaza at the northwesterly corner of Avocado Avenue and Farallon Drive in Newport Center. ZONE: C-O-H APPLICANT: Edwards Theatres Circuit, Inc. , Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach Commissioner Merrill stepped down from the dais because of a possible conflict of interest. James Hewicker, Planning Director, referred to Condition No. 4 regarding the' required mid-week daytime matinee parking spaces of one parking space for each 3.29 seats, and he stated that the staff has no objections if the parking requirement would be changed to one parking space for each 5 seats. Mr. Hewicker explained that the requirement of one parking space for each 5 seats was suggested in the proposed project's Parking and Traffic Study. Donald Webb, City Engineer, referred to Condition No. 23, requesting "two additional stairways be constructed between the upper and lower parking areas with loca- tions to be approved by the Planning Department and the Public Works Department". Mr. Webb further stated that the applicant has indicated that The Irvine Company may object to the construction of one of the stairways; therefore, he proposed that Condition No. 23 be modified to state "provided The Irvine Company will allow the second stairway to be constructed". Mr. Webb explained that staff felt that as much access as possible should be provided to the theatre parking area from the lower parking area. He said that The Irvine Company has made arrangements with the applicant to allow additional parking in the rear of the Design Plaza; however, they may object to a stairway adjacent to the Good Earth Restaurant. Mr. Webb commented that staff did not want to put the applicant in a position -5- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES October 23, 1986 yGFc^ GOAP mc� O . vFy CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOLL CALL INDEX wherein they would not be able to comply with the condition. In response to a question posed by Chairman Turner, Mr. Webb replied that the location of the second stairway is not under the leasehold of the applicant. Mr. Webb stated that the applicant must construct one additional stairway and there appears to be no problem with that request. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. James Edwards, representing the applicant, appeared before the Planning Commission. Mr. Edwards stated that the parking arrangement with The Irvine Company for the additional 269 parking spaces are at the easterly end of Design Plaza. He said that there is one existing stairway and that they have no objections to the request for two additional stairways; however, he said that the stairway closest to the theatre is back of the Good Earth Restaurant and that is an area of which the theatre has no jurisdiction. Mr. Edwards stated that the applicant concurs with the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A" including modified Conditions No. 4 and No. 23. The public hearing was closed at this time. Motion x Motion was made to approve Use Permit No. 1527 (Amended) and related Environmental Document subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", including modified Condition No. 4, requesting "the maximum number of mid-week daytime parking spaces of one parking space for each 5 seats"; and the addition to Condition No. 23, ". .provided The Irvine Company Ayes 21 x x x permits the construction of the second stairway". Absent x x x Motion voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Motion x Motion was made to approve Traffic Study subject to the Ayes X x x x findings in Exhibit "A". Motion voted on, MOTION Absent x x x CARRIED. A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: 1. That an initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , the State CEQA Guidelines, and Council Policy K-3. 2. That the contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this project. -6- COMMISSIONERS • October MIN1�JFS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I I I I I INDEX 3. The project will not have any significant environ- mental impact. B. TRAFFIC STUDY: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S-1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the proj- ect-generated traffic will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour p.m. peak period on one leg of one critical intersection. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the proj- ect-generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major' , 'primary-modified' i or 'primary' street. USE PERMIT NO. 1527 (Amended) : Findings: 1. The project will comply with all applicable City and State Building Codes and Zoning requirements for new building applicable to the district in which the proposed project is located. 2. That the proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 3. Adequate off-street parking and related vehicular circulation are being provided in conjunction with the proposed development. 4. The off-site parking areas are located so as to be useful to the proposed theatre use. 5. Parking on the subject off-site lots will not create undue traffic hazards in the surrounding area. -7- COMMISSIONERS • 0 October M1NI�VS yGc^ c^ G400 G�ti�NO 9��y F FZ 4- � CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OLL CALL INDEX 6. That the applicant has -entered into an appropriate lease for the off-site parking spaces, which is of sufficient duration for the subject theatre. 7. The approval of Use Permit No. 1527 (Amended) 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 or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City; and further, that the proposed modification to the Zoning Code so as to permit the use of compact size parking spaces for a portion of the required off-street parking is consistent with the legisla- tive intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. Conditions: 1. That development shall be in substantial confor- mance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and elevations except as noted in the following conditions: 2. That all conditions for Use Permit No. 1347 and Use Permit No. 1527 shall be null and void. 3. That an approved off-site parking agreement shall be approved by the City Council, and be recorded in the County Recorder's Office, guaranteeing that the following off-site parking locations shall be provided to the subject theatre: a. Parcel A of Parcel Map 25-1 (Resubdivision No. 260) located at the southwesterly corner of Newport Center Drive and San Miguel Drive. Said parking shall be for the exclusive use of the theatre and shall provide the maximum number of parking spaces ap- proved by the City Traffic Engineer, and in no case shall said parking area provide less than 143 parking spaces. b. Parcel No. 2 of Parcel Map 60-36 (Resubdivision No. 454) located at the rear of the subject theatre. Said parking area shall provide a minimum of 50 daytime parking spaces and 310 nighttime parking spaces for the subject theatre. _A_ COMMISSIONERS ( MINUTES October 23, 1986 yGt^ c^ GO o CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX C. A portion of. Parcel No. 3 of Parcel Map 60-36, located in the easterly portion of Design Plaza. Said parking area shall provide a minimum of 269 nighttime only parking spaces. 4. That the mid-week daytime matinees shall be limited to the number of seats as established by the maximum number of daytime parking spaces, times a parking demand ratio of one parking space for each 5 seats. The number of daytime parking spaces shall be established in conjunction with the City Traffic Engineer's approval of a new parking design for the parking area at the southeasterly corner of San Miguel Drive and Newport Center Drive. Said parking area shall be redesigned so that the number of compact spaces shall not exceed 25 percent of the total number of parking spaces in said parking area. 5. That a minimum of 722 parking spaces shall be provided for the subject theatre on weekday evenings 'beginning at 5:30 p.m. , on Saturdays and Sundays and recognized holidays and that during such times the maximum number of theatre seats shall be 2,377 seats. 6. Handicap parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with Title 24 of the Building Code. 7. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall submit a plan describing signing and other traffic controls to direct traffic to the off-site Parking Area No. 3. Said plan shall be approved by the Traffic Engineer. 8. That the on-site vehicular and pedestrian circu- lation systems shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 9. That all signs shall be in conformance with the provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer if located adjacent to any vehicular ingress and egress. 10. That the applicant shall obtain the approval of a resubdivision or lot line adjustment so as to establish a legal building site for the proposed theatre addition. -9- COMMISSIONERS 0 MINUTES a October 23, 1986 y � y �yo��yyo�9 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 11. Development of site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 12. 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. 13. 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. 14. The velocity of concentrated runoff from the project shall be evaluated and erosive velocities controlled as part of the project design. 15. That grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a Civil Engineer and based on recommendations of a soil engineer and an engi- neering 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 Depart- ment. 16. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regu- larly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 17. That prior to the issuance of building permits; the Fire Department shall review the proposed plans and may require automatic fire sprinkler protection. 18. That all access to the buildings be approved by the Fire Department. 19. That all improvements be constructed as required by ordinance and the Public Works Department. 20. That the displaced portions of sidewalk along the Newport Center Drive frontages and San Miguel Drive frontage be reconstructed and curb access ramps constructed at the corner of Newport Center Drive and San Miguel Drive and drive entrances off Newport Center Drive and San Miguel Drive. All -10- CbMMISSIONERS 0 MINUTES October 23, 1986 y�G9y�N�Fy9 yCo'o'e oyc� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 21. That arrangements be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the Public Works improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 22. That the applicant contribute 25 percent of the cost of installing a traffic signal at Newport Center Drive and San Miguel Drive prior to obtain- ing building permits. 23. That two additional stairways be constructed between the upper and lower parking areas with locations to be approved by the Planning and Public Works Departments, provided The Irvine Company permits the construction of the second stairway. 24. That a sidewalk be constructed between the Newport Center Drive walk and the front of the theatre with location and design to be approved by the Public Works Department. 25. That the Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 26. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090 A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. -11- '47 ADAN ASSOCIATES ❑ ENGOEERS & PLANNERS CD C. 3�gE6 April 16, 1986 Ms. Pat Temple ti Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Ms. Temple: As you know, in December 1985, we conducted a traffic study for the proposed Edwards Theater Expansion in the Newport Center. The report was prepared in accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance as adopted in February 1979 and amended in November 1981 . Since that time, the Ordinance has been modified. We understand from Rich Edmonston that the report will need to be done again in accordance with the new phasing ordinance using recently collected data and considering additional committed projects. Mr. Jim Edwards has recently contacted our office to request such a revised report. Mr. Edmonston indicated that the new field data and traffic volumes associated with the additional committed projects would be available within a few days. We would be pleased to prepare the revised Traffic Phasing Report using the aforementioned data. Since we have prepared the December 1985 report, and are familiar with the proposed project, the report could be easily completed within 2 weeks of receiving all -of the necessary data from the City. Compensation is suggested on fixed fee basis of $900. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal to the City. Should you have any questions or should you need further information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectively submitted, WILLDAN AS OCIATES /� . Tom Brohard Manager Transportation Engineering Department TWB/ELC:kj JN 9602 12900 CROSSROADS PARKWAY SOUTH • SUITE 200• INDUSTRY- CALIFORNIA 91746-3499• (213) 695-0551 l • r _ dwar ,g T-hc,,Lrc,,3 Circuit, hnca 300 Newport Center Drive.Newport Beech,California 92660 (714)640-4600 c" CO W.James Edwards lll 9 RECEIVED Prceident Planning, t S Department ��1 AUG301985 m-- CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIF. !� August 28, 1985 w ro ' Pat Temple Environmental Co-Ordinator 3300 Newport Blvd Newport Beach, Ca. 92663 Re: Traffic Phasing Report Newport Expansion Dear Pat: Enclosed please find our check #1812 in the amount of $1100.00 for the Traffic Phasing Report re: the Edwards Newport Cinema expansion in Fashion Island. We understand that Tan Brohard of Willdan Associates will be preparing the report. Sincerely yours, ARD EATRES C U INC. W James dwar ..P"' President wj e/sh encl. r � 147 WILl'bAN ASSOCIATES ❑ ENAERS & PLANNERS Anaheim,Norwalk,Ventura,Lancaster.San Bernardino and San Diego,California c Y 9 RECEIVED FIB.'riin8 DePytment i5 JUl 301985 - It 1' CITY OF NE`NPOPTBEACH' 1p July 29, 1985 CALIF- N Ms. Pat Temple Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Ms. Temple: EDWARDS THEATER EXPANSION - REVISED TRAFFIC PHASING REPORT In November 1983, Willdan Associates prepared a traffic phasing report for the proposed Edwards Theater expansion for the City of Newport Beach. Recently, we were advised by Mr. Edwards that the plans for expansion have changed. While the size is the same, the expansion is now proposed to occur on the north side of the existing theaters rather than the south side. As we discussed last week, our November 1983 traffic phasing report for this project can be revised to include consideration of traffic from other projects which have been approved over the last two years. Our work in the revision of the November 1983 traffic phasing report will include reassessment of the proposed project at those intersections in the City which could be affected by the project. It is envisioned that a total of 22 locations will be analyzed. Each of these will be evaluated using existing traffic count data, projected regional growth, additional traffic associated with previously committed projects and trip generation data. It is our understanding that the City Traffic Engineer will provide the present traffic data, the regional growth factors and projected traffic volumes associated with committed projects. We propose to use the same trip generation data from the previous report which had been developed from actual field observations at the Edwards Theater com- plex and from the San Diego Traffic Generation Report. The results of our evaluations will be contained within a revised traffic phasing report for the proposed project, with all work to be done in accordance with pro- cedures established by the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Willdan Associates will complete the work as outlined above within two weeks following reciept of your approval to proceed together with the traf- fic data from the City. Compensation is suggested to occur on a time and materials basis in accordance with the enclosed scheduled hourly rates and will not exceed $1,000. 14714 CARMENITA ROAD • SUITE 300 • NORWALK • CALIFORNIA 90650-5284 • (213)921-8215 • (714)523-4702 Ms. Pat Temple -2- July 29, 1985 We appreciate the opportunity to submit to this proposal to the City. Should you have any questions or should you need further information, please contact me at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, WILLDAN ASSOCIATES T� 44o Tom Brohard Manager Transportation Engineering Department TWB:sd JN 9602 Enclosure SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES August 1984 Classification Fee Rate Per Hour Engineering: Senior Consultant $ 90.00 Principal Engineer 80.00 Division Manager 71.00 Project Director 71.00 Senior Project Engineer 65.00 Project Manager 58.00 Project Engineer 53.00 Senior Designer 48.00 Design Engineer 42.00 Senior Draftsperson 42.00 Designer 38.50 Draftsperson 35.00 Junior Draftsperson 26.50 Construction Observer (Public Works) 44.00 Senior Real Property Agent 65.00 Real Property Agent 58.00 Assistant Property Agent 48.00 Surveying: Senior Survey Analyst 52.50 Senior Calculator 52.50 Calculator II 42.00 Survey Analyst 38.00 Calculator I 35.00 Field Supervisor 60.00 Party Chief 58.00 Two-Man Field Party 112.00 Three-Man Field Party 145.00 Planning: Planning Division Manager 71.00 Principal Planner 63.50 Senior Planner 53.00 Planning Associate 48.00 Planning Assistant 38.00 Planning Technician 29.00 t Y • • Schedule of Hourly Rates (Cont. ) Classification Fee Rate Per Hour Building: Plan Check Examiner $ 44.00 Building Inspector 44.00 Building Clerk 30.00 Computer Computer Time 60.00 Programming Supervisor 58.00 Senior Programmer Analyst 48.00 Programmer Analyst 38.00 Programmer 32.50 Computer Data Entry 26.50 Other Clerical 21.00 Delivery 21.00 Consultation in connection with litigation and court appearances will be quoted separately. The above schedule is for straight time. Overtime will be charged at 1.25 times the standard hourly rates. Sundays and holidays will be charged at 1.70 times the standard hourly rates. It should be noted that the foregoing wage rates are effective through July 31, 1985. The rates may be adjusted after that date to compensate for labor adjustments and other increases in labor costs. Edwards Theatres Circuit, Inc. 300 newport center drive east, newport beach, california 92660 • (714) 640-4600 JIM EDWARDS III September 16 , 1983 Mr. Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768' Newport Beach, Ca. 92663-3884 Subject: Traffic Study Newport Edwards Expansion Dear-Fred: Enclosed is our check in the amount of $1 ,075 .00 to cover our fees for the Traffic Study in accordance with the City 's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. We are still working with the Irvine Company as to the- legal description of the property and will have a filing soon. Sincerely yours , EDWARDS T EATRES CIRC T INJCw.� - W. Jag sS wards , III Senior -President wj a/sh cc: Mr. Edwards , Sr . ,Pres . uf b SEP 19'�83�' ci, tytti.roaa t ' EDWARDS THEATER EXPANSION ' TRAFFIC PHASING REPORT FOR THE ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ' APRIL 1986 Prepared by: Willdan Associates Engineers and Planners 1 12900 CROSSROADS PARKWAY SOUTH •SUITE 200• INDUSTRY• CALIFORNIA 91746-3499• (213) 695-0551 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES ❑ ENGINEERS & PLANNERS April 22, 1986 ' Ms. Pat Temple Environmental Coordinator ' Planning Department City of Newport Beach P. 0. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884 ' Dear Ms. Temple: ' As requested, we have conducted traffic studies at those intersections in Newport Beach believed to be possibly affected by a proposed expansion of the Edwards Theater Complex in Newport Center. Twenty locations were ' analyzed. The study was conducted in accordance with the City's new Traffic Phasing Ordinance as adopted in December 1985. The results of our evaluations are included in the enclosed Traffic Phasing Report. ' Each intersection was evaluated using existing traffic count data, projected regional growth figures, additional traffic associated with previously committed projects and trip generation data. The present traffic data, the regional growth factors and projected traffic volumes attendant to committed projects were provided by the City of Newport Beach. The trip generation data was obtained from the San Diego Area Traffic Generation Rates Report of September 1981 and actual field observations. Other relevant information was ' provided by the applicant. We appreciate this opportunity to serve the City in this matter. We wish ' to thank Richard Edmonston, Traffic Engineer for the City of Newport Beach, and his staff for their cooperation during the course of our study. Very truly yours, ' WILLDAN AS OCIAT �` ES M 0.40P ' Tom Brohard 2L` eft,. Manager /� Transportation Engineering Department ' TWB/ELC:dmv JN 55598 Enclosure cc: Mr. Richard Edmonston ' 12900 CROSSROADS PARKWAY SOUTH • SUITE 200• INDUSTRY- CALIFORNIA 91746-3499 . (213) 695-0551 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal ' Page Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ' Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ' Traffic Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 1 Traffic Distribution and Assignment . • • • • • • • • • . 4 ' Regional Traffic Growth . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Committed Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '7 ' Critical Intersection Analyzed (1% Analysis) . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 8 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 9 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ' Appendix - 1% Work Sheets I.C.U. Analyses for MacArthur Boulevard/San Miguel Drive LIST OF FIGURES ' Figure No. Page 1 . Project Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ' 2. Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Traffic Generation - Various Routes . . . . . . . . . 5 i li ' Introduction ' The City of Newport Beach has selected Willdan Associates to perform a traffic impact analysis for the proposed expansion of Edward's Theater. The study is to be conducted in accordance with the City's current Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The City's Traffic Engineer has indicated that 20 intersections are ' potentially affected by traffic predicted to be generated by the proposed project. These intersections include all signal controlled locations along Coast Highway from the west City limit to the east City limit as well as each ' signalized intersection along Jamboree Road from Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road and along MacArthur Boulevard from Coast Highway to and including Bison Avenue. While certain on-site parking densities are outlined on the site plan for the proposed development, it is assumed for the purpose of this evaluation that the City's requirements have been or will be satisfied. This study will address only the potential traffic impacts to the selected intersections associated with the proposed theater expansion. The existing traffic count data at each intersection, the regional growth ' factors for each affected route and the traffic volume data predicted to be generated by other previously approved projects affecting the intersections involved have been provided by the City Traffic Engineer's Office. ' Information relative to the project's site plan and ticket sales has been provided by Edward's Theater Circuit, Inc. ' Project Description The proposed project consists of a 650 seat expansion of the Edward's Theater complex in Newport Center. Presently, there is a 1 ,750 seat theater ' located generally in the southwest quadrant of the Newport Center development. Assuming approval and completion, the project is expected to be operational by the end of 1986. The project is located near the intersection of Newport Center Drive East and San Miguel Drive as shown on Figure 1 . The project site plan is shown as Figure 2. Traffic Generation The daily traffic generated by walk-in theater operations has been identified to be 0.4 trips per day (per San Diego Area Traffic Generation Rates, September 1981) . According to the applicant, the proposed 650 seat expansion will be subject to the same restrictions imposed on the existing operation relative to matinee showings. These restrictions limit the sale of seats to 1 ,250 prior to 6:00 p.m. due to the available daytime parking. Other parking becomes available after business hours which permits greater utilization of the theater. ' Currently, the box office opens for ticket sales at 5:15 p.m. Features begin at 5:30 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. with no one leaving the theater complex before 7:30 p.m. Assuming that traffic associated with the existing operation ' -1- J SAN n ✓�gQv�ti o D � O H/L L n � o�'� •� aORT CEyp r��t PEEP C pL IOR� \ o o � FASH/ON m ` RiVE e ro yTF - 9 oyi�`c WEST ( $ � ✓ \� W Z m PROJECT LOCATION �o a A m -CDA'sT y/yCFripl7y' �\ FIGURE / � SAN SITE PLAN ' Il9jGU�L 182 PARKING SPACES a ' W F . 24 U a ' r s U O a ¢ U r COMP w o IL a ¢ a ACT a0 0 a v U o a r ' M O O a O Q O ro V O ' O U m co 00 ' � O W a O W M U a o w z EXISTING ' THEATRES NO SCALE ' FIGURE 2 -14- i is accounted for in the existing traffic volumes, only traffic generated by the ' proposed expansion will be considered. Since the proposed additional seating will exceed the already imposed requirement that ticket sales in excess of 1 ,250 not occur until 6 p.m. , additional traffic is not expected to ordinarily occur until just prior to 6:00 p.m. For the purpose of this examination, however, a worse case scenario was assumed. Based on the proposed expansion of 650 seats, we assume one-half ' occupancy during the earliest possible showing (6:15 p.m. ) and that all of these patrons will be on the surrounding road network during the peak 2.5 hour period. Each of these trips will be inbound toward the theater. By ' assuming one-half occupancy and only the inbound trip, the trip generation factor will be 0.1 per seat. Therefore, 65 inbound trips (650 x 0.1) will be used for this evaluation. tTraffic Assignment and Distribution The percentage of traffic generated by the project has been distributed ' and assigned to the various routes serving Newport Center and presented in Figure 3. The distribution assumptions are based upon information provided by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineering Department and is based on ' previous studies in the area. Regional Traffic Growth The project is anticipated to be operational by late 1986. An evaluation of projected traffic volumes on the potentially affected routes was conducted for a period of one year following completion of the project. The percent of ' traffic increase expected per year is 2.3 percent.* Therefore, a 4.6 percent increase is predicted over the next two years. The amount of regional traffic on the highways believed potentially affected by the project is listed below with the respective factor as determined by information provided by the City of Newport Beach. ' The amount of regional traffic on Coast Highway east of MacArthur Boulevard is assumed to be 25 percent.* Therefore, the amount of growth to the regional traffic anticipated on this portion of Pacific Coast Highway is ' 1 .15 percent (4.6 x 25%) . The amount of regional traffic on Coast Highway between MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road is assumed to be 18 percent.* The amount of II ' growth to the regional traffic on this portion of Coast Highway is, therefore, anticipated to be 0.83 percent (4.6 x 18%). ' The amount of regional traffic on Coast Highway between Jamboree Road and Dover Drive is assumed to be 7 percent.* The growth to the regional traffic on this portion of Coast Highway is, therefore, estimated to be 0.32 ' percent (4.6 x 7%) . * Information provided by the City of Newport Beach or obtained from ' Orange County Administrative Office Forecast Analysis Center. ' -4- CITY OF NEWPOR.T BEACH -TRAFFIC PHASING STUDY — EDWARD`S THEATER EXPANSION TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT OF PEAK 2.5 HOUR TRAFFIC Q� 41 aim Im 0 o �o �E• P Q log PER P �y\0� P,�• moo �Jh o COgST (p SqZ � \ si SAA/TA BA.PBA,PiO O.e c9�G o z P 30640 �fn a N 0¢ sec 0 �qQ 0 The amount of regional growth expected to occur on Coast Highway west ' of Dover Drive is assumed to be 12 percent.* The growth to the regional traffic on this portion of Coast Highway is, therefore, estimated to be 0.55 percent (4.6 x 12%) . ' The amount of regional growth expected to occur on MacArthur Boulevard between Coast Highway and San Joaquin Hills Road is assumed to be 8 percent.* The growth to the regional traffic on this portion of MacArthur Boulevard is anticipated to be 0.37 percent (4.6 x 8%). The amount of regional growth expected to occur on MacArthur ' Boulevard between San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road is assumed to be 5 percent.* The growth to the regional traffic on this portion of MacArthur Boulevard is anticipated to be 0.23 percent (4.6 x 5%) . ' The amount of regional growth expected to occur on Jamboree Road between Coast Highway and MacArthur Boulevard is assumed to be 2 percent.* The growth to the regional traffic on this portion of Jamboree ' Road is anticipated to be 0.09 percent. (4.6 x 2%) . 1 1 1 ' * Information provided by City of Newport Beach or obtained from Orange County Administrative Office Forecast Analysis Center. I.i I ' Committed Projects ' Information obtained from the City of Newport Beach indicates that the following projects have been committed for the purpose of projecting future traffic flow characteristics in the City. ' 1 . Hughes Aircraft (industrial) 2. Hoag Hospital (community facility) ' 3. Far West Savings and Loan (office) 4. Pacesetter Homes (office) 5. Aeronutronic Ford (residential) 6. Back Bay Office (office) ' 7. Boyle Engineering (office) 8. Cal Canadian Bank (office) 9. Civic Plaza (office) 10. Corporate Plaza (office) 11 . Koll Center Newport (office, industrial) 12. MacArthur Court (office) ' 13. National Education Office (office) 14. North Ford (industrial) 15. Orchard Office (office) 16. Pacific Mutual Plaza (office) 17. 3701 Birch Office (office) 18. Newport Place (office) 19. Shokrian (office) ' 20. Bank of Newport (office) 21 . Bayside Square (office) 22. Sea Island (residential) ' 23. Baywood Apartments (residential) 24. Harbor Point Homes (residential) 25. Roger's Gardens (commercial) 26. Seaview Lutheran Plaza (residential) ' 27. Rudy Baron (office) 28. Quail Business Center (office) 29. 441 Newport Boulevard (office) 30. Martha's Vineyard 31 . Valdez - 3101 W. Coast Highway 32. Coast Business Center 33. Koll Center Newport and No. 1 TPP ' 35. Ross Mollard - 1511 and 1252 Superior 36. Banning/Newport Beach 38. Park Lido Medical Office 39. Hughes Aircraft No. 2 40. Heritage Bank 41 . Flagship Hospital 42. Big Canyon 10 43. Fun Zone 44. Marriott Hotel 45. St. Andrews Church ' 46. YMCA 47, Allred Condos 48. Morgan Development t -7- ' 49. Four Seasons Hotel 50. Univ Ath Club TPP 4 Emkay 51 . Block 400 Medical 52. Sheraton Expansion 54. Amend No. 1 MacArthur Court ' 55. National Education (RVSD) 56. Amendment No. 2 Ford Aero 57. Carver Granville Office ' 58. Corona Del Mar Homes 59. Big Canyon Villa Apts. 60. 1400 Dove Street 61 . 1100 Quail Street 62. Heltzer Medical Office 63. Koll Center Tipp Amend. 4A 64. Villa Point ' 65. Rosan's Development 66. Block 500 Newport Center Project 68. Newport Aquatics Center ' 69. 2600 E. Coast Hwy. 70. Jasmine Park 71 . MacArthur Associates 72. Newporter Inn Expansion ' 73. Newport Lido Medical Center 75. Fashion Is. Renaissance 76. Crown House ' 77. CDM Senior Project 340. Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 341 . Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero ' 342. Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 343. Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero 530. Amendment No. 1 North Ford 531 . Amendment No. 1 North Ford ' 532. Amendment No. 1 North Ford 533. Amendment No. 1 North Ford 910. Newport Dunes ' 920. Bayview This list represents all projects currently approved that are expected to ' impact traffic flow in Newport Beach. Not all projects will affect the streets and intersections being evaluated in this report. Critical Intersections Analyzed (1%) ' Twenty intersections were designated by the City Traffic Engineer for analysis to determine if the traffic generated by this project during either peak 2.5 hour period will exceed 1 percent of the anticipated traffic volume before the end of the one-year period following completion of the project. Those locations include all signal controlled intersections along Coast Highway from the west City limit to the east City limit, all signal controlled ' intersections along Jamboree Road from San Joaquin Hills Road to Coast Highway and all signal controlled intersections along MacArthur Boulevard from Bison Avenue to Coast Highway. These intersections represent all those ' that would be potentially impacted by the subject project. ' -8- ' Conclusions ' It should be noted that the proposed theater expansion project is not expected to affect the morning peak hour. While analyses were conducted for morning peak traffic conditions, no location was affected due to no traffic ' being added to that time period. Based upon an analysis of each of the 20 intersections potentially ' affected during the afternoon commuter period by the proposed expansion of Edwards Theater complex, only the east approach to MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive was found to exceed 1 percent. of "existing plus committed ' projects" traffic on any approach to any of the intersections. All remaining intersections and the other approaches to MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive passed the one percent test. In fact, with the previously mentioned single exception, the additional traffic expected on the system t during the afternoon peak period as a result of the expansion of Edwards Theater Complex represents less than one half of one percent increase at all other locations. ' The reason the east approach to MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive exceeded the 1 percent criterion was the relative low existing and projected westbound traffic volumes at this intersection. An Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) analysis was conducted at MacArthur Boulevard and San Miguel Drive as a result of the location failing the initial 1 percent test. This evaluation revealed that the level of service at the intersection ' will not be adversely affected by the small amount of traffic generated on the east approach (14 vehicles) or by the 16 vehicles generated on the north approach by this project. The actual I.C.U. value increased from 0.89 to ' 0.90 with the addition of the traffic generated by the project. These Values do not exceed the 0.90 volume/capacity considered to be allowable under the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The primary reason for the ' intersection being found at the 0.90 percent of utilization level is the existing traffic and traffic volumes associated with previously approved projects in the area. The theater expansion is predicted to add only 1 percentage point to ' the I .C.U. value. Summary ' Based on the results of this study of 20 intersections potentially affected by the proposed project, it is believed that no significant impact will be realized at any of the locations evaluated. The project has no affect on ' morning peak traffic periods. ' -9- 1 1 1 A P P E N D I X 1 1 1 1 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/ORANGE ST ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) AM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peek 2 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 258 Q 255 3 ! 0 Southbound 210 O O Z 10 2 ' Eastbound 5537 30 /196 67165 Fib 0 — Westbound 1 2>- 3 Z7 70 Z8 1 ' r Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' �E G�bwi �ti UGC I Gr it 0,95 I t DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: �y EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I i 1 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/ORANGE ST 1 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring g 86 PM ' Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume 1 Northbound 183 D O Southbound 2 O p 13 Z O 1 Eastbound3709 20* 724 443 3 4 4- Westbound 1 5651 31 1163 1 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 1 61^0w-4 Fctc)-or 15 O-SS°1v 1 1 1 11 1 E: April 21, 1986 DAT PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/PROSPECT ST ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring g 86 M Peak 2, Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2, Hour Growth Peak 2, Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2, Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 144 O O 144 1 I p Southbound 400 D 1 O ' Eastbound 4521 254 1203 S749 57 O _ Westbound 14 405 Z876 2Q D ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume t 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. �6�Uw�-ti j=cactor is O,S S 1 ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: �� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/PROSPECT ST ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring pM Peak 2y Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Nour Peak 2 Hour Peak 2§ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 117 O 0 1 /-7 i I 0 south bound 260 0 1960 3 0 ' Eastbound 3311 /5* 72-8 4057 41 /6 _ Westbound 33x i163 7/88 • 72 O ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LIT Peak 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. ,1 ' Growi�� t'aclor is O,ss 70 1 1 1 1 ' DATE: April 21, 1986 ' PROJECT: q EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/BALBOA BL-SUPERIOR AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Minter pring 19 16M ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2xs Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2+ Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound 1986 O 0 1986 20 D southbound 604 O l6 620 6 Q ' Eastbound 4167 25�' 901 SO91 S l p ' westbound 1104 Gam` 66Z 174Z 1-7 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 211 Hour Traffid Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 . � Groc.�-1-h F�c�or is D,55 1 ' ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT:. EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY & BALBOA BL/SUPERIOR AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Inter pring 86 PM Peak 21, Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2-� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound 1755 0 4-7 OZ O Southbound297 0 2ZZ. 4-519 45 0 ' Eastbound 4368 24 44 3236, 1 / Westbound 6322 35* q03 7260 73 D LJ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2x Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' Growl 17 rah Jer is 0.55 '7p 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: 3 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/RIVERSIDE AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1986 ) AM Peak 22 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k, Hour Growth Peak 2)g Hour Peak 2> Hour Peak 2h, Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound. 100 0 34 134 1 O Southbound 809 D AZ, 851 9 0 Eastbound 6322 35A 903 7Z60 73 D _ Westbound 2996 /b R32 3944 39 O 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. t ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: 6 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I i ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/RIVERSIDE AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) PM Peak 2sa Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2s Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 44 d b 44 Q Q Southbound 1296 Q 41 1337 15 0 tEastbound 6040 33* 1/60 7233 7z M _ Westbound 5586 3 1* /150 6747 6& ' 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. 61now•t h racfor ie, 0.55% 1 1 1 1 April 21, 1986 DATE: PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I I, 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/TUSTIN AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) AM t Peak 2)1 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume — Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 11 Q Southbound 116 Q 13 /29 1 Q ' Eastbound 5487 30 1 865 3 2 i 0- Westbound 3246 /8-* 920 4/84 4Z Q ' rY Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected lJ Peak 2Z Hour Traffic Volume ' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected [� Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: a EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/TUSTIN AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 19 86 PM Peak 2-� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h, Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound 15 D O 15 0 I Q Southbound 148 D O D ' Eastbound 4029 2 * 115) 5202 52 / _ Westbound 5856 ' 32* !I -77 7065 71 D ' 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. 1 1 1 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: �� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/DOVER DR-BAYSHORE DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) AM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2, Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume - Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 335 O 0 335 3 ! Southbound 2571 0 121 08 9 Z. 27 0 1 Eastbound 4827 27 870 572 57 D _ Westbound 5182 1 ** �]Zq 6128 t 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-, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. EcLc-tbouv>J fcLo-1or 15 0,557 �-� �Jes-�-hcund 6�oas�� �ac�or rs D,32 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: y EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/DOVER DR - BAYSHORE DR ' (Existing Traffic. Volumes DuScu on Average winter/Spring g _ M Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existin g Projects Projected Direction Peak 2+a Hour ReGrowth gional 1. of Projected I Project i Volume Volume Peak VolumeHour Peak lu Hour PeaYo7umeour Peak 2y HOL Yo7ume Volume ' Northbound i • 268 0 Zhf3 , 1 South bound + _ 33 O 1 3176 q4 ,�Z 7G 3 3 I Castbound 1 O ' 4104 23�` ---------------- Westbound 6 : lg !43 5 /6 _ 120¢ 3 70 ' 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 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. . ' JF Easi-�nd 6row•tli Factor i5 0,55 * ,X- Wef)th-1LM6( • (rOLIA-1 FGclor it) 0132% I ' April 21, 1986 PROJECT: DATE: �S EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION MO., T --- ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/BAYSIDE DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1911AM Peak 2h Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1, of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2's Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2+y Hour j Peak 2h Hou i Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound J 1322 O p ( Southbound 180 ISO 2 O Eastbound 6782 22 83 76€3'7 77 p Westbound 3532 ) 1 -y- 894 4437 ¢¢ ' Q 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 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization ' (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' Glbwth Fc�c�Dr �s O,3 Z`7 11 April 21, 1986 PROJECT: ' DATE: ,33 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORm I 9.� I ' N Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/BAYSIDE DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes ase Vol nvUrage Winter/Spring 9 PM Approach g PeRe Regional Approved ' Existing Direction I Peak 2y Hour Droyrth Peek Jests Protected 1� of Protected I Protect i Volume yol,,,,� 2ty Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hoy Yolume Yolume Volume Northbound I Volume ' ffEastbound 824 1 r 40 i 162 / D o z o ' 352 zo7514 2 4 383 9` D ' — -- Project Traffic is estimated to be lets than 1% of Projected Peak 2-� Hour Traffic Volume Q 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. ' C/Y�whlt F<AC or t April 21, 1986 PROJECT: DATE: �q EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION Foar4 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on nVC1,09d Inter pring NT6FAM Peak 21$ Hour Approach Existin Projects ' Direction Peak 2h Hour RGraxihl Projects Projected 1-- of Projected ! Project Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2 Volume k Hoy Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound I Volume � � _ ' ' 0 001 20 southbound 1454 374 �+ Eastbound i 7570 24 4 7 54 �HE ZR O ' westbound q S 2733 . . Z 3 596 3352. 34 D Project Traffic is estimated to be less than iS 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. ' at Scuth nc� 6row'th Fexc-br is 0,0`1 % ' 8a57-bound &r^ow+A FaCIear is O 3Z 1�e�llx�u��d Gnowrt{� Fcuetor- is 0, 83,7 1 ' April 211 1986 PROJECT: DATE: �y EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FO-y T f ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic, Volumes wdacu on Average inter pring 19 _ M ' I n Existing Peek 2h Hour Approved hDProec Regional Projects Projected Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2)s Hour 1Peak 2y Projected I Peak 2eCHou j Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume Volume f Northbound' 1117 So I O ' 5 Jc 5 Eastbound '� 0 5678 S� 1 � 1lestbound ��� •� � 5.3 � � 5147 ' • _' 3 63q S Z 9 58 ' 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1Z 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. 6<Du`Rlbnc.r d 6rewth Fae-1t)r is 0'0°1 II ' -K-* Ec,':, --6GuviJ Gr©cOi-h Fcxe-lor• i6 D, 3Z `Z W(25) - oc.cvfl 6rous �=aeinl, rs 0.83 1 ' April 21, 1986 PROJECT: DATE: �3 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM 1 ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/NEWPORT CENTER. (Existing Traffic. Vol-- OuSau on Average inter pring g 86 AM Existing Peak 2h Hour Approved PProved Direction ; Peak 2h Hour Regional Projects Projected 1- of Projected ProSect i Volume Volume Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2 Hour Volume Volume Vol me Peak guy Hcc Northbound I Volume ' 0 p D 6OSouthbound 512 Z3 Eastbound Westbound 3904 IS 44 5 1 1 t1 3388 Z8 541 3qS? ¢p 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. " ' � • Growl-1, Facfor i� c�.8 3% ' A PROJECT: DATE: April 21, 1986 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/NEWPORT CENTER (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) PM ' Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 21� Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2+ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound O D D D D Southbound 2494 D 2 97 2 79 1 2 IF3 D ' Eastbound 3888 3Z-"(— 7 54 4674 I _ Westbound 3232 2 7"- 489 3748 37 3 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 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. � Gr�w+i� Feaeir�r is D�83�� 1 ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: 7 E'DWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/AVOCADO ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86)AM Peak 2k Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 231 Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 455 Q —450 .505 Jr^ ! O Southbound 6 0 15 31 1 a o Eastbound 15 261 2207 248e) 25 o _ Westbound 3152 26* 655 3553 38 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 21 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' � Gr'crui-h Fac'la�^ is O,g37 1 ' DATE: April 2Is 1986 PROJECT: o EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY AVOCADO ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 19 86 PM Peak 2-, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 437 D 11 56 southbound 21 O 1 O ' Eastbound 3Z* 650 4572 46 O _ Westbound 2818 1 473 3314 33 3 ry Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume ' Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' --Y- &,owth FaC'lor^ Pb 0. 83`, ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: 5-� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/MACARTHUR t (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 8 AM Peak 23, Hour Approved ' Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2 Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume tNorthbound O D 0 O O O out Dun 1451 5 Z 17 Z)fj 17 ' Eastbound 2271 �q215 2525 2 0 — Westbound1 7125 I 907 1 g 1 l 4- 1 Q ' Ejr 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. �f Sou l h b�c end G rbw�� rc���o r i s 0, 37 07o 1 Ea�� bou11c1 Growl ��er 15 ©,8307p ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: , ., EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/MACARTHUR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 9 86 PM Peak 23s Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 231 Hour Growth Peak 231 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 0 O b Q I O South bound 3480 13 444 33 37 -39 O ' Eastbound 4516 ?j7'v�E 2/ 6 SZb 9 53 O _ Westbound 3870 4517 S 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 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. --- 50L,(thb uno( Grbw-t-M Facfor is 0,3770 K-K- Ea-0tb0WId 61,060 tl FCLefcr ib 4,837o Wcbt6und 61'ow-i-A Fccc}or 1's 1.15'0 ' DATE: April 211 1986 PROJECT: 3"� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY GOLDENROD (Existing Traffic Volumes ased on Average Winter pring 19 86 AM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected In of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour j Peak 2), Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume tNorthbound 306 © 26 332 3 Southbound 164 0 S /6 q Z O _ ' Eastbound 2051 247(- 333 240 I 24 _ L Westbound1 5277 _6 9 I I 6249 6z O ' r y Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 1 1 � 1 April 219 1986 DATE: PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection LDENROD s ase on (Existing Traffic Volume verage Winter/Spring 19 86) PM ' Peak 22 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 21� Hour Growth Peak 215 Hour Peak 23, Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 256 0 16 274 3 0 Southbound 181 0 10 ( 91 2 0 Eastbound 5711 66 q 2-6 6703 67 0 _ Westbound 3488 -"z- 550 40 78 41 J ED ' 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. April 21, 1986 DATE: 7 PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I t ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/MARGUERITE (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) AM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 21� Hour Growth Peak 2;, Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2, Hour j Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume I — ' Northbound 556 0 (� rJ6Z Southbound 463 20 1 4 3 1 S ' Eastbound 2102 24-1(- 281 2407 24- _ Westbound 5600 4* 684- 654s 45 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 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 1 1 1 1 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY MARGUERITE ' (Existing Traffic Vol—u—m—es--Fas—ed on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) PM Peak 21� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 21S Hour Peak 2 Hour Peak 2 Hour Volume — Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 662 D O 66Z 7 I O Southbound 722 730 7 O ' Eastbound 4837 Westbound 35'l� S 36 ZO 36 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2j 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. � Grcu�tl� Faeio� is l IS�b 1 1 1 1 1 ' DATE: April 211 1986 PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/POPPY ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86 AM ' Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 73 O O 73 1 southbound 122 O Q I Z Z 1 Q ' Eastbound 1537 16* Z?6 1831 1 Q _ Westbound 6397 74' 884 7 355 1 74 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. ' � Grc,W-f�t1 �aC'.1'Gr� !S 1•IS`T DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: � � EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HWY/POPPY ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 -U) pM ' Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected FPiroject Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 235 Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2s Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume tNorthbound 155 0 0 155Z ! 0 Southbound 593 O 0 595 ' Eastbound 5064 5,5-x— 57 59 72 60 0- Westbound 3430 1 ?J SZ9 1 3998 1 40 3 ry Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected t� 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:_ April 21, 1986 PROJECT: �'� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SANTA BARBARA DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86) AM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2's Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4311 4* 609 49z4 South bound 2671 �E 74 3 3 47 33 ' Eastbound L Nestbound 443 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. ' Grow,l kk FQe-hor fs ©,oci 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: wa EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SANTA BARBARA ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter pring 19 _) PM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2+1 Hour ' Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 23� Hour Peak 2� Hour j Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2585 5/0 309 7 �� ! Southbound 3889 G' ' Eastbound ' westbound 1833 D 261 ZO i¢ 1 ZI (� ' 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. � Growi-h Fc�c1-or is O.O� April 21, 1986 PROJECT: DATE: ,� s EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD ' (Existing Traffic. Volumes based on verage inter pring 986 M ' Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1, of Projected I Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 21 Hour Peak 21, Hour Peak 2>f Hour Peak 2>s Hai Volume Volume Volume_ Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 3987 241 4 71 Z 47 Southbound 4205 4" 9S0 5/5 SZ O ' Eastbound 793 ! O GCB Westbound 414 Q Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ' El Peak Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. ' Gr^ow1-h Foctcw- is U 0�1 April 21, 1986 ' PROJECT: DATE: ��� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD SAN JOA UIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on Average inter Spring 19 _) PM ' Peak 23k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 21'g Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4235 4-k 640 4679 4 Southbound 6 3 �I D I 4 1• 4 I I ' Eastbound 0 33 67 ' Westbound 667 O 4-3G I I D3 11 p ' 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 2h Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. Grain I la l=actor is D.OG ' April 21, 1986 DATE: ty 7 PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL SAN MIGUEL DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter pring 19 86 AM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2j, Hour Growth Peak 2), Hour Peak 215 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 3915 " 407 4336 43 I Q southbound 1991 7"t 4Z5' 2 Z3 4- 0 Eastbound 346 0 At 42-2 4- 0 _ ' westbound 594 Q 1 34- 728 7 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 22 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. Gr�,,Loth Factor is 0. 377 ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: 13o EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL SAN MIGUEL DR ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average nter pring 86 PM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2;1 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume Northbound 2378 Southbound 3605 15 476 41 /6 ' Eastbound 2061 9 60/6 Z y!6 7, Q Westbound 751 ' 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. ' C7vocvA /il�zefo/- i5 O. 37� DATE: PROJECT: 3� FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersec:tion MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/spring 19 8-0 AM ' Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume Northbound 3477 13�' 31 3604- 3 C9 0 L hbound 3023 7'� 54 36 4 37 0 tbound 3 0 174 667 7 tbound 2118 O 39 1 2167 1 Z 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. Nor�thbouvld G,2cw y-h Fac�or is o, 37 `fi ' Sc uf-Ilbourrcl. GfCwth Factor is 0, ZYZ DATE: April 21, 1986 '/ 3�f PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersec:tion MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD — (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/spring M ' Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2608 435 30S.3 31 0 Southbound 5751 13-"- '736 6500 65 1 ' Eastbound 2367 413 27 5 O 2 0 _ Westbound 1143 L 01 75 IZIB 1 Z O ED ' 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. Morthbouyid &rmo-kh Fac0r)r jS 0. 3-7 -�-� 5c�uthboun� Grows-h Fc��1vr (s O. Z�� ' DATE: April 21, 1986 7340 PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection MACARTHUR BL FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 86 AM ' Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound J� Jc ! 0 Southbound 3322 UZ(, 40 O Eastbound 326 O O 3Z6 Q _ ' Westbound 1540 O So 1590 1 !6 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume ' Q 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. 1 Groff i ), FaCio�^ Z 37, ' April 210 1986 DATE: 'i3s PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersec:tion MACARTHUR BL FO/ RD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on AverageInter pring 19 86 PM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 216 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume ' Northbound 4308 56 SZ O ' Southbound i - R ! 9 448 1 84 ! / Eastbound 1365 0 38 1 O 3 14 D Westbound 1 68 D 6 6 I Z 3 4 1 2 D 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. Gr©wth Fao �Or, is ©. Z3% 1 1 1 DATE: April 21, 1986 ' �G PROJECT. EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL BISON AV ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 86)TM ' Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2> Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 6126 66 8 167 ! Q southbound 4706 1 1* p _ ' Eastbound 1 589 1 O 1 1 DO 7 O _ 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 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 6?'ci.0*1I Nnc1-0r is D.239c, ' DATE: April 21, 1986 PROJECT: y EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis t Intersection MACARTHUR BL/BISON AV (Existing Traffic Vol—um-e-s—Fa—sed on Average inter Spring 19 86 PM ' Peak 21s Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 5195 1 ZEE 58 6 0 r> 60 � ' Sorthbound 7145 9 1 ej coo 7C I 16 Eastbound 2019 0 273 2Z9 7- 23 O Westbound 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. � 6rbWi-4� FaeFoi- is 023�0 ' April 21, 1986 DATE: �l �ly PROJECT: EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION FORM I I. C,Lf/AJJtlCI ' INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD & SAN MIGUEL DRIVE 7135 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1986 AM ' EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING EXISTING REGIONAL COMMITTED PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT; Movement Lanes Lanes PK HR V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/C Capacity Capacity Volume Ratio Volume Volume w/o Project Ratio Volume ' NL 1 1600 I 1 238 1 0.15 I O NT 1 1 1416 1 1 I 175l — } 3200 } 0.48 ' NR I 1 118 SL 1 1600 'I I 2 1 •0 * 0 I O 1 0,00*1 O 1 — ' ST } 3200 I I 453 } 0.29 1 I 13`p 1 0.55 1 1 SR 1 1 467 I Z 1 7.5 1 — 1 o i — EL 1 3200 1 1 83 1 0.03 I Q I j? I I 0.0-3 O 1 - ' ET 1 1 34 l 0 1 1,5 Zl0,02 1 0 l } 3200 1 } 0.02 I 22 x ER 1 0 1 6 l o l — ' WL 1 1600 1 1 120 1 0.08 * 0 1 4 1 0,08-x- 1 0 — wz 62. 149 ' } 3200 I 1 9 } 0.05 I O I — wR o ' EXISTING I.C.U. 1 0.58 1 EXIST + REG GROWTH + 00441ITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0,64 1 ' EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I 0,6¢ ' 1—Lr'�rojected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ' 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ' Description of system improvement: ' ' April 21, 1986 PROJECT F=%t 11 3� EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION ' INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD & SAN MIGUEL DRIVE 7135 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1986 Pm ' EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING EXISTING REGIONAL COMMITTED PROJECTED PROJECT PROJECT Movement Lanes Lanes PK HR V/C GROWTH PROJECT V/C Ratio Volume V/C ' Capacity Capacity Volume Ratio Volume Volume w/o Project Ratio Volume ' NL I 1600 I I 83 I 0.05 * O i 12 I 0,06* 1 © 1 -- NT } 3200 I I 671 } 0.25 I 2 1 /69 11 0. 31 1 0 1 ' NR I I 128 I O l 51 — SL I 1600 I I 8 1 0.01 I O I 2 — ' ST 1374 _ } 320C I I } 0.48 I 5 I 21'7 ZI © S I O 10,66 SR 163 I D I 16 1 1 16 1 — EL 1 3200 I I 500 I 0.16 I OET } 3200 I 2ss } o.la I O I 61 I O,2o'F I p l — ER I I 313 i D l 2z I — 1 0 I — ' WL I 1600 I I 123 I 0.08 * D I 3 10.08*Wr 1 0 I — ' } 3200 i i loa } 0.04 I O I to I O.c3s 1 ¢ 1 o,Os WR 1 0 1 0l — ' EXISTING I.C.U. I 0.71 1 EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. ' EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 10,90 ' I—brprojected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 t1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 ' (_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project Description of system improvement: — ' April 21, 1986 PROJECT FORM II 3 3 EDWARD'S THEATER EXPANSION