Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTPO070_PAC-BELL SITE TP0O70 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1768 Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION To: Office of Planning and Research From: City of Newport Beach ❑ Sacramento,CA 95814 1400 Tenth Street,Room 121 Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1768 Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 County Clerk,County of Orange (Orange County) Public Services Division ED P.O.Box 838 Date received for firing at OPR: Santa Ana,CA 92702 Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Name of Project: GPA 90-1(G) ; Amendments No. 701, 721; TPO #67 & /170; and a Finding of General Plan Consistency State Clearinghouse Number. Lead Agency Contact Person: TelephoneNo.: Project Location: 1177 Camelback & 101 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA Amendment of Planned Community Regulations to permit office, Project Description: rather than retail use on PacTel site, on Camelback. Transfer of 13,550 sq.ft. of retail development from PacTel to Newport Center. This is to advise that the City of Newport Beach has approved the above described project on Marsh 1 1 , 1991 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Date) 1. The project❑will ® will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. ❑ An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. ® A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures Q were❑ were not made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations❑was Q was not adopted for this project. 5. Findings M were❑ were not made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available to the General Public at the Planning Department of the City of Newport Beach,3300 Newport Boulevard,Newport Beach, CAA 92659-1768;714/644-3225 _LLt& 6 March 12, 1991 Advance Planning Manager Signature Date Title ;;•i•r , l ",!i•t••••'e Ji CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME .a ••CERTIFICATE.OF FEE EXEMPTION De Minimis Impact. Finding - : • ProJedt-41t16/Location•.(inc tide county) GPA 90-1(G) ; Amendments-No. 701-, 721; TPO #67 & #.70; and a Vinding of General Plan Consistency 1177 'Camelback & 101 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA ' Project Description: Amendment of Planned Community Regulations to permit office, rather than retail use on PacTel site, on Camelback. Transfer of 13,550 sq.ft. of retail development from PacTel to Newport Center. Findings of Exemption (attach as necessary) : No significant resources exist on the project sites and therefore no impacts will occur. Certification: I hereby certify that the public agency has made the above finding and that the project •will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. Sandra L. Genis t Title: Principal Planner Lead Agency City of Newport Beach Date March 15. 1991 Section 711.4, Fish and Game Code DFG:12/90 SEW PO R > CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P.O.BOX 1768,NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659-1768 C'gCl FppN�P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 August 23, 1990 David Dmohowski, Vice President, Entitlement Irvine Pacific Co. P.O. Box I Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904 Subject: Office Building Traffic StudX Dear Dave: The City of Newport Beach has received a proposal from Weston Pringle &Associates, to provide professional traffic engineering services for the proposed office building on the Pac- Tel site. The proposal contains an outline of the scope of work required, estimated time schedule for completion, and estimated budget required for the preparation of the studies. The fee requested has been reviewed by the City, and the amount requested for the tasks required is considered appropriate and warranted. To proceed with the study, it is requested that you remit the following fees: Consultant Fees $ 4,000 City Fees (10%) ' 400 Total Request: $ 4,400 Please make the check payable to the City of Newport Beach. Your prompt attention in this matter is appreciated. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director Patricia L. Temple Advance Planning Manager Attachment P\JM\EIR-DOCS\PAC-TEL.TPD 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach W * AWeston Pringle & Associates TRAFFIC &TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING August 21, 1990 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ms. Patricia Temple CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Principal Planner City of Newport Beach AM AUG 2 o »g� PIA P.O. Box 1768 718,9110,11,12,11213141516 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 Dear Ms. Temple: We are pleased to submit this proposal to provide professional traffic engineering services for the proposed Office Building on the Pac-Tel site on Camelback project in the City of Newport Beach. This proposal is based upon information provided by you, previous work, and our understanding of the needs of the study. In general, the work would consist of preparing a traffic analysis as required to satisfy the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) as well as other traffic related concerns for inclusion in an EIR for the project. The analysis would include consideration of existing, committed projects, regional growth and project traffic as required by TPO. Criteria and methodologies contained in the TPO would be utilized to identify potential traffic impacts along with previous studies and development plans. Site access and parking provisions would also be reviewed. Mitigation measures would be recommended as may be required. A report would be prepared summarizing our findings and recommendations. We would envision the following specific tasks to be required for the completion of this study: 680 Lengsdorf Drive • Suite 222 • Fullerton, CA 92631 0 (714) 871-2931 • FAX:(714) 871-0389 r RV V Q000 • R 1 0 o a 400A 4400 + 41 /r ' I w • -2- TASK 1 - DATA COLLECTION We would assemble all available information pertinent to the study. This would include development plans,existing traffic volumes, committed projects and traffic, regional growth;factors, planned circulation improvements, previous studies, and similar data. We would discuss the project with you and the City Traffic Engineer to ensure our understanding of the project and the scope of the study. It is understood that the City would provide AM and PM traffic volumes data for existing conditions and for committed projects. A field review would be made to familiarize ourselves with existing conditions. TASK 2 - TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT Estimates would be made of trips to be generated by the project during the AM and PM peak hours and 2.5 hours peak periods. These estimates would be based upon trip generation rates applicable to the specific uses and acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. A geographic trip distribution will be developed for the site. This distribution would be reviewed with the City Traffic Engineer. Estimated project traffic would be assigned to the street system in conformance with the distribution pattern. TASK 8 -ANALYSIS The City Traffic Engineer has identified 14 signalized intersections to be included in the study. The "One Percent" test would be conducted at each of these intersections to identify potential traffic impacts as required by the TPO. Any intersections that failed the"One Percent"test would be further evaluated with the ICU analyses. (Both the "One Percent" and the ICU analyses would include existing, committed project and regional growth traffic as prescribed in the TPO). Any intersections with.ICU values greater than 0.90 would be analyzed to identify mitigation measures. Any potential deficiencies would be identified. Site access would also be examined with respect to traffic operations and safety. Mitigation measures would be recommended as may be required. Sketches of recommended mitigation measures would be included where applicable. • -3- TASK 4 - REPORT AND MEETINGS A report would be prepared summarizing our findings and recommendations. The report would contain the required supportive data and conform to the requirements of the TPO. We would meet with you, and other City Staff and others as may be required during the course of the study. Attendance at two (2) public hearings is included as a part of this proposal. We would be prepared to begin work on this study upon receipt of authorization. It is anticipated that approximately four (4) weeks would be required to complete the study. This schedule assumes no delays in obtaining City supplied data. Our fee for the work outlined in this proposal shall be based upon personnel charges plus direct expenses as indicated in our Standard Rate Schedule, a copy of which is attached and made a part hereto. In no case would the total fee exceed $4,000.00 without prior approval from you or your representative. Since it is not possible at this time to estimate the time required for additional meetings and/or presentations concerning this project not mentioned in this proposal, our staff would be available with the fee based upon our Rate Schedule in addition to the previously stated maximum. The additional work shall be conducted when requested by you or your representative. Statements shall be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon completion of the work at our option and payable within 30 days after submission. After 45 days, unpaid invoices shall have a 1.5 percent per month service charge added. We shall have the option of halting work on your project when statements are unpaid and overdue unless mutual agreement is achieved. This proposal may be considered as effective for six months from the date of this letter. If the project is not completed within six months after the scheduled completion date (due to no fault of Weston Pringle & Associates) additional reimbursement may be required due to increased costs. If required, such additional reimbursement will be the • -4- required due to increased costs. If required, such additional reimbursement will be the subject of negotiation and mutual agreement between both parties. This letter can serve as a memorandum of agreement and our authorization to proceed. Please sign one copy and return it to us for our files. We are looking forward to serving you on this most interesting project. Respectfully Submitted, WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES w Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer CONTRACT APPROVAL Approved by: Title: Firm: Date: w* 1 �°y P duo A Weston Pringle & Associates TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE Effective January 1, 1990 Professional Staff Hourly Rate Firm Principal $95.00 Senior Engineer $75.00 Associate Engineer $50.00 Assistant Engineer $40.00 Support Staff Engineering Draftsman $40.00 Secretary $20.00 Clerical, Field Enumerator $25.00 General 1. Travel, reproduction, telephone, supplies, and other non-wage direct costs are billed at cost plus ten (10) percent. 2. Hourly rates apply to travel in addition to work time. 3. Statements will be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon completion of work. Statements are payable within 30 days of receipt. Any invoices unpaid after 45 days shall have a service charge added at a rate of 1.5 percent per month (or maximum permitted by law) on the unpaid balance. 4. Compensation for services performed will not be contingent upon the necessity of client to receive payment from other parties. Any controversy of claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association and judgement upon the award rendered by the arbitration may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 5. These rates are based upon procedures and methods outlined in the American Engineers' Manual on Engineering Practice Numbe r 45. Society of Civil Eng gi g 680 Langsdorf Drive 0 Suite 222 • Fullerton, CA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 • FAX:(714) 871-0389 * " FA FINDINGS AND CONDITIONSITtR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-1(G) AMENDMENT NO. 721 TRAFFIC STUDY No. 70, FINDING OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY AMENDMENT NO. 701 AND TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 67 AS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 11, 1991 A. Environmental Document: Accept the environmental document, malting the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the 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. 3. That based on the information contained in the initial study, comments received, and all related documents, there is no substantial evidence that the project (as conditioned or as modified by mitigation measures identified in the initial study) could have a significant effect on the environment. B. GPA 90-1 (G) 1. The proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community. 2. Based on information contained in the traffic study which has been performed for development proposed under the proposed amendment, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project. C. General Plan Consistency Determination/Density Transfer 1. A traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development, and the traffic analysis indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system. D. Amendment No. 721, Traffic Study No. 70 Findin 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. r Final Findings and CondOns • Page 2 2. 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. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a general office development will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of .90 or less. 4. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a medical office development will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue and the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue, and could potentially add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue. 5. That the Traffic Study suggests circulation system improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. 6. That the proposed project, including circulation system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major,' "primary-modified," or "primary' street. Conditions: 1. Medical office uses on the Pactel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. 2. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimise the impacts of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil + Final Findings and Condions • Page 3 and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 7. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers, or other similar tools which produce grinding, pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m, to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 8. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 9. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimise light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. 10. The Water Plan shall be approved by the Utilities Director before any building plans are approved, and when the building is ready to be built, that the Utilities Director will take the most current drought situation into consideration. 11. That all developments shall be subject to Water Conservation Laws or regulations, if any exist prior to the issuance of a building permit. D. Amendment No. 701, Traffic Study No. 67 Findings: 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. Final Findings and Cond�Cons • Page 4 2. 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. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for up to 20,000 square feet of retail development will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of a critical intersection, and will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of.90 of less. 4. That the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic.service on any "major, "primary-modified," or "primary' street. Conditions: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, Final Findings and CondlTCons Page 5 jack hammers, or other similar tools which produce grinding, pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m, to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 8. The Water Plan shall be approved by the Utilities Director before any building plans are approved, and when the building is ready to be built, that the Utilities Director will take the most current drought situation into consideration. 9. That all developments shall be subject to Water Conservation Laws or regulations, if any exist prior to the issuance of a building permit. CITY OF -NWORT BEA 0 COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES S March 11, 1991 ROLL CRLL INDEX 3. Mayor Sansone opened the public hearing GPA 90-1(G) regarding GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT No. 90- (45) 1(G) - A request by THE IRVINE COMPANY to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pacific Telephone site (Camelback Street and Bison Avenue) ; and the acceptance of an Environmental Document; AND PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 721 - A PCA 721 request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pacific Telephone site; AND TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 70 - For proposed office Traffic development on the Pacific Telephone site. Study 70 Property located at 1177 Camelback Street; AND FINDING OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY - A Finding request by The Irvine Company for a finding GP Cnstncy of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island; AND PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 701 - A PCA 701 request to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Regulations so as to increase the allowable development allocation by 13,550 square feet; AND TRAFFIC STUDY No. 67 - For increased square Traffic footage at Fashion Island. Study 67 Report from the Planning Department. It was noted that the 1988 General Plan permits 33,550 sq. ft. of commercial development in parcel 2(a) adjacent to Bison, midway between MacArthur and Jamboree, which is currently undeveloped and used as a parking lot. The proposal is to reduce the allowed density in parcel 2(a) from 33,550 sq. ft. to 20,000 sq. ft. of office development. The difference of 13,550 sq. ft. would be transferred to Fashion Island within the Loop, and in the Volume 45 - Page 69 CITY OF NWORT BEACO COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES ROLL CRLL March 11, 1991 INDEX Loop, The Irvine Company currently has GPA 90-1(G; 5,643 sq. ft. of unused entitlements. The applicant is proposing to combine the 131550 sq. ft. being transferred from parcel 2(a) to Fashion Island with the 5,643 sq. ft., resulting in approximately 19,000 sq. ft, of commercial development in Fashion Island. It would not increase the total sq. footage of the General Plan, but decrease parcel 2(a) by 13, 550 sq ft. and increase Fashion Island. The Traffic Phasing Ordinance shows that in Fashion Island the proposal meets all the requirements of the TPO, and if parcel 2(a) remains as office development, it meets all criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. If medical offices goes in on Parcel 2(a) , which it could, then the intersection at Bison and MacArthur would be impacted greater than the TPO allows, and it would require the construction of one additional two-lane, which would be accomplished by restriping. The Advance Planning Manager, Patty Temple, advised the Council that mitigation, which was taken out by the City of Irvine, will again be required at this location. The City of Irvine is basically doing all of the planning to add the third northbound through lane in relation to the improvements coming in at Bonita Canyon Road as a result of the connection of Pelican Hill Road. The required mitigation here, will be a widened intersection with the three lanes staying on northbound MacArthur through the Bonita Canyon intersection, and actually become a part of the City of Irvine's project; therefore, the city of Newport Beach does not anticipate a problem at this time. Discussion ensued, wherein it was suggested that conditions be placed on the subject project that; 1) The Water Plan is to be approved by the Utilities Director before any building plans are approved, and when the building is ready to be built, that the Utilities Director will take the most current drought situation into consideration; 2) All developments will be subject to Water Conservation Laws or requirements, if any exist prior to the issuance of a building permit; and 3) Delete . . ,"and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays". . .from Condition No. ' 7, Exhibit A, regarding construction hours. Volume 45 - Page 70 *vC I TY OF NEWPORT BEA#JJ COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES S March 11, 1991 ROLL CPLL INDEX Council was advised that at the next City GPA 90-1(G Council meeting, an emergency ordinance will be introduced, and if six members of the Council concur, the ordinance will be adopted and take effect immediately. The conditions that are being proposed on this project will be in effect immediately before a building permit is issued. David Neish, Representative of The Irvine Company, addressed the Council, stipulating that they concur with the Findings and Conditions contained in Exhibit A, and would respectfully request that the Council uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and approve their requests. He added that as far as any future developments in Fashion Island and North Ford, if it is the council's intent to adopt an emergency ordinance in the next two weeks, they can be assured that The Irvine Company will not be drawing building permits within that two-week time frame. He also stated that The Irvine Company would not have any problem in accepting the conditions that they be subject to water conservation laws and/or regulations, and complying with the condition that there be no construction on Sundays and holidays. Motion x Motion was made to; All Ayes A. Adopt Resolution No. 91-20, Res 91-20 approving GPA 90-1(G) , amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative , Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternative use on the Pactel site; B. Adopt Resolution No. 91-21, Res 91-21 approving Planning commission Amendment No. 721, amending the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pactel site; C. Traffic Study No. 70 for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site; D. Adopt Resolution No. 91-22, Res 91-22 approving Planning Commission Amendment No. 701, increasing permitted development in the Fashion Island Planned Community by 13,550 square feet; Volume 45 - Page 71 CITY OF NWORT BEAOO �r COUNCIL MEMBERS MINUTES ROLL CflLL March il, 1991 INDEX E. Traffic Study No. 67 for entitlement transfer and increased square footage at Fashion Island; F. Adopt Resolution No. 91-23, Res 91-23 making a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet ' of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island; G. Acceptance of an environmental document for the above approvals; a. The Water Plan is to be approved by the Utilities , Director before any building plans are approved, and when the building is ready to be built that the Utilities Director will take the most current drought situation into consideration; I. All developments will be subject to Water Conservation Laws or regulations, if any exist prior to the issuance of a building permit; and J. Condition No. 7, Exhibit A - Delete . .-."and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. E. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1. Allan Beek, 2007 Highland, addressed the SJHT Crdr council regarding the certification of the EIR for the San Joaquin Hills "Feeway," stating that this is the same as a toll road. He advised that the bond underwriters will want collateral to guarantee payment of the construction bonds for this toll road, and presented facts that the toll booths will not be able to pay off the bonds. He added that he is very much afraid this collateral consists of the property taxes collected from real estate, which includes many of the homes in Newport Beach, and commented that there is an opinion from Senator Marion Bergeson's office which confirms this fear--that the Joint Powers Authority really does have taxing power. He feels that every effort Volume 45 - Page 72 w � City Council Meeting March 11, 1991 Agenda Item No. y ^3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: City Council FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: A General Plan Amendment 90.1(G)(Public Hearing) Request by the Irvine Company to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pacific Telephone site (Camelback Street and Bison Avenue); and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND B. Amendment No. 721 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pacific Telephone site. AND C. Traffic Study No. 70 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. LOCATION: Lot 6, Tract No. 6680, located at 1177 Camelback Street, on the northwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street, in the North Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P-C AND D. Finding of General Plan Consistency (Discussion) Request by the Irvine Company for a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. 1 TO: City Council - 2. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND E. Amendment No. 701 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Regulations so as to increase the allowable development allocation by 13,550 square feet. AND F. Traffic Stud No.y 67 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for increased square footage at Fashion Island. APPLICANT.': The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Suggested Action If desired, approve the following: Resolution No. , approving GPA 90-1(G), amending the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and Financial ,Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pactel site. Resolution No. , approving Amendment No. 721, amending the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pactel site. Traffic Study No. 70. Traffic study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. Resolution No. approving Amendment No. 701, increasing permitted development in the Fashion Island Planned Community by 13;550 square feet. Traffic Study No. 67. Traffic study for entitlement transfer and increased square footage at Fashion Island. Resolution No. ,making a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. AND TO: Citylouncil - 3. Acceptance of an environmental document for the above approvals. Applications/Project Objective The above approvals are needed to accomplish the applicant's objective which is to gain entitlements for the construction of approximately 20,000 square feet of office space at the Pacific Telephone (Pactel) site located in the North Ford Planned Community and approximately 20,000 square feet of additional retail space at Fashion Island. Planning Commission Recommendation On February 7, 1991, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council that the above applications be approved. Copies of the Planning Commission minutes and staff report are attached. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director SANDRA GENIS Senior Planner Attachments: Exhibit A, Findings and Conditions Resolution No. ;approving General Plan Amendment 90-1(G) Resolution No. , General Plan Consistency Resolution No. , North Ford P-C Amendment Resolution No. , Fashion Island P-C Amendment Excerpt of the February 7, 1991 Planning Commission Minutes. February 7, 1991 Planning Commission staff report with Traffic Study No. 70, Traffic Study No. 67, and Negative Declaration and Initial Study attached. \env\pacte1\ccsf2 TO: City Council - 4. EXHIBIT A FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS A. Environmental Document: Accept, the environmental document, making the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the 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. 3. That based on the information contained in the initial study, comments received, and all related documents, there is' no substantial evidence that the project (as conditioned or as modified by mitigation measures identified in the initial study) could have a significant effect on the environment. B. GPA 90.1 (G) 1. The proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community. 2. Based on information contained in the traffic study which has been performed for development proposed .under the proposed amendment, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project. C. General Plan Consistency Determination/Density Transfer 1. A traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development, and the traffic analysis Indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system. D. Amendment No. 721, Traffic Study No. 70 Findines: 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. 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 S4. TO: City foluncil - 5. • 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a general office development will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of .90 or less. 4. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a medical office development will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue and the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue, and could potentially add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue. 5. That the Traffic Study suggests circulation system improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. 6. That the proposed project, including circulation system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major, "primary-modified," or "primary" street. Conditions: 1. Medical office uses on the Pactel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. 2. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach,the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair • � t� 6 TO: City Council - 6. of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 7. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers, or other similar tools.which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the' hours of 8:00 a.m, to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 8. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away,periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 9. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. D. Amendment No. 701, Traffic Study No. 67 Findings; 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. 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. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the ,project generated traffic for up to 20,000 square feet of retail development will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of a critical intersection, and will not add to anunsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of.90 of less. 4. That the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major," "primary-modified," or "primary" street. t > TO: City Council - 7. Conditions: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers, or other similar tools which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. cL u RESOLUTION NO. _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN FORPROPERTY LOCATED AT 1177 CAMELBACK STREET[GENERAL PLAN AMEND- MENT 90-1(G)] WHEREAS,the Land Use Element of the General Plan sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element designates the general distribution and general location and extent of the,uses of land and building intensities in a number of ways, including residential land use categories and population projections,commercial floor area limitations, the floor area ratio ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Land Use and Circulation Elements are correlated as required by California planning law; and WHEREAS, the provisions and policies of the Land Use and Circulation Elements are further implemented by the traffic analysis procedures of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the implementation programs of that Ordinance and the Fair Share Traffic Contribution Fee Ordinance; and WHEREAS,.pursuant to Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach,the Planning Commission has held apublic hearing to consider a certain amendment to the land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and has recommended approval of Amendment No.90-1(G); and WHEREAS,the proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community;and WHEREAS, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration with supporting Initial Study for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and 1 1 > • i WHEREAS,on March 11,1991,the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding the amendment; and WHEREAS,the public was duly noticed of the public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan; and NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that an amendment to the General Plan is hereby approved so as to provide for Administrative;Professional,and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pactel site located at 1177 Camelback Street. ADOPTED this —day of . 1991. Mayor ATTEST. City Clerk SLG\GNV\I'ACML\CC-R0.GPA 2 9 .r: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING A TRANSFER OF ALLOWED DEVELOPMENT FROM THE NORTH FORD/SAN DIEGO CREEK PLANNED COMMUNITY TO FASHION ISLAND IN NEWPORT CENTER WITH THE DETERMINATION THAT THE TRANSFER IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS,the Land Use Element of the General Plan sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS,in the adopted Land Use Element,the City established the ability to transfer development allocations;and WHEREAS, transfers may be approved so long as the traffic system is not adversely affected;and WHEREAS, a traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development;and WHEREAS,the traffic analysis indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment and has recommended the approval of the proposed transfer; and WHEREAS,on March 11,1991,the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding the amendment; and WHEREAS, the public was duly noticed of the public hearing; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that a transfer of 13,550 square feet of retail development from the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community to the Fashion Island Planned Community in Newport Center is determined to be consistent with the intent of the General Plan and is hereby approved. I ID • i ADOPTED this _day of 1991. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk SLG\CNV\PAGI'CL\GPDEr•CC.RES 2 • L� w RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH FORD SAN DIEGO CREEK PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.721) WHEREAS,the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides specific procedures for the implementation of Planned Community zoning for properties within the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community District regulations is necessary in order to provide for it specified square footage of additional office development in Area 2'of the Planned Community consistent with the General Plan and is necessary to maintain consistency between the Newport Beach General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment and has recommended approval,of Amendment No.721. WHEREAS;on March 11,1991,the City Council of the City of NewportBeach held a public hearing regarding the amendment; and WHEREAS,the public was duly noticed of the public hearing; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve an amendment to the Planned Community designated as Planning Commission Amendment No.721 to provide for an additional 20,000 square feet of office development in North Ford Area 2a as shown on Exhibit 1 attached. i I I� ADOPTED this_day of 1991. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk SLG\PNPAPACreL\CGRES 721 Attachment: Exhibit 1 2 1� t`• a Exhibit 1 GHQ• �i I t l\ r•Y M '� �� s G QL4 ••• •'• •• •''. • Ind p ;eAM is. ri it LIGHT INDUSTRIAL- Office pJJJJ�7 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL- 4'U!1!� Office/CommAnd, ® OFFICE ® COMMERCIAL �; : • SPECIAL LANDSCAPED i STREETS AND AREAS •'. RESIDENTIAL M.' PARK LAND LUSE PLAN NOT TO SCALE NORTH FORD/SAN DIEGO CREEK ws.+b•+Ur PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT �"' 3Sw�G�nm�Nr.:ni M SECTION I. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS North Ford / San Diego Creek Approx. Additional Additional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres Sq. Ft. DU's Light Industry-Office 1 16.7 -0- -0- Light Industry-Office- Commercial/industrial 2 25.5 90;000'* -0- TOTAL 42.2 20,000 -0- Approx. Additional Additional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres S . Ft. DU's Commercial 3 5.0 50,000 -0- Office 4 22.0 Undetermined -0- Residential 5 79.0 -0- 888 Park 6 12.0 -0- -0- TOTAL 118.0 50,000 888 The above statistics are based on gross acreage and do not account for buildable area. The analysis also indicates additional allowable development in the existing developed areas (Area 1 and 2) and allowable development in the undeveloped areas (square feet or DU's) per GPA 82-1. Existing developed areas are assumed to be built out b Planned Community-Amendment•Amendment 514. In Areas 1 and 2, new development Y tY ma replace existing development so long as no square feet are added. (It may be Y p 9 p assumed that Areas 1 and 2 will be the subject of future PC District Amendments-as reedevelopment occurs.) * This 20 000 square fee4'of additional allowable develo ment is allocated to Area 2a (See Land Use-Plan Map). /5 i 0 SECTION V. LIGHT INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND .PROFESSIONAL, AND COMMERCIAL, AREA 2 A. Intent It is the intent oft is district to emit the location of a combination of light industrial uses h n permit g , business and professional;office uses, and Commercial/Industrial uses engaged in the sales of products and services relating to and supporting the development plan, provided such uses are confined within a building or buildings, and do not contribute excess noise, dust, smoke, or vibration to the surrounding environment nor contain a high hazard potential due to the nature of the products, material or processes involved. Ancillary activities, i.e., vehicle and bulk storage, associated with the above prmitted uses may be located outside a structure provided screening requirements as set forth in this document are observed. B. Permitted Uses The following uses and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Director are compatible shall be permitted: t. Commercial/Industrial Uses primarily engaged,in commercial activities that involve some degree of on-site production, assembly, repair, maintenance, etc., of the product sold or products related to the service rendered,,such as, but not limited to, the following list of examples: a. Appliance sales, rental, repair b. Furniture sales, rental, repair C. Locksmith d. Plumbing shop e. Carpet sales and cleaning f. Drapery sales and cleaning g. Home improvement centers h. Equipment rental centers 1. Wholesale-retail food distributors J. Nursery and garden stores 2. Public and Quasi-Public Uses a. Post office b. Public and quasi-public utility business office and related service facilities C. Utility substation d. Service and maintenance facilities J. Office (Area 20 -Permitted office uses include.business and professional offices, corporate :headquarters facilities, and medical offices. ' C. Building site area Twenty thousand (20,000) square feet minimum. 6 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FASHION ISLAND PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO. 701) WHEREAS,the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides specific procedures for the implementation of Planned Community zoning for properties within the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS,a transfer of General Plan development intensity from the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community to the Fashion Island Planned Community has bee found to be consistent with the intent of the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the existing Fashion Island Planned Community Development Plan and District Regulations do not provide for the additional development transferred to Fashion Island; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment and has recommended the approval of Amendment No.701; and WHEREAS,on March 11,1991,the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held a public hearing regarding the amendment; and WHEREAS, the public was duly noticed of the public hearing; NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve an amendment to the Planned Community designated as Planning Commission Amendment No.701 to provide for an additional 13,550 square feet of retail and restaurant development in Fashion Island as shown on Exhibit 1 attached. 1 17 �_0 t` k ADOPTED this_day of ,1991. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk scc\errv\rncreL\coaM:rot Attachment: Exhibit 1 2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Total Acres 75 Acres Retail/Restaurant ^ -7 1 32 jt3O,, S Ft. ,,.., A.I., q• Theater 1,700 Seats 2-13-90 4 r �r _t:k S. 8. Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial developments, including video game devices in theaters and restaurants, where such uses do not alter the character of the area in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. Accessory buildings shall be allowed only when constructed concurrent with or subsequent to the buildings housing primary uses. 9. Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. Office uses, only when such offices are ancillary to and in the same building as a permitted use, including Fashion Island management and leasing facilities. USES WHICH REQUIRE A USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted subject to the securing of a use permit in each case: 1. Gymnasiums, health clubs and other uses which are of a similar nature. 2. Free standing drive-in, outdoor and take-out restaurants located outside the Fashion Island Mall area. 3. Drive-in facilities. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Floor Area and Development Limits. The total gross floor area permitted in all structures, except theaters and enclosed bicycle lockers, shall not exceed 1,310,750 , ,30(f gross square feet; provided, however, that the floor area devoted to parking within a building shall not be considered in determining the total floor area allowed. Of this floor area limitation a maximum of 15% may be for restaurant uses, including drive-in and take-out restaurants, both freestanding restaurants and those within the Fashion Island mall area. Commercial land uses not within a struc- ture, such as balloon vendors, ice cream carts, popcorn carts and similar uses which are "portable" in nature, shall not be a reduction of entitlement established by this section. Outdoor areas and kiosks which are defined by planters, awnings, shade structures, fences or rails and are for the exclusive and permanent use for display or seating by a retail or restaurant use shall be calculated as floor area. Incidental outdoor seating, covered or uncovered, which is not for the exclusive use of any retail or restaurant establishment shall not be calculated as floor area ae entitled by this section. Bicycle storage lockers contained within structures shall not be 2-13-90 11 �a j � , ,,,y ,, •,,•• .0`Op,AMISSIONERS MINUTES �0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX A 1 General Plan Amendment go-1(G)(public Hearing) xtE _c-2 Request by the Irvine Company to amend the Land Use Element GPA 9:(Res. -244)•iG of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and A721 Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pacific (Res.1246) Telephone site (Camelback Street and Bison Avenue); and the TS No.70 acceptance of an environmental document. GP consist. (Res.1245) INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach A701 (Res. 1247) AND TS67 A 2 Amendment No 721 (Public Hearing) Approved Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pacific Telephone site. AND A 3 Traffic Study No 70 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. LOCATION: Lot 6, Tract No. 6680, located at. 1177 Camelback Street, on the northwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street, in the North Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P-C AND -4- COMMISSIONERS February J, 1991 MINUTES` ' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL_ CALL INDEX B ] Finding of General Plan Consistency (Discussign) Request by the Irvine Company, for a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND B 2 Amendment No 701 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Regulations so as to increase the allowable development allocation by 13,550 square feet. AND B 3 Traffic Study No 67 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for increased square footage at Fashion Island. APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. David pp Neish appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant, and he concurred with the Findings and Conditions in Exhibit "A". There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. Motion * Motion was made to recommend and adopt General Plan Amendment No. 90-1 (G) (Resolution No. 1244), Amendment No. 721 (Resolution No. 1246), Traffic Study 'No. 70, Finding of General Plan Consistency (Resolution No. 1245), Amendment No. -5- 1Z COMMISSIONERS f 0 mIrvu ca f CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL I INDEX 701 (Resolution No. 1247), and Traffic Study No. 67, to the City Council. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Glover, Don Webb, City Engineer, and James Hewicker, Planning Director, explained that Traffic Models are not projected for a specific time frame, and the projections consider the remaining development rights as specified by the General Plan. Ayes * * * * * * The foregoing motion was voted on, MOTION CARRIED. Absent A. Environmental Document: Accept the environmental document, making the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the 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. 3. That based on the information contained in the initial study, comments received, and all related documents, there is no substantial evidence that the project (as conditioned or as modified by mitigation measures identified in the initial study) could have a significant effect on the environment. B. GPA 90-1 (GI 1. The proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community. 2. Based on information contained in the traffic study which has been performed for development proposed under the proposed amendment, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project. -6- Z3 February7, 1991MINGTES� COMMISSIONERS O.o �p�Y•a� CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH _ROLL CALL INDEX C. ,General Plan Consistency Determination/Density Transfer 1. A traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development, and the traffic analysis indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system. D. Amendment No 721 Traffic Study No. 70 Findin 1. That the proposed amendment is, consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15AO of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S-1. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a general office development will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of.90 of less. 4. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a medical office development will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue and the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue,and could potentiallyadd to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue. 5. That the Traffic Study suggests circulation system improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. -7- Xq . ' � 'COMMISSIONERS . MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX ROLL CALL . at t e propose protect, me u mg circu aeon system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified" or "primary' street. Conditions: 1. Medical office uses on the Pactel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. 2. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologisF subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the"Approved as Built"grading plans shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach,the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 8 COMMISSIONERS February7, 1991 MINUTES` 0 � OyY cam CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX 7. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers,or other similar tools which produce grinding, pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 8. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on- site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 9. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. E. Amendment No 701 Traffic Study No. 67 findings: 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and.provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. 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. -9- i • reoruaiy r, 1771 MINUTES >;OMMISSIONERS OA �p�•pce CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INDEX ROLL CALL 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for up to 20,000 square feet of retail development will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of a critical intersection, and will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of .90 of less. 4. That the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified" or "primary" street. Conditions: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a . civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach,the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be -10- Z? COMMISSIONERS hebruary7, 1991 MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 pim. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers,or other similar tools which produce grinding, pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control progranvin compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and' construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on- site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. A. e Plan Amendment N 0-1 A Public Hearin item xo.3 Request to consider endment to the Land Use Element of GPA 90-1A the General Plan to establish lling unit limit consistent with A723.12481 existing development for the residenU as on Domingo Drive Approved and Amigos Way in the Eastbluff area of New Beach. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND -11- Planning Commission Meeting February 7, 1991 Agenda Item No. 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: A. General Plan Amendment 90-1(G)(Public Hearing) Request by the Irvine Company to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pacific Telephone site (Camelback Street and Bison Avenue); and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND B. Amendment No. 721 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pacific Telephone site. AND C. Traffic Study No. 70 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. LOCATION: Lot 6, Tract No. 6680, located at 1177 Camelback Street, on the northwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street, in the North Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P-C AND D. Finding of General Plan Consistency (Discussion) Request by the Irvine Company for a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach } 4 TO: Planning Commission - 2. AND E. Amendment No. 701 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Regulations so as to increase the allowable development allocation by 13,550 square feet. AND F. Traffic Study No 67 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for increased square footage at Fashion Island. APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Applications/Project Objective It is the applicant's objective to gain entitlements for the construction of approximately 20,000 square feet of office space at the Pacific Telephone (Pactel) site located in the North Ford Planned Community and approximately 20,000 square feet of additional.retail space at Fashion Island. In order to accomplish this, the following approvals are needed: GPA 90-1(G). To amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pactel site. General Plan Amendment procedures are contained in City Council Policy Q-1. Amendment No. 721. To amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pactel site. Amendment procedures are contained in Chapter 20.84 of the Municipal Code, and Planned Community procedures are contained in Chapter 20.51. Traffic Study No. 70. Traffic study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. Traffic Study requirements are contained in Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code. Amendment No. 701. To increase permitted development in the Fashion Island Planned Community by 13,550 square feet. Traffic Study No. 67. Traffic study for entitlement transfer and increased square footage at Fashion Island. 30 • TO: Planning Commission - 3. Finding of General Plan Consistency. Finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. Acceptance of an environmental document for the above approvals. The individual applications are discussed in more detail below. Subject Properties and Surrounding_Land Uses The Pacific Telephone (Pactel) site is located at the northeasterly corner of Bison Road and Camelback Street at 1177 Camelback Street. The site is vacant and largely paved. To the north is the United States Post Office, to the east, across Camelback Street, is retail commercial development with multi-family residential development to the northeast; to the south, across Bison Avenue, are attached homes, and to the west are a church and an office/research and development facility. Fashion Island is a regional shopping center located in the central portion of Newport Center, a major commercial center. Land uses within Newport Center are office,restaurant, hotel, residential and recreational uses. North, east, and south of Newport Center are residential uses; to the west are recreational and hotel uses and vacant land. Environmental Documentation In accordance with the California Environmental Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K-3, an Initial Study has been prepared for the proposed project. Based on the information contained in the initial study, it has been determined that the project, as conditioned, will not have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project and is attached for the Planning Commission's review. Project Approvals The specific approvals necessary for the proposed project are discussed in the following sections: General Plan Amendment No. 90-1 (G). The Pactel site is currently designated for Retail and Service Commercial uses with a maximum gross floor area of 33,550 square feet under the Land Use Element of the General Plan. This designation permits retail sales, offices which offer goods or services directly to the public, hotels, motels, restaurants, commercial recreation, and senior citizen housing facilities. Separate corporate type offices are not permitted. The applicant proposes to develop 20,000 square feet of office space on the site, potentially as medical offices, but possibly as separate corporate offices which do not offer goods or services directly to the public. The latter use could be provided only under the Administrative, Professional, and Financial Commercial designation of the General Plan 3 TO: Planning Commission- 4. which is applied to areas predominantly used for office, but which also accommodate support retail and service commercial uses. Inasmuch as medical offices provide services to the public and would be permitted under the Retail and Service Commercial designation, the'only new use contemplated would be separate corporate offices. The office use would be compatible with the surrounding institutional, commercial, and office/research and development uses, and is expected to be as compatible with nearby residential uses as the currently permitted retail uses. Further, as discussed in more detail below, an office use on the site would generate less traffic than a retail use. Staff therefore has no objection to this request. Finding of General Plan Consistency for Density Transfer. The Land Use Element of the General Plan provides for transfers of development rights in Newport Center subject to City approval with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent'of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The floor area limits established by the General Plan are designed to coordinate land use intensity with the City's circulation system and insure that traffic does not exceed the level of service desired by the City. Thus, development allocations may be considered consistent with the intent of the General Plan only if the associated traffic will not cause the desired level of service to be exceeded. As discussed below and in the attached traffic studies, an increase in permitted retail and service commercial development at Fashion Island and associated decrease at the Pactel site will have no adverse impact on traffic, and would thus be consistent with the intent of the General Plan. Amendment No. 721. The Pactel site is located in Area 2 of the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community. The PC District Regulations specify that Area 2 is to be used for light industrial uses, business and professional offices, and support sales and services. The PC Statistical Analysis provides for various uses by acre, but does not specify any additional allowable square footage for Area 2. However, the Land Use Element of the General Plan would permit up to 33,550 square feet of commercial development on the currently vacant Pactel site. It is proposed that 20,000 square feet of development be provided for the site under the PC, with the remaining 13,550 square feet provided under the General Plan to be transferred to Fashion,Island. TPO No. 70. In accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance and City Council Policy S-1, a traffic study was performed for a 20,000 square foot office development on the Pactel site (attached). The first step-in evaluating intersections is to conduct a 19o' Traffic Volume Analysis, taking into consideration existing traffic, regional growth and the traffic of previously committed projects. For any intersection where, on any approach leg, the project traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of the projected morning or afternoon peak two and one-half hour volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) is required. Results of the one percent test indicate that the project traffic exceeded 1% of projected traffic on an approach leg of the following intersections: 0 MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue w Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue 3y I� 0 TO: Planning Commission - 5. An ICU Analysis was conducted for these two intersections. It was found that with a general office use on the Pactel site, the ICU values for the two intersections would be less than .90 or remain unchanged as a result of the proposed project. Thus, no mitigation would be required for the development of general office uses, and the development would meet the requirements of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. With medical office use, the PM peak ICU value for the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue would increase from .90 to .91, and mitigation would be required. If medical office use is developed on the site, an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur Boulevard at Bison Avenue would be necessary to mitigate project traffic. It is anticipated that this could be accomplished by restriping to provide an additional lane within the existing paved right of way. Implementation of this improvement in association with a medical office development will meet the requirements of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Amendment No. 701. The applicant proposes to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Plan and District Regulation to increase permitted development in Fashion Island by 13,550 square feet resulting in a total allowable development of 1,324,300 gross square feet. Remaining allowable development at Fashion Island is currently 5,643 gross square feet. The increase would bring remaining allowable development to 19,193 gross square feet. The 13,550 square feet would exceed that currently designated for Fashion Island under the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and is proposed to be permitted as a transfer of General Plan entitlement from the Pactel site. TPO No. 67. A traffic study was performed for development of up to 20,000 square feet of additional retail development at Fashion Island (attached). A one percent Traffic Volume Analysis of twenty four intersections was performed. Results of the one percent test indicate that the project traffic would not exceed 1% of projected traffic of an approach leg at any intersection during the morning or afternoon.peak two and one-half hour period. Therefore, no additional study was required, and the proposal meets the criteria of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Conclusions and Recommendations The proposed applications which will ultimately permit the development of 20,000 square feet of freestanding offices on the Pactel site and transfer 13,550 square feet of entitlement to Fashion Island are compatible with the established land uses. As mitigated, the proposed development will not adversely affect the environment nor anticipated levels of traffic service in the community. Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 90-1 (G), Amendment No. 721, and Traffic Study No. 70, Amendmenf No. 701, Traffic Study No. 67, and the related General Plan Consistency Determination. Should the Commission concur, the attached Resolutions and Findings should be adopted. �3 TO: Planning Commission - 6. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER,.Director Sandra L. Genis Principal Planner Attachments: Exhibit A, Findings and Conditions Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 90-1(0) Resolution, General Plan Consistency Resolution, North Ford P-C Amendment Resolution, Fashion Island P-C Amendment Traffic Study No. 70 Traffic Study No. 67 Negative Declaration and Initial Study \cnv\pactc1\pa-7 34 TO. Planning Commission - 7. EXHI BIT A FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS A. Environmental Document: Accept the environmental document, making the following findings: 1. That an Initial Study and Negative Declaration have been prepared in compliance with the 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. 3. That based on the information contained in the initial study, comments received, and all related documents, there is no substantial evidence that the project (as conditioned or as modified by mitigation measures identified in the initial study) could have a significant effect on the environment. B. GPA 90-1 (G) 1. The proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community. 2. Based on information contained in the traffic study which has been performed for development proposed under the proposed amendment, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project. C. General Plan Consistency Determination f Density Transfer 1. A traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development, and the traffic analysis indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system. D. Amendment No 721 Traffic Study No. 70 Findin : 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15AO of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S-l. 3S T TO: Planning Commission - 8. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a general office development will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization ,of .90 of less. 4. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for a medical office development will be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue and the intersection of Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue, and could potentially add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue. 5. That the Traffic Study suggests circulation system improvements which will improve the level of traffic service to an acceptable level at all critical intersections. 6. That the proposed project, including circulation system improvements will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified" or "primary" street. Conditions: 1. Medical office uses on the Pactel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. 2. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading,permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 3. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 4. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of .the Building.Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 5. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair 36 TO: Planning Commission - 9. of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 7. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers, or other similar tools which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 8. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away,periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 9. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. D. Amendment No 701 Traffic Study No. 67 Findinas 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and provides for land uses compatible with the surrounding area. 2. 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. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project generated traffic for up to 20,000 square feet of retail development will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on any leg of a critical intersection,and will not add to an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any critical intersection which will have an Intersection Capacity Utilization of.90 of less. 4. That the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service on any "major", "primary-modified" or "primary" street. 0 r TO: Planning Commission - 10. Conditions: 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating, the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system, utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays,, 8:09 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills, jack hammers, or other similar tools which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such,measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away, periodic watering of stockpile soil, and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 3� • Att nt 2 ,- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1177 CAMELBACK STREET (GENERAL PLAN AMEND- MENT 90-1 (G)l WHEREAS,the Land Use Element of the General Plan sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, the Land Use Element designates the general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land and building intensities in a number of ways, including residential land use categories and population projections,commercial floor area limitations,the floor area ratio ordinances;and WHEREAS, the Land Use and Circulation Elements are correlated as required by California planning law;and . WHEREAS, the provisions and policies of the Land Use and Circulation Elements are further implemented by the traffic analysis procedures of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and the implementation programs of that Ordinance and the Fair Share Traffic Contribution Fee Ordinance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 707 of the Charter of the City of Newport Beach,the Planning Commission has held a public hearing to consider a certain amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan; and WHEREAS,the proposed office use is compatible with the existing land uses in the North Ford Planned Community; and WHEREAS, the circulation system will not be adversely affected by the proposed project; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration with supporting Initial Study for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and 1 �� 3y • ` �T BY Thomas Edwards Secretary SLG\PM1PACrHL\PCGPRPS 2 40 RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SFER OF ALLOWED DEVELO MENTFROMTHENORTHFORD%ANDIEGO CREEK PLANNED COMMUNITY TO FASHION ISLAND IN NEWPORT CENTER WITH THE DETERMINATION THAT THE TRANSFER IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS,the Land Use Element of the General Plan sets forth objectives, supporting policies and limitations for development in the.City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS,in the adopted Land Use Element,the City established the ability to transfer development allocations; and WHEREAS, transfers may be approved so long as the traffic system is not adversely affected; and WHEREAS, a traffic analysis was prepared to assess the impact of the proposed transfer of development; and WHEREAS,the traffic analysis indicated that the transfer would not adversely affect the City of Newport Beach traffic system; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines;and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach that a transfer of 13,550 square feet of retail development from the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community to the Fashion Island Planned Community in Newport Center is determined to be consistent with the intent of the Geheral Plan and is recommended for approval to the City Council. 1 ADOtrMl3 this day of 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES NOES ABSENT BY Jan Debay Chairman BY Thomas Edwards Secretary SLG\M4V\PACrEL\OPDlrr 2 a RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMEND- MENT TO THE NORTH FORD SAN DIEGO CREEK PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.721) WHEREAS,the Newport Beach Municipal Code provides specific procedures for the implementation of Planned Community zoning for properties within the City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community District regulations is necessary in order to provide for a specified square footage of additional office development in Area 2 of the Planned Community consistent with the General Plan and is necessary to maintain consistency between the Newport Beach General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council an amendment to the Planned Community designated as Planning Commission Amendment No. 721 to provide for an additional 20,000 square feet of office development in North Ford Area 2a as shown on Exhibit 1 attached. ADOPTED this day of 1991,by the following vote, to wit: 1 Y � AYES NOES' ABSENT BY Jan Debay Chairman BY Thomas Edwards Secretary Attachment: Exhibit 1 daknY\p,dd\Arum 2 'l "I q Exhibit 1• G�Pa G � �G a µ N •. . .;. rrrrr LIGHT INDUSTRIAL- Of ice ~� ' ® LIGHT INDUSTRIAL- Office/CommAnd. ® OFFICE rrrrrr rrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrr ® COMMERCIAL rrrrrr rrrrr ', rrrrr�rrrrrr SPECIAL LANDSCAPED rrrrr rrrrrrr f`,. rrrr rrrrrrrrr STREETS AND AREAS rrrrrrrrrrrrrr P� rrrrirrrrrr � �� rrrrrrrrr RESIDENTIAL -„• PARK LAND USE FLAN NOT TO SCALE NORTH FORD/SAN DIEGO CREEK p� PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT SECTION I. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS North Ford / San Diego Creek Approx. Additional Additional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres S . Ft. DU's Light Industry-Office 1 16.7 -0- -0- Light Industry-Office- Commercial/Industrial 2 25.5 20;Q00* 0- TOTAL 42.2 20,000 -0- Approx. Additional FAdditional Gross Allowable Allowable Area Acres S . Ft. DU's Commercial 3 5.0 50,000 -0- Office 4 22.0 Undetermined -0- Residential 5 - 79.0 -0- 888 Park 6 12.0 -0- -0- TOTAL 118.0 50,000 888 The above statistics are based on gross acreage and do not account for buildable area. The analysis also indicates additional allowable development in the existing developed areas (Area 1 and 2) and allowable development in the undeveloped areas (square feet or DU's) per GPA 82-1. Existing developed areas are assumed to be built out by Planned Community Amendment 514. In Areas 1 and 2, new development may replace existing development so.long as no square feet are added. (it may be assumed that Areas 1 and 2 will be the subject of future PC District Amendments as reedevelopment occurs.) * This 26 000 square feet of additional allowable,developmenf is.allocated to Area 2a (See Land Use•Plan Map), SECTION V. LIGHT INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL, AND COMMERCIAL, AREA 2 A. Intent It is the intent of this district to permit the location of a combination of light industrial uses, business and professional office uses, and Commercial/Industrial uses engaged in the sales of products and services relating to and supporting the development plan, provided such uses are confined within a building or buildings, and do not contribute excess noise, dust, smoke, or vibration to the surrounding environment nor contain a high hazard potential due to the nature of the products, material or processes involved. Ancillary activities, i.e., vehicle and bulk storage, associatedwith the above prmitted uses may be located outside a structure provided screening requirements as set forth in this document are observed. B. Permitted Uses The following uses and other uses which in the opinion of the Planning Director are compatible shall be permitted: 1. Commercial/Industrial . i Uses primarily engaged in commercial activities that Involve some degree of on-site production, assembly, repair, maintenance, etc., of the product sold i or products related to the service rendered, such as, but not limited to, the following list of examples: a. Appliance sales, rental, repair b. Furniture sales, rental, repair C. Locksmith d. Plumbing shop e. Carpet sales and cleaning f. Drapery sales and cleaning g. Home improvement centers h. Equipment rental centers i. Wholesale-retail food distributors I. Nursery and garden stores 2. Public and Quasi-Public Uses a. Post office b. Public and quasi-public utility business office and related service facilities C. Utility substation d. Service and maintenance facilities 3 C ice Area 20 Permitted office uses include business and professional offices, corporate head uarters facilities and medical offices. C. Building site area Twenty thousand (20,000) square feet minimum: r RESOLUTION NO._ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 'RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF AN AMEND- MENTTO THE FASHION ISLAND PLANNED COMMUNI- TY DISTRICTREGULATIONS(PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT NO.701) WHEREAS,the NewportBeach Municipal Code provides specific procedures for the implementation of Planned Community zoning for properties within the'City of Newport Beach; and WHEREAS,a transfer of General Plan development intensity from the North Ford/San Diego Creek Planned Community to the Fashion Island Planned Community-has bee found to be consistent with the intent of the General Plan;and WHEREAS, the existing Fashion Island Planned Community Development Plan and District Regulations do not provide for the additional development transferred to Fashion Island; and WHEREAS,the City of Newport Beach prepared a Negative Declaration for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the environmental document in making its decision on the proposed amendment. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council an amendment to the Planned Community designated as Planning Commission Amendment No. 701 to provide for an additional 13,550 square feet of retail, and restaurant development in Fashion Island as shown on Exhibit 1 attached. ADOPTED this day of , 1991,by the following vote, to wit: 1 �V AYES NOES ABSENT BY Jan Debay Chairman BY Thomas Edwards Secretary Attachment: Exhibit 1 SI.G\EM'\PACM\A•AI 2 ji STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 75 Acres Total Acres 4_0 3 3Z4 •• ptk S Ft. Retail/Restaurant ; •--••`•%- 4� Theater 1,700 Seats 2-13-90 4 � D 8. Accessory uses normally incidental to commercial developments, including video game devices in theaters and restaurants, where such uses do not alter the character of the area in respect to their use for purposes permitted in the district. Accessory buildings shall be allowed only when constructed concurrent with or subsequent to the buildings housing primary uses. 9. Temporary structures and uses. Regulations are as specified in Section 20.30.015 of General Controls - Commercial Districts of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10. Office uses, only when such offices are ancillary to and in the same building as a permitted use, including Fashion Island management and leasing facilities. USES WHICH REQUIRE A USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted subject to the securing of a use permit in each case: 1. Gymnasiums, -health clubs and other uses which are of a similar nature. 2. Free standing drive-in, outdoor and take-out restaurants located outside the Fashion Island Mall area. 3 . Drive-in facilities. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Floor Area and Development Limits. The total gross floor area permitted in all structures, except theaters and enclosed bicycle lockers, shall not exceed ' ,"1�:-550- � r,306 gross square feet; 'aev provided, however, that the floor area oted to parking within a building shall not be considered in determining the total floor area allowed. Of this floor area limitation a maximum of 15% may be for restaurant uses, including drive-in and take-out restaurants, both freestanding restaurants and those within the Fashion Island mall area. Commercial land uses not within a struc- ture, such as balloon vendors, ice cream carts, popcorn carts and similar uses which are "portable" in nature, shall not be a reduction of entitlement established by this section. Outdoor areas and kiosks which are defined by planters, awnings, shade structures, fences or rails and are for the exclusive and permanent use for display or seating by a retail or restaurant use shall be calculated as floor area. Incidental outdoor seating, covered or uncovered, which is not for the exclusive use of any retail or restaurant establishment shall not be calculated as floor area as entitled by this section. Bicycle storage lockers contained within structures shall not be 2-13-90 11 [ 7I iL : d7b � p Weston Pringle $. Associates TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING November 27, 1990 RECEIVED BY Ms. Patricia Temple PLANNING DEPARTMENT Principal Planner city Of NEWPORT BEACH City of Newport Beach 3 logo P.O. Box 1768 � �' ve Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 AIA 18f9i��u���1���$��i��6 Dear Ms. Temple: This letter summarizes our analysis of traffic factors related to the proposed Office Building on the Pac-Tel site on Camelback Street in the City of Newport Beach. The study has been conducted to satisfy the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. This study is based upon information provided by you, City Staff and previous studies. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is located at the comer of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. A total of 20,000 square feet (SF) of office use is proposed for the site. Access to the site is proposed at the northeast comer of the site on Camelback Street. Figure 1 illustrates the project location. An alternative use .as a medical office building has also been considered. No specific site -development plan was provided. EXISTING CONDITIONS The streets in the area of the project are fully developed. Camelback Street is a two lane street which is the only vehicular access to the site. The site access is not signalized. Camelback Street connects with Bison Avenue to the south and Jamboree Road to the north which provides regional access. 680 Lenpdorf Drive • Suite 222 • Fullerton. CA 92631 0 (714) 871-2931 • FAX:(714) 871-0389 r DR. SIX 5 0 30 $P11StOL ST m eRlsro NORTH I .14 II L ST �20 5 I $ITI: . I , q 0 7w LEGE 10=DIRECTIONAL SG 25 DISTRISUTON PERC. p•ORO ' . S9 201 1 Q ��;N JQAQU�y 20ir t , 3 ' ar c jf5 + S� Q CoAST H,WY, 10 p c� VIA U to PAACIFIC p� H x PROJECT DISTRi'BUTION VAMON PRINGU &ASSOKIAUS FIQtARS 1 53 Z -2— Existing daily traffic volumes and 1990 ICU values at major intersections are illustrated on Figure 2. These data were provided by the City of Newport Beach. TRIP GENERATION In order to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of the project, it is necessary to estimate the number of trips that would,be generated. Trip generation rates for various land uses have been established by the City Traffic Engineer. These rates are summarized in Table 1. By applying these rates to the land use data, estimates of trip generation were obtained and are listed in Table 2. As indicated in Table 2, the project with general office use would generate 50 AM peak hour trip ends and 45 PM peak hour trip ends. The AM 2.5 hour period would be 95 trip ends and the PM 2.5 hour period, 95 trip ends. If a medical office is assumed, the AM peak hour generation would be 15 trip ends and the PM peak hour 90. The AM 2.5 hour period would be 30 and the PM 2.5 hour period would be 180. TRIP ASSIGNMENT In order to assign project traffic to the street system, it is necessary to develop a trip distribution pattern. A pattem for this site was developed based upon previous studies and area development data. That distribution pattern has been utilized to assign project traffic to the road system and is illustrated on Figure 1. The estimated trips from Table 2 were then assigned to the street ; system in conformance with these distribution patterns. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The traffic analysis has been completed to conform to the criteria of the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. A total of 14 intersections were identified by the City Traffic Engineer for inclusion in the analysis. The first required analysis is the "One Percent" test. An intersection is defined as critical by the Ordinance when the project traffic exceeds one percent of existing plus committed project plus regional growth traffic on any approach to an intersection during the AM or PM 2.5 hour period. A list of committed projects was provided by the City for inclusion in this study and these projects are listed in Table 3. �7 0.61/0.65 37 36 0.46/0.54 DR. 14 0.74/0.60 0.66/0.84aj 0.80/I. 2 \U 4- m m 0.47/0.59 • BRiSToL- S NORTM 0.65/072`��Q�� BRISTOL ST. 29 4 LEGEND 0.83/0.92 SITE 56=DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1.15/0.65 IN THOUSANDS 0.78/0.76 56) 54 SJr,,r.. 0.77/0.66= AM/PM ICU Z Q68/0.66a�p q� 50 10-97/0.74 � m • � ti 9 a 39 61 G�SiO. �� u+ 056/0.54 0.78/0.74 FORD 6 ti 0.62/0.61 d 50 y 0.56/0.44 22 J04 9 51 a m d �32 17 0.8910.79 v~i ►' ¢ it h w¢ 0.45/0.56 ' /<C g fia do W h w �► r m 0.66/0.86Q i `� 28 p z y 54 29 40 64 74 3T� 47 C 60 C0A57 ►+Wy ki` a m ra . VIA eu PACIFIC 52 �O a to 4 0 d d d 0 2 N N Q M r- O an 0.51/0.51 2O3p d c QP d 0 d o p o ,fir d o °D 0.46/0.59 �� C; EXISTING DAILY VOLUMES AND ICU VALUES WFSrON PMGU & ASSOCIA ES FIGURE 2 �5 • • pY r Y —3— TABLE 1 TRIP GENERATION RATES Pac-Tel Site TRLP ENDS PER DEER M LAND USE DESCRIPM Am AM Fm our Office 1,000 SF 2.0 0.4 0.6 1.7 Medical Office 1,000 SF 0.6 0.2 1.9 2.4 �6 ' • • -4- TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION Pac-Tel Site TRIP ENDS PEWOD cFNERAL OFFICE me r OFPZ_CE Daily 400 554 AM Peak Hour In 40 10 Out 10 5 i PM Peak Hour In 10 40 Out 35 50 AM 2.5 Hour In 80 20 Out 15 10 PM 2.5 Hour In 25 80 Out 70 100 �7 6 -5- Y TABLE 3 COMMITTED PROJECTS Hoag Cancer Center Mariners Church Expansion Civic Plaza Big Canyon Villa Apts. Corporate Plaza 1400 Dove Street Newport Place 1100 Quail Street Valdez McLachlan-Newport Place Koll Center NPT No. 1 Koll Center TPP Amend. 4A 1501 Superior Medical Villa Point Newporter Resort Expansion Rosan's Development Amendment No. 1 North Ford Fashion Island #2 Newport Dunes Newport Aquatics Center Bayview Taco Bell City of Irvine Development Newport Retirement Inn Sholaian Newport Classic Inn Edwards Newport Center Newport Lido Medical Center Villa Point I1 Big Canyon 10 Zonta Club Residential YMCA Calty/Poyota Expansion Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero Ambrosia Restaurant Amendment No. 1 MacArthur 28th St. Marina Restaurant 3800 Campus Dr. 15th Street Apartments 3760 Campus Dr. Rockwell Expansion Andrew Restaurant Balboa/Washington Newport Imports Restaurant 5� 1 -6- Appendix A contains the"One Percent" analysis sheets for the 14 intersections analyzed and the results are summarized in Table 4. Review of Table 4 indicates that all intersections passed the "One Percent"test except MacArthur Boulevard and Bison Avenue, and Jamboree Road and Bison Avenue. In conformance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, ICU analyses were completed for the two intersections for those periods that were found to be critical. These analyses are contained in Appendix B and included existing, existing plus regional growth plus committed project and existing plus regional growth plus committed project plus project traffic conditions. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5. Review of Table 5 indicates that all intersections are projected to have ICU values of less than 0.90 or are not made worse for the critical periods with the project and committed project traffic. The "One Percent" and ICU analysis procedures were redone with trip generation estimates for a medical office use. These analyses are contained in Appendices C and D and summarized in Tables 6 and 7. Review of Table 2 indicates that trip ends decrease during the AM peak hour and AM 2.5 hour period when comparing general office use with medical office use. The trip generation increase during the PM peak periods, therefore only the PM peak periods were reanalyzed. In other words, the medical office use would have reduced impacts during the AM periods and possible increased impacts during the PM periods as compared to general office uses. Review of Table 6 indicates that both the MacArthur/Bison and Jamboree/Bison intersections fail the"One Percent" test for medical office use. The ICU values are summarized in Table 7 for the medical office use and an increase from an ICU value of 0.90 to 0.91 is indicated at the MacArthur/Bison intersection. Discussion with the City Traffic Engineer revealed a plan to add a northbound through lane to MacArthur being prepared by CalTrans. With this improvement the ICU value would be 0.80 which is an acceptable condition. S% S 0 0 -7- TABLE'4 CRITICAL INTERSECTION IDENTIFICATION Pac-Tel Site - General Office 2.5 HOUR PERCENTAGES NB S$_ ___EE_ �' - LOCATION gM Bristol St. & Campus Dr. - Irvine Ave. - - - - - - Bristol St. & Birch St. - - - - - Bristol St. & Jamboree Rd. 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 - Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. - - - - - Bristol St. N. & Birch St. - - - - - - - Bristol St. N. & Jamboree Rd. 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 - - - MacArthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 MacArthur Blvd. & Bison Ave. '0.2 0.1 0.3 0.1 1.3 3.0 - Jamboree Rd. & MacArthur Blvd. - - - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 MacArthur Blvd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.2 '0.1 0.1 0.3 - - 0.2 0:1 MacArthur Blvd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.2 0.1 0.1 '0.2 - - - - Jamboree Rd. & Bison Ave. 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 - - 0.7 3.0 Jamboree Rd. & East Bluff Dr. - Ford Rd. 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 - - - Jamboree Rd. & East Bluff N. - University 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 - - - 6D q TABLE 5 ICU SUMMARY Pac-Tel Site - General Office . ICU VA�,S�S FxIS'PIIdG =SSTING +REGIONAL EXISTING +REGIONAL. +COMMITTED EXISTING +REGIONAL +COMMITTED +PROJECT INTERSECTION PERIOD 990 +COMMTTTEI? +PROJECT MacArthur Blvd. 6s 1.18 Bison Ave. AM Peak 0.97 1.18 PM Peak 0.74 0.90 0.90 Jamboree Rd. 6z Bison Ave. PM Peak 0.54 0.66 0.66 10 • , n —4— TABLE 6 CRITICAL INTERSECTION IDENTIFICATION Pac-Tel Site - Medical Office PM PEAK 23 HOUR PERCENTAGES LOCATION B SB --EB— —WB Bristol St. & Campus Dr. - _ Irvine Ave. Bristol St. & Birch St. - - - - Bristol St. & Jamboree Rd. 0.3 0.1 0.3 Bristol St. N. & Campus Dr. - - - Bristol St. N. & Birch St. - - " Bristol St. N. & Jamboree Rd. 0.2 0.1 - MacArthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 0.3 0.3 - 0.3 MacArthur Blvd. & Bison Ave. 0.3 0.2 4.0 - Jamboree Rd. & MacArthur Blvd. - - 0.2 0.1 MacArthur Blvd. & 0.4 San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.3 0.4 MacArthur Blvd. & San Miguel Dr. 0.3 0:3 - Jamboree Rd. & Bison Ave. 0.3 0.3 - 4.0 Jamboree Rd. & East Bluff Dr. - Ford Rd. 0.3 0.5 - - Jamboree Rd. & East Bluff N. - University 0.3 0.2 - - -10- TABLE 7 ICU SUMMARY Pac-Tel Site - Medical Office ICU YALtTVS — EXISTING EXISTING +REGIONAL EXISTING +REGIONAL +COMMITTED EXISTING +REGIONAL +COMMITTED +PROJECT INTERSECTION P (1990) +COMMPI�D_ 0) MacArthur Blvd. & 0.91 0.80 Bison Ave. PM Peak 0.74 0.90 Jamboree Rd. & Bison Ave. PM Peak 0.54 0.66 0.67 63 I� 1 7 —11— SITE ACCESS ON-SITE CIRCULATION AND PARKING Since no specific site plan has been provided, no review of traffic factors related to access, on-site circulation or parking have been completed. These items willrrequire review when a specific plan and use are submitted. SUMMARY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to the development of the Pac-Tel Site as required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Estimates were made of trips to be generated by the project for both general office and medical office uses and the impact of•these trips evaluated in terms of the Ordinance. No intersections were found to be impacted by the general office project and improvements would be required for medical office use. Principal findings of the study are the following: 1. General office use would generate an estimated 50 AM peak hour trip ends and 45 PM peak hour trip ends while medical office use would generate an estimated 15 AM peak hour trip ends and 90 PM peak hour trip ends. 2. Of the 14 intersections evaluated, two did not pass the "One Percent" test required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 3. With general office use, both intersections would have ICU values less than 0.90 or not be changed with project traffic. 4. With medical office use, the intersection of MacArthur/Bison would require improvement. 0 • -12— MITIGATION MEASURES The following measure are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project. 1. Add a northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison if medical office use is proposed. (This is a current CalTrans project.) 2. Review access, on-site circulation and parking when specific plan is available. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of Newport Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE &ASSOCIATES Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP:hd #4109E bS 1`{ f APPENDIX A ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS - GENERAL OFFICE 6� • i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pr ng 90 AM Peak 211 Hour approved Projected 1� of Projected Project Regional Projects Peek 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour Approach Existing Peak 2�y Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Volume Volume Volume I Northbound 3980 f�2 4 4(o' i` �� 0 Sou thbound 1208 5� G-' 481 S D (v53 � -7 Eastbound 6848 O 0 ' Westbound 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ® Peak 2;1 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. 6� DATE: PROJECT: FORM I '6 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average WinteMpring 199 o PM Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected' Project Direction Peak 24 Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour PeaVolumeour I Peak Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2587 Z&' �2-9►70 3c� 0 Southbound 2889 �32- 4`y J —7J 'i" ^�Eastbound © (p t 5 1 �O O Westbound O c r 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: PROJECT: _ 17 0 1% Traffic volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Avcluve nter pr ng 9U Peak 2y Hour APproVal 1� of Proj4cted Project Regional Projects Projected Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour I , Approach Existing Growth Peak 2s, Hour Peak 2&S Hour volume volume Direction Peek 2k Hour volume volume volume ! ' volume � Northbound 1107 f 6�1 Southbound f O Eastbound 4662 0 987 � � � O v ! Westbound 0 Q 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. by DATE: t9 PROJECT: FORM I ,r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ,ST M (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on Average 1n er pring _ Peak 24 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2$ Hour Peak 2k Hour PeaVo� ur Direction Pea Volume Hour volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 587 (U Southbound 1792 4 ((( O Eastbound 7'13 Q- O 9030 , � O Westbound gV Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AaJ Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected (� Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (IiC.U. ) Analysis is required. �a DATE: PROJECT: �Q MOM 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n el` pring AM Peek 2k Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Protect I Regional projects Peak 2 Hour Peak 2 Hour Approach Existing Growth peak 2 Hour PeaYo22)Hour Volume i Volume Direction Peak 2 Hour Volume volume I Volume �3 �Q Northbound 5389 � 1703 Z� Southbound Eastbound 6337 di 7614 I -7(p Westbound oProj o O Peakect d Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Hour Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 24 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: y0 PROJECT: FORM I c - r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pr ng 9o) PM f Peak 2$ Hour Approved �I Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Proj at Approach t Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Pent iy Hour Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 427 1� - 2 Southbound �q 2117 d Eastbound- 5977 71 Westbound 0 U O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected W Peak 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. �2 DATE: 21 PROJECT: FORM I • i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N CAMPUS DR (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon verage Inter pring 90 AM Peak 211 Hour Approved lo. of Projected Project I Regional Projects Projected Peak 211 Hour Peak 2h Hour Approach Existing Peak 2y Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume volume Direction Peak Volume Hour GrowthVolume volume volume • Volume Volume �� I Northbound 4602. 154 475C° 00 Southbound Eastbound 0 O Westbound 2284 �2q 2�v 8 29 r� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2;1 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. 7� DATE: PROJECT: FORM I b 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N CAMPUS DR (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon Average n er pr P ng 90 M Peek 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional, Projects ted Projeet Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 21s Hour Peak 2k Hour PeaYo� ur , PeaYo'kHour Volume Volume Volume Yoiume 2 i Northbound 3106 7Q �Ai �^-7!z I O Southbound 8 d 'LSrj 4t 4` O O Eastbound i westbound 6206 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 23, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. 7� DATE: y3 PROJECT: _ ______FORNLI __ • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection HRISTOL ST R BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon Verage inter pring �0_ AM Peak z4 Hour Approved Projected I% of Projected Project Regional Projects Peak 2y Hour Pea 2h Hour Approach Existing peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Direction Peak ;u Hour me Growth Volume volume Northbound 3119 C7 =1" 35 O Southbound 897 O Eastbound i O Westbound 2634 0 SCcCa 32� �� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected 12 Peak 2;1 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. �5 DATE: J-4 PROJECT: FORM I • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTO'L ST N/BIRCH ST M (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er pring _ i Peak 2y Hour Approved ; of Protected Project Approach Existing Regional Protects Peak 2ected IN, 24 Hour Peak 24 Hour Direction Peak 24 Hour Growth Peak Volume Hour Peak 1u Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ! I Northbound 1314 i34 1448 O 3940 14 3`� Sauthbound 3645 O O Eastbound Westbound rrM Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected 11�i Peak 2� 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: y5 PROJECT: 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N/JAMBOREE RD AM (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon Verage inter pring _ Peek 211 Hour Approved Projected 1m. of Projected Project Regional Projects Peak 2k Hour Peak 2;1 Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume i Volume Direction Peak 24 Hour Volume Volume Voluae Volume 2qZ 94f 9154 9Z 3 0. Northbound 7971 Q2 Southbound 1545 -7 Eastbound Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2;1 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. -71 DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysi-s Intersection BRISTOL ST N JAMBOREE RD .(Existing Traffic Volumes based on Mrage ginter. pring 9 90 PM Peek 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional projects Projected 1� of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peek 2k Nour Peak 2k Hour PeeVo;kHour Pea�o, our Volume Volume Volume Volume I I I Northbound 6961 Zt� 82Zz S 2 o.z° Southbound 3780 (15 4949 4`� 2 Eastbound 0 ' O i Westbound D ( Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected 10 Peak 2;1 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: 17 PROJECT: — — FORM I • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/FORD RD 0 (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er pang Peak 2k Hour Approves pro3teted 1+ of Projected Projeet Regional Projects peak 24 Hour Peak 2k Hour Approach Existing Peak 24 Hour Peak 2k Hour volume Volume Direction Peak 2$ Hour Volume volume Volume — yo,uaK Northbound 5381 84S (P795 �o 57 T:;>`7 o. Souihbound 4700 Q Eastbound Z 3 2 Q ' 2� ' O•Z°/ Westbound 1972 Q ZiZ� k d project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea 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. 7C' DATE: Y� PROJECT: FORM I z , 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL FORD ttD (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon verage nter pr ng S.Q PM Peak 21, Hour Approved Projected iS of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Direction Peak volume Hour Volume Peak 21, Hour Peak Hour volume volume Vo1Ume Volume volume 5 A r 55 ! e Northbound 4708 4�Z 3 Southbound 6737 2 O 32 Eastbound 594 1 e7 o/ Westbound 1207 0 �{ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of .Projected (WSJ Peak 2&1 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: y1 PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MA R (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er prin9 94 art Peak 2h Hour AOProv� Proloctt l% of Projitted Project Regional Pro3cu Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 24 Hour Peak 2h Hour volume i Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Yolune Yol , Volume i Northbound 6683 (053 Ito 0 �« (0o Southbound 4844 7 C7 ,55 8 �j Eastbound 490 i Q y Westbound 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2;1 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% o Utilization Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. intersection CApacity . (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. SI DA E: 3D PROJECT: FORM I wu 1% Traffic Volume Analysis InterseCtion MACARTHUR 8 8 (Existing Traffic Volumes based on 7v .-Qh9r/Spring-rV9—O PM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Protected 15 of Protected Protect Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak lume ur Peek ;y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 5409 SS51 10 Southbound 7047 �(, 05g l 7- Eastbound 938 0 ( 5 (03 t O Westbound 0 O • 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 231 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization LAJ (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: 3( FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er pring 90 AM Peak 231 Hour Approved Projected 1: of Projected Project Regional Projects Peak 24 Hour Peak 2y Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume volume ! Volume 12 a 2°k Northbound 4043 3sq so34 SCE ' , SC715 50 � 0.1'6 Southbound 4055 �� O 5q9 5 ' Eastbound 531 0 Westbound 2202 0 projPeak Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea 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 3Y PROJECT: FORM I r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD PM (Existing Traffic Volumes basea on verage n olluZl 5pr ng _. Peak 2h Hour Approved 1% of Projected Project Regional projects Projected Peak 2� Hour Approach Existing peak 2�S Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 24 Hour Volume Direction Peak volume Hour Growth Volume volume ! 4otume Northbound 3265 S(S 2 Jlgl 40 ! 4- O (% CvSQ'.� (aF'j i Q 0.3 ° Southbound 5442 858 O Eastbound 2054 2Z i Westbound v z2 98z 10Proj k dect Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea 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. DATE: 33 - PROJECT: - FORM-I — - • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BISON AV 90 AM (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage In er pring Peak 2k Hour Approves Projected 1% of Projected Project Regional Projects Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Approach Existing Growth peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume ! Volume ' Northbound 3746 49 g677 0.3' southDound 7 Z 35(v Eastbound 334 westbound 559 0 rrvvtt Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected to Peak 23, 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: �5 PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD B2SON Av (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon verage inter pring 90 PM Peak 2h pour Approved projected 1- of projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Peak 24 Flour Peak 2h Hour Approach Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound 4619 (ao 35 54� 4 �S o.�° Southbound 4346 1 32 ` Q 2�2 3 Eastbound 217 C7 Westbound 568 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2�a 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: �6 PROJECT: 35 � FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis i Intersection JAMBOREE RD/MACARTHUR I3I, (Existing Traffic Volumes Dased on verage inter pring 90 Art :PeakourM pro;k-44 ad 1S of Projacted Pr1'0/6 FApproach Existing l Peak our Peak 2y Hour Penyume on Peak 2y Houry, VolumeVolume nd ' 37 �� I O 2795 nd 1834 ZSD�D 28 Eastbound 7-���- �"� i Westbound 2575 -78 749 34v2 34 '• rr, Project Traffic .is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected L,X�1 Peak 212 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. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 36 Mod 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD MACARTHUR BL 90 P (Existing Traffic Volume ase on verage nter prin9 s M Peak 2k Hour Approved 1� of Projected ProjeeL Approach Existing Regional Protects Projected Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2> Hour Peak 2y Nour Peay ;'y Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume i Volume Northbound 14g6 Southbound 2693 Eastbound 53 7 2 Fi Z71 Z i 0.1 07 42�Z 1 0. of Westbound 3138 /c�7 4Z 9 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ® Peak 211 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: PROJECT: 3� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL SAN MIGUEL DR (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter 'p ing 19 29)Art Peak 24 Hour Approved pro�eeted 1: of Protected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Penk 2y Nour Peak 24 Hour Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peek 2u Hour Peed ;kueour Yotume volume volume volume volume ! n Northbound 4631 730 Southbound 7 39 Qj 2 O Eastbound 4 32 4 412 Westbound 667 Q 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 2;k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 3� �3Z • t• 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN MIGUEL DR PM (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pr ng _ Peak 24 Hour Approved projected 10 of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Peat' ;�Hour Peat' lumeour Volume volume Volume Volume Northbound 2418 38l - 29Q9 29 01 0.2° ( 'ICo L(8C�3 48 o Southbound 3908 Eastbound 2111 0 227-9 7Z O i O G�Co 7 Westbound 662 � 14 ICI Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ipa 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. ) Analysi's is required. y� DATE: 3k PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD EASTB U F DR— (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pring 9_Q AM Peak 21, Hour Approved 1% of Projected Project Regional Projects Projected peek 2k Hour Peek 2k Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 21t Hour Volume i Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour volume volume volume volume 4 49 ° 3' Northbound 3904 is q— g105 41 South bound 3361 �U�— Z' Q Eastbound 1081 D ' l O i Westbound 998 1v PProjeak Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2;fi Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization El (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. �1( DATE: qa PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection 'JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR—FORD RD PM Existing Traffic Volumes based on Avtlravr n 111 er pang _ Hour Approved Project Peek 2k1� of Protected J Projected Pro Projects Approach Existing Regional Peak 2k Hour Peak 2h Hour pea k 2�S Hour Peek 2h Hour Direction Peak 2k Hour Volume yotume Volume volume volume Volume .c Northbound 4 812 ,t �8D J� I 6 ) •0 �4•�0 ? Z Southbound 4040 Zz ( 254 53 0 i O Eastbound 1194 Westbound 500 to( Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected �J Peak 2;1 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2ij Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utiliiation (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. i qy r DATE: PROJECT: FORM 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR N—UNIVE OI`rAM R (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pring Peak 24 Hour Approved 1% of Projected Project Regional Projects Projected Peak 2k Hour Peak 2y Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 24 Hour Volume Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour Volume volume Volume Volume ! S1�3 52 : 3 o.i% Northbound 4181 (27 0 G7£3► 48 1(0 0.3 Southbound 3753 ( 914 O Eastbound 1136 1 Q i4 Westbound 2 i355 b{ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LI 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. 93 DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF_ DR—UNIVERSITY DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Overage Winter pring 90 PM Peak 2y Hour Approved 1� of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected Direction Peak 2;1 Hour volo h Peak 2h Hour peaolume k Hour Peak 2h Hour PeaVo;hmeour Volume olume Northbound 4782 145 e&5 Southbound 5311 Eastbound 825 d Q Westbound 1016 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2�2 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 9,l DATE: PROJECT: �Z FORM I APPENDIX B INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS GENERAL OFFICE 95 KA4995AN INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD 6 BISON AVENUE 4995 1990 AM EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING .......................................................................-------------•-----_-- I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIE%ISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTED) PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI INovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I WC i GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio IVOILM i V/C I I iCapacitylCspacityl Volume I Ratio i VOLUse i VOLUme IWO Projactl I Ratio I i I I i I I I Volume I I i �• - - .......- -' ..�..i .. -- :W' - ._..... ..-- ... ... NL 159 I0.10 1 , ro_..!. - .. .................................. - - -! O . 774 94 ! �MT 3200 3017 0 � n ' .*.!._."_-!'-�;,T . ... . ---------------------------------------- . HRI I 132I / I I 1 0 I I I I -------'-----------------i.._.....i.._._......_...._............._..._.__.:_..._.._.....--SL I I I O I 1 1 I •........................ ..............................................1 I ST 6400 2192 �....0.34 I .11 p 2— I 0 ` �... o--+1.............. c !--•--- I_ _- _....-._i.... ._...i. ... SR M.S.N.s. 226 1 ........ 02- I I I I i .........._..... .................../...... .................i._._....... I EL I 3200 I 95 I 0.03 • I �' I Q. 0 f_ 12 I�•0 •__--_--•...................................... ............... I ET .I.. . . I. I I I 1 0 I 1 1 I ........................................................................................... i ER I N.S. I I 1111 I I Cl i 1.3...I....... _ ........................................................ ... . i,. WL _.i --------i.. I I I I S I I I I i_- �_.�..._.._.�- _.... I 1 I 1 0 I I I I I ........................................................I...__.......... --_----i--------i- II I I + I I I I _ _ ..............I IE%!STING •••.......................i---0.97 I •• I------------------------------------------------- I (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I...-...-•--.-.•� -----------------------....-------------------------------------- (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. I I.l I 1_I Project + Project traffic I.C.U. Will be Less than or equal to 0.90 I_I'Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will, be greater then 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be Less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C-U- with project Improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ................ .................................................................. Description of system improvement: FORM 11 PROJECT 9� KA4995PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD Z BISON AVENUE 4995 1990 PM EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING--..-•-•----•-----.--- ,• - .IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICC!WITTED{ PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI IMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio IVOIUme I Ratio I ICapacitylCapecityl Vdluae i Ratio I Volumr I Volume 1w/o Projectl I I I I I . I I I Volume I I I ............................................ ...........I..._.. �. o•�t 3 i j-•-WL �--'160o I I u9 I 0.10 I 0 1 I i 10. ------------------------•--------------.---•-•-------•------•--- -----{ I-- -- - Z1M o-6B * 1 1 0, 't ... I I NT I 3zoo I I i 3L�'S 131 �3 g3 (� •........................................ _..NR _.1.._.....1_ I i I I (� i I I � _-----------••-------------------------------------••_•__•__....._....._ _..SL..i.._...._i- i I I I _ _ �l._._..__..GG._.._-•.......................... I ST I- •6400 I I 3157 I 0.49 I �.q g I "IQ I �•(00 I I�•�a� _ _ _ _..._..I -------------__'...N.S..1_.._.._.i_.. 169---- I ...................................... . _..!_.. '- ' _rL_'`__ I.............................I ---• - I EL I- .3zoo i I 192 I 0.06 • I 150 1 0. 07 r7 1 0.071 - - - -----•-- ------------------------•----------------------1 -ET -I-._.___.i. I i I 10 1 1 1 1 ---------------------------------- ER ► U.S- I I 176I 1 132- I 1 9 1 I ........................................................................I _.WL_ I I I I I 1 0 1 1 I .............................•.--............---.--..--.--....._......_ ..-WT---—1 I I I 1 0 1 1 .............................. I i ..........................I I 0.74 I --. ._i....._.-i. . .I.........i I I © I I I I . •. . ...............i-- .._...__..__.._.._..._.___'_--- -•.._.._..--..I {EXISTING I---------------- .^. ' - ----------------------------------------- I (EXIST + AEG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0 ,q0 I I I-------..................................................................................... 01 (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U.------------------ . .. . -------------------------------------------------------- 1_1 Project + project traffic I.C.U. WILL be less than or equal to 0.90 1_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems iaprovement will be Less then or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less then I.C.U. without project ............. ......................................................................... Description of system improvement: FORM 11 PROJECT !' 147 0 JA437OPH INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD i BISON STREET 4870 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1990 PH, I ••-- .----•-- IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMIIITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECT IPROJECTI (Movementl Lanes ( Lanes I PK MR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio (Volume I V/C i 1 ICapacitylcapacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume Iw/o Project) I Ratio 1 I I I I I I I I Volume I I I j NL ..1 1600 I --•--- I--- -25 I---0.02 I........I..0...1.0 . 02 I.......10:021 ---------------- _ ---- I_._MT......_....'......_-I- '1695 1 6 1 3 S5 .0'..[ I I NR ) I 1 126 1 I �S ( _ •---___--___•--________-_•_---•............................. ..........1 �...SL I -3200 p 1 150 1 0.05 • 1 20 10.0`j*1 2 10 pS fiF ____-_ _--_--. �___ST_ 1 4800 1 1 1767 1 0.37 1 5-g- 1 jf93 1 0. +g I ID 4H.I ___--•__________________________________ _______ 1 sR 1 1600 1 1 60 1 0.04 1 1 0 1 0, R: I_......1044 1 _________:----------------------------------------------I.......... I . . ............... .I I ET 16GO 1 1 54 ) 0.05 t..... - I 2 ( 0.07 11•. J 1 .................) .................--------I ER ) 1 1 12 1 1 �(� 1 1 I ____________________________________________:--__--__-_-_-- _..__.-I ...UL..1 1600 1 1 93 1 0.06 • 1 / 5 1,0. 0 7 '�I-•9.-10.0� i'i� I................................70........ ............_............. I I Q.e l I ur I 160D 1 1 I 1 1 l0. p4-.....................1 I________________________________ ___-________--. I WR 1 3200 1 1 83 1 0.03 1 1 4.1 I.Q. 04 I IEXIS7ING....................................1..............0.54 1 ._..._.. _.... . -.......... I (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I O•b(p I I ___________________________________________________•---- -•- -I (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. .--------•-.10:G(P1 .........................................................I.............. .... 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systems improvement will be Less than or equal to 0.90 I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ......................................................................................... 0ascription of system improvement: , PROJECT FORM II y� APPENDIX C ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS - MEDICAL OFFICE �y �9 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pang 9 90 PM i Approved Approach Existing PeRegionalur Projects Projected 1� of Protected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2$ Hour Peak 24 Hour Peek 24 Hour Peak 2hHour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i Northbound ' 2587 ,I F 2&6- 2 / /70 �O Southbound 2889 Eastbound Westbound 0 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. �pD DATE: tl4 PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST M (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average MOT _ Peak 21, Hour Approved projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peet } Hour Peat ;k Hour Volume Volume Volume volume lume & Northbound 587 Southbound 1792 / v An O Eastbound 4030 1 0 7 / /3 /n Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2�j 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. 101 'DRTE 5 PROJECT: FORM I • t• A T f* 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL, ST/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pring 9O PM Peak 2� Hour Approved projected 1% of Protected Protect ` Approach Existing Regional Projects peek Zy Hour Peek 2k Hour Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peek 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume i / /ry � Northbound 5427 /o� / � FFW1 . Southbound 2117 Eastbound 5977 ' 0 HIP] 72 Westbound D D 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 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. /oy DATE: PROJECT: FORM I Ih 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N CAMPUS DR go PM (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage Inter pring Peak 21, Hour Approved projected i% of Projected Project I Approach Existing Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 2h Hour Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak Hour volume i volume Volume Volume volume ume Northbound 3106 O Southbound Eastbound 0 v © D Westbound 6206 k d Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2;1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersecction Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. �03 DATE: 5Z PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis, Intersection BRI,STOL ST N/BIRCH ST M (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon verage nter pr ng _ Peak 211 Hour Approved I Approach Existing Regional Projects Protected l� of Projected Project Peak 2h Hour Peat/ � Hour Direction Peak 2h Hour 4ohwne P°°yoj� Hour Peak Hour volume I ' volume I ume Northbound 440 1314 / Southbound 3645 O O I O Eastbound O Q D 7hf Westbound V Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2;1 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: y3 PROJECT: FORM I J 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BR2STOL ST N JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on AMIP In er pring 90 PM Peak 24 Hour Approved projected 1� of Projected Project I Regional Projects Peak 24 Hour Peek 2y Hour Approach Existing Growth Peak 2)i Hour Peako2hHour volume volume Direction Peak Hour Volume /^V�olumre,, /1 Northbound 6961 south bound 3780 - I Eastbound i 0 Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Prrojected Peak 2;, 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. �D5 DATE: PROJECT: FORM I I_�3_ r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BZ FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon verage nter pang S,Q PM Peek 2h Hour Approved Projected to of Projected Projeet Approach Existing Regional Projects Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak, Hour Peak ur peak ;kHour Pea�o� ur me Volume Volume volume 4 Northbound 4708 / � // �0� �� "�/� � � �� �•30 Southbound 6737, Eastbound 594 /Z� 0.3�a Westbound 1207 0 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: 55 PROJECT: FORM I • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR B B (Existing Traffic Volumes base on erage inter pring 90 PM Peak 2k Hour Approved protected 1X of ProJeeLed Protect Regional Projects Peak Zk Hour Peak 2k Hour Approach Existing Peak 2k Hour Peak 24 Hour volume Volume Direction Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Voles /070 Northbound I ✓� pJ_ J Southbound 7047 �� ' Eastbound 938 O O Westbound O O O O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2;1 Hour Traffic Volume d to be greater than 1% of Projected Project Traffic is estimate Peak 2� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 07 DATE: . 5h PROJECT: FORM I 14& • . 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD PM (Existing .Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er prrng _. Peak 2h Hour Approved Projected lg of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 2$ Hour Peak 24 Hour Peat ;'y Hour Direction Peak 21s Hour Volume volume Voles Volume Volume Northbound 3265 southbound 5442 Eastbound 2054 ! Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2;1 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. 108 DATE: 5� PROJECT: FORM I 138 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD BISON AV (Existing Traffic Volumes basedrag on vee Winter/Spring 19 90) PM Peak 24 Hour Approved projected 1X of Projected Project Approach Existing Regional projects peak 29 Hour Peak 24 Hour Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak guy Hour PeaVolueour Volume YalunK Volume Volume Volume Py Northbound 4619 SouLhbound 4346 2lO 55-0¢ Eastbound 7 i �p Westbound 568 0 lf Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected ❑ Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than I% of Projected Peak 2a Hour Traffic Volume. * Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. l°q DATE: PROJECT: FORM 158 • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD MACARTHUR BL (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage n er pang 90 PM Peak 2h Hour Approved 1S of Projected Project Regional Projects Projected Peak 2y No Peak 2h Hour Approach Existing Peak 2h Hour ' Peek 2k Hour ,volume Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Volume Volume Voluna! Volume n (� �/ Northbound 1496 23& ' T d 40� 30 �` Southbound d(70 !2 2693 Eastbound 63 Westbound 7 3138 111 5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume ✓✓✓ ��- Project Traffic is estimated to 'be greater than 1% of Projected Q Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume.. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.), Analysis is required. //0 DATE: 6y PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection .MACARTHUR BL/SAN MIGUEL DR PM ir (Existing Traffic Volumes base- on verage n er pang Peek 2k Hour Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project I Regional Projects Peek 2k Hour Approach Existing Peak 211 Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 1�ur Volume Direction Peak 24 Hour Growth Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2418 South bound 3908 Eastbound 2111 Westbound 662 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Jz Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic i,s estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. j11 DATE: bo PROJECT: FORM I �Lu ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR—FORD RD 14 (Existing Traffic Volumes basea on verage n er pring Peak 2k Hour Approved Projected 1m of Projected Project Existng Regional Projects Peak 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Approach Peak Hour Peek 2h Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume- Volume Direction Peat Volume Volume Volume Volume 1-7 n oel Northbound 4812 5orthbound 4040 ,Q Q Eastbound 1194 I S Westbound 500 571 ProjPeak Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Pea 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. I17' DATE: b) PROJECT: FORM I H4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTSLUFF DR—UNIVER ITY DR (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage inter pring 90 PM Peak 2k Hour Approved projected 10. of Projected Project Regional Projects Peak 2 Hour Peak 2k Hour Approach Existing Peak 24 Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume VolunH Direction Peek lu. Hour Growth volume Volume Volume volume 57 Northbound 4782 g 'r Southbound 5311 + � � 2 f yn Eastbound 625 O Westbound © (p v 1016 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2;1 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�3 DATE: 6?- PROJECT: FORM I • ••� .. -•S1 sue., ..'t' � +i• "5l• } • it . •�:i,�Y.:��. R kr L�1�. o�� Fes,��. �!t-}`�tY SIX'�=•(0 t ' APPENDIX D INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS MEDICAL OFFICE . 11`f 63 > ' • MA4995PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD i BISON AVENUE 4995 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1990 PM ............................................................................................. I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTTNGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI IMovementl Lem$ I Lanes I PK MR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio (Volume I Ratio I ICapscitylcapacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume Iw/o Projectl I I I I I I I I Volume I I i I---------------------............•-----•-••------- -•I I ML I 1600 I 159 I 0.10 I 126 10 • // I /0 I0•/21 ________ _________________________________ -------- -------I I NT I 3200 I 21W 0.66 .345 1 /3/ • 1 d.p 3* !�•g3A ----R•-------•--i---•-•--i--•-----i----•-•--------------•-•-i-•-•------_i..__...i... - ..------.------.....-------------.......--------------------.._------ --I SL I I I i I 10 I I I I _____________________________________ ____ ------------------I ST I ---- I ( ---- I 0.49 I I Q I --•/p0 I I.*, I--- SR I M.S. I I , 169,1 i 1 22 I I Q I I ---------------"I......._.._--__-_--.-___-----------------"W ..........I I.. EL I 3200 I I 182 I 0.06 ` 15-0 I 0.0 / "I /o 10•D8 f I------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ET I I I I I I Q I I I I - -• ---.._...-i 1 ---1 -- -•__•----i•-----•6--�Z -' ---i----------•i------------ - ER I N.S. I WL I I I I I I p I I I I ------ _----------i _____________________________ _ __________________________________I I WR I I I I I 10 1 I I 1 -----------------------------•------------•---------I [EXISTING ..........................i•--0.74 I I 1--------•••-••-•--••---••--•--•-------•-•-----••------------•-------•-----•- (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I O. 9 0 I I I-•--------•---•---------------------------------------•--------------••---------..---------I (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 10. 1 / .......................•___...__.._._...._.....__.......__....___._..__....-"..........._... I_I Project + project traffic I.C.U. will be Less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greeter than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/systemr improvement will be Less than or equal to 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be Less than I.C.U. without project ......................................................................................... Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 wi 64 r' JA487OPM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD i BISON STREET 4870 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED 09 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING .............1990_..PH ......•................................................................. ... I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI IMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio IVOLune I' V/C I I ICapacitylCopecityl Volume I Ratio. I VOLuma I Volume 1W/0 Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I volune I I I .........................................................................I i---•------- _ o.oz I I Ip,021 1 NL I 1600 I I I 1 0. •------'---........................................... ) 0.38 �/ 3ST �,4 4�.........._ , -7 4800 1 ..._......1695 •.. ................ - MR- I 1 126 I 1 15- I i 10 ri ••---------------•-------------------------------•- _• �c 1 -- - ...3200 ISO 0.05 * i 1 6.0 "f Q 10 SL I 3200 I I 1 2.0 .. ............... -------•-•-----------•---•...........................p... I_._._.. . 480D 1767 ^^ p .$............. 1 I 4T i ---- l i ( �---- I ST I 1 I Q . . l .. TO l L•.....'1 1600. 60 0.04 1 4-- I 10.0 1 SR I ---- l l I I 1 0 0. 0 EL I I I ...... 54 0.05 1 ? . .....tET 1600 . . I I - -------. ..'I1 ' VL i 1600 I I • 1 /3 1 0.0 �I �2- 10. 07I ---- -- ----WT I 1600 I 1 70 1 0•04 1 1 I 1 Q. 04 1-- la o4: I----------•------------------------------------------- ------- •------------- I WR 1 3200 1 1 83 I 0.031 14-1 1 0.0¢ 1 10.04-I ----------------------------------------------•--- 1 IEXIST3NG ----•....................i- -0.54 l 1---•- - • -- _-----•--------•-•--------------------•--------------------- IE%IST + AEG I ,0•(OAP 1 GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. -....--.-. --------------------------------------------------•------------------ l (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U--------------•--_----_-.-_ Ip IO. - ........................................ 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. W/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.9D 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements WILL be less than I.C.U. without project ........................... Description of system improvement: FORM 11 PROJECT 1Ib bti I 1191 APPENDIX E INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSES WITH IMPROVEMENTS MEDICAL OFFICE � � 6b r {, MA4995PM ' INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD i BISON AVENUE 4995 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC HINTER/SPRING 1990 PN- .......................................................................••---••--.•-. I IE%ISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIORALICOMNITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECT IPROJECTI IMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PX MR I WC 1 GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio (Volume I V/C 1 ICapacitylCapseityl Volume I Ratio I VOLUME 1 Volume lw/o Projectl I Ratio 1 I I I I I I I 1 volume I I I I 1 -------------•------------------•----------- ----------i I 1600 I NL 1 159 1 0.10 1 1 20 I O . 1 1 1 - NT _..---3200 1(5)9bcol 2188 ( 0.61 * ,{ '1 1 Q•83 0 .1 ----------------------- ..... 1 MR I I 1 ----------•----- --------I- `1................................� j s� .i_.......i.__.._..I I I _I.. ....... 1----------•-------------••-- I ST 1 6400 1 i 3157 1 0.49 l ��� I I�O' 1 O' WD.,.I_.. 0. ....I �..1 1 SR 1 H.S. 1 1 169 1 I i LZ 1 11 ............ I..._. .............................................................. .. EL I 3200 I I 182 1 0.06 ' I' 10, 0 7� /O 1'4.09w • •. .• . l _'•.............................................................. I Er I I I I I I �J 0 1 I I I - 1 .ol U.S..I._......i--- 176 i.._.....i.... ER ....L:J. ...'...........I .c...l..... .� -----••I-•-----•--------- •----i•--••-------- I I i I I 1--•-------------- ---•----------•-------•-----------•----.........._..._...i.......i....... WT 1-----•••- 1 I I I - 1 I I WR I I I I 1 1 rD 1 I I I IE%ISTtNG .........................i i -- 0.74 .............................................. I 1-------------------•--------•---------•----•---............................i I (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED w/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0. 90 •............................................................................... (EXISTING + CCMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. 10, a ........................................................................................ ... 1-1 Project * project traffic I.C.U. will be less then or equal to 0.90 Projected + project 'traffic I.C.U. Will be greater than 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. w/system improvement WILL be Less than or equal 40 0.90 I_I Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project •........................................................................................ Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 r Ij O b'1 141 _ • f FASHION ISLAND ENTITLEMENT TRANSFER TPO DRAFT November 1990 ®r4W.4WMl-rVWrASSOCf4MS, /MC • +it Draft FASHION ISLAND ENTITLEMENT TRANSFER TPO Prepared for: City of Newport Desch Prepared by: Austin-Foust Associates 2020 N. Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, California 92701 November 1, 1990 aJ CONTENTS Page Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Trip Generation and Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 TrafficImpacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix i� LIST OF FIGURES Page IProject Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Proposed Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 Project Trip Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ii I Zy `l LIST OF TABLES Page 1 Trip Generation'Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 Approved Projects Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3 One-Percent Analysis Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 iii PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of 19,560 square feet of retail space to be located in the Fashion Island parking lot on the southwest corner of Santa Rosa Drive and Newport Center Drive in the city of Newport Beach. Of the 19,560 square feet, 6,060 square feet are currently approved for Fashion Island, and the remaining 13,500 feet are to be transferred from an approved project at Bison and,Camelback. Figure 1 illustrates the project site, and Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. MacArthur Boulevard is a major north-south arterial which connects to several freeways in the project vicinity. Jamboree Road provides north-south access to the vicinity and is designated as a major arterial on the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). Bristol Street and the Corona Del Mar Freeway (SR-73) provide east-west access to the project vicinity. TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION Appropriate trip generation rates for the proposed project were obtained from the City of Newport Beach peak hour rates for general retail uses. An average inbound rate of .7 trips/PSF and an outbound rate of .5 trips/ISF for a total of 1.2 trips[OF were utilized for the peak one hour AM period. For the peak one hour PM period,the average rates are 1.5 trips[OF inbound and 2.0 tripsfMF outbound, for a total of 3.5 trips/OF. These rates and the resulting project trip generation are summarized in Table 1. As this summary indicates, the proposed project will generate 16 trips in the AM peak hour and 47 trips in the PM peak hour. The trip generation was factored to obtain a peak 2.5 hour volume for the AM and PM peak periods. The peak 2.5 hour volumes were based on an estimated factor of 2.0 to account for the extension of the usual one-hour peak period. Credit is given to the project for existing traffic generated at the project site. Since the proposed project consists of an entitlement transfer credit is given to the project by omitting the approved project at Bison and Camdlback from the cumulative project list. Consequently, there is no reduction in project-generated traffic. Fashion Island Entitlement Transfer 1 Austin-Foust Assaciatcs, Inc. 14 b w� CAN{0N �J m eaIBT01. p \ ml+ MESA I CA • F1'Py OEL NM _ 8150N ���P Cy, \\ S Z'Ne PROJECT SITE 13 F ss yty ISTA 1 BARBAftt� yaOR De f N` Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION Fashion Island Entitlement Transfer 2 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. - I� YM V d , b ; �" t Retail{Pad' � g r fp M HF Figure 2 PROPOSED SITE PLAN Faz_ hlon Island Entitlement Transfer 3 Austin•Foust Associates, Inc. I �� Table 1 TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY AM PEAK-- --- PM PEAK— LAND USE SIZE IB OB TOTAL IB OB TOTAL General Retail 13.5 TSF TripsMF 3 .5 1.2 1.5 2.0 3.5 Trip Generation 9 7 16 20 27 47 Project Peak 2.5-Hour Trip Generation IS 14 32 40 54 94 Fashion Island Entitlement Transfer 4 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. ' c� Distribution of project-generated traffic was derived from observed travel patterns in the vicinity of the project site as well as from locations and levels of development in relation to the location of the proposed project. Ten percent of project-generated traffic is assumed to travel between destinations within Newport Center and will not impact any of the study intersections during the AM and PM peak periods. The general trip distribution is illustrated in Figure 3. TRAFFIC IMPACTS The City of Newport Beach identified 24 intersections for analysis to determine the impact of the proposed development. The 1990 peak 2.5 hour volumes were provided for each _ intersection by the city staff. Since the project is expected to be completed by 1992, the ambient growth rate of one percent per year was added to all volumes along Jamboree Road south of MacArthur and along MacArthur north of Jamboree. A factor of five percent per year was added to all volumes along MacArthur Boulevard south of Jamboree Road. Along Coast Highway, a 2.5 percent per year factor was applied west of Newport Boulevard, a one percent factor was applied between Jamboree and Newport, a two percent factor was applied between MacArthur and Jamboree, and a four percent factor was applied east of MacArthur. The peak 2.5 hour volumes of all approved projects, also provided by the city, were added to the peak 2.5 hour volumes. The resulting volumes represent the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes prior to the addition of project traffic. A list of approved projects is given in Table 2. One percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes of each approach of each intersection was compared with the peak 2.5 hour distributed volumes from the proposed project. A summary of this comparison is shown in Table 3. If one percent of the 1993 peak 2.5 hour volumes of each approach was larger than the peak 2.5 hour project volumes, no further analyses were required. If project peak 2.5 hour volumes were higher than one percent of the projected peak 2.5 hour volumes on any approach of any intersection, the intersection was analyzed using the Intersection Capacity Utilization(ICU)method. Comparison of the one percent of the peak 2.5 hour volumes with the project peak 2.5 hour Fashion Island�Enlitlemcnt Transfer 5 Austin-Foust Associates. Inc. r/ l2d' ID w 11% 9% ->1 m 14%aalsrot N Z 1 ffi MESA S,y T vyy OEL NM BISeN �P 4 � F a 1UN0 PROJECT SITE ST y 11f Al ) OAaaAnA� 1 0% S4 4�10, 9� 4% s > Y M 40 14% g 2% t 4% A 3% 14% _ - — Figure 3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION Fashion Island Entitlement Transfer 6 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. r Table 2 APPROVED PROJECTS SUMMARY APPROVED PROJECTS PERCENTAGE COMPLETED Hughes Aircraft #1 100%Occupancy Far West Savings and Loan 100%Occupancy Aeronutronic Ford 100%Occupancy Back Bay Office 100%Occupancy Boyle Engineering 100% Occupancy Cal Canadian Bank 100%Occupancy Civic Plaza 89% Occupancy Corporate Plaza 30%Occupancy Koll Center Newport 100%Occupancy MacArthur Court 10096 Occupancy Orchard Office 100%Occupancy Pacific Mutual Plaza 10D%Occupancy —' 3701 Birch,ORice 100% Occupancy Newport Place 86%Occupancy Bank of Newport 10D% Occupancy Bayside Square 10D%Occupancy Sea Island I"Occupancy _ Haywood Apartments 100%Occupancy Harbor Point Homes 100%Occupancy Rogces Gardens 100%Occupancy Seaview Lutheran Plaza 100% Occupancy Rudy Baron 100%Occupancy Quail Business Center 100%Occupancy 441 Newport Blvd 100%Occupancy Martha's Vineyard 100%Occupancy Coast Business Center 10096 Occupancy Ross Mollard 10D%Occupancy — Hughes Aircraft#2 100%Occupancy Flagship Hospital 100% Occupancy Big Canyon 10 29%Occupancy Fun Zone 10D% Occupancy Marriott Hotel 100% Occupancy St.Andrew's Church IOD% Occupancy —" Allred Condos 100% Occupancy Morgan Development 100%Occupancy Four Seasons Hotel 100%Occupancy Univ.Ath Club TPP 4 EMKAY 100% Occupancy _ Block 400 Medical 100%Occupancy Amendment Ml MacArthur Court 52% Occupancy Amendment #r2 Ford Aero 106%,Occupanry Carver Granville Office IOD%Occupancy Corona Del Mar Homes 100%Occupancy Raan's Development 90%Occupancy Block 500 Npt Center Project 100% Occupancy Newport Aquatics Center 45%Occupancy 2600 E.Coast Hwy IOD%Occupancy, Jasmine Park 10096 Occupancy Newporier Inn Expansion 100%Occupancy Fashion Island Renaissance 100%Occupancy CDM Senior Project IOD%Occupancy Point Del Mar 100% Occupancy Pacific Club 100% Occupancy Newport Sacrest Apia. IOD% Occupancy Seaside Apia.(Mesa 11) IOD%Occupancy Victoria Station(Office) 100%Occupancy NewportIp Imports 100% Occupancy Mariner's Mile Marine Center 100% Occupancy ry 15th St.Apia. IOD% Occupancy Fashion island Entitlement Transfer 7 Auatla•Foust Associates, Inc. .. ja Table 2(cont.) APPROVED PROJEC-M SUMMARY APPROVED PROJECTS PERCENTAGE COMPLETED Seaside Apts.111 100%Occupancy Amendment 81 Ford Aero 100%Occupancy _ Amendment /1 North Ford 100% Occupancy Amendment N1 North Ford 100%Occupancy Amendment #1 North Ford 100% Occupancy -• Fashion Island'Entitlement Transfer 8 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. 13 Table 3 ONE-PERCENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY AM PROJECT PEAK 2.5 HOUR VOLUMES LESS THAN 1%OF 1993 INTERSECTION NB SB En WB PEAK 2.5 HOUR VOLUMES 1. Coast Hwy& Orange 0 0 ? 2 Yes 2. Coast Hwy&Prospect 0 0 2 2 Yes 3. Coast Hwy&Balboa/Superior 0 1 2 3 Yes 4. Coast Hwy&Riverside 0 0 3 3 Yes S. Coast Hwy&Tustin 0 0 3 3 Yes 6. Coast Hwy& Dover/Bayshore 0 1 3 4 Yea 7. Coast Hwy&Bayside 0 0 4 4 Yes 8. Coast Hwy&Jamboree 1 3 4 2 Yes 9. Coast Hwy&MacArthur 0 2 0 3 Yes 10. Coast Hwy&Goldenrod 0 0 2 3 Yes 11. Coast Hwy&Marguerite 0 0 2 3 Yes Yes 12. Coast Hwy&Poppy 0 0 2 3 13. MacArthur&San Miguel 3 1 2 0 Yea _ 14. MacArthur&San Joaquin Hills 1 4 5 1 Yes 15. MacArthur&Ford 4 4 0 0 Yes 16. MacArthur&Bison 4 4 0 0 Yes ' 17. Jamboree&Santa Barbara 3 0 0 3 Yes 18. Jamboree& San Joaquin Hills 0 3 0 1 Yes 19. Jamboree& F.astbluWFord 1 2 1 0 Yes 20. Jamboree&Bison 1 2 0 01 Yea 21. Jamboree&Easibluf/University 1 2 0 0 Yes 22. Jamboree& Bristol 1 2 0 0 Ya 23. Jamboree&Bristol North 1 2 0 0 Yes 24. MacArthur&Jamboree 1 2 2 2 Yes PM PROJECT PEAK 25 HOUR VOLUMES LESS THAN 4%OF 1993 INTERSECTON NB SB an WB 'PEAK 15 HOUR VOLUMES �. 1. Coast Hwy&Orange 0 0 6 7 Yes 2. Coast Hwy&Prospect 0 0 6 7 Yes 3. Coast Hwy& BalboaAuperlor 0 2 6 9 Yes 4. Coast Hwy&Riverside 0 0 8 12 Yes 5. Coast Hwy&Tustin 0 0 8 12 Yes 6. Coast Hwy&DoverlBayshorc 0 2 S 14 Yes 7. Coast Hwy&Bayside 0 10 10, 14 Yes 8. Coast Hwy&Jamboree 2 9 10 7 Yea 9. Coast Hwy&MacArthur 0 8 0 5 Yes 10. Coast Hwy&Goldenrod 0 0 8 5 Yes 11. Coast Hwy&Marguerite 0 0 8 5 Yes 11 Coast Hwy&Poppy 0 0 8 5 Yes 13. MacArthur&San Miguel 5 4 4 0 Yes 14. MacArthur&San Joaquin Hills 3 8 20 3 Yes 15. MacArthur&Ford 12 8 0 0 Yes 16. MacArthur&Bison 12 8 0 0 Yea 17. Jamboree&Santa Barbara 7 0 0 9 Yes 18. Jamboree&San Joaquin Hills 0 8 0 9 Yes 19. Jamboree&EastbluMFord 9 6 2 0 Yes 20. Jamboree&Bison 7 6 0 0 Yes 21. Jamboree&Eastbluff/Univemity 7 6 0 0 Yes _ 22. Jamboree&Bristol 7 4 2 0 Yes Fashion Island Bntitlemck Transfer 9 Austin.Foust Associates,lno ✓/ � Jy - iN volumes resulted in all intersections passing the one percent analysis. Further analysis is not required. CONCLUSIONS The proposed retail development which is in reality a transfer of entitlement previously approved at Bison and Camelback will generate 32 trips during the AM peak 2.5 hour period and 94 trips during the PM peak 2.5 hour period. Twenty-four intersections were checked to determine the marginal impact of project traffic on the street system. All of the intersections pass the one- percent analysis. Therefore, the proposed project has no significant impact on the arterial network. Fashion Island Entitlement Transfer 10 Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. �33 15 APPENDIX 13q 1� 12 Irn(f u. Vulunu Anil y:r; Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Orange St Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic WinterlSpring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved - Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 112 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peaky2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume — ume Northbound 228 0 0 228 2 0 Southbound 218 O O 218 2 0 Eastbound 4471 268 587 5326 53 2 . Westbound 2534 152 265 2951 30 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. — Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than -1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 13h PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1� 0 � . 1%Traffic Volume Analysts Intersection: Coast Hwy Q Orange St Existing,Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 i/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2•Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 204 0 0 204 2 0 Southbound 124 0 0 124 1 0 Eastbound 3339 200 440 3979 40 6 Westbound 4782 287 659 5728 57 7 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. — Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 r ------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 ►B I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Prospect St Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of, Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2ume Hour Peak Volume Hour Peak Volume Hour Volume Volume — Northbound 163 0 p 163 2 0 � Southbound 422 0 p 422 4 0 W 1 Eastbound 4452 267 587 5306 53 2 Westbound 2586 155 265 3006 30 2 => Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993_____________________ ✓ 7 ---------------------- (; �f 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Prospect St Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak2Volume/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume '— Northbound 160 0 0 160 .2 0 Southbound 262 0 2 264 3 0 Eastbound 3323 199 446 3968 40 6 Westbound 5131 308 665 6104 61 7 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ 9 v7� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Balboa BI-Superior Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakU2 1/2ume Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 1717 0 7 1724 17 0 — Southbound 1231 0 24 1255 13 1 Eastbound 5111 307 585 6003 60 2 Westbound 1795 108 239 2142 21 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. ' PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL-OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 - 1 3`( 0 l% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Balboa 61-Superior Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH III Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1788 0 8 1796 18 0 Southbound 281,1 0 110 2921 29 2 Eastbound 3638 218 438 4294 43 6 Westbound 3448 207 561 4216 42 9 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 19 of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. _. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 lq 7„z, 1% Traffic Volume Analysr5 I nl ervecL ion: coast Nwy U Riverside Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic WrnterlSpn ng 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour Peak volume Hour Volume Volume Volume Northbound 12 0 3 15 0 0 Southbound 824 O 59 883 9 0 Eastbound 4951 119 624 5694 57 3 Westbound 2956 71 447 3474 35 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than l% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 j i3 r � • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy 8 Riverside Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH 'Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1X of Projected Protect Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 ,112 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Vol Ume Northbound 65 0 8 74 1 0 Southbound 1287 0 32 1319 13 0 Eastbound 4532 109 640 5281 53 8 Westbound 4872 117 747 5736 57 12 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 112 Hour Traffic Volume. project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------- I�y 1% Traffic. Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Tustin Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 I/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour Volume Volume Volume 0 10 0 0 Northbound 10 0 _ Southbound 123 0 13 136 1 0 Eastbound 4335 104 632 5071 51 3 . 446 3786 38 3 78 Westbound 3262 ' Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------- 0 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Tustin Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1X of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 23 0 0 23 0 0 Southbound 270 0 4 274 3 0 Eastbound 4252 102 641 4995 50 8 Westbound 4944 119 724 5787 58 12 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 iL} --- �t yb 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy 0 Dover Or-Bayshore Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected I% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Uolu/me Hour Peak Volume Hour volume Volume Volume volume Northbound 337 0 8 345 3 0 ..._ Southhound 2500 0 49 2557 26 1 48 3 Eastbound 4156 100 585 4841 , Westbound 4645 112 451 5209 52 4 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. —' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ,%5 ------- -- ------ �/ y1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Dover Dr-Bayshore Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1X of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 297 0 20 817 3 0 Southbound 2894 0 55 2949 29 2 Eastbound 4100 98 569 4767 48 8 Westbound 6780 163 670 7613 76 14 Project Traffic is estimated to be less-than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ----- ----'---------- ---- -- -- I y� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Bayside Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakZolume 2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour Volume Volume Volume V 10 1306 13 0 Northbound 1296 O • Southbound 145 p 159 304 3 0 Eastbound 6635 159 651 7445 74 4 Westbound 3397 82 415 3894 39 4 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. •• Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---'---------- ! 2/, 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Bayside Or Fxisting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volame•Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1496 0 q 1500 15 0 • Southbound 180 0 267 447 4 0 Eastbound 6412 154 663 7229 72 10 Westbound 6989 168 691 7848 78 14 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. - PROJECT: FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ___ Iq - FASHION D----- _ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Jamboree Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2ume Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour '— Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 1514 0 34 1548 15 'I Southbound 2242 0 538 2780 28 3 Eastbound 5690 137 623 6450 64 4 , Westbound 2762 133 242 3137 31 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31 s 0 6 C 1% Traffic Volume Analysis intersection: Coast Hwy @ Jamboree Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 112 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak'2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Y22 1/2 Hour peakolume Y2 1/9 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 1009 p 48 1057 11 2 ._ Southbound 4522 g 696 5218 52 9 Eastbound 4918 118 713 5749 57 10 Westbound 4526 217 322 5065 51 7 __. Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity utilization (I.C.U•) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 0 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 37- 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ MacArthur Bl Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakU2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ume 0 0 -- Northbound 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1569 0 195 1764 18 2 Eastbound 2625 126 139 2890 29 0 Westbound 5855 562 644 7061 71 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 112 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 J/), • � t V L � 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy D MacArthur el Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved - Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour 'Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 g Southbound 2983' 0 437 3420 34 8 Eastbound 3750 180 284 4214 42 0 Westbound 2678 257 349 3284 33 5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than.1% of'Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilizati0o (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3q • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Goldenrod Av Fxisting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volume Hour -- Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 368 0 0 368 4 0 — Southbound 178 0 0 178 2 0 2953 30 2 Eastbound 2479 238 236 - Westbound 5134 550 678 6962 70 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic Is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 3 - -- -- ---= -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - i5 3y 4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: (,oast Hwy @ Goldenrod Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected l% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2. 1/2 Hour Peak 2 112 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 342 0 0 342 3 0 Southbound 300 0 0 300 3 0 Eastbound 5516 530 686 6732 67 8 Westbound 3684 354 347 4385 44 5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection,Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 -----------------------------------------------------------_----------------------------- ------ --- - ,y �6 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Marguerite Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved , Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 554 0 0 554 6 0 Southbound 486 0 0 486 5 0 - Eastbound 2409 231 236 2876 29 2 Westbound 5194 499 678 6371 64 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 37 r c L � 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy Q Marguerite Av Ixisting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional, Projects 'Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volu/me Hour Peak V2 1/22 Hour Volume Volume volume Volume —' ume Northbound 701 0 0 701 7 0 _ Southbound 965 0 0 965 • 10 0 Eastbound 5083 488 666 6257 63 6 Westbound 3333 320 347 4000 40 5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. -' Project Traffic Is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND ---- - --- - FULL OCCUPANCY YEARt 1993 ---------------- 3 I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy @ Poppy Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 74 0 0 74 1 0 Southbound 135 0 0 135 1 0 Eastbound 1950 187 239 2376 24 2 Westbound 5847 561 682 7090 71 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. '— Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 '�� • � r s i t 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Coast Hwy O Poppy Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 215 0 0 215 2 0 Southbound 494 0 0 494 5 0 Eastbound 4523 434 744 5701 57 8 Westbound 2967 285 397 3649 36 5 Project Traffic Is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected , Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND- FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 --------- ------- ----- ' . I� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur Bl @ San Miguel Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Fxisting Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volume Hour PeakVolume Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume — Northbound 4631 556 217 5404 54 3 ._ Southbound 2527 303 206 3036 30 1 432 4 2 Eastbound 412 @ 20 , Westbound 667 0 24 691 7 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • • y � i 1% Traffic Volumo Analysis Intersection:' MacArthur Bl @ San Miguel Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 112 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 112 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2418 290 150 2858 29 5 Southbound 3908 469 279 4656 47 4 Eastbound 2111 0 118 2229 22 4 Westbound 662 0 14 676 7 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 112 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 L 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur B1 @ San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakU2 1/2ume Hour Peak Volu/me Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume — Northbound 4043 485 354 4882 49 1 49 4 •_ Southbound 4055 487 321 4863 , Eastbound 531 0 18 549 5 5 Westbound 2202 0 106 2308 23 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. _ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND PROJ FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 I b - - k 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur B1 @ San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak.2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3265 392 207 3864 39 3 Southbound 5442 653 500 6595 66 8 Eastbound 2054 0 115 2169 22 20 Westbound 960 0 22 962 30 3 S=> Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 '------------------- I • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ... Intersection: MacArthur Bl @ Ford Rd, Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 112 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peakvolume Hour PeakV22 1/22 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume '— Northbound 5381 646 566 6593 - 66 4 _ Southbound 4700 564 348 5612 56 4 312 Eastbound 312 O 0 , 3 0 Westbound 1912 0 151 2123 21 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. —' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 6 ------------------------------- ------------------- /,�J a F 1 IX Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur 61 @ Ford Rd g0 PM Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected iX of Protected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growtfi Peak 2'1/2 Hour PeakV ' Volume 22 1/2 Hour Peakame Volume Hour Peak Hour olume Volume Volume Volume " Northbound 4708 565 361 5634 56 12 .� Southbound 6737 '808 6B3 8228 82 8 Eastbound 594 0 32 626 6 0 Westbound 1201 0 30 1237 12 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to•be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. — PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 lb� ----------------------------------------------------- yb 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur B1 @ Bison Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volume Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6683 802 402 7887 79 4 Southbound 4844 581 406 5831 58 4 Eastbound 490 0 66 558 6 0 Westbound 0 0 22 22 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. , Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur 81 0 Bison Av (xisting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected iX of Projected Project _ Direction Peak Z 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 5409 649 297 6355 64 12 Southbound 7047 846 423 8316 83 8 Eastbound 938 0 165 1103 11 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utildzatiom (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 --------------------------------- ---------------""------------------------- p'7 1 • • L � 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Santa Barbara Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour Peak Volume Hour Volume Volume Volume 4741 -47 3 Northbound 3158 90 893 _ _ Southbound 3202 77 655 3934 39 0 0 p 0 Eastbound 0 0 0 Westbound 540 0 41 581 6 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 6�J ---------------------------------------------------------------- y� r I% traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Santa Barbara Or g0 PM bxrsting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved ' Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Existing 9 Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour ro th Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Pe Hour G W Direction Peak 2 Volume Volume Volume _ Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2942 �1 621 3634 36 7 _ Southbound 4129 99 1020 5248 52 0 Eastbound 0 0 0 10 0 0 Westbound 2168 0 188 2356 24 9 =_> Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ' SD _ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour -Peak V2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume — ume Northbound 3400 82 952 4434 44 0 — Southbound 4268 102 688 5058 51 3 0 2 696 7 0 Eastbound 694 Westbound 1179 0 103 1282 13 1 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected - Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected' Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR:, 1993------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ yr k 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd (a San Joaquin Hill% Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring BO PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing, Regional Projects Projected l% of Projected Protect Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2ume Hour Peak Volu/me Hour '— Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3295 f9 734 4108 41 0 Southbound 5124 123 1145 6392 64 8 Eastbound 419 0 2 421 4 0 Westbound 2183 0 100 2283 23 9 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. - Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 �D------------------ h 1- 0 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Eastbluff Dr-Ford Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected i% of-Projected Protect Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2ume Hour Peak Volume Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume — Northbound 3904 94 844 4842 48 1 _ Scuthbound 3361 81 642 4084 41 2 Eastbound 1081 0 26 1107 11 1 Westbound 998 0 3 1001 10 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. —' Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (i.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULU'OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- /.( ♦ L 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Eastbluff Dr-Ford Rd ixisting Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1X of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4812 115 722 5649 56 9 Southbound 4040 97 1092 5229 52 6 Eastbound 1,194 0 4 1198 12 2 Westbound 500 0 17 517 5 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak Z 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 I�y -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ 5� I% Traffic Volume Analysis — Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Bison Av Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 3746 90 874 .4710 47 1 Southbound 3972 95 785 4852 49 2 Eastbound 334 0 22 356 4 0 Westbound 505 0 49 554 6 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected r Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. —' PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 65 • � 3y IX Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd 0 Bison Av g0 PM Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1X of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakY2 1/2ume Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume — ume Northbound 4619 111 735 5465 55 7 Southbound 4346 104 1026 5476 55 6 Eastbound 217 D 45 262 3 0 Westbound 568 0 109 677 7 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- ------------------ 11 y6 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Eastbluff Dr-University Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth _ Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4181 100 885 5166 52 1 _ Southbound 3753 90 914 4757 A8 2 Eastbound 1136 p 160 1296 13 0 1355 14 0 Westbound 1353 O 2 , Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. -- Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I�✓ � tY 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Eastbluff Dr-University Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 112 Hour Peak V22 1/22 Hour peakolume 2 Volume'/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4782 115 865 5762 58 7 Southbound 5311 127 1213 6651 67 6 Eastbound 825 0 33 858 9 0 Westbound 1016 0 63 1079 11 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. — PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 b -------- ------- -- --' --- �.� 5� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Bristol St Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour _ Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 6389 129 891 6409 64 1 Southbound 864 21 813 1698 17 2 Eastbound 6337 p 1277 7614 76 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' 7 R A4 1% Iraffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Bristol St Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 112 Hour Peak Volu/me Hour Peak V22 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume olume Northbound 5427 130 1027 6584 66 7 Southbound 2117 51 764 2832 29 4 Eastbound 5977 0 1181 7158 72 2 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Traffic 1s estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is•estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 --------- -------'------ ' - -"---"--"-""-"-" -------------- ---------- O 60 Y ` X3 • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd @ Bristol St N Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour PeakVolume Hour PeakVolume Hour '— Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 7971 191 941 9103 91 1 — Southbound 1545 37 888 2470 25 2 Eastbound 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 Westbound 0 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6� , • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: Jamboree Rd 0 Bristol St N Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PH Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour' Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6961 167 1050 8178 82 7 Southbound 3780 91 1014 4885 49 4 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (1.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- U 6ti 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur Bl @ Jamboree Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 AM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project _ Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak Volu/me Hour Peak u2 1/2 Hour Volume volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 2795 335 479 3609 36 1 _ Southbound 1834 44 916 2794 28 2 Eastbound 919 O 1125 2044 20 2 Westbound 2575 62 749 3386 34 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 + G J ----------------------------'----------'-------'---------------'-- ---------'- /0 63 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection: MacArthur Bl Q Jamboree Rd ' Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Daily Traffic Winter/Spring 90 PM Peak 2 1/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected' 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 1/2 Hour Growth Peak 2 1/2 Hour Peak 2 '1/2 Hour PeakV2 1/2ume Hour PeakV2 1/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume ume Northbound 1496 180 498 2174 22 5 Southbound 2693 65 723 3481 35 4 Eastbound 1752 0 907 2659 27 4 Westbound 3138 75 989 4202 42 6 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume, Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2 1/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. -• 1 PROJECT: FASHION ISLAND FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 1993 I�Y ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- G� �EVUPpRr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U S P.O. BOX 1768,NEWPORT BEACH,CA 92658.8915 CyC FOaN�P NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO: Office of Planning and Research FROM: Planning Department Q1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 City of Newport Beach Sacramento, CA 95814 P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 a County Clerk of the County of Orange P.O. Box 838 Santa Ana, CA 92702 NAME OF PROJECT:GPA 90-1 G Amendments No. 701 and 721, TPO No. 70 and Finding of Gnex 11 PROJECT LOCATION:Plan consistency1177 Camelback & 101 Newport Center Drive, Newport Be lI PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Amendment of Planned Community Regulations to permit office, rathEp than retail use on Pac Tel site, on Camelback. Transfer of 13,550 feet of retail [development from Pao Tel to Newport Center. 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: ATTACHED INITIAL STUDY PREPARED BY: Sandra L. Genis Principal Planner INITIAL STUDY AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 4 DATE RECEIVED FOR FILING: Environmental Coordinator DATE: C14 /p `t/ �'�' 3300 Newport Boulevard,,Newport Beach • � r pL MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the ior to the issuance of the ing permit. A, copy of the plan roval of the Bshallbe fing orwarded to tepartment he California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system,utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours of'construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills,jack hammers,or other similar tools which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include.such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away,periodic watering of stockpile soil,and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 8. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed'in a manner so as to conceal the light source and'minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. 9. Medical office uses on the Pac Tel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. Igq i �3 • • ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Date Filed Janua 4 1990 General Information 1. Name and address of developer or project sponsor: City of Newport Beach. 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, Ca. for GPA 90-1 G and Finding of_General Plan consisteri : The Irvine Com?ap% 550 Newport Center Drive.Newport Beach, Ca. for PC amendments and TPO, 2. Address of project: 1177 Camelback and 101 Newport Center Drive, Fashion Island Assessor's Block and Lot Number: 442-041-30 and 442-021-16 3. Name, address, and telephone number of person to be contacted concerning this project: Sandra L. Genis Citv of Newport Beach..(714) 644-3225 4. Indicate number of the permit application for the project to which this form pertains: GPA 90 1(G) Amendments No 701 and 721, TPO No 70• Finding of General Plan c_onsistenU. 5. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: NA 6. Existing zoning district: Planned CommuniV, retail uses 7. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed): Office and retail Project Description 8. Site size: 2.76 acres and 19,560 s.f. 9. Square Footage: Amendments provide for construction of 20,000 s.f. office building at Pac Tel site on Camelback St., and construction of 20,000 square feet of retail space in Fashion Island, which will include a transfer of 13,550 s.f. transferred onto Fashion Island. 10. Number of floors of construction: Not specified. Will meet PC standards, maximum 32 feet at Pac Tel, and 40 feet for peripheral buildings at Fashion Island. 11. Amount of off-street parking provided: To be provided to existing PC standards. - 1 - I �y b1 12. Attach plans. NA 13. Proposed scheduling. NA 14. Associated project. 15. Anticipated incremental development. 16. If residential,include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected. 17. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities. Commercial at Fashion Island will be regional in nature. 18. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 19. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. 20. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. A Planned Community District.Amendment is required to provide for office uses on the Pac Tel site and to provide for increased retail space and Fashion Island. Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets if necessary) Yes No 21. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, — X or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. 22. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residen- — X tial areas or public lands or roads. 23. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area — X of project. 24. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. — X 25. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in — X vicinity. - 2 - b Yes No 26. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water — x quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. 27. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration — x levels in the vicinity. 28. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. x (Small portion of periphery of Pac Tel site) 29. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, — x such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. 30. Substantial change in demand for municipal services — x (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.) 31. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption — x (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.) 32. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. — x Environmental Setting 33. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on viro topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Both sites are largely paved, with no on site structures. Both sites are largely flat, although the Pac Tel site is somewhat below the grade of Bison Avenue and sloped at the periphery of the site. 34. Describe the surrounding properties,including information on plants and animals and any cultural historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. - 3 - 6Y Surrounding land uses for both sites are largely commercial, with single family attached residential uses south of the Pac Tel site, across Bison Avenue and multi- family residential northeast of the Pac Tel site, across Camelback Street. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date Signature JJ�� � For ]M\EIR-DOCS\EIR-INPA - 4 - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. Background 1. Name of Project Proponents: City of Newport Beach for GPA 90-1 G and Finding of General Plan consistency; The Irvine Company for PC amendments and TPO. 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent City of Newport Beach 3300 NeW4rt Boulevard Newo rt Beach Ca (714) 644-32251: The Irvine ompany 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach Ca (214) 720-2335. 3. Date Checklist Submitted January 3 1991 4. Agency Requiring Checklist Cily of Newport Beach 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable GPA 90 1 (G) Amendments No. 701 and 721 TPO No 70• Finding of General Plan consistency. II. Environmental Impacts (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required on attached sheets.) Yes Maybg No 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? — — X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? — x C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? — X — d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? - - x - 1 - 7'I i k Yes Ma e IN e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? — —x — f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or X any bay, inlet or lake? — — g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, X mudslides,,ground failure, or similar hazards? — 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration X of ambient air quality? — — b. The creation of objectionable odors? -- — -'X C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, X either locally or regionally? — — — 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either X marine or fresh waters? — — b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of X surface runoff? —C. Alterations to the course or flow of X flood waters? — —' d. Change in the amount of surface water X in any water body? — - 2 - �t�0 t > . Yes May No e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? — x — f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground water? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? — — X h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? — — X i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? — — x 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num- ber of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? — -- X b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? -- — X C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? — — x 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or num- bers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms or insects)? — — X - 3 - I�1 ,I • '13 A rk Yes a e .No b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animalsT — — x C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in'a barrier to the migra- tion or movement of animals? — — X d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? — — X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? -- X — b. Exposure of,people to severe noise levels? — — X 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? — X — S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X — — 9. Natural,Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? — — X 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? — — X b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? — — x 11.. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution density, growth rate of the human or population of an area? — — x - 4 - iyv �y Yes Ma be No 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? — — X 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? X — — b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? X -C. Substantial impact upon existing trans- portation systems? — x — d. Alterations to present patterns of circula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? - - x e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? - - x f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? — — X 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered gov- ernmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? — — X b. Police protection? — — X C. Schools? — — X d. Parks or other recreational facilities? — — X e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? — — X f. Other governmental services? — — X - 5 - 75 Y U Maybe .-.. o 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? — — x b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy, or require the development X of new sources of energy? — — 16. Utilites. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? — — X b. Communications systems? — — x C. Water? — x d. Sewer or septic tanks? — — X e. Storm water drainage? — — X f. Solid waste and disposal? — — X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in? a. Creation of any health hazard or potential x health hazard (excluding mental health)? — -- b. Exposure of people to potential health x hazards? — — — 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in,the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? — — X 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing x recreational opportunities? — --- - 6 - i4� 6 7 R r Yes Maybe No 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or x historic archaeological site? — — b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or x historic building, structure, or object? — — — C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect x unique ethnic cultural values? — — — d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses with the potential impact x area? — —' — 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of x California history or prehistory? — — — b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a rela- tively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) — — x - 7 - �yh -7? ye Mayhe No C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively con- siderable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) — x d. Does the project have environmental effects which wil cause substantial adverse effects on-human beings, either directly or indirectly? _ x — III. Discussion of Environmental Evaluation (Narrative description of environmental impacts.) lb Development of the project sites will involve disruption of existing ground surfaces. However,because the two sites have previously been graded and are currently paved over, this is not considered a significant impact. lc Eventual development of the project sites could result in alteration of the existing, largely flat ground surface. However,under existing City regulations, any significant alteration would be subject to the approval of a grading permit by the City of Newport Beach, which would incorporate appropriate conditions to reduce any potential impacts to an insignificant level. le, 3e The potential exists for erosion and associated surface water turbidity during construction. Any potential impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance by the attached mitigation measures. 6a Short term impacts due to 'construction noise could occur in the surrounding area. The distance to the nearest residential development lessen the significance of this impact. However, construction hours will be limited those specified in the attached P i mitigation measures, thereby reducing this impact to a level of insignificance. outdoor lighting. nd lare could result from parking lot lighting and other 7 Light a g This has the potential for significance only insofar as residential areas near the Pac Tel site could'be affected. However,the attached mitigation measure will reduce this potential impact to a level of insignificance. 8 Future land use of the Pac Tel site will be altered from Retail and Service Commercial to Administrative,Professional and Financial Commercial. This change is not considered significant. - 8 - Itb 01 0 13a,c 20,000 square feet of general office use on the Pac Tel site would generate 50 am peak hour trips and 45 pm peak hour trips,which would not have significant adverse impacts on any intersection. The same amount of medical office uses on the same would generate 15 am peak hour trips and 90 pm peak hour trips, which has the potential to result in adverse impacts on the intersection of MacArthur and Bison. This impact can be reduced to an insignificant level by the intersection improvement listed in the attached mitigation measures. The proposed increase in square footage at Fashion Island would generate 16 am peak hour trips and 47 pm peak hour trips,which would not have an adverse impact on the arterial network. 13b Development of the project sites will result in increased demand for parking. However, adherence to existing City parking standards for the sites will result in no significant impact on surrounding areas. 21d Development of the project sites could effect people in the area to the extent the above impacts were not mitigated. However, the imposition of the attached list of mitigation measures will reduce any potential impacts to a level of insignificance. IV. Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find that although the proposed project could have a signif- icant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. — A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. x I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. — to Si ature For six oocs�acnw — • 9 ' �9 MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to muumite the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department .prior to the issuance,of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be q re uired to,enter into an agreement and post abond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system,utilities or other public property that might be damaged during f retaining excavation and construction o g structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code which limits the hours of construction and.excavation work to 7:00 Mu , P to Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. • a.m. to 6:30 .m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6.00 pm. on Y . he use . ' which involve t � 'onactiviUes • n Sundays and holida s:• Hand excavate • 6.00 .m. o Y,. P Y produce grinding,pounding which , ammers or other similar..tools p g g P stone drills jack hammers,ofsto ,7 or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program ' ro am shall include such measures as. contatnin g,soil on-site until it is ha uled away, watering stockpile of stoc ale soil,and,regulnrvacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 8. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the ligbt.source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential rl side of Camelb ack Street and the southerly side of northeasterly on the Y properties Bison Avenue. 9. Medical office uses on the Pac Tel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. g0 MITIGATION MEASURES L. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. 2. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimise the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of the plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be required to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system,utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code,which limits the hours.of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30'p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of stone drills,jack hammers,or other similar tools which produce grinding,pounding or other similar loud and pulsating sounds shall be limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as: containing soil on-site until it is hauled away,periodic watering of stockpile soil,and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 8. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. 9. Medical office uses on the Pac Tel site shall not be certified for occupancy until such time as an additional northbound through lane on MacArthur at Bison is provided. 2i _MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit approved by the Building and Planning Departments. , 2. The grading permit shall include a.description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize the impacts of haul operations. 3. An erosion, siltation and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the'Building Department prior to the issuance of the grading permit. A copy of thd plan shall be forwarded to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 4. Grading•shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the recommendations of a.soil engineer and au 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 shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to ,the issuance of building permits. 5. If found necessary by the City of Newport Beach, the project applicant will be requir'•ed to enter into an agreement and post a bond guaranteeing the repair of the public street system,utilities or other public property that might be damaged during excavation and construction of retaining structures and'foundations. 6. Construction activities will be conducted in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code, which limits the hours of construction and excavation work to 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.on Saturdays and 10:00 a.m. to m on Sundays and holidays. Hand excavation activities which involve the use of s00 tone Y pounding of stone drills,jack hammers,or other similar tools which produce grinding,p g or other similar loud and pulsating sounds sbalPbe limited to the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday. through Saturday. 7. A dust control program in compliance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403 shall be implemented'during excavation and construction. This program shall include such measures as containing soil on-site until it is hauled away,periodic watering of stockpile soil,and regular vacuum sweeping of streets used for the haul operation to remove accumulated material. 8. The lighting system for the proposed developments shall be designed in a manner so as to conceal the light source and minimize light and glare to the nearby residential properties on the northeasterly side of Camelback Street and the southerly side of Bison Avenue. il such 9 time as a Medical nfadditional northboundlthroughllane on MacArthur hur at Bison provided, �� ' • City Council Meeting February 25,1991 Agenda Item No. F-10(a) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: City Council FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: A General Plan Amendment 90-1(G)(Public Hearing) Request by the Irvine Company to:amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for'Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pacific Telephone site (Camelback Street and Bison Avenue); and the acceptance of an environmental document. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND B. Amendment No. 721 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pacific Telephone site. AND C. Traffic Study No. 70 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. LOCATION: Lot 6, Tract No. 6680, located at 1177 Camelback Street, on the northwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street, in the North Ford Planned Community. ZONE: P-C AND D. Finding of General Plan Consistency (Discussion) Request by the Irvine Company for a finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. r . TO: City Council - 2. INITIATED BY: The City of Newport Beach AND E. Amendment No. 701 (Public Hearing) Request to amend the Fashion Island Planned Community Development Regulations so as to increase the allowable development allocation by 13,550 square feet. AND F. Traffic Study No. 67 (Public Hearing) Request for a Traffic Study for increased square footage at Fashion Island. APPLICANT: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach OWNER: Same as applicant Suggested Action If desired, set the following matters for public hearing at the city Council meeting of March 11, 1991: GPA 90-1(G). To amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to provide for Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial uses as an alternate use on the Pactel site. Amendment No. 721. To amend the North Ford Planned Community District Regulations to provide for 20,000 square feet of office development on the Pactel site. Traffic Study No. 70. Traffic study for proposed office development on the Pacific Telephone site. Amendment No. 701. To increase permitted development in the Fashion Island Planned Community by 13,550 square feet. Traffic Study No. 67. Traffic study for entitlement transfer and increased square footage at Fashion Island. Finding of General Plan Consistency. Finding of General Plan consistency for a transfer of 13,550 square feet of commercial development from the Pacific Telephone site to Fashion Island. Acceptance of an environmental document for the above approvals. TO: City Council - 3. Alications/Project Objective The above approvals are needed to accomplish the applicant's objective which is to gain entitlements for the construction of approximately 20,000 square feet of office space at the Pacific Telephone (Pactel) site located in the North Ford Planned Community and approximately 20,000 square feet of additional retail space at Fashion Island. Planning Commission Recommendation On February 7, 1991, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council that the above applications be approved. Copies of the Planning Commission minutes and a more detailed staff report will be provided prior to the March 11, 1991 City Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director BYca � SANDRA GENIS Senior Planner \env\pacte1\cc2-25 �w �" ; P - 1�; A Weston Pringle & Associates TRAFFIC&TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING March 22, 1989 4' Ms. Pat Temple 9 EEpa�nnim e Environmental Coordinator oPa "t li City of Newport Beach g MAR24198� �` P.O. Box 1768 ct�pp Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915 NVVPOfCf BEAG14- '0 GA41F. Dear Ms. Temple: w This letter summarizes our analysis of traffic factors related to the proposed Pacific Telephone Site development in the City of Newport Beach. The study has been conducted to satisfy the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. This study is- based upon information provided by the developer, City Staff and previous studies. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Pacific Telephone Site is located on the northwesterly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. At present, the site is vacant and was previously utilized by Pacific Telephone for vehicle storage.. Planned development would include 33,500 square feet of commercial building and 137. off-street parking spaces including 32 compact stalls. Vehicular access is proposed at the northerly property line via a joint easement with Southern California Edison Company acid at a point that aligns with the existing commercial driveway on the east side of Camelback Street. Figure 1 illustrates the site location. EXISTING CONDITIO S The streets in the area are fully developed. Camelback Street extends from Bison Avenue to Jamboree Road. Adjacent to the site, Camelback Street has a varying width and generally provides two lanes in each direction plus turn lanes. Special channelization has been provided due to the numerous driveways 2651 East Chapman Avenue • Suite 110 • Fullerton, California 92631 • (714) 871-2931 OR. J r. . q � BRISTOL `° m KRIS ST NORTH TOL S7. � SITE n s ti a G�vkD• F W FORD GO SPN JOAQ��N 4 t S RP, a w m Q Q _ dQ 4 OpAST HWy, 4Z Z) o w PACIFIC �° a Qp SITE LOCATION MAP WESTON MUNGLE k ASSOCIATES FIGQRE . I -t- in the area. Bison Avenue is improved with three lanes in each direction and median channelization. The intersections on Bison Avenue at Mac Arthur Boulevard, Camelback Street and Jamboree Road are signalized. At Jamboree Road, Camelback Street is limited to right turns only. Existing daily traffic volumes and 1988 ICU values at major intersections are illustrated on Figure 2. These data were provided by the City of Newport Beach. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation rates for various land uses have been developed from studies conducted by government agencies and consultants. The City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineer has recommended a rate for General Retail uses which would apply to this project. These rates are listed in Table 1. The estimated 2.5 and peak hour trip generation for the proposed development are listed in Table 1. These estimates are based upon 33,550 square feet (SF) of retail use. An estimated 80 trips would be generated during the AM 2.5 hour peak and 235 during the PM 2.5 hour peak. During the AM peak hour, an estimated 40 trips would be generated and 115 during the PM peak hour. TRIP ASSIGNMENT In order to assign project traffic to the street system, it is necessary to develop a trip distribution pattern. A trip distribution pattern was previously established for the commercial site on the northerly corner of Bison Avenue and Camelback Street. This distribution provided a basis for a distribution for the subject project. This distribution pattern has been reviewed and accepted by the City Traffic Engineer. This distribution is illustrated on Figure 3. The estimated trips to be generated by the project were assigned to the street system in conformance with this distribution. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS The traffic analysis has been completed to conform to the criteria of the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance: A total of 18 intersections were identified by the City Traffic Engineer for inclusiop in the analysis. The first required analysis is the "One Percent" test. An intersection is defined as critical by the Ordinance when the project traffic exceeds one percent of existing plus committed project plus re%ional growth traffic on any approach 37 ,57/0.66 36 0.47/0.56 0R. 14 0.68/0.69 y 0.58/0.92 r t 0.49/0.49 1.02/0.90 ¢ �'�SITE aQ $RIS7OL ST. 15 0.54/0.62 y\ BRISTOL S7; NOR tH 0.84/0.J���EQ` 0.96/0.71 29 LEGEND 0.95/0.59 0.87/0.68 56 IN ILY TRAFFIC THOUSANDS. VOLUMES ) SJ�.... 0.78/0.55 oQ. 54 Q77/0.66 = AM/PM ICU 4 0.89/0.73 �p 50 a S� �\5061 tic 9� w. 39 Q69/0.59 9R 0.91/0.77 FORD 0.68/0.76 1- 0.78/0.55 50 JO 51 c5j AQV�N a 3 17 0.65/0.82 Ir o 0.57/0.73 8 y/C48 RD. NEW CENTER Q71/0.87 Q W a 54 O� 64 a ~ g 74 37a, 47 43 28 2 , a 60 COPST HWY �I m O c�j W PACIFIC M �. 52 O a a._ h v ~o o� �9 0\ a o 43 �vp hh U O O O M I�� (� O O� d O 5 � h GQ O O tQ p M QD QD d � EXISTING DAILY VOLUMES AND I C U VALUES WESTON 1'IUNCLE II.ASSOCMM FIGUR9 ' 2 -3 Table 1 TRIP GENERATION Pacific Telephone Site TIME PERIOD RATE(1) TRIP ENDS(2) In Out I_nn Out 2.5 Hour Peak - AM 1.4 1.0 45 35 2.5 Hour Peak - PM 3.0 4.0 100 135 AM Peak Hour 0.7 0.5 25 15 PM Peak Hour 1.5 2.0 50 65 (1) Trip ends per 1,000 SF (2) Based upon 33,550 SF i DR J t a a U Q J Off. BRISTOL ST m m 5� BRISTOL NORTH uN�J�� ST 5 �5 25 +�' 5 SJMAT,C�.... LEGEND 5 Io ..• n 10 DIRECTIONAL O .i� ;o DISTRIBUTION PERC. m y125 9 N W 10� D. y FORD 69 10 j �a �G 5 10 a' S� A Q a 5 g � yyS RO. u h wm W� pwco �5 , w 4 > > Q a O 4 OO 'a 2i a OAS7 Ma. �9 w PACIFIC GµrY �9W a `� qP PROJECT DISTRIBUTION WFSTAN MgNW E&ASSOCIATES, FIGURE 5 0 -4- to an intersection during the AM or PM 2.5 hour peak period. A list of committed projects Was provided by the City for inclusion in this study and these projects arp listed in Table 2. Since the project is scheduled for completion in 1990, the apalyses were completed for 1991 as required by the Ordinance. Appendix A contains the "One Percent" analysis sheets for the 18 intersections analyzed and the results are summarized in Table 3. Review of Table 3 indicates that all intersections passed the "One Percent" test except Jamboree Road/San Joaquin Hills Road, Jamboree Road/Bison Avenue and' Mac Arthur Boulevard/Bison Avenue. In conformance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, ICU analyses were completed for the three intersections for those periods that were found to be critical . These analyses are contained in Appendix B and included existing, existing plus regional growth plus committed project and existing plus regional growth plus committed project plus project traffic conditions. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 4. Review of Table 4 indicates that all intersections are projected to have ICU values of less than 0.90 for the critical periods or will not have an ICU value made worse by the project. On this basis the project would not be defined as having an impact in conformance with the Ordinance. SITE ACCESS As was indicated in the Existing Conditions section of this report, Camelback Street has special striping and channelizatiop to provide service to the various driveways and uses. The existing striping and channelization are illustrated on Figure 4. At present, the subject site has a driveway adjacent to the Southern California Edison driveway near the northerly property boundary. The site plan indicates a new driveway to align with the existing commercial driveway on the east side of Camelback Street and an improved driveway at the northerly property line to serve the project and Edison. • 0 -5 Table 2 COMMITTED PROJECTS Hoag Cancer Center Mariners Church Expansion Aeronutronic Ford Big Canyon Villa APts. Civic Plaza 1400 Dove Street Corporate Plaza 1100 Quail Street Mac Arthur Court McLachlan-Newport Place Newport Place Koll Center TPP Amend. 4A Sea Island Villa Point Harbor Point, Homes Rosan's Development Martha's Vineyard Fashion Island #2 Valdez Newport Aquatics Center Coast Business Center 2600 E. Coast Hwy. Koll Center NPT No. 1 Taco Bell Ross Mollard Newport Retirement Inn 1501 Superior Medical Newport Classic Inn 15th Street Apts Newport Lido Med Center Newporter Resort Expansion Big Canyon 10 Fashion Island Renaissance YMCA 20th St. Bed/Breakfast Inn Amendment No. 1 Ford Aero Amendment No. 1 North Ford Sharaton Expansion Newport Dunes Amendment No. 1 Mac Arthur Bayview National Education City of Irvine Development North Ford Shokrian Riverside Retail Building Edwards Newport Center 3800 Campus Dr. Seaside Apts. III 3760 Campus Dr. Newport Imports Fidelity National Title Newport Place Tower Mariners Mile Marine ,Ctr. Table 3 i CRITICAL INTERSECTION IDENTIFICATION Pacific Telephone Site LOCATION 2.5 HOUR QERCENTAGES NB SB EBT' WB AM PM AM AM PM AM LM Bristol St & Campus Dr. - Irvine Ave. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - Bristol St. & Birch St. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - Bristol St. & Jamboree Rd. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - Bristol St. N. & Campus - Irvine Ave. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - 0.0/0.0 Bristol St. N. & Birch St. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - 0.0/0.0 Bristol St. N. & Jamboree Rd. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - - Coast Highway & Jamboree Rd. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & Santa Barbara Dr. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 - - 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & San Joaquin Hills Rd. 0.0/0.0 0.1/0.1 0.3/1.2 0.4/0.2 Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. -Ford Rd. 0.1/0.2 0.1/0.2 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Jamboree Rd. & Bison Ave. 0.1/0.2 0.1/0.1• 1.3/4.3 1.4/3.5 Jamboree Rd. & Eastbluff Dr. - 0.1/0.1 0.1/0.1 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 University Dr. Coast Highway & Mac Arthur Blvd. - - 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Jan Miguel Dr. 0.1/0.1 0.1/0.1 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 Mac Arthur Blvd. & 0.1/0.1 0.1/0.2 0.0/0.0 0.1/0.5 San Joaquin Hills Rd. Mac Arthur Blvd. & Ford Rd. 0.1/0.2 0.2/0.3 0.0/0.0 0.3/0.9 Mac Arthur Blvd. & Bison Ave. 1.0/0.4 0.1/0.1 2.7/3.9 - - Jamboree Rd. & Mac Arthur Blvd. 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 0.0/0.0 • r7- Table 4 ICU SUMMARY Pacific Telephone Site INTERSECTION PERIOD Existing Existing Existing Existing (1988) +Regional +Regional +Regional +Committed +Committed +Committed (1991) +Project +Project 1991 W[Improv. Jamboree Rd. & PM Peak 0.55 0.68 0.68 - San Joaquin Hills Rd. Jamboree Rd. & Bison Ave. AM Peak 0.69 0.82 0.82 - PM Peak 0.59 0.71 0.73 - Mac Arthur Blvd. & Bison Ave. AM Peak 0.89 1.11 1.11 - PM Peak 0.73 0.91 0.91 - PROJECT /PROPO S RED PROPOSED SITE - TvFP CE • / CRIVENAYA}ACCESS I I CUT C."•':.y -- t_--_--- --------------__- 1 1_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -PROPOSED MECIAN -- - -- 1 INSTALL "NO LEFT TURN" SIGN R=17 111 FELT L* EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS BISON CAMELBACK STREET AVE. 1Srr`S. TON PRINGLE AND ASSOCIATES FIGURE 4 _8 The existing striping and channelization on Camelback Street restrict site ingress/egress opportunities. In addition, some vehicles exiting the Post Office ore making a left turn around the raised median to travel northerly on Camelback Street. These two conditions were considered in the review of site access. The peak hour volume into the site is estimated to be 50 vehicles (Table 1). Based upon the distribution in Figure 3, 75 percent would come from the south or execute a left turn to enter the site. This is 38 vehicles and a left turn storage length of approximately 50 feet would be required to accommodate this demand. Since it is not possible to provide for this storage at the proposed southerly driveway, left ingress would have to occur at the northerly driveway. This would allow for adequate left turn storage. In order to improve the safety of the area, if is recommended that left turns out of the northerly driveway be prohibited. It is also recommended that a raised median be constructed to prohibit left turns out of the site at the northerly driveway. This additional median island would also eliminate the current left turn problem from the Post Office driveway. This recommendation is illustrated on Figure 4. The southerly driveway can include all movements except left turns into the site. It is recommended that a "NO LEFT TURN" (R17) be posted for northbound traffic on Camelback Street at the southerly driveway. SUMMARY This study has reviewed traffic factors related to the Pacific Telephone Site development as required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Estimates were made of trips to be generated by the project and the impact of these trips evaluated in terms of the Ordinance. No intersections were found to be impacted by the project. Potential problems were identified with respect to site access and mitigation measures have been recommended. w -9- A Principal findings of the study are the following: 1. The project will generate 40 AM peak hour and 115 PM peak hour trip ends. 2. Of the 18 intersections evaluated, three did not pass the "One Percent" test required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 3. Of the three critical intersections, all were found to have ICU values less than 0.90 or not made worse by the project. MITIGATION MEASURES The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential traffic impacts of the project. 1. Allow left turns into the site at the northerly driveway and construct a raised median to prohibit left turns out (See Figure 4). 2. Prohibit left turns into the site at the southerly driveway. We trust that this study will be of assistance to you and the City of Newport Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer State of California Numbers C16828 & TR565 WSP:hld #4109D r APPENDIX A ONE PERCENT ANALYSES r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis r Intersection BRISTOL ST CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on verage Inter pring iV0 AM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4277 /9S s�/ � -Flo South bound N3 ��r Sf �a/o2 /p? O Eastbound8611 Westbound 74 602 I p 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 21 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE. PROJECT: FORM I r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Vol—um—e—s—Ea—sed on AVerage Winter/Spring 919a pM Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1' of Projected' Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2$ Hour Peak 2� Hoor Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2412 .2gl p�g/� 0�8 ; O South bound 2572 $ S3 ] 3 aa7 3a ; 0 Eastbound 5245 (f/g 6a�J 6� Westbound 2� 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�j Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE.- PROJECT: FORM I a r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST/BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19q8 }1M Peak 24 Hour Approyed Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1: of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Vglume Volume Volume Northbounq 707 ,?d 717 7 D Southbounq A XS 6/1 Gp Eastbound o?c, 9 S6Jt� Sp i D Westbound O 8 I D 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: PROJECT: FORM I 3 Traffic Volume Analysis r Intersection BRISTOL ST/BIRCIi ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average rater Prtng 39 g_ $M Peak 21s Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected In of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)s Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2ti Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 454 �� y71 S- I V 5outhCound 1652 1771 O Eastbound 3723 771 1 41Z- i Westbound 13 r- � Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2� Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization . (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJ9CT: FORM I • • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average nter pring lg8$ AM Peak 2)1 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected In of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 21g Hour Peak 2+ Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume I Northbound 6039 Sout hbound 7 7Z 5744 /16 C7 Eastbound 5656 i Westbound I ! 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 21 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM l 5 r . • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis r Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST (Existing Traffic Volum—e-s—Fa—sed on Average Winter/Spring 9 U_) pM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2c Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 2�s Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume /Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5464 ��G v�LL� 6� O South bound 2056 Got '$6 a96`� a9 O Eastbound 5375 /wy,1 O Westbound Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: . FORM I b ' I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis r Intersection BRISTOL ST N/CAMPUS DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter79pring 9 8 AM Peak 2is Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Protected Protect Direction Peak 2$ Hour Growth Peak 2� [lour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume /Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6006 a711 Southbound 1332 ADa Eastbound Westbound 3038 v11y 3 '4a 37 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: PROACT: FORM I 11� 7 r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N/CAMPUS DR—IRVINE AV (Existing Traffic Volumes based on verage inter pring 19 aW pM Peak Vi Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2i5 Hour Peak 21, Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3236 �y� 1 q 0 3`Uo? 301 0 Southbound 3 1/739 1 1411 ; Eastbound j Westbound 7814 1751S -71V°/ �6 0 r—� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ 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: PROJECT: FORM I B 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N/BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volume—sTa-s--e-a on Average Winter pring 1988 AM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1:; of Projected Project Direction Peak 21, Hour Growth Peak 2u, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2, Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2520 6S� J17,I( Southbound 703 Eastbound Westbound 2478 rr5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected LJ Peak 21� Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2Ji Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U•) Analysis is required. OATS: PROJECT: FORM I 9 • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection BRISTOL ST N/BIRCH ST (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 988 PM Peak 2� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1o, 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 1214 31/ 1,r3.r Sout hbound 3237 1r7 378111 Y Eastbound I I-ILI Westbound 5099 1313 6y/OZ f 7 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume Q 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: PROJECT: FORM I 1D 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST N (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1988 AM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 211 Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2)s Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 10144 307 Southbound 1521 yd 8�7 02 v Eastbound Westbound 6 I U r-7( Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected lJ 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: PROJECT: FORM I I I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BRISTOL ST N (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Verage Winter/Spring 1988 PM Peak 211 Hour . Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1� of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6772 c1 oS ��3 !�/J///�l �� C Southbound 3518 l o y /1)"2U Eastbound i Westbound ©� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume n Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected 4� Peak 2-� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysiq is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 12 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HIGHWAY/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 9 8 AM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 23, Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1647 50 Southbound 2159 7,-,2a Eastbound Al 22 7S,? 0 Westbound 2773 a 97 3 74 3� I 0 r-v{ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than l% of Projected lJ peak 2;1 Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (;.C.U.) Anplysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HIGHWAY/JAMBOREE RD (Existing Traffic Volumes ase on Average Winter/Spring 1988 PM Peak 2c, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1: of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2c Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2+ Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1112 3'1 //P/7 10 SouthDound 4596 132 10 Eastbound 5541 7 Westbound •p Project Traffic 1s 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 21� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SANTA BARBARA DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on verage inter pring 9aZ FAM Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10,; of Projected Project Direction Peak 2)1 Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2u Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4594 /3Gl / S�y7 p southbound 91 677 3?,7 Eastbound I ; _- Westbound 428 9 y67 O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21� Hour Traffic Volume O 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: PROJECT: FORM I 5f 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SANTA BARBARA. DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 198L8 PM Peak 2)1 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 21s Hour Peak 21g Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2689 South bound IP 7, D Eastbound Westbound 2007 ' a/7 a� Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 5�- 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19$8 ) Am Peak 2k Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project pireGtion Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2> Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5225 Sg ��Q 6� �1 d C3 Southbound 4411 707 ,i 7Ya S3 3 1 Eastbound B43 a gy/s i y r i Westbound 363 J 3 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume O Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 53 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes basedon Average inter pring 9gg, p Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 21. Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume volume Volume' Northbound 3618 /0 7 7j� Southbound 5917 / 79 7334' 73 i (0 ,1) Eastbound 424 Westbound / 7ol Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 23� Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. _ DUE, PROJECT: FORM � 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD EASTBLUFF DR—FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volume$ Pased on Avqrage pter pr py 988 ) AM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10h of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2h Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2u Hour Volume Volume pVolume Volume /Volume Volume Northbound 524E S O ) 6� 7 a3 I �' o northbound 3537 / 07 t a l Eastbound 1155 Westbound 911 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 21 Hour Traffic Volume a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 55 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR—FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 9jLL) M Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2g Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2h Hour Peak 211 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5160 j y6 V1 6/37 southbound 5187 j 5.7 //6/ f D S 6 14 012. Eastbound1168 Westbound 17 d Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume a Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak Na Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DAIS: PROJECT: FORM I 1%'Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BISON AV (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1FEFAM Peak 231 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2s Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5269 /10 771 /3d1 (d.11 5outhbound 4085 �a"I 7��1 y9 7 2, o / i) Eastbound 331 � 7 3 111f 3 i S 13 Westbound 455 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected El Peak 2� 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. �IAjE: PROJECT: FORM I �7 . r 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/BISON AV (Existing Traffic Volumes—based on Average Winter/Spring 1988 PM Peak 214 Hour Approved —� Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1. of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2k Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4869 Z;p 1,F37 South bound 4802 �/� I3 6079 Eastbound226 Westbound /I/ 7Z7 O I 27 3 rS) Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2-� Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I T • • ' 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR—UNIVERSITY DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 988 AM Peak 2-, Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2+ Hour Growth Peak 21s Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2+ Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5147 Southbound 4073 ff�9 15 0161 Eastbound C7 i Westbound 1399 2 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2k Hour Traffic Volume o Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 5� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/EASTBLUFF DR—UNIVERSITY DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 91 PM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10, 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 I Northbound 5193- S7 �L ! 7 o, I southbound 55A9 / G a263 z ' 70 5 p l Eastbound6117 33 7aU i 7 l o Westbound 1249 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 2; Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I bo 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOREE RD/MACARTHUR BL (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1 8e j�AM Peak 2)= Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2�, Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2AA U 3 gS S 70 33Iff o South bound 3 463 Cis 6 a/ �S �o? O Eastbound 3827 y ' C'� Westbound 1800 SS 66/ sly as Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2�2 Hour Traffic Volume a 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: PROJECT: FORM I 61 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection JAMBOr= RD/MACARTHUR BL (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 ) '?M Peak 21, 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 1385 p7/p 59 02/ ya a°Z i 0 Southbound 3057 67 ys Eastbound 1856 S6 ff�0 r� 77.2 Westbound 3700 v2 86� 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 21fi Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HIGHWAY/MACARTHUR BL (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pprripg 19U) AM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 2�- Hour Peak 2k Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound Southbound 1399 1a a o a sa i�r9 �9 o Eastbound 2681 Westbound 7 6 C7 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 231 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. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I :Sj • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection COAST HIGHWAY/MACARTHUR BL (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1988 PM Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project 'Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2u Hour Peak 2u Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2 0 7 3 0 3 0 i Southbound S6 SyS yG�y Z/ Eastboupd 3665 Westbound 3611 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 2)-2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 7q 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN MIGUEL DR (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average inter pring 19 S Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10 of Projected Project Direction Peak 2+ Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 23a Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6259 / $6 3a6 7171 7� 2 c�i ) sout.hbound 2271 3 0 3 oy a 93 3 a 9 o.I [WeEstbo "0 yG' ��'� S I O i 592 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected Pe4k 2a Hour Traffic Volume Project Traffid is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2, Hour Traffic Volume. intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U. ) Analysis is required. • DATE: PROJECT: FORM I 67 i y 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR DL/SAN MIGUEL (Existing Traffic Volumes based on verage n er p ng lV873�M Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected li, of Projected Project Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2c Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume �IVolume volume Volume /Volume Northbound 2337 36p 51/ Southbounq 3764 S9'i 377 y701 `/7to'll Eastbound 1913 /SD 2063 1071 1 O Westbound a7 710 17 7 7 O Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected © Peak 2-� Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 23� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required: nATE• -- PROJECT: FORM I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1 88 AM Peak 2.� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 24 Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 24 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 43B3 Southbound 3664 177 -Yy0 -2 Eastboupd548 Westbound 221E ��$ a3 3 0�3 2 p• I) 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 2� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. _ DATE: PROJECT: FORM I' 6� • 1% Traffic Volume Analysis intersection MACARTHUR BL/SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD (Existing Traffic VOlymes based n Average rater pP nq it, PM Peak 21� Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2y Hour Peak 24 Hour Peak 2; Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2703 qa6 33d 3 �qi- 3f j 5 Southbound 5306 F36 67S 8'/ 7 1 Eastbound 2148 �/�/ a3y 07,E 1 0 Westbound 1000 yq / I �G S , 0.5 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2a 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: PROJECT; FORM i 70, 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes base4 on Average Winter/Wing 88 ) AM Peak 2y Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2y Hour Growth Peak 211 Hour Peak 2)1 Hour Peak 21s Hour Peak 2� Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6450 M7 7 ff/ 7z 5 b. Sorthbound 4216 66161 . u.z Eastbound 501 Westbound 2184 f 6S 2�y y o 3 � 0,3 �{ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected u Peak 2.11 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PROJECT: FARM I 7� 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/FORD RD (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average nter pring 9 _ PM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 211 Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 4582 1p X Sout hbound 7427 117p y 31,7 `f i h (0 3) Eastbound 821 36 S 7 9 Westbound 8 %a / 73G 17 =IS - Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume a 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: �PRO49PT: FORM I 72, y l% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BL/BISON AV (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 19 88)AM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 10 of Projected Project Direction Peak 2� Hour Growth Peak 2� Hour Peak 2� Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 6784 /069 Ell Southbound 4889 771 Sv 7 ,!5 O,0 Eastbound 374 y Westbound 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 (r✓] Peak 2-� Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE: PRWgCTi FORM I 73 v 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MACARTHUR BZ BISON AV (Existing Traffic Volumes base onAverage inter pring 19 g�pM Peak 211 Hour Approved Approach Existing Regional Projects Projected 1% of Projected ;Peak ct Direction Peak 2k Hour Growth Peak 2m Hour Peak 2y Hour Peak 25 Hour HourVolume Volume Volume Volume Volume meNorthbound 5168 YN y9� 6y7/ '4 Southbound 6332 99g 6y7 '7 9 77 ID tx Eastbound 1033 /OZ i 7 3. 9 i Westbound 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 Q Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. DATE- PROJECT: FORM I 7k n t l APPENDIX B S INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET I'� JAS045PH J INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD & SAN JOAQUIN HILLS ROAD 5045 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1938 PM ............................................................................................. I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED 1PROJECTIPROJECTI lMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I WC Ratio (Volume I V/C I 1 ICapacitylCapacityl Volume I Ratio I volume I Volume lw/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I volume I I I i...........................................................................................I I WL I 160D 1 1 119 1 0.07 • I t I d,o$4 .._..! o,u0 I .................••-••-...... . .... l UT 1 4800 1 1 1249 1 0.26 1 38 1 313 1 0 .35-_! 10.35 ........ 1 NR 1 1600 1 1 151 1 0.09 1 1 zo I p, 1i I 1 0,11 1 i....._..'•...............•--•--...•---.....--_.....--•-----•-----'•----•--•--•• ....... 1 SL' 1 32001 1 6081 0.191 1 400 1 0,21 1 3 I0.44 I--•------•••--•-•-•------••-----------------•-------------•---- ST 1 4800 I I 1944 1 0.41 0,53 i C)S3l '� SR L..soo.................217........0..14 i........1....a...i...o 1 .3 .! °_.141 -------•-•-•-••----------------------•--•---•----__---- ... . I EL 1 1 70 1 I k I 0.02.A 3 10,01,1 * I-----•• .................. *....................._._ ............... 4800 ) 0.02 -- ET I i 33 I I p l 1 I I I ER I N.S. 1 1 62 1 1 1 z I I•----•-----•-----•----•--••----------•-----••-•--'•-•-••••-•--••-•-•••--,�--•--•-•ti --- I WL 1 1 163 1 1 ?- ! 414J� ! I _..�--) 4800 i--------i..----•-;• 0.05 i-----...i._. I I I I 59 O 1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --I I WR 1 16001 1 I 1 1 �7...l...o:o4.1 3 1Qoq 1 1........ ....................................._.......... ...._._......_.I 0.55 1 1 _•- I 1EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. 1 0,(08 1 p i................................................................................... ....... i... I 1EXISTINO + ;OMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ...............................................^__________---__________--•--•-___---__...... lj(Projected + project traffi4 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 wilt be Less than or equal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements Will be less than I.C.U. without project --'^•...............•------..._._^•-----'•-----••--'.._............._......._.__.__.... Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 lye i JA4870AM d INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD i BISON STREET 4870 ' EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1988 AN ..--...•......•...•--•....•..................•........................__._.___..._........_.. I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICCMMITTEDI PROJECTED 1PROJECTIPROJECTI IMovamentl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I WC I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio IVolune I V/C I I lcapacitylCapacityl Volune I Ratio I Volume I Volume lW/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I voLune I I ---- I NL 1 16001 1 281 0.021 1 4 I p,02 I Id,0. I i........................................................................................ - ...NT-..} 4800 I-......_I-_2406 ] 0.52 I ..!. Q21...I_. � `I.......!... NR I I84I I 19.__I......... I I I I...-_--•------•--------••-------------•••------•• ...'�......____•1 I SL 1 3200 1 1 81 1 0.03 • I PJ.__�_•O D ` I00 �3f I------•---------------•--------------------------........ I ST 1 4800 1 1 1690 1 0.35 1 $1 I .1..0.4Q. ( ln.A4. .................................................. SR 1 1600 I 1 16 1 0.01 I I I o.oL I I n.oj --------------- I EL 1 1 72 1 1 I I I I 1 - ] ............... ..] ..............Q...............................I 1 ET 1600 1 1 41 0.09 " 1 �...I 0111 ?�.�. 33...142.�4.1� ........] ..................] ............... I I I ER I I I uL 1 1600 1 1 Bz 1 0.05 • 1 I .... .... ....� .....•-----•--••................................. .. _ ... ...o.oi� 1 WT 1 1600 1 1 50 1 0.03 ( I••...........................••.......................-----............ 1 WR 1 3200 1 1 63 ( 0.02 -----------------------------------I-------------I r 1EX1STING ••----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U. I :.._ ___I..______•-__...I I.......•---------------------•---------_------_----•-----•--•------ gZ 1EX►STING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. IQ Qy .................•.......•........................•.................__..._._.............._.. (Projected t project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 1-1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. 4111 be greater than 0.90 1-1 Projected t project traffic I.C.U. W/systems isprovement Will be Less than or "I to 0.90 I_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. With project improvements will be Less than I.C.U. without project ......................................................................................... Description of system inprovement: PROJECT FORN 11 ��f d JA4870PM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: JAMBOREE ROAD & BISON STREET 4870 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1988 PM .................................•.................•..•................_..................... I IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI IMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio IVOlune I V/C I I lCapacitylCapacityl Volume I Ratio I votume I volume lw/o Projectl I Ratio I --.-.--_-..---••-- I I I I I Volume I --- I I l NL 1 1600 1 1 30 1 0.02 1 1 n 10.oz I--------------------------•-•------.-..----i---------------- -i---- 1965 --------) 4800 ............. ..•.) 0.43 r......._.407)_....�:5��1 ........ .....•I NR i 1 122 I 1 i 51 ------.---•--------------- ------------------------------11...�.........._1.. ..........II1 i SL 1 3200 1 1 120 1 0.04 • I 3q ....4.:q l sT 1 4800 1 1 2020 1 0.42 1 dal I � ..�..Q.S4..!.......�b: 1............................................... 1 SR 1 1600 1 1 54 1 0.03 1 1 p I 30 .......!d:43 I 1................................ ............. "-•.......... I EL 1 I ) i I �.•.�_....._....� I I ........) .... ..- -....... 1 ET 1600 1 1 50 ) 0.06 • 1 I ...... OIP ..�..1 p_O a 114 ........E ) .................. i-----......•�••... I I I 15 I---------------••-••----------- .------•------------ 1 uL 1 1600 I 1 100 1 0.06 • I . �q I �..�...�C).ObI 1........................................................ l WT 1 1600 1 1 59 1 0.04 1 1 1 O.t74 17 10.t 1............................................................ I 4200 1 1 92 1 0.03 1 1 QkJ•_.1.................. 0.04 1 10,0A 1 .........� (EXISTING I 0.59 1 EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.C.U, I................................•...----...------.--.-..........---- --.... I........O:ry..� (EXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ...•.................................................•....•........._..._..........._...._... lv(Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to o.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 @goal to 0.90 1_1 Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project inprovements will be less than I.C.U. without project -•.............. .......................................................•........... Osserlption of system.improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 ' I J� a MA4995AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS , INTERSECTION: •MACARTHUR BOULEVARD 8 BISON AVENUE 4995 ' EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1988 AM ............................................................................................. IEXISTINGIPROPOSEDIEXISTINGIEXISTINGIREGIONALICOMMITTEDI PROJECTED IPROJECTIPROJECTI IMovementl Lanes I Lanes I PK MR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I WC Ratio (Volume I V/C I 1 lCapacitylCapacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume Iw/o Projectl I Ratio I I I I I I I I I Volume I I I I-•-•----•--•-------••-----------•--•--••-•--•---•••-••------••••---•-••-•-----•-----•--__--I NL 1 1600 1 1 139 1 0.09 1 I G3 10,11...1 .�> -!R,11.I 1 NT 1 3200 1 1 2771 1 0.87 *q3� I L3 1-.4.,6.j l i----------•---••-•-•---•---•----- NR I I 1 01 I----------------------••---------------------------•---------------••----------------------I I 6L I I I I I 1 p 1 1 1 I i------------------------------------------------•---------... ----------------•------- I ST ( 6400 i j 2016 I 0.32.1 -1 1 lb I 0:�9..I.......I ot. - 1--•---•--••--•--••••---•.... ............. I 69 1 N.S. 1 1 2101 I I 102. 1 N 1 3 1 1........................••--............-------•........._.._.. 1 EL 1 3200 1 1 69 ( 0.02 k 1 Z7 jC! !�:VJI I-•••----•-------•-•-•---•---•---•-----••______________________•-•••-•- I ET I I I I I 1 p 1 1 1 I I-------•••----•••---••-----------------••--------------•-----_-•--•---••••-----------------I I ER I N.S. I 1 108 1 1 1 2,o 1 V4.1 . 1 4 1 P1.S 1 ..........................................................•- I I WL 1 I I I 1 I ................I I i WT 1 1 I I i I o 1 1 1 I ....................................... ------- ••I I W2 I I I t I I . ................................. II I IEKI6TING .............. 1 0.89 i.....__._.... I-------------------------------------------------------------------••------ (EXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS I.F.U. I...................................•-•-•--•.......---.... ......---...................... IEXISTING + COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ................................................•_•_---___....._.............__.............. 1_1 Project + 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 leas than I.C.U. without project .........................................•--....._____......._....___•_______...___....__ Description of system improvement: PROJECT FORM 11 167 MA4995pm w � J INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: MACARTHUR BOULEVARD & BISON AVENUE 4995 EXIST TRAFFIC VOLUMES BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC WINTER/SPRING 1988 PM --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I EXISTINq PROPOSEDI EXISTINq EXISTINq REGIONAL) COHHITTEDI PROJECTED I PROJECII PROJECII I Movementl Lanes i Lanes I PE HR I V/C I GROWTH I PROJECT I V/C Ratio I Volume I V/C 1 I Capacityl Capacityl Volume I Ratio I Volume I Volume 1 w/o Projects ( Ratio l I I I I 1 I I I Volume I I I ---NL--'---1600 1--------1----120 1 0.08 i--------I--2S----'--o: I __ --I__^ -^__.-^_1--- --- -_-�NT3200 1 2079 0.65 " 1125� i __ __ ______________________________________________3 ___ _ --- _'Y I-- Q_$Z 1 - I NR I I I I I 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 _ --I I --------------------------------------------------------- I ST 1 6400 1 1 2913 1 0.46 1 �-- --��--- --0=5�--- ------ � � I ----------------------------------------------- I SR I N.S. 1 1 157 1 1 1 �--' I �- '_-Iy S --- _-S I Iy,S• i I --------------------------------------- ---------------- 77 --------_-_ I EL ( 3200 I -- 1 _ 241 1 0.08 +� 1 1 O - I -------'--------I----^ I --------------------------- -- ------- ---- I I I ---- -WT -------'--------'-------- -- ' �------- I ------ --------I-^D -_--'_-----_----I-- ^I----- ( EXISTING -^---- ---1 ---0.73 1 -------- ------------------------------- 1 1 --------------------^------------------------------------------------------- IEXIST + REG GROWTH + COMMITTED W/PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS T.C.U. 1 0_91 I - ( EXISTING +-COMMITTED + REGIONAL GROWTH + PROJECT I.C.U. ------_-_-Ip_C�� --I ID Project + project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U, w/systems improvement will be less than or equal to 0.90 I J Projected + project traffic I.C.U. with project improvements will be less than I.C.U. without project ----w------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Description of system improvements PROJECT FORM Il 02-219— pi TRAFFIC STUDIES '(/ �a p APPLICANNT: CONSULTANTS: NAME: PHONE: PROJECT NAME: . DESCRIPTION: arly G� DATE DEPOSIT FEES PAYMENT REMAINING BALANCE yoo, o o Vo, 07 y DaD, Od /0- v 3 39P-oZd Go> . Sd �a /� d o , 90 } _ PoR, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECEIPT i4 O Gm NEWPORT BE H. CAIIFORNIA g92663 No. 58670 19< !! i �{ RECEIVED FROM / 1 FOR: i ACCOUNT NO. AMOUN DEPARTMENT BY a ...ww.r....w.r...r.wr...r..w...--- _ :.................w...w RECEIPT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92663 No. 68565 19DATE ' 1 a t 1Y�� CJ`YZ V $ d-- Y Cory RECEIVED FROM FOR: + AMOUNT AOCOUNT NO O'0 -__ DEPARTMENT ' BY 1 ��,���.�.�-- �r..•••..w............w.w;ww w ...w...ww...w FORM 16U3/89 01 0399809 -CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH —- 430b11 430611.� VOUCHER NO. INVOICE NO. PURCHASE ORDER NO INVOICE DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NETAMOUNT 345708 CORPLZ-W 3/18/91 25.00 .00 25.00 A�C�_Ir � a ?ice TOTAL 25.00 .00 25.00 CITY CF dE�wPokr DEMAND FOR o� NEWPORT @� PAYMENT BEACH U Cq<F00.NPS Demand of: Weston Pringle & Associates Date: Dec. 101990 Address: 680 Langsdorf Dr. , Ste. 222 Fnllartnn, CA 92611 In the amount of $3,39 8.20 Item of Expenditure Budget # Amount Pac-Tel Site Traffic Analysis 02-219-01 $3,398.20 August - November 1990 Professional Services Rendered • I i Total $3,39 8.20 Approved For Payment: - Department li d Audited and Approved: Finance Director W * Weston Pringle & Associates TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING December4, 1990 $ F1n PAYMENT By Ms. Patricia Temple, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach - P.O. Box 1768 lanni J D!,ov:tor Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 �.0 UNT NO.: �,Z_a/ rj _ 0/ REFERENCE: PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONSULTING SERVICES FOR Pac-Tel Site Traffic Analysis August - November 1990 INVOICE • Personnel Charges Firm Principal 16.0 hours @ $95.00 $1,520.00 Assistant Engineer 43.0 hours @ $40.00 $1,720.00 Secretary 5.0 hours @ $20.00 100.00 TOTAL PERSONNEL CHARGES $3,340.00 Direct Expenses Printing $ 58.20 TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES 58.20 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE THIS STATEMENT 3 398.20 REC:Ett+tf? BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT WSP:hd ^ITY OF NEWPORT BEACH #4109E AIA DEC 71990 PM 7181%AHI1211121314A 680 Langsdorf Drive • Suite 222 • Fullerton, CA 92631 0 (714) 871-2931 0 FAX:(7141871-0389 P '`A� Weston Pringle 8. Associates TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING August 21, 1990 Ms. Patricia Temple Principal Planner City of Newport Beach P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 Dear Ms. Temple: We are pleased to submit this proposal to provide professional traffic engineering services for the proposed Office Building on the Pac-Tel site on Camelback project in the City of Newport Beach. This proposal is based upon information provided by you, previous work, and our understanding of the needs of the study. • In general, the work would consist of preparing a traffic analysis as required to satisfy the requirements of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) as well as other traffic related concerns for inclusion in an EIR for the project. The analysis would include consideration of existing, committed projects, regional growth and project traffic as required by TPO. Criteria and methodologies contained in the TPO would be utilized to identify potential traffic impacts along with previous studies and development plans. Site access and parking provisions would also be reviewed. Mitigation measures would be recommended as may be required. A report would be prepared summarizing our findings and recommendations. We would envision the following specific tasks to be required for the completion of this study: 680 Langsdorf Drive • Suite 222 • Fullerton, CA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 • FAX:(714) 871-0389 TASK 1 - DATA COLLECTION • We would assemble all available information pertinent to the study. This would include development plans, existing traffic volumes, committed projects and traffic, regional growth factors, planned circulation improvements, previous studies, and similar data. We would discuss the project with you and the City Traffic Engineer to ensure our understanding of the project and the scope of the study. It is understood that the City would provide AM and PM traffic volumes data for existing conditions and for committed projects. A field review would be made to familiarize ourselves with existing conditions. TASK 2 - TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT Estimates would ben ade of trips to be generated by the project during the AM and PM peak hours and 2.5 hours peak periods. These estimates would be based upon trip generation rates applicable to the specific uses and acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. A geographic trip distribution will be developed for the site. This distribution would be reviewed with the City Traffic Engineer. Estimated • project traffic would be assigned to the street system in conformance with the distribution pattern. TASK 8 - ANALYSIS The City Traffic Engineer has identified 14 signalized intersections to be included in the study. The "One Percent" test would be conducted at each of these intersections to identify potential traffic impacts as required by the TPO. Any intersections that failed the "One Percent"test would be further evaluated with the ICU analyses. (Both the "One Percent" and the ICU analyses would include existing, committed project and regional growth traffic as prescribed in the TPO). Any intersections with ICU values greater than 0.90 would be analyzed to identify mitigation measures. 'Any potential deficiencies would be identified. Site access would also be examined with respect to traffic operations and safety. Mitigation measures would be recommended as may be required. Sketches of recommended mitigation measures would be included where applicable. • • -3- TASK 4 - REPORT AND MEETINGS A report would be prepared summarizing our findings and recommendations. The report would contain the required supportive data and conform to the requirements of the TPO. We would meet with you, and other City Staff and others as may be required during the course of the study. Attendance at two (2) public hearings is included as a part of this proposal. We would be prepared to begin work on this study upon receipt of authorization. It is anticipated that approximately four (4) weeks would be required to complete the study. This schedule assumes no delays in obtaining City supplied data. Our fee for the work outlined in this proposal shall be based upon personnel charges plus direct expenses as indicated in our Standard Rate Schedule, a copy of which is attached and made a part hereto. In no case would the total fee exceed $4,000.00 without prior approval from you or your representative. Since it is not possible at this time to estimate the time required for additional meetings and/or presentations concerning this project not mentioned in this proposal, our staff would be available with the fee based upon our Rate Schedule in addition to the previously stated maximum. The additional work shall be conducted when requested by you or your representative. Statements shall be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon completion of the work at our option and payable within 30 days after submission. After 45 days, unpaid invoices shall have a 1.5 percent per month service charge added. We shall have the option of halting work on your project when statements are unpaid and overdue unless mutual agreement is achieved. This proposal may be considered as effective for six months from the date of this letter. If the project is not completed within six months after the scheduled completion date (due to no fault of Weston Pringle & Associates) additional reimbursement may be • required due to increased costs. If required, such additional reimbursement will be the I I . required due to increased costs. If required, such additional reimbursement will be.the subject of negotiation and mutual agreement between both parties. This letter can serve as a memorandum of agreement and our authorization to proceed. Please sign one copy and return it to us for our files. We are looking forward to serving you on this most interesting project. Respectfully Submitted, WESTON PRINGLE & ASSOCIATES 0 Weston S. Pringle, P.E. Registered Professional Engineer CONTRACT APPROVAL Approved by: Title: Firm: Date• i P ICI Weston Pringle & Associates A TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE Effective January 1, 1990 Professional Staff Hourly Rate Firm Principal $95.00 Senior Engineer $75.00 Associate Engineer $50.00 Assistant Engineer $40.00 Support Staff Engineering Draftsman $40.00 Secretary $20.00 Clerical, Field Enumerator $25.00 General 1. Travel, reproduction, telephone, supplies, and other non-wage direct costs are billed at cost plus ten (10) percent. 2. Hourly rates apply to travel in addition to work time. 3. Statements will be submitted monthly for work in progress or upon completion of work. Statements are payable within 30 days of receipt. Any invoices unpaid after 45 days shall have a service charge added at a rate of 1.5 percent per month (or maximum permitted by law) on the unpaid balance. 4. Compensation for services performed will not be contingent upon the necessity of client to receive payment from other parties. Any controversy of claim arising out of or relating to this contract, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association and judgement upon the award rendered by the arbitration may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 5. These rates are based upon procedures and methods outlined in the American Society of Civil Engineers' Manual on Engineering Practice Number 45. 680 Langsdorf Drive 9 Suite 222 • Fullerton. CA 92631 • (714) 871-2931 • FAX:(714) 871-0389 .��Ew•apRT a CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U _ T P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659.1768 C"9</Fp KN�P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 August 23, 1990 David Dmohowski, Vice President, Entitlement Irvine Pacific Co. P.O. Box I Newport Beach, CA 92658-8904 Subject: Office Building Traffic StudX Dear Dave: The City of Newport Beach has received a proposal from Weston Pringle & Associates, to provide professional traffic engineering services for the proposed office building on the Pac- Tel site. The proposal contains an outline of the scope of work required, estimated time schedule for completion, and estimated budget required for the preparation of the studies. The fee requested has been reviewed by the City, and the amount requested for the tasks required is considered appropriate and warranted. To proceed with the study, it is requested that you remit the following fees: Consultant Fees. $ 4,000 City Fees (10%) 400 Total Request: $ 4,400 Please make the check payable to the City of Newport Beach. Your prompt attention in this matter is appreciated. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By Patricia L. Temple Advance Planning Manager Attachment P\]M\EIRDOCS\PAC•TELTPO 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach