Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
TS089
CITY OF NEWP®R1� BEACH N 2 - 3300 ewport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1763 �,, Newport Beach,CA 9z6s911768 gm 1093 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION GNRYI �@ANYII ountyCletk To: Office of Planning and Research From City of Newport Beach ❑ 1400 Tenth Street,Room 121 Planning Department Sacramento,CA 95814 3300 Newport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1768 Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 County Clerk,County of Orange (Orange County) XXX Public Services Division P.O.Box838 Date received for filing at OPR: Santa Ana,CA 92702 1 J Subject: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Name Of Project: Alamo Car Rental Facility, Traffic Study No. 89, Use Permit No. 3512 State Clearinghouse Number. Lead Agency Contact Person: Telephone No.: City of Newport Beach/John Douglas 714 / 644-3225 Project Location: 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach , California Construction of a new one story building that contains 9,000 sq.ft. Project Description: three new driveways on Birch Street, fueling and vacuuming facility and surface storage area for automobiles. This is to advise that the City of Neuport Beach has approved the above described project on Nov. 4 , 1993 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project: (Dare) 1. The project❑will U 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. El A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures❑ were 91 were not made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A Statement of Overriding Considerations❑was ®was not adopted for this project. S. Findings IN were❑ were not made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. The fmal EIR or Negative Declaration and record of project approval is available for review at the Planning Depart- ment of the City of Newport Beach,3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768;714/644-3225 A44-4 11-5-1993 Environmental Coordinator Sign hve Date Title Reviscd 11-91 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME r 9 L E 'Z�► , CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION NOV 0 1°93 De Minimis Impact Finding fp RA VILLE,County Cleric A. Name and Address of Project Proponent: Robert H. Lee and Associate 1137 N. McDowell Blvd. Petaluma, CA 94954 B. Project Description. Construction of new one story building that contains " 9,000 sq.ft. , three new driveways on Birch Street, fueling and vacuuming facility and surface storage area for automobiles. C Project Location: 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach, California D. Findings: The city of Newport Beach has conducted an Initial Study to evaluate the projects potential for adverse environmental impact, and considering the record as a whole there•is no evidence before this agency that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which 10 wildlife depends. On the basis of the evidence in the record, this agency finds that the of adverse effect contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the presumption California Code of Regulations (CCR) has been rebutted. Therefore, the proposed project qualifies for a De Minimis Impact Fee Exemption pursuant to Section 7535(c) of Title 14, CCR. E. Certification: I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and-that based upon the initial study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife resources, as defined in Section 7112 of the Fish and Game Code. November 5, 1993 Date Jo ?Dl gas, AICP En ta l Coordinator City of Newport Beach F.\W P51\PIANN%NG\JOHN-D\FORMS\DFG-EXEM" COMMISSIONERS MINUTES �yIt tt 4oso CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX A Traffic Study No. 89 (Public Hearing) Item No.1 Request to approve a Traffic Study so as to allow the construction TS89 of a 9,000 square foot automobile rental facility including' UP3512 administrative offices, automobile maintenance facilities, fuel facilities and a surface automobile storage area; and the Approved acceptance of an environmental document. AND B. Use Permit No 3512 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of an automobile rental and storage facility on property located in the M-1-A District. The proposed facility will include administrative offices, automobile maintenance, car washing and detailing, and refueling operations. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the installation of a 6 foot high monument sign and a security gate, both of which encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback. LOCATION: Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10, Tract No. 3201, located at 4361-4443 Birch Street, on the northwesterly side of Birch Street, between MacArthur Boulevard and Dove Street, across from the Newport Place Planned Community. ZONE: M-1-A APPLICANT: Robert H. Lee and Associates, Petaluma OWNER: Alamo Rent A Car,Fort Lauderdale, Florida William R. Laycock, Current Planning Manager, reported that the required Lot Line Adjustment was approved by the Modifications Committee on November 2, 1993, in accordance with Condition No. 27, Exhibit 'W'. In reference to the staff report regarding the -2- p COMMISSIONERS MINUTES YOAp �tt'Glpji,��dlp�rs, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX parking spaces required for the storage, servicing and car wash portions of the operation, Mr. Laycock reported that the staff report should be corrected to state 19 parking spaces instead of 3 parking spaces; therefore, the total parking requirement would be 31 parking spaces as opposed to 15 parking spaces.An automobile leasing facility does not have a specific parking requirement, and inasmuch as a maximum of 15 employees would be on the site at any one time, 16 additional parking spaces would be provided for customers, which is adequate to serve the facility. The public hearing was opened in connection with this item, and Mr. Gary Semling appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant. He requested the following changes to the original application. In reference to Condition No. 13,Exhibit"A", he stated that a modification to the Zoning Code would not be required. The request for a monument sign and a security gate to encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback has been eliminated from the proposed plans inasmuch as no customers would be coming to the facility, and no shuttle bus would be coming to the establishment. He stated that a sign would be located on the fascia of the building indicating Alamo Rent-A-Car. The floor plan has also been changed to provide only a conference room and an office in the administrative area, and no counter area would be provided. Mr. Semling requested that the setback of the proposed masonry wall along a portion of Birch Street be moved to within 17 feet of the front property line and built to a height of 5 feet 4 inches. He stated that a 5 foot 4 inch high masonry wall would be constructed along the northerly side property line, from the 15 foot front yard setback for a length of 100 feet, which corresponds to the front of the proposed building,located 115 feet from the front property line. The existing trees will be removed when the masonry wall is constructed. Mr. Smelling also stated that the widened driveway approach would remain, and that a masonry wall would be constructed along the southerly side property line, similar in height and depth to the other masonry wall. In reference to the canopy in the pump island that is 18 feet high with a 4 foot wide fascia, he requested that the canopy be lowered to 16 feet high with a 4 foot wide fascia. He requested -3- p QOrM,MISSIONERS . • MINUTES YOC dI`�'Clpf'i'spolprS I 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX that the canopy be extended to allow for an added dispenser so as to eliminate the automobile back-log that could occur. In response to a question posed by James Hewicker, Planning Director, Mr. Semling described the location of the additional island and the vacuum unit that would be shifted away from the property to the south, and he anticipated that the vacuum would be approximately 70 feet away from the southerly side property line. Mr. Semling requested that the 4 foot high wall adjacent to the employee parking be constructed as a chain link fence with slats as opposed to masonry. The employee parking area would be landscaped with 29 trees and shrubs. In response to a question posed by Chairman Merrill, Mr. Semling replied that the fence would be visible from the street. In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Semling explained that the applicant has indicated that the proposed chain link fence would not be as visible as a wall and the fence would not be adjacent to the street. The fence would also match the chain link fence and slats that are located at the rear of the property. Mr. Semling requested that Condition No. 12, in Exhibit "A", that the on-site parking, vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation systems and a detailed operation design plan for the shuttle bus customer drop-off and pick-up be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer, be deleted inasmuch as there will no longer be a shuttle service or customer drop-off to the site. Rich Edmonston, City Traffic Engineer, concurred with the request to delete Condition No. 12. He explained that when the request was originally reviewed, it was staffs opinion that a shuttle bus would be provided for customers. In reference to Condition No. 13, Mr. Semling requested that the reference to the monument sign be deleted. -4- p-COMMISSIONERS • • MINUTES "oC ry��t�n'lp�,sO�lr'�fS' i CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX In response to questions posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Semling replied that customers were originally going to come to the subject site. Mr. Hewicker suggested that a condition be added indicating that no customers would be coming to the site. In reference to a ' question posed by Chairman Merrill, Mr. Edmonton replied that the Traffic Study has been reviewed by staff and it is acceptable. In response to question posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Semling explained that the County has provided them with ample parking spaces at John Wayne Airport, and the customers would return the automobiles to the Airport. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Gifford regarding Condition No. 10, Exhibit "A", Mr. Semling explained that the applicant does not propose a security gate and, therefore, there would no longer be a request to encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback on Birch Street. He further replied that the three foot high brick wall on a portion of the subject site is near the 15 foot setback. Mr. Mark Knutson, 61 Majorca, Laguna Niguel, appeared before the Planning Commission on behalf of Alamo Rent-A-Car. He discussed the aforementioned changes in the use of the facility. In response to a question posed by Chairman Merrill, Mr. Knutson explained that the automobiles are currently being serviced at 3510 Irvine Avenue. In response to comments by Chairman Merrill regarding revenue from the sales tax, Robin Flory, Assistant City Attorney, stated that sales tax would be an irrelevant consideration for the approval of the use permit. In response to a question posed by Chairman Merrill regarding the chain link fence, Mr. Knutson replied that he would not object to a block wall in the employee parking area. Commissioner DiSano commented that inasmuch as the applicant stated that customers would not be coming to the site, that if the -5- COMMISSIONERS � � MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993• ROLL CALL INDEX use would be changed in the future it would be necessary for the applicant to apply for an amendment to the subject use permit. Mr. Knutson stated that inasmuch as the airport allocates parking spaces based on market share, and Alamo Rent-A-Car parking' spaces were doubled in 1993 and will be doubled again in 1994, there would no longer be a need for customers to come to the subject site. In response to a question posed by Mr. Hewicker, Mr. Knutson explained that the customers that come to the Irvine Avenue facility are directed to rent the automobiles at the airport. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Knutson explained the procedure that is followed with respect to moving the automobiles between the facility and the airport. Mr. Knutson replied that the turnover of automobiles per day is approximately 250 to 280 trips. Mr.John Arlotti, 19000 MacArthur Boulevard,Irvine,representing the Seventh Day Adventist Church, appeared before the Planning Commission. He supported the proposed project; however, he expressed concerns that the use and the site plan would adversely affect the value of their property and the comfort of their tenants directly south of the subject building. He addressed the extension of the block wall, and he stated that the proposed landscaping that would be installed adjacent to the property would not soften the proposed chain link fence. He expressed concerns regarding the noise level and the aesthetics of the service station and vacuum area that is the closest to the office building that he represents.He suggested that the block wall be extended the length of the property of the common property line between the two properties, and to have landscaping on both sides of the wall to soften the appearance. Mr. Arlotti requested an on-going relationship with Alamo Rent-A-Car in the event there would be future concerns. In response to questions posed by Commissioner Pomeroy, Mr. Arlotti moved to the exhibit area, and he described the areas that -6- COMMISSIONERS MINUTES CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX he considered would adversely affect the adjoining building's first and second floor tenants. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Ridgeway, Mr. Arlotti supported the proposed 5 foot 4 inch high wall. Discussion ensued regarding the proposed landscaping. Mr. Semling reappeared before the Planning Commission. He explained that the landscaping includes trees that would ultimately be 30 feet high, and the trees would screen the subject property. In response to questions posed by Chairman Merrill, Mr. Semling opined that the extensions of the proposed masonry walls 100 feet along each side of the property, to the rear of the 15 foot front yard setback, would address Mr. Arlotti's concerns. Mr. Hewicker queried if a 5 foot 4 inch high block wall would stop the vacuum equipment noise wherein he commented that the only mitigation would be distance from the property line. Discussion ensued regarding the impact of vacuum equipment noise, and the extension of the proposed walls. There being no others desiring to appear and be heard, the public hearing was closed at this time. In response to a question posed by Commissioner Ridgeway regarding the proposed metal building, Mr. Hewicker referred to Condition No. 22, Exhibit "A", and he suggested that the front of the building be constructed of a split-face block to correspond with the treatment that is being used on the masonry wall across the front of the property. Motion * Motion was made and voted on to approve Traffic Study No. 89 and Use Permit No. 3512 and related Environmental Document subject to the findings and conditions in Exhibit "A", delete Condition No. 12, and add Condition No. 30 stating that an additional 100 feet of masonry wall to the rear of the wash rack be required along the southerly side property line before converting to chain link fence. Commissioner Pomeroy addressed the -7- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES +Sf��Op �,4't01��d�Ld�S o� y`��olt 'P i'o�Qoo CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX aforementioned concerns regarding a chain link fence with slats adjacent to the office building. Modify Condition No. 13 to reflect the deletion of the monument sign. Add Condition No. 31 stating that customer drop-off or pick-up would not be allowed on the' site. Commissioner Ridgeway suggested that Condition No. 32 be added to address the retention of the wall for the employee area. Commissioner Pomeroy concurred that a 4 foot high masonry wall would replace the chain link fence. Finding No. 6, regarding the Ayes * * * * * * proposed modification to the Zoning Code, was also deleted, Absent * inasmuch as the revised plans no longer have encroachments in the required 15 foot front yard setback. MOTION CARRIED. A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Accept the environmental document, making the following findings and requiring the following the mitigation measures: Findings: 1. That based upon 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, therefore a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the project, and satisfies all the requirements of CEQA, and is therefore approved. The Negative Declaration was considered prior to approval of the project. 2. An Initial Study has been conducted, and considering the record as a whole there is no evidence before this agency that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. On the basis of the evidence in the record, this agency finds that the presumption of adverse effect contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) has been rebutted. -8- COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES �a Ao �lor�A���rs CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX Therefore, the proposed project qualifies for a De Minimis Impact Fee Exemption pursuant to Section 753.5(c) of Title 14, CCR. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the lighting system shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent properties. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,with a letter from the engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy, the applicant must demonstrate to the City's Building Department and Fire Department that the project is in compliance with the County of Orange Health Department and the City's Fire Department Regulations. B. TRAFFIC STUDY: Approve the Traffic Study,making the findings listed below: FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak-hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S-1. 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project-generated traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major,' 'primary-modified,' or 'primary' street. -9- p COMMISSIONERS • MINUTES �OAO �'�''lprs��dlydrs o�q��olr���o,Qoso CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH \\ November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project-generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic during the 2.5 hour peak period on four of the seven study intersections and that the ICU analysis for the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard/Birch Street, MacArthur Boulevard/Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard/Jamboree Road, indicates that the ICU values for the A.M. and P.M. peaks will not be altered by the addition of the project. C. USE PERMIT NO. 3512 FINDINGS: 1. That the proposed application is support service in nature and an intensification of use of the existing structure within the limits specified by Chapter 20.07 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, and as such, is consistent with the band Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate parking will exist on-site for the proposed development. 3. That the establishment of the subject business will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. 5. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 6. Deleted. -10- COMMISSIONERS 0 • MINUTES G, c� �ort�Jp �o94oso CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX 7. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3512 will not, under the circumstances of this case,be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved, revised plot plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all parking spaces shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 3. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the on-site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self-parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 4. That all mechanical equipment, trash areas and vehicle storage areas shall be screened from Birch Street and adjoining properties. The proposed screening adjacent to the Birch Street frontage shall be a minimum of 5 feet 4 inches high. That all automobile repairs shall be conducted within the building and no outdoor display of vehicles for sale shall be permitted. 6. That grease interceptors shall be provided in all drains within the building where petroleum residues may enter the sewer system, unless otherwise permitted by the Building Department. -11- COMMISSIONERS * • MINUTES �dAp �"�lOf��d�Gd's CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ROLL CALL INDEX encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 17. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen.Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 18. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical. 19. That the car wash area shall be protected so as to prevent drainage from the parking lot from entering the sewer system. The drain shall be connected to the sewer system and have a grease trap. The design and installation of the above facilities shall be approved by the Utilities Department. 20. That the outdoor storage of tires and other auto related parts or merchandise shall be prohibited on-site. 21. That the entire site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 22. That the front of the building facing Birch Street shall be constructed of masonry veneer or similar material as indicated on the approved elevation. 23. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of the structure, the -13- COMMISSIONERS • . MINUTES C t1 O .c� 1G s d���o � �p Pd�Pdo CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX 7. That no outdoor sound system shall be utilized on-site. 8. That all employees shall park on-site at all times. 9. That all signs shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of Newport Beach Sign Code. 10. That any future entry security gate shall be located to provide a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from the front property line, and shall be subject to further review of the City Traffic Engineer. 11. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 12. Deleted. 13. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be designed in such a manner as to provide sight distance in conformance with the City's Sight Distance Standard 110-L. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty- four inches in height. 14. That the intersection of Birch Street and the private drives be designed to provide sight distance for a speed of 40 miles per hour. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. 15. That the centerline of the customer drive entrance shall be aligned with the centerline of the drive entrance of the Sheraton Hotel located directly across Birch Street, unless otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 16. That the unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Birch Street frontage. All work shall be completed under an -12- COMMISSIONERS . MINUTES `Q!p`�O 'lr�,n'lof��d�drs CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX licensed landscape architect or architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan). 24. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, the Public Works Department, and the Planning Department. 25. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 26. That the approval of this application shall permit complete engine rebuilding (including electrical and transmission repair), as well as tune-ups, lubrication, smog testing and brake service and installation. No painting, body work or other operations of a similar nature shall be permitted on- site unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 27. That a Lot Line Adjustment shall be approved and recorded to create one building site prior to the issuance of building permits. 28. That the Planning Commission may add 'or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 29. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 30. That a 5 foot 4 inch high masonry wall shall be constructed along the northerly side property line for at least 100 feet -14- COMMISSIONERS , • MINUTES �dc�' GlOf��O�Ldrs CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH November 4, 1993 ROLL CALL INDEX to the rear of the required 15 foot front yard setback before converting to chain link fence. A similar masonry wall shall be constructed along the southerly side property line, provided that the masonry wall be extended an additional 100 feet before converting to chain link fence. 31. That no customer service, shuttle bus service, customer drop off or pick up of automobiles shall be allowed on the premises unless an amendment to the use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 32. That a 4 foot high masonry wall shall replace the chain link fence in the employee parking area. Use Permit No 1640 (Amended) (Public Hearing) Item No.2 Request to amend a previously approved use permit that per tted UP1640A the establishment of a restaurant with outdoor dining, th service of alcoholic beverages, and live entertainment inside a facility, Approved on property located in the RSC-H District. a proposed amendment includes a request to relocate the pre ' usly approved outdoor dining area to the northerly side the restaurant, adjacent to the rear parking area of th astbluff Shopping Center. LOCATION: Parcel 1, Lot ine Adjustment No. 93-2, located at 31 Eastbluff Drive, at the northwes ly corner of Eastbluff Drive and Vista 1 Sol, in the Eastbluff Shopping Cen r. ZONE: SC-H APPLICANT: Puccini Ristorante, Newport Beach OWNER: The Irvine Company, Newport Beach -15- Planning Commission �ting November 4. 1993 Agenda Item No. 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: A Traffic Study No 89 (Public Hearing) Request to approve a Traffic Study so as to allow the construction of f' a 9,000 square foot automobile rental facility including administrative offices, automobile maintenance facilities, fuel facilities and a surface automobile storage area; and the acceptance of an environmental document. AND B. Use Permit No. 3512 (Public Hearing) Request to permit the establishment of an automobile rental and storage facility on property located in the M-1-A District. The proposed facility will include administrative offices, automobile maintenance,car washing and detailing, and refueling operations. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the installation of a 6 foot high monument sign and a security gate, both of which encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback. LOCATION: Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10, Tract No. 5169, located at 4361-4443 Birch Street, on the northwesterly side of Birch Street, between Dove Street and MacArthur Boulevard, across from the Newport Place Planned Community, Sheraton Hotel. ZONE: M-1-A APPLICANT: Robert H. Lee and Associates, Petaluma OWNER: Alamo Rent-A-Car, Fort Lauderdale, Florida Application The applicant requests to permit the establishment of an automobile rental and storage facility on property located in the M-1-A District. The proposed facility will include administrative offices, automobile maintenance, car washing and detailing, and refueling operations. The proposal also includes a modification to the Zoning Code so as to allow the installation of a 6 foot high monument sign and a security gate, both of which encroach k In accordance with Section 20.42.025 of the 15 foot front and setback.into the requiredy Newport Beach Municipal Code, automobile service stations and other uses which in the TO: Planning Commission - 2 opinion of the Planning Commission are similar in character are permitted in the M-1-A District, subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. Use permit procedures are outlined in Chapter 20.80 of the Municipal Code. Traffic study procedures are set forth in Chapter 15.40 of the Municipal Code, and modification procedures are set forth in,Chapter 20.81. Environmental Significance This project has been reviewed, and a Negative Declaration has been prepared by the City of Newport Beach in connectionmith the application. The Negative Declaration states that the subject development will not result in any significant effect on the environment. For the Planning Commission's information, staff has attached a copy of the environmental document. Conformance with the General Plan The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site for "Administrative, Professional and Financial Commercial" use. The proposed use is allowed under support retail and service use. The Land Use Element has also established area specific land use policies throughout the City. These"area"policies set a site-by-site floor area ratio(FAR.) development limit of 0.5/.75 (Base Development Allocation is 58,000 square feet = 0.5 times the site area). Given that the application is for the construction of a structure containing less than the base development allocation, the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Land Use Element of the General Plan policies and guidelines. Subject Property and Surrounding Land Uses The subject property measures 400± feet wide and 290± feet deep with land area of 116,000± square feet. The subject property is currently developed with a light industrial building (6,000 sq.ft.), which,will be demolished, and related on-site parking area. To the northeast,northwest, and southwest are existing office buildings with related parking areas; and to the southeast, across Birch Street, is the Sheraton Hotel. Combination of Lots The proposed site is currently comprised of four lots which are to be consolidated into one parcel of land through a Lot Line Adjustment which has already been submitted and will be heard by,the Modifications Committee on November 2, 1993. A copy of the letter from the Modifications Committee regarding this matter will be furnished to the Commission prior to the meeting. The following table has been prepared which sets forth the characteristics of the proposed parcel: Parcel Parcel Area Building (s ) Floor Area Ratio 1 116,000± sqft. 9,000± sq.ft. 0.079 TO: Planning Commission - 3 The proposed parcel fully conforms to the design standards as specified for the M-1-A District. The Lot Line Adjustment for consolidation of the four lots is for financing and conveyance purposes and for the proposed construction of the automobile rental facility. Analysis The applicant is requesting to allow the establishment of a retail auto rental facility and related facilities consistent with such operations. The facility will consist of a 9,000± sgft. structure which will house four maintenance service bays(only minor automobile repairs will be performed),two automobile washing bays,two automobile preparation areas,a customer service area and related.employee offices. The proposed hours of operation will be generally 24 hours since vehicles are constantly being serviced or prepared for redelivery, as is typical for automobile rental facilities. The maximum number of employees will be 15 at any one time. Off Street Parkin Requirement for EMosed Business The Municipal Code does not contain any specific parking requirement for automobile leasing facilities. However,based on a standard of one parking space per each 225 sgft.of office space in the M-1-A District specified under Section 20.42.045 of the Municipal Code, the administration and customer service portion of the facility would generate a requirement for 12 parking spaces(2,300 sq.ft.administration + 400 sgft.customer service = 2,700 sgft. + 225 = 12 spaces). Based on a standard of three spaces for each 1,000 sq.ft. of'industrial use as specified under Section 20.42.045 of the Municipal Code, the storage, servicing and car wash portion of site operations would generate a requirement for 19 parking spaces (3,200± sgft.maintenance and storage + 39100± sgft.car wash/preparation area = 6,300± sgft : 1,000 x 3 = 18.9 or 19 spaces). Thus, the total parking requirement would be 31 spaces (12 spaces + 19 spaces = 31 spaces). As shown on the attached site plan, 30 parking spaces will be provided for visitors and employees. In addition, space for storage of over one hundred vehicles will also be provided on-site. This will be more than adequate to serve the proposed facility. Traffic Study No. 89 The proposed development will generate a significantly higher traffic volume than the light industrial or general office use allowed under the current zoning. Therefore, a traffic study was required to determine the compatibility of the proposed project under the guidelines of the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. A traffic study has been prepared for the proposed project in conformance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance and City Council Policy S-1 to examine the consistency and conformity of the project with the City's Circulation Element. The City Traffic Engineer identified the following seven (7) intersections for detailed evaluation in the traffic study. TO; Plantg Commission - 4 i 1. MacArthur Boulevard at Campus Drive 2. MacArthur Boulevard at Birch Street 3. MacArthur Boulevard at Jamboree Road 4. Campus Drive at Bristol Street North 5. Campus Drive at Bristol Street 6. Birch Street at Bristol Street North 7. Birch Street at Bristol Street The first step in evaluating an intersection's traffic volume capacity is to conduct a 1% traffic volume analysis, taking into consideration existing traffic, regional growth, and committed projects that the City has granted approvals. If the project's generated traffic is less than one percent traffic volume on all approach segments to the selected intersections during the projected peak 2-1/2 hour volume in either the morning or afternoon, then the projects traffic impact is considered insignificant and in compliance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance requirement. In the event that the project's generated traffic,exceeds the one percent traffic volume analysis on any approach leg to any of the selected intersections,then further analysis would be required which consists of Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. The one percent traffic volume test was applied to the selected intersections and three of the intersections exceeded the maximum one percent volume test: MacArthur Boulevard/Birch Street, MacArthur Boulevard/Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard/Jamboree Road exceeded 1% of the intersection traffic volume; therefore, further ICU analysis for those intersection became necessary. The ICU analysis indicated-that the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard/Birch Street and MacArthur Boulevard/Campus Drive are operating at acceptable level of service for both peak periods. The intersection of MacArthur Boulevard/Jamboree Road, currently maintains a Level of Service "F with an ICU value slightly higher than required by the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The proposed project would generate 11 trips southbound on MacArthur Boulevard and 14 trips in the northbound direction. The additional 25'trips on MacArthur Boulevard generated by the project would not deteriorate the existing ICU value or level of Service at the intersection. Therefore,the proposed project would not have any significant impact on the City's circulation network. The ICU analysis is contained in Section 8 of the 'Traffic Impact Assessment report. The site did not qualify for any trip credits since the building has been vacant for a number of years. The Traffic Study for this project indicates that the proposed automobile rental, storage and maintenance facility would generate 696 trip ends per day. The a.m.peak period traffic is•estimated to generate 160 trips and 174 trips during the p.m. peak periods(2-1/2 hour periods). Vehicular Access and Parking Access to the site is provided via Birch Street. Presently, there are two driveways that provide for ingress and egress to the site: The existing driveways would be demolished and three new driveways would be constructed for vehicular access from Birch Street. The frontage distance on Birch Street can accommodate the three proposed driveways. It is the TO: I a•g Commission - 5 recommendation of the Traffic Consultant that the location of the proposed middle driveway, shown on the Site Plan, be modified to line-up directly across from the entrance to the Sheraton Hotel main parking lot so that in the event of a future traffic signal is needed at this location, construction costs would be minimized. The layout of the facility indicates that adequate internal circulation will be provided. There are 30 parking spaces that would be sufficient to accommodate the employees and customers. The applicant has agreed with the recommendation and the appropriate conditions of approval have been included in the attached Exhibit "A". The Traffic Consultant in the preparation of the Traffic Assessment Analysis recommended and the City Traffic Engineer agrees that the customer/employee parking lot provide-an area for shuttle bus customer drop-off and pick-up. The City Traffic Engineer has also requested that a detailed operation and design plan be submitted for review and approval prior to implementation. The appropriate conditions of approval have been included in the attached Exhibit "A". Public Improvements Staff has observed that the existing public improvements on the site, namely sidewalks and drive approaches, are either damaged,will be unused, or nonconforming to City Standards. The Public Works Department has indicated that the unused drive aprons be replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalks and that the parking lot be striped, in conformance with City Standards. The appropriate conditions of approval have been included in the attached Exhibit "A". Modification to Encroach into Front Yard Setback The applicant originally requested the approval of a modification to allow a monument sign and an entry security gate to encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback. The Zoning Ordinance limits the number of freestanding signs to one per building site and requires a minimum 15 foot front yard setback on Birch Street, unless a modification to the Zoning Code is approved. The proposed double-faced monument sign measures 6 feet high by 10 feet in length, or 60 sq.ft. per face, identifying the site as an Alamo Rent-a-Car facility. A small (no more than 2 ft. by 3 ft.) directional sign warning that the exit driveway is not an entrance is also proposed. The double-faced monument sign is proposed to be set back 7.5 feet from the front property line, while the warning sign is shown to be set back 3 to 4 feet. The applicant has since agreed to locate the warning sign clear of the 15 foot front yard setback; therefore, a modification is no longer needed for this item. It is staffs opinion that the the proposed double-faced monument sign is acceptable inasmuch as the site is quite large with limited access, and clear identification would enhance circulation in the area. Furthermore, the sign encroachment is consistent with other signs that have been approved by the Planning Commission and the Modifications Committee in front yard setbacks in this area. The block wall at the front of the site which screens views of the car storage area from the street precludes placement of the Alamo identification sign further from the property line. However, the Public Works Department and the City Traffic Engineer have determined that the sign location as proposed is not in accordance with City TO: Planning Commission - 6 • s Standards for sight distance and the appropriate condition of approval to assure compliance with those standards has been included in the attached Exhibit "A". The applicant has decided to delete the proposed entry security gate;,therefore, this item no longer requires,a modification. It is staffs opinion that an encroachment of this nature at the site entry in the future could impair pedestrian circulation by automobiles stopping across the public sidewalk. In order to assure that,pedestrian circulation is not affected,the City Traffic Engineer has recommended that the location of any future entry security gate be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the front property line and be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer. The applicant has been made aware of this requirement and the appropriate condition of approval has been included in the attached Exhibit "W'. Specific Findings Chapter 15.40'of the Municipal Code requires that the Planning Commission make certain findings in conjunction with its approval of a traffic study. Section 20.80.060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code also provides that in order to grant any use permit, the Planning Commission shall find that the establishment, maintenance or operation of the use or building applied for will not,under the circumstances of the particular case,be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare, of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Should the Planning Commission wish to approve Traffic Study No. 89, Use Permit No. 3512 and acceptance of the environmental document,the actions,findings and conditions of approval set forth in the attached Exhibit"A"are suggested. No exhibit for denial has been provided, inasmuch as staff is of the opinion that no findings may be reasonably made in support of the denial of these applications. However, should information be presented at the public hearing which warrants a denial of these applications, the Planning Commission may wish to take such an action. PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director JAVIER S. GARCIA ✓eL Senior Planner Attachments: Exhibit "A" Vicinity Map Letter from the Applicant Describing the Facility Operational Statement from the Applicant Traffic Study No.'89 dated October 25, 1993 Negative Declaration Site Plan, Conceptual Planting Plan, Elevations and Sign Plan F.\WP51\JAY-G\UP\AU r0\UM12SR 0 • TO: Planning Commission - 7 EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 89 USE PERMIT NO. 3512 AND RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT A ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Accept the environmental document,making the following findings and requiring the following the mitigation measures: Findinns• 1. That based upon 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, therefore a Negative Declaration has been prepared. The Negative Declaration adequately addresses the potential environmental impacts of the project, and satisfies all the requirements of CEQA, and is therefore approved. The Negative Declaration was considered prior to approval of the project. 2. An Initial Study has been conducted, and considering the record as a whole there is no evidence before this agency that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. On the basis of the evidence in the record, this agency finds that the presumption of adverse effect contained in Section 753.5(d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR)has been rebutted. Therefore, the proposed project qualifies for a De Minimis Impact Fee Exemption pursuant to Section 753.5(c) of Title 14, CCR. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the lighting system shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimise light spillage and glare to the adjacent properties. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer, with a letter from the engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy, the applicant must demonstrate to the City's Building Department and Fire Department that the project is in compliance with the County of Orange Health Department and the City's Fire Department Regulations. TO: Planning Commission - 8 B TRAFFIC STUDY: Approve the Traffic"Study, making the findings listed below: FINDINGS: 1. That a Traffic Study has been prepared which analyzes the impact of the proposed project on the peak-hour traffic and circulation system in accordance with Chapter 15AO of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and City Policy S-1, 2. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project-generated-traffic will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic on any 'major,' 'primary-modified; or 'primar ' street. 3. That the Traffic Study indicates that the project-generated traffic will not be greater than one percent of the existing traffic,during the 2.5 hour peak period on four of the seven study intersections and that the ICU analysis for the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard/Birch Street, MacArthur Boulevard/Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard fJamboree Road, indicates that the ICU values for the A.M. and P.M. peaks will not be altered by the addition of the project. USE PERMIT NO, 3512 FINDINGS: 11. That the proposed application is support service in nature and an intensification of use of the existing structure within the limits specified by Chapter 20.07 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, and as such, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is compatible with surrounding land uses. 2. That adequate parking will exist on-site for the proposed development. 3. That the establishment of the subject business will not have any significant environmental impact. 4. That the design of the proposed improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed development. S. That public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.80.060 of the Municipal Code. 6. That the proposed modification to the Newport Beach Municipal Code"so as to allow the proposed monument sign to encroach into the required 15 foot front yard setback will not, under the circumstances of this case be detrimental to the health, safety, TO. Planning Commission - 9 peace, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of Title 20 of the Municipal Code. 7. That the approval of Use Permit No. 3512 will not, under the circumstances of this case,be detrimental to the health, safety,peace,morals,comfort and general welfare of persons residing and working in the neighborhood or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. CONDITIONS: 1. That the proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan and elevations, except as noted below. 2. That all parking spaces shall be striped with approved traffic markers or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 3. That the required number of handicapped parking spaces shall be designated within the on-site parking area and shall be used solely for handicapped self-parking. One handicapped sign on a post and one handicapped sign on the pavement shall be required for each handicapped space. 4. That all mechanical equipment, trash areas and vehicle storage areas shall be screened from Birch Street and adjoining properties. The proposed screening adjacent to the Birch Street frontage shall be a minimum of 5 feet 4 inches high. 5. That all automobile repairs shall be conducted within the building and no outdoor display of vehicles for sale shall be permitted. 6. That grease interceptors shall be provided in all drains within the building where petroleum residues may enter the sewer system, unless otherwise permitted by the Building Department. 7. That no outdoor sound system shall be utilized on-site. 8. That all employees shall park on-site at all times. 9. That all signs shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of Newport Beach Sign Code. TO: Pifung Commission - 10 10. That any future entry security gate shall be located to provide a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from the front property line, and shall be subject to further review of the City Traffic Engineer. 11. That all improvements be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 12. That,the on-site parking, vehicular circulation, pedestrian circulation systems and a detailed operation design plan for the shuttle bus customer drop-off and pick-up shall be subject to further review by the City Traffic Engineer prior to implementation. 13. That the proposed monument sign adjacent to Birch Street shalt be moved back or designed in such a.manner as to provide sight distance in conformance with the City's Sight Distance Standard 110-L. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed twenty-four inches in height. The final design and positioning of the monument sign shall ,be approved by the Public Works Department to insure conformance with City sight distance standards. 14. That the intersection of Birch Street and the private drives be designed to provide, sight distance for a speed of 40 miles per hour. Slopes, landscape, walls and other obstruction shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight line shall not exceed,twenty-four inches in height. 15. That the centerline of the customer drive entrance shall be aligned with the centerline of the drive entrance of the Sheraton Hotel located directly across Birch Street, unless otherwise approved by the City Traffic Engineer. 16. That the unused drive aprons be removed and replaced with curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Birch Street frontage. All work shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 17. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with state and local requirements. 18. That overhead utilities serving the site be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is unreasonable or impractical. 19. That the car wash area shall be protected so as to prevent drainage from the parking lot from entering the sewer system. The drain shall be connected to the sewer system and have a grease trap. The design and installation of the above facilities shall be approved by the Utilities Department. TO: Planning Commission - 11 20. That the outdoor storage of tires and other auto related parts or merchandise shall be prohibited on-site. 21. That the entire site shall be maintained in a clean and orderly manner. 22. That the front of the building facing Birch Street shall be constructed of masonry veneer or similar material as indicated on the approved elevation. 23. A landscape and irrigation plan for the project shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect or architect. The landscape plan shall integrate and phase the installation of landscaping with the proposed construction schedule. (Prior to the occupancy of the structure, the licensed landscape architect or architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the prepared plan). 24. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review of the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Department, the Public Works Department, and the Planning Department. 25. Landscaping shall be regularly maintained free of weeds and debris. All vegetation shall be regularly trimmed and kept in a healthy condition. 26. That the approval of this application shall permit complete engine rebuilding (including electrical and transmission repair), as well as tune-ups, lubrication, smog testing and brake service and installation. No painting, body work or other operations of a similar nature shall be permitted on-site unless an amendment to this use permit is approved by the Planning Commission. 27. That a Lot Line Adjustment shall be approved and recorded to create one building site prior to the issuance of building permits. 28. That the Planning Commission may add or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or recommend to the City Council the revocation of this use permit, upon a determination that the operation which is the subject of this use permit causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or general welfare of the community. 29. This use permit shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.80.090A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. T/ ICINITY NPAP s \° I P-C P-C , ~ BIRCH STREET r O� N I TG n Gt' N a \ P-C °sy P-C 9 P-C I G Gt , W t � N P-C G• • O /•, Z M• I P•C P-C IoT YI u - t[t Y,• K N � \ �9� \ DISTRICTING MAP NEWPORT BEACH CALI FOR NI Co Aaltl ill,"1 y Atl`ml L IGlTT—i�, wYlnnl KtaYu4 C•._ wNGL[ I,YXS AtlIDCXTIQ `'� LIGHT CDNY[AtIAL i Mktg A[t0[ATIAL c4.D •tNWL COYKMAL _J` ��-t•] t[tTAKm YATRt MLY A[wDCM1At �•,� MMWA"W/ ' „ Ne •W Gp0 ICG I a) CHI cNNwwO DIG,wcl C:T—j D ANV[C I pAp,NDDATIt — USE PERMIT NO . 3 � �- TRAFFIC STUDY NO. S9 AN ESOP COMPANY QROBERT H . LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. ARCHITECTURE • ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1137 NORTH MCOOWELL BOULEVARO • PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA 949 54-1 46 9 (707) 765-1680 Mailing Addraee: P.O. Box 750908. Petaluma, CA 94975.0908 Fax (707) 765-9908 OMAN F.ZITA October 25, 1993 Architect JOHN W.JOHNSON Architect Mr. Jay Garcia JOMN B.HICKS Architect City of Newport Beach STEVEN A KATTNER Planning Department Architect 3300 Newport Blvd. CECIL R.SPENCER Newport Beach, CA 92659-1768 Architect JAMES H.RAY RE: ALAMO RENT A CAR SERVICE FACILITY Civil Engineer 4361 &4401 BIRCH STREET NEWPORT BEACH, CA Dear Mr. Garcia: Per our phone conversation Monday morning, I have enclosed two sets of permit drawings for your review. The set contains the site plan, site details, canopy/building elevations and landscape plan. The building/canopy elevations, sheet Al-2, depicts the light grey masonry "Castle Rock" block on the exterior of the administrative portion of the building. Cut sheets from Designer Blocks, Castle Rock series, have been provided to show the detail and texture of the building exterior. This portion of the building will be the only portion visible to public. Concerning the split-faced concrete block screen wall at the street frontage; the drawings reflect a 4'-0" high on detail A10 on sheet SDI-3. This wall is incorporated into the landscape design with street trees between the street and sidewalk, and additional trees and shrubbery in front of the block wall to break up the mass of the front elevation. See sheet L-1 for landscape and plant legend. We are requesting that the screen wall stay at a lower height of 4'-0" or to a 5'-4" maximum. With the extensive landscaping along the street frontage (20' to 25' high trees), the fact that the average car height is only 3%6", a screen wall of 4'-0" will sufficiently screen a car and any activities behind the wall. Any wall over 4'-0" would dominate the street frontage and detract from the overall site appearance from the street. Please give me a call if you need any further information or clarification. Sincerely, ROBERT H. LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Gary Semling Archit t cc: Chip Sabadash, DKBERT & Assoc. FAWIA94I6.I(hGAROA.GMs MARIETTA, CIA SACRAMENTO. CA BELLEVUE. WA LA HAt`BRAA-,MCA September 24, 1993 Alamo Rent A Car 4361 & 4401 Birch Street Newport Beach Street OPERATIONAL STATEMENT The primary operation of this Alamo service facility will be to clean and maintain rental cars that have been rented at the Orange County/John Wayne Airport. Cars will be picked-up and dropped off at the John Wayne Airport by the customers. Alamo employees will bring these returned cars to this new facility to be cleaned and refueled, then delivered back to the airport by the employees for customer use. No customers are anticipated to drop-off or pick-up rental cars at this facility. The process for these returned cars will be as follows: They will enter the site from the South approach on Birch Street and be lined up to cleaned. The cars will then proceed to the canopy for fueling, vacuuming and topping-off of fluids. The next step is to proceed to the "prep area/car wash" where the car receives its final preparation and is washed. The completed car is then lined up in the storage area on the north end of the site until it is needed at the airport; they will exit the site from the north approach onto Birch Street. Secondary uses of the facility include housing of Alamo's administration and executive offices. Employee and visitor parking has been provided for these uses. The site will also contain four mechanics bays that will be used to maintain their fleet of rental cars. The maintenance services will consist of oil'changes, minor mechanical and electrical repairs and pre-delivery inspections. 1. 'GF NFWPOR) AM SEP 2-8 1993 PM 7�8i9iID,illl]2�1i2�314i516 4 I ROBERT H. LEE &ASBOCIATES. INc. FAWN9418.101STAWNT `L.'{ ADVANCED CIVIL Civil & Transportation Engineering TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSME NT ALAMO Rent-a-Car Located at �aoFEss� 4361 &4401 Birch Stree QROFESSIOV Newport Beach, California `��\ A, �yE ZA gqy �y w Ho. 1617 ` G? w`r\ 9op'rm c EV. c m NO Y 790 A ' * Cxp..(� 3 5? FOR N�q �'94 Fr-k `P sl Cly� CAL1F 9rF Of CAS�c0 City of Newport Beach 3300 Neport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 Project AC-1001-11 October 25, 1993 49 Phone: (714)261-2766 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B,Irvine,California 92714 Fax: (714)261-04\5 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. EXISTING CONDITION 1 3. STUDY INTERSECTIONS 4 4. COMMITTED PROJECTS 4 S. REGIONAL GROWTH FACTORS 4 6. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 5 6.1 Trip Generation 5 6.2 Trip Distribution 7 6.3 Traffic Assignment 7 7. ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS 7 8, INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION(ICU) ANALYSIS 14 9. SITE ACCESS 15 10. SUMMARY 16 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Study Intersections 4 2 Trip Generation and Peak Period Trips 6 3 Study Intersections One Percent Analysis Summary 13 1� i LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1 Location Map 2 2 Site Plan 3 3 Project Trip Distribution- Inbound 9 4 Project Trip Distribution - Outbound 10 5 Peak Period Project Traffic AM/PM-Inbound 11 6 Peak Period Project Traffic AM/PM- Outbound 12 1� APPENDICES APPENDIX A Committed Projects List B Regional Growth Factors C One Percent Analysis Work Sheets D ICU Worksheet 1 � TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to evaluate the system wide traffic impacts of the Alamo Rent-a-car project proposed to be located at 4361 &4401 Birch Street in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project site is a parcel of almost 2.66 acres abutting Birch Street across from Sheraton-Newport Hotel. The proposed project will serve as a rental car maintenance/storage facility. The site is being designed to have a maximum storage capacity of 300 vehicles. However,it is anticipated that typically there will not be more than 100 cars kept at an single P tYP Y P Y g day at this site. The project will-have a fueling area and a fuel storage tank, car wash bays, maintenance building and an office. All the support facilities such as car wash bays are used only for the rental cars, and there will not be any public use of them. Figure 1 shows the project location in the regional context. Currently there is an existing vacant office building in the site which is almost 6,000 square feet. The site currently has two-driveway accesses onto Birch Street. The proposed project will remove both existing driveways and replace them with three new ones. The specific site plan of the proposed project showing the entrances and exits to Birch Street is shown in Figure 2. 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project has access only through Birch Street which is currently striped for two traffic lanes in each direction separated by a 10' wide dual turn median. The major thoroughfares providing access to the project are: MacArthur Boulevard, Campus Drive, Bristol Street and Jamboree Road. The area surrounding the project site is well developed and is mostly office/commercial type land use. There is a well developed system of arterials and collector streets serving the traffic needs of this area. The proposed project is at close proximity to the Orange County's John Wayne Airport. All the major intersections in the area are signalized with exclusive turn lanes for right and left turn traffic. The access for the regional trips made to and from the project will be through 405, 73 and 55 freeways. 1 UU Milk rA N Ylsx Dr. 'rY�i9 C Location Map PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 Figure 1 ADVANCED CIVIL 2 a� I I 1 I I I ��1 I �/ O w�..•u C to i Nwfn°K vaw<.fw _ a.o. � �' l.fKf-P fwaiul PE.ITASTaTIpI 10f N•On(`Oa � � Ov(Af CM1UWa$NNFINT _ � y 1 ul \ _I wrt• I AO�f 4R IM Y•1(fl \/ `\ IY YNtU 1 �'r� I If .f f 1 � I .T •mow 0[.n4..H •ap R.R CRF� Y<•..MR.r � ••• VIIL PLAN am no(K`f^'... fy`w`•.1`w..a/ (ns xf-.. at6f u0am18UOf SRSER 1ENY\YVTeE.•6l G BIRCH STREET O SR'E PLAN I Pm'ect No. I AG1001-11 Fi we I2 ADVANCED CIVIL - 3 r I f I 3. STUDY INTERSECTIONS Seven intersections were recommended by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Engineer for evaluation of the proposed project's impact on them. The study intersections are listed in Table 1. The project's traffic impacts on each of the seven intersections were checked according to a trip distribution scheme approved by the City and based on the City's Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. TABLE 1 1. MacArthur Boulevard @ Campus Drive 2. MacArthur Boulevard @ Birch Street 3. MacArthur Boulevard @ Jamboree Road 4. Campus Drive @ Bristol Street (north) 5. Campus Drive @ Bristol Street 6. Birch Street @ Bristol Street (north) 7. Birch Street @ Bristol Street 4. COMMITTED PROJECTS The City Traffic Engineering staff provided a list of committed projects (meaning projects having had prior approvals) and their cumulative traffic volumes on the seven study intersections. Although the committed projects are in the various phases of their development, their full traffic impact on the study intersections have been accounted for. The list of the committed projects and their traffic contribution to the seven intersections is given in Appendix A. 5. GROWTH FACTORS The traffic volume growth rates for all the major access routes to the project were provided by, the City's Traffic Engineering staff. Appropriate growth rates were applied to establish, based on the previous year traffic counts, to obtain volumes for one year after the project opening. The growth rates used (as supplied by the City) are listed in Appendix B. 4 c�FJ 6. TRAFFIC EWFACT ANALYSIS This study analyses the proposed project's traffic,impact on,the City's street network for the year 1995. The proposed project is scheduled to become operational in the summer of 1994. According to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance requirements, the project's impact is analyzed for one year after the anticipated occupancy. The following is a description of this report's approach and assumptions regarding Trip Generation, Trip Distribution and Traffic Assignment. 6.1 Trip Generation The proposed project is a rental car maintenance/storage facility designed with a maximum handling capacity of 300 vehicles. However, it is very unlikely that at any given single day the facility will reach its maximum capacity. According to the information provided to us by the project applicant no more than 100 cars will typically be stored at this site. Regardless of this fact, to accommodate the worst case scenario, full capacity utilization was assumed for the project. The trip generation rate and its accompanying peak periods trip factors were provided by the City according,to a study done by Austin-Foust in October 1991 for the City to establish a range of trip generations for car rental facilities. The summary of the total daily trips generated by the proposed projects and the number of the inbound and outbound trips made during the peak periods are presented in Table 2. Although there is an existing 6,000 square-foot office building on this site, the City procedures do not allow for a traffic credit for an existing land use if it has been vacant for one year or longer. Therefore, the total generated trips of 696 will be used for the purposes of our analysis. As can be seen from the data, the project generates a total of 696 trips daily with 160 and 174 trips during the morning and the afternoon peak hours, respectively. 5 TABLE 2 Trip Generation and Peak Hour Total Number of Daily Trips = 300 spaces X 2.32 ADT/Space = 696 Trips Peak Hour Trips AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Direction In Out Total In Out Total Peak-Hour Rates 0.13 0.10 0.23 0.13 0.12 0.25 Peak-Hour Trip 90 1 70 1 160 90 84 174 4 6.2 Trip Distribution The trip distribution of the project was done through a review of the existing land uses (generators and attractors) and with consultation with the City's Traffic Engineering staff. A major factor taken into consideration was the existence of John Wayne Airport at close proximity to the project site. Also the locations of major hotels in the area and larger size office complexes were taken into consideration. This facility is planned to be used as the storage/maintenance yard for Alamo Rent a-car. The majority of the trips interaction will be between the site and John Wayne Airport. Shuttle vans will be bring customers from the Airport to the site for car pick ups. However, according to the information provided to us by the Project Architect, there will be no public drop off service at this location either during business hours or afterwards. All the drop offs will be at the Airport with the Alamo employees returning the cars to this site. The trip distribution scheme developed for the project is based on the facility operation and its,interaction with other major attraction areas in the region. The trip distribution for the project is shown,in Figures 3 and 4 for inbound and outbound trips, respectively. 6.3 Traffic Assignment The percentages established through trip distribution scheme were converted into actual traffic volumes for both a.m. and p.m. peak periods. These numbers are presented in Figures 5 and 6 for inbound and outbound traffic, respectively. 7. ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS According to the City's guidelines, one percent(1%) of the 2 1/2 hour a.m. and p.m. peak period intersection traffic volumes are used to evaluate if.the project's corresponding 2-Hour traffic volumes exceed or are less than the above volumes for all the approaches of the study intersections. If the project's volumes are less than the established one percent of the intersection volumes (including the adjustments for growth and committed projects) for all the approaches, then the project is considered to have an insignificant traffic impact on the intersection. Otherwise, the project's traffic impact has to be analyzed for an intersection where project traffic exceeds the one percent of the intersection 7 0 • volume for all the approaches. Table 3 shows the summary of the one percent analysis. As observed from the analysis summary presented in table 3, three of the seven study intersections fail to meet the 1% test. At the intersections of MacArthur/Birch and MacArthur/Campus the project's traffic exceed the 1% of the intersection's traffic for both a.m. and p.m. peak periods. However, at the intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree the projects trafffic eceed the 1% of the intersection's traffic only during the p.m. peak period. Therefore, ICU analysis were performed for these intersections as will be discussed in Section 8. 8 71. Not to Seale UV z � r Ire Irvine Newport B ach Project Trip Distribution - inbound PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 Figure 3 ADVANCED CIVIL 9 c�� Not to Seale vU ti� 0 a= o � Plax Dt. Irvine Newport B act Project Trip DistriblllUon - Outbound PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 Figure 4 - ADVANCED - CI VIL 10 2r�1 a Ask qw t� Not to Scale UU � 0 � P-z OS 14I� av S N y� Dr. Irvine .a. �8 Newport IB ach Peak Hour Project Traffic PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 AM/PM (Inbound) Figure 5 ADVANCED CIVIL i l 2�0 Not to Scale UU O � Q D � e O 182 �Aa, o r PWW Dr. 0 Ux a Irvine �e o � Newport B acl� Peak Hour Project Traffic PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 AM/PM (Outbound) Figure 6 ADVANCED CIVIL 12 3l TABLE 3 STUDY INTERSECTIONS ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY Does the Intersection Satisfy One No. Study Intersection percent Analysis A.M. P.M. 1. MacArthur @ Campus No No 2. MacArthur @ Birch No No 3. MacArthur @ Jamboree Yes No 4. Campus @ Bristol (north) Yes Yes 5. Campus @ Bristol Yes Yes 6. Birch @ Bristol (north) Yes Yes 7. Birch @ Bristol Yes Yes "Yes" Implies that the project's traffic "DOES NOT EXCEED" the one percent of the intersection's traffic on all approaches 13 3�. 8. INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) ANALYSIS Since the intersections of MacArthur/Birch, MacArthur/Campus and MacArthur/Jamboree did not satisfy the I% analysis, further evaluation of the intersection operation and Level-of-Service (LOS) was needed through Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU)methodology. 1993 traffic counts were adjusted(by incorporating 3% and 1% growth factors for 2 years only to the MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road traffic, respectively) to obtain 1995 traffic volumes. Also,the traffic from the Committed Projects, as provided by the City, were added to create a traffic condition at the intersection for "Without the project" case. Then, the project's traffic was added to the 1995 traffic volumes to analyze the impact of the project at the Level-of-Service of this intersection. ICU analysis were performed for both a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the "with" and "without" project conditions for the intersection of MacArthurBirch and MacArthur/Campus. However, the intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree was analyzed only for the p.m. peak hour when the 1% test was not satisfied. The ICU worksheets are provided in Appendix D. The results of the ICU analysis are presented below: W/O Project W/Project Intersection V/C IOI£ Y/C ICU Mac.Arthur/Dirch AM Peak 0.57 A 0.59 A PM Peak 0.72 C 0.73 C MacArthur/Campus AM Peak 0.66 B 0.67 B PM Peak 0.79 C 0.79 C MacArthur/Jamboree AM Peak --- -- --- -- PM Peak 0.93 E 0.93 E As can be observed from the data presented above, the project has minimal impact on the operation and the Level-of-Service (LOS)at these three intersections. The intersections of MacArthur/Birch and MacArthur/Campus are operating at reasonable and acceptable LOS with or without the project. The intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree will be at LOS "E" with or without the project. The project contributes 11 and 14 vehicles to the soudtbound and northbound directions, respectively, at this intersection during the P.M. peak hours. Of these two 14 33 movements only the southbound thru is a critical movement. However the addition of project traffic does not change the Wo value for the intersections. 9. SITE ACCESS,PARKING AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION Access to site will be provide through three new driveways as shown on Figure 2. These new driveways will replace the two existing ones. All the three driveways will access to Birch Street. The geometric of Birch Street can accommodate these driveways safely. However,we recommend that the City conduct a sight distance study at this location, after the driveways are installed, to establish parking, restriction zones to maintain adequate line of sights for the driveways. Also, the construction of the northerly driveway appears to require the relocation of an existing bus stop on Birch Street. The proposed site accesses are adequate for the proposed use of the site and the number of trips generated during the peak periods. Although the volumes at this time do not justify the installation of a traffic signal on Birch Street at the site access points. We recommend that the middle driveway be lined up with the entrance to Sheraton-Newport to allow for a future installation of such a device should it become warranted. In addition, due to the frequent use of this middle driveway (which is the only uncontrolled access to the site)by the shuttle vans,we recommend that the driveway and the internal parking circulation be modified to allow for a counter- clockwise circulation of the vans in the parking lot. The project's architect is also required to check tha adequacy of the clearance between the parking stalls and the turn corners for the size of vehicles expected to use the facility. This is again specially important due to the frequent use of the parking lot by oversized vehicles bringing customers from the Airport to the site. Our review of the site plan indicated that there are ample parking space for both the employees and the customers at the site. Comparing the design capacity of 300 rental cars with the anticipated daily operation of no more than 100 cars at the site provides additional confidence level for the adequacy of parking. However the proposed site plan shows only one handicap parking which sould be increased to 2 designated handicap parking spaces. The proposed site plan, after incorporating the recommendations of this report, will provide for a smooth and safe internal circulation in the site and at its access points to the city street network. 15 �J t 10. SUMMARY • The project generates 696 daily trips with 3200 and 348 trips during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods (2'/Z-hour periods), respectively. • A total of seven intersections were analyzed. All intersections satisfy the one-percent analysis, except for the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street, MacArthur Boulevard and Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road. • The intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street will operate at LOS A and C during a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, in year 1995, with or without project. • The intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Campus Drive will operate at LOS "B" and "C" during a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, in the year 1995, with or without the project. • The intersection of MacArthue Boulevard and Jamboree Road will operate at LOS "E" during the p.m. peak hour, in the year 1995, with or without the project. The project has insignificant traffic impacts on the City's street network. • The installation of the northerly driveway requires the relocation of the existing bus stop on Birch Street. • The main driveway (middle one) has to be lined up with the entrance to Sheraton-Newport to facilitate the installation of a future traffic signal, should one become warranted. Also this driveway needs to be moved northerly to allow a counter-clockwise circulation in the parking lot. • Driveways spacing has to be adjusted to avoid any need for the relocation of the existing street lighting post • There needs to be at least (TWO) 2 designated hanidcap parking spaces in the public parking lot in front of office. 16 2� • No after business hours drop off service is proposed for this facility. However, if in the future such service is being considered, the impact of the controlled access gates on the on-street parking has to be evaluated and addressed to the City staffs satisfaction. The project architect has to ensure that all the site plan features (such as 6' high chainlink fence and the monument sign) comply with the City standards and requirements. 17 �(0 APT ho• 0 DATE: C-9/1U/93 REPORT ON�APPROYED PR CJ ECT VU LJNES • 54 AMEND NO 1 MCARTHUR COURT J52% OCCUPANCY 356 AMENDMENT NO 2 FORD AERC 1]CX OCCUPANCY 0 �57 CARVER GRANVILLE OFFICE 1U:X OCCUPANCY J5� CORONA DEL MAA hVME'a 1C�S LCOUpAkCY _ bIG CANYON VILLA RATS. 1$J.1 OCCUPANCY ,j yJ 141+: DOVE STREET 1i�X uCLUPaNCY Jot 11U3 QUAIL STREET +,Oa2 OCCUPANCY • Ut2 SUPERSEDED ODUX OCCUPANCY 6 1;03 KOLL CENTER TFP 4N END. 4A jc. x OCCUPANCY JE4 SUNSETTED JOo1 OCCUPANCY 5% OCCUPANCY Jos ROSAN'S DEVELOPMENT 1105 ,,X OCCUPANCY ,.00 ALCCK 5=3 NPT CTR PROD u4 OCCUPANCY .,oS NEWPORT ACUATICS CENTER 45x ,Ey 2oLJ J E COAST HWY ZJZ OCCUPANCY OCCUPANCY :7� JASMINE PPR6 ..sz i.71 SUNSETTED +X CCC UPANCY 172 VEWPORTEF. INN EXPANSION 10,Z OC:UP;hCY 73 SUNSETTED V:bX CCCUPaNCY _ JL SUNSETTED UX OCCUPANCY i+7 3 I '75 FA SHICh IS RENAISSANCE 1:Jz OCCUPANCY • a7t SUNSETTED GC•9X OCCUPANCY 77 COM SENI04 PROJECT 17L•x OCCUPANCY :7d POINT DEL MAR P:JS CCCUPA hCY 0 J79 PACIFIC CLUE 1J:X OCCUPANCY ONL SUNSETTED JOUX OCCUPANCY U61 NEWPORT SEACREST APT 1C•�X OCCUPANCY 4Ej 3800 CAMPUS DR(M-STORAGE) 106X OCCUPANCY tt4 HOPb CAN[EA _CENTER JUvx CCCUPaNCY SCUARDS NEWPORT CENTER :O;X CCCUPaNCY v:o SEASIDE A_PT5 (MESA II) 13,.X OCCUP+hCY vt7 VICTORIA STATION (OFFICE) 002 OCCUPANCY J33 37oO CAMPUS DR(N-STORAGE) Irwz OCCUPANCY fv '139 NEWPORT IMPORTS 1LUz OCCUPANCY y9c. SUPERSEDER vi.LX OCCUPANCY . _d2 MARINCHS' MILE MARINE CTR IOJX 'OCCUPANCY J93 15TH STREET APARTMENTS 1L.X OCCUPANCY 394 SEASID'c APARTMENTS III 10�X OCCUPANCY C .155 NPT SAY RETIREMENT INN UBLX OCCUPANCY 096- NEWPORT CLASSIC INN OC=S OCCUPANCY r'7 MARINERS CHURCH EXPANSION JO..X OCCUPANCY „93 MCLACHLAN-NEWFORT PL U-C4X OCCUPANCY -0 799 1531 SUPERICR MEDICAL 1L6x OCCUPANCY 1 i10 FASHION ISLAND A4 OGUX OCCUPANCY y 111 NEWPORTER RESORT EXPAND. UOOX OCCUPANCY 102 SUNSETTED ULbt OCCUPANCY 09oz OCCUPANCY 1C: NEWPORT LI DC M E 0 CENTER 1(14 VILLA POINT JC'JX OCCUPANCY 105 SHOKR_IAN UOC•z OCC U°AHOY 1.:t 15TH ST AFTS Vu-3% OCCUPANCY 107 ROCKWELL CXPANSIDN GCC+X OCCUPANCY 'I 1Ug ANDRE4 RESTAURANT 10:X OCCUPANCY 1:'.9 HALa A / 4PSHINGTON J:iX OCCUPANCY 11i NEWPORT 114PORTS REST. OLLx CCC UPANCY y 4v -- - -- PPT UP: TE:1•• TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE DATE: -29/10/53 REPORT ON APPPOVEO P:OJECT VOLUMES , PROJ-NtR ALL PROJECTS ON FILE: APPk OvtD VOLUME IS WSIGHTFO E JC1 HUGHES AIRCRAFT 41 10oX OCCUPANCY uE2 SUNSETTED OSJX OCCUPANCY •13 FAA 'WEST SAVINGS AND LOAN 1.11,11 OCCUPANCY J/;c SUPERSEDED dCJX OCCUPANCY � 5 AERONUTRONIC FORD 1COX OCCUPANCY OCO MACK tiAY CFFICE 1f JX OCCUPANCY 1•J7 POYLE ENGINEERING 1CJX OCOUP4NCY 'i 113 CAL CANADIAN SANK ISOX OCCUPANCY J79 CIVIC PLAZA t5/A OCCUPANCY J16 CORPORATE PLAZA C30X OCCUPANCY ill KOLL CENTER NEWPORT 1C,2 OCCUPANCY J12 MACARTdUk COURT 17o!X OCCUPANCY c13 SUPERSEDEC U:�X OCCUPANCY E14 SUP=RSEDED Oi JX OCCUPANCY •;l5 ORCHAFD OFFICE 10JX OCCUPANCY 010 PACIFIC MUTUAL PLAZA 1Ci;X OCCUPANCY L 517 3731 BIRCH CFFICE '1r.'JX OCCUPANCY G18 NEWPORT PLACE 1J9X OCCUPANCY 019 SUNSETTED bCJ} UCCUPANCY 120 BANK CF NEWPORT 1^.•oI OCCUPANCY 021 JAYSICc SCUAnE IC.X O[C'JPm NCY 022 SEA ISLANC 1::i% UCCUP?NCY !23 3AYW000 AFARTMENTS 10u2 OCCUPANCY U24 HARBOR POINT HOMES- 1OZ,3 OCCUPANCY C25 ROGEBIS GARDENS 1:3X CtCUFANCY ;:20 SEAVIEW LUTHERAN PLAZA 1r--X OCCUPANCY :27 RUDY JARON 10vZ OCCUPANCY 02'! uUAIL EUSINESS CENTER 10:7X OCCUPANCY 029 441 NEWPORT BLVD. 1C•JX OCCUPANCY 037 MARTHA15 VIN°YARD _ 10LX CCCUPANCY .31 VALDEZ 1-,-% OCCUPANCY •� ?32 COAST OUSIN=SS CENTER 109E OCCUPANCY „33 kOLL CENTER NPT NO. 1 TFP J2 iX CCCUPANCY Q34 SEE PRCJECTS 340 TO 34J U',X CCCUPANCY 735 kOSS MOLLARD 7t•'. X OCCUPANCY C3C SUNSETTED U•?LX OCCUPANCY ` ,39 HUC4E3 AIRCRAFT 02 IW.2 CCCUPANCY 14J SUPERCED2D 16•JX OCCUPANCY C41 FLAGSHIP HCSPITAL li•.:X OCCUPANCY •J42 9IE CANYON 1u •12Y3 OCCUPANCY 043 FUN ZONE IOJX OCCUPANCY G44 MARRIOTT HCTEL lOOX OCCUPANCY '145 ST. ANDR%VS CHURCH 1:_X OCCUPANCY :140 YMCA .-X OCCUPANCY C47 ALLRED CONDOS _ 1:cz OCCUPANCY Job MORGAN DLVELOPMENT 1GUX OCCUPANCY J49 FOUR SEASCNS HOTEL IOJX OCCUPANCY C5G UNIV ATH CLUB TPP•.4 EMKAY lciz OCCUPANCY U51 CLOCK 4JL' MEDICAL 1LiX OCCUPANCY J53 SEE PROJECTS 530 TO 533 .:C•:X OCCUPANCY V^ °PT NR: TE31,, TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE DAT-: 79/1�/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES III 26TH ST MARINA PROJECT JSUx OCCUPANCY 112 AMBROSIA RESTAURANT ucLX OCCUPANCY 113 CALTY/TOYOTA EXPANSION 1LU-X OCCUPANCY 114 OUR LADY GLEEN OF ANGELS 12J1 OCCUPANCY 11S IONTA CLUB RESIDENTIAL 1062 OCCUPANCY 110 2cTH STREET ISLAND -itrvx OCCUPANCY 117 VILLA POINT II 103% OCCUPANCY lld TACC LELL (FAST FOOD) l>3x O'CCUPABCY 119 FASHION ISLAND TRANSFER OOJX OCCUPANCY 12,1 PACIFIC DELL SUE JCLX CCCUPANCY 121 4E4PORT VILLAGE 0C•JA OCCUPANCY 122 CASTAw AYS MARINA JG?X OCCUPANCY 123 NOLL CENTER CARL'S JR l_i,X OCCUPANCY 124 CIVIC PLAZA GGOX OCCUPANCY ivv y CORPGRATE PLAZA &L WEST GG:.z GCCUpa hC.Y 127 BURGESS CChMEkCIAL CEHTSi IL-2 OCCUPANCY 125 HARIOR FACIFIC PLAZA JvuX OCCUPANCY 129 HUNG HOSPITAL "EXTENSION 1JLX OCCUPANCY 34.1 AMENDMENT NO. 1 FORD AERO ISGX OCCUPANCY 341 AMENDMENT NC., 1 FORD AERO .i00X OCC UPAhCY 342 AMENDMENT NO. 1 FORD AERO 6%M-4. OCCUPANCY 343 AMENOMENT NO. 1 FORD PERO Z; x OCCUPANCY $30 AMENDMENT NC 1 NORTH FORD 1437 OCCUPANCY 531 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FOD 1G.FX OCCUPANCY 532 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FORD 1-1JX OCCUPANCY 53-3 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FOPO uJ X OCCUPANCY 555 IRVINE PROJECT L-303 OCCUPANCY 91G NEUPJAT DUNES t'.Lx OCCUPANCY D 2L' 3AYVIEH 4Jvx OCCUPANCY Dad CITY OF IRVINE DEV. OC. OCCUPANCY C L i RP NK: It:lIa Innr r]t rnno•na vn oannrv,� C DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 SUMMARY 1_ 2 a INTERSECTION—NAME — INT—NR OS BRISTOL ST / BIRCH ST 4160 a 2-17[HR�PM-PEAK -HOUR PM%PEA_ K. 9 ' YR NO 58 ES WB NL NT NR � 'S L' -ST SR:. _ EL• ET ER WL YT WR _ Ic 1;. 04 696 E�_ 5 C 23 9 5 300 0 4S 0 � 11 i2 2-1/2 HR—AM—PEAK 1—HOUR AM—PEAK 3 u NS SB EB WS NL NT' 'NR, -..`BL. ST - SR'.--- EL, ET ER WL WT WR .1,. ::. . . Is 36 81 861 8 0 8,. :'_a3E- x! 3 0`` 9.9 333 O 0 4 0 n 19 34 2 a 9 _ 1 _ a e r 5i r �r44wYf t•• ________ -:mac �. _ KV I HK. 1 rriu rnAaiMu Un am 6c C DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 - SUMMARY ' --- C � ° �1 TERSECTION-NAME - INT-NR :S dRISTCL ST N / BIRCH ST 417` ° 7 Z-1/2 HR-PM-PEAK -HOUP PM-PEAK -- •— l. ° ° YR N8 S8 _ Es NB _ NL NT NK :-SL ST -SR _ EL ET__ ER _YL 1T _WR _ l0 1 0 13E 0-Itn� - 5c C 41 53 0 :91 L u la 2-1/2 HR-AM-PEAK 1-HOUR AN-PEAK NB Sa EA WA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL E7 '7- 1: 213 1'15 n 530 0 1G7 '0-- +0 46 12 0 1 • 1 ' L. 9 Z4' { -apt, J _ t RPT NR: TE510 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE (, DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES + SUMMARY'; G+ : N EE RS T—IONON+ MT —N R US --'--'---'— —'-- (, s rRISTOL ST / CAMPUS DR ` IRVINE AV 4155 6 7 �-17-2 HR—P M—PE�K--�---- rNOUR PM—PEAK ----- --'---- a YR NE_ Ss EB WB NL NT, .NR. '',Sl, , ST SR'-- 'EL ET ERWL _ MT _ WR_ 8 2 6 56 Z33 —'I S__ _'4J C +� 2-1/2 HR—AM—PEAK 1—HOUR AM—PEAK 3 - , 1. NB SB EB WB NL NT MR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL LT WR 493_ 226 690_ —_B _ 0 _ 51 196 0 113 _ 0 141 20y _ 6 0 4 0 v +� 22 ie a .. y 3 s 0 0 a .r, art ,Rs• `�.� �. a 9 - � al '8 s . i RPT NR: ThDlu IhAtr,L r"AJInb unulhAt*.c Q DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 - SUMMARY: ex . - a IN ERSECTION-NAME (, a ?RISTOL ST N / CAMPUS OR 4172 ] 2-1/2 HR—PM—PEAK - - —HOUR PM—PEAK- V s _ ' YR Na S2 Es WB _ NL NT - :NR' _SL ST SR EL _ET ER WL WT WR o -- 2 27'L 0 U9 4 43 0 30 106 0 0 0 203 4E5 tT (� u x 2-1/2 NR—AM—PEAK __ - 1—HOUfl AM—PEAK 4 N8 SB ES WO NL NT NR SL ST SR', EL ET ER WL WT WR s 205 65 . 0 626 5 970 0 11 22- 0 G 0 100 213l0� n is 1 — 3 V 0 0 I 1 I w = p y V N _ 11rrJJ 3 I. v RPT NR: TE514 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE D DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES , 3 - SUMMARY • 3 _ 41 I NIE RSE�ION—NAME NT—NR DS ---- —+ C a JAMBOREE RD / MACARTHUR GL 4275 6 9 =%2 MR=PIPE AK [; e 9 YR NS SS E_D_ Wy NL NT 'N R' SL ST SR EL ET ER _ WL _ kT WR _ .o SY3-774 919 975 20 200 50 15 249 124 177 279 5 67 S7d 45 y n 2 2-1 /2 NR-AM-PEAK 1-HOUR AM-PEAK „ L - NS SS ED WS NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL MT WR I5 4E5 940 1239 715 5 195 43'. ,116 270 92 184 417 20 54 297 10 I6 11 ,a V20 21 2 3 4 6 9 3 • �e 14 V 9 � a t TY• '3+ ,� Y 3 .i, '< "..iji 44 a 1• N ..�M APT NR: TE51O TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 -- SUMMARY. a INTERSECTION-NAME ,Q s HACARTHUR EL / 019CH ST 4295 7 E-1 E2 HR-PM-PEAK -- —�- 1-HOUR PM-PEAK -- ' _ - - ---- -- -- r e s YR Na SE EE WU _ _ _ _ NL_ _ NT NR SL 5T SR EL_ ET ER_ _ _ 4T _WR w ti91'J—423 _ _1�9 _15d �u 341 9 0 2�� 32 54 G 39� 39 �o j u _•- _ ___ 2-1/2 HR-AM-PEAK_- _„ _ •_ 1—HOUR AM—PEAK __ . - ] 1a N8 SO ES WE NL NT NR SL- ST SR EL ET ER WL 6T WR u_ 324 647 144_ _ 39 _ _- _10 142 12 0 32S 0 17 5e 0__ 12 7 0 16 U 17 70 ] Is 41 14 s _ _ 9 � 2 ] L - - 7 ✓1 J PT NR: TE510 InNI'r t� rnnainu �nv�nnns� DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES Vv SUMMARY ___-- MACARTHUR BL / CAMPUS DR 43G0 HOUR PM-PEAK YR NS SB_ ES w8 _ _ NL_ NT NR SL ST SR � EL ET ER WL_ MT_ _wR 736 H61 34—2�30 333 U 1 22Oa 0 O 17 2-1/2 NR-AM-PEAK 1-HOUR AM-PEAK NB SB ER wa NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER wL MT WR 3C6__ 724 112 47 — _ 0 _154 0 49 315 •0 0 560 0 _ 13_ 11 . k is r .. — _ CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGIONAL TRAFFIC ANNUAL GROWTH RATE COAST HIGHWAY East city limit to MacArthur Boulevard 2% MacArthur Boulevard to Jamboree Road 2% Jamboree Road to Newport Boulevard 2% Newport Boulevard to west city limit 4% IRVINE AVENUE All 2 .5% JAMBOREE ROAD Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road 3% San Joaquin Hills Road to Bison 2% Bison to Bristol 1% Bristol to Campus 1% MACARTHUR BOULEVARD Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road 6% San Joaquin Hills Road to north city limit 3% NEWPORT BOULEVARD Coast Highway to north city limit 1% Street segments not listed are assumed to have 0% regional growth. 1 PROPOSED ALAMO RENTAL CAR FACILITY - 4301 & 4361 BIRCH STREET Preliminary Information on Project - 7800 sq. ft. of space - 3 service bays - 2 car wash bays Traffic Study (applicable for non-residential projects generating more than 130 daily trips) Rates for trips per rental space AM (7 TO 9 a.m. ) PM (4 to 6 P.M. ) ADT In out Tot In, out Tot In Out Tot .13 .10 .23 .13 .12 . 25 1. 1 1.22 2.32 JO 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. Birch Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM Peak 2V2 How Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2V2Hour Peak2hHour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1569 95 324 1988 20 28 Southbound 1967 119, 647 2723 27 28 Eastbound 991 0 144 1 1135 1 11 1 64 westbound 629 0 38 1 667 1 7 1 64 ❑ 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 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 �a 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. Birch Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM Peak 2Y2 Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%x Hour growth Volume Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%How Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1737 106 690 2533 25 28 Southbound 2121 130 423 2674 27 28 Eastbound 1182 0 171 1353 13 74 Westbound 1746 0 150 1896 19 74 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 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. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 �2 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Dr. Bristol St. (northbound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spreing 1992) AM Peak 2h Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak2%Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak2YS Hour Peak 2'h Hour Peak 2%Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5389 0 205 5594 56 12 Southbound 1218 0 65 1283 13 10 Eastbound 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 N/A I N/A Westbound 2641 1 0 1 626 1 3267 1 33 14 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 Hour Traffic Volume. ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 Hou' Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(l.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 �54 i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Dr. Bristol St. (north bound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) PM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%:Hour growth Volume Peak 2%x Hour Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3436 0 92 3528 35 12 Southbound 3569 0 272 3841 38 12 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A Westbound 6255 0 1309 7564 76 1 6 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected Peak 2%2 Hour Traffic Volume. ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required, Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 ' S5 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Drive (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) AM Peak 2%,Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%Hour growth Volume Peak 216 Hour Peak 2Y Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1525 142 306 1973 20 36 Southbound 2924 271 724 3919 39 10 Eastbound 2284 0 112 2396 24 1 0 Westbound 1 911 0 47 958 10 1 18 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 2t/a Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 '- Ito s 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Drive (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) PM Peak 2K Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%2 Hour growth Volume Peak 2%2 Hour Peak N Hour Peak 2%x Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2365 219 736 3320 33 42 Southbound 3581 332 461 4374 44 10 Eastbound 1699 0 1 34 1733 1 17 0 Westbound 1 2817 1 0 1 230 3047 1 30 18 ❑ 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 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 159 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Jamboree Road (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM Peak2%How Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak N How growth Volume Peak 2%How Peak 2%How Peak 2Y2 How Peak N How Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2841 173 485 3499 35 28 Southbound 1166 71 940 2172 22 20 Eastbound 1 3257 1 66 1239 14562 1146 0 Westbound 1 2014 1 40 715 1 2769 1 28 1 0 0 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 2%2 Hour Traffic Volume.Intersection Capacity Utilization G.C.U.) Analysis is required. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 2 X I% Growth Factor For Jamboree Road Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 �a 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Jamboree Road (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected I%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2Y2 Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2'h Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1831 112 533 2476 25 28 Southbound 2876 177 774 3827 38 22 Eastbound 2208 44 919 3171 32 0 Westbound 3631 73 975 4679 47 1 0 ❑ 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 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 2 X 1% Growth Factor For Jamboree Road Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch Street Bristol Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM Peak 2YS Hour Approved. Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%Hour growth Volume Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%aE= Peak2%:Hour Peak 2YS Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 473 0 36 509 5 0 Southbound 578 0 81 659 7 6 Eastbound 1 4336 1 0 1 861 5197 52 1 6 Westbound 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 N/A I N/A © 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 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 l0© 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch Street Bristol Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2'/z Hour growth Volume Peak 2%z Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2'/z Hour Peak 2'/z Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 634 0 10 644 6 0 Southbound 1336 0 64 1400 14 8 Eastbound 1 3982 1 0 1 696 4678 47 6 Westbound 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z 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: 9/21/1923 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 b, F 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch St. Bristol St. (north bound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) AM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak2Y2Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2Y2Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2436 0 213 2649 26 6 Southbound 711 0 115 826 8 4 Eastbound 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 Westbound 1 2519 0 586 3,105 1 31 1.0• 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2%2 Hour Traffic Volume. E. Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 21/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch St. Bristol St. (north bound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) PM Peak 2%2 How Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%2 Hour growth Volume Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%x Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1192 0 110 1302 13 6 Southbound 2937 0 188 3125 31 6 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 Westbound 4532 0 1180 5712 1 57 1 10 © 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 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 b�J 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Drive Bristol Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2'/a Hour growth Volume Peak 2%a Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2Y,Hour Peak 2V2 Hour Volume volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3952 0 493 4445 1 44 1 0 Southbound 991 0 226 1217' 12 0 Eastbound 1 6645 1 0 1 690 7335 73 18 Westbound 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A 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 2%2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/2-1/1993 Project: Alamo Rent a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 f I% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Drive Bristol Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM Peak 2%2 Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak N Hour growth Volume Peak 2%,Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2'/2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3002 0 301 3303 33 0 . Southbound 2823 0 456 3279 33 0 Eastbound 5600 0 1 602 6202 1 62 18 Westbound 0 1 0 1 0 0 N/A N/A ® 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 2t/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. Date: 9/21/1223 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 �9� ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersectio MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) an Birch Street (east /west) Analyzed A.M Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analysts HB Dat 9/22/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C M_ n_vPme_nt_ Lanes Capacity W/O Proiect W/O Proiect I W/ Proiect W/ Proiect NL 1 1,600 79 0.05* 93 0.06* NT 3 4,800 720 0.15 720 0.15 NR Free N/A 127 N/A 127 N/A SL 1 1,600 128 0.08 128 0.08 ST 3 4,800 918 0.25* 918 0.26* SR 0 t303 L317 -- EL 1.5 2,400 99 0.04 117 0.05 ET 1 1,600 315 0.20* 320 0.20* ER 0.5 800 70 0.09 80 0.10 WL 1 1,600 36 0.02 36 0.02 WT 1 2 1 3,2001 221 0.07* 233 0.07* WR Free I N/A 1 54 N/A 54 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.57 0.59 Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A N/ Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.57 0.59 ICU V/C ICU A 0.00 to 0.60 e 0.61to0.70 * Critical Movement C 0.71to0.80 East-west Direction is split phase D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ W 1 0 r ADVANCED 'CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) and Campus Drive (east /west) Analyzed for A.M — Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 10/7/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C Movement Lanes Capacity W/O Proiect'W/0 Proiect W/ ProiectW/ Proiect NL 1 1,600 45 0.03 45 0.03 NT 4 6,400 807 0.13* 821 0.13* NR 1 1,600 53 0.03 57 0.04 SL 1 1,600 365 0.23* 365 0.23* ST 4 6,400 1,2721 0.20 1,277 0.20 SR 1 1 1,600 2001 0.13 200 0.13 EL 2 3,200 334 0.10 334 0.10 ET 2 3,200 801 0.27* 801 0.27 ER - - 54 - 54 WL 1 1,600 51 0.03* 60 0.04* WT 3 4,80.01 299 0.06 299 0.06 WR . Free N/A 94 NIA 94 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.66 0.67 Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A N/ Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's r 0.66 0.67 ICU we ICU p 0.00 to 0.60 s 0.61 to 0.70 * Critical Movement c 0.71 to 0.80 p 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ w� ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersectio MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) an Birch Street (east /west) Analyzed P.M Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 9/22/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C Movement Lanes Ca acit W/O Proiect W/O Proiect W/ Proiect W/ Proiect NIL 1 1,600 154 0.10* 168 0.10* NT 3 4,800 990 0.21 990 0.21 NR Free N/A 35 N/A 35 N/A SL 1 1,600 56 0.04 56 0.04 ST 3 4,800 912 0.23* 912 0.23* SR 0 L191 Z205 - EL 1 .5 2,400 272 0.11 293 0.12 ET 1 1,600 290 0.18* 295 0.18* ER 0.5 800 26 0.03 37 0.05 WL 1 1,600 130 0.08 130 0.08 WT 2 3,200 686 0.21 * 698 0.22* WR Free N/A 128 NIA 128 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.72 0.73 Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A N/ Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.72 0.73 ICU ! C WC ICU A 0.00 to 0.60 E 0.61to0.70 * Critical Movement c 0.71to0.80 East-west Direction is split phase D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ 1 0 ADVANCED CIVIL, Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) and Campus Drive (east /west) Analyzed for P.M Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 10/7/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C Movement Lanes Ca pa( W 0 Pro'ec W 0 Pro'ect W/ Pro'ect W/ Pro'ect NL 1 1,600 104 0.07* 104 0.07* NT 4 6,400 1,220 0.19 1,236 0.19 NR 1 1,600 65 0.04 70 0.04 SL 1 1,600 227 0.14 227 0,14 ST 4 6,400, 1,121 0.18 1,126 0,18 SR 1 1,600 784 0.49* 1 784 0.49* EL 2 3,200 254 0.08 254 0.08 ET 2 3,200 424 0.16* 424 0.16* ER - - 77 - 77 - WL 1 1,600 107, 0.07* 116 0.07* WT 3 4,800 1,031 0.21 1,031 0.21 WR Free N/A 1 165 N/A 165 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.79 0.79 Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A N/ Adjusted Sum. of Critical V/C's 0.791 0.79 ICU vrc ICU A 0.00 l0 0.60 a 0.61to0.70 * Critical Movement C 0.71 to 0.80 D 0.81 l0 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ ADVANCED' CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) and Jamboree Road (east /West) Analyzed for. P.M Peak Period ( to ? Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car AnalystHB Date 10/7/93 Volume Volume V/C�- Volume V/C Exist. No. of Growth Approved without without Project With with i Pr iects Project Project Traffic Pr�Pro'ect� Move en; Volume Lanes Volume Ca act o , NL 286 j 1 17 1,600 20 1 232 0.20* 1 323 0,20* � a NT 1 391 3 231 4,800 195 609 0.17 14 623 0.18 NR 159 - 10 - 45 214 214 - SL 172 1 10 1,600 15 _ 197 0.121 197 0.12 ST 874 3 52 4,800 251 1,177 0.254 11 1,188 0.25- SR 470 Free 28 N/A 125 623 N/A 623 N/A �! EL I 229 2. 5 3,2001 177 411 0.13*I I 411 0.13* IJ ET 640 3 13 4,800 279 932 0.19 , 932 0,19 ER I 16 Free 1 N/A 1 5 22 N/A ! 221 N/A I WL j 505 2 10 3,200 641 579 0.18 579 0.18,I WT 1299 3 26 4,800 3781 1,703 0.35' 1,703 0.35* I; WR 67 Free 1 N/ 45 1131 NIA 116 N/AI l{ Sum of Critical V/C's 0,93 0 9311 "�r ,ICI i Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/ tr,.zua,a N/A, 5... 1 Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.93 _ „, 0.93 ICU �� 0 V/C ICU A 0.00 CO 0.60 a 0461 to0.70 " Critical Movement C 0.71 to 0.90 D 0,81 to 0.90 8 0.91 m 1.0 P 1.0+ 1 � 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH P ® S T E D 3300 Newport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1768 - COUhCI t19111 Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 OCT 0 5 1993 3 �NOy GRAy`A��E' GARYL.GRANVILLE,CountyClerk QUO DECLARATION To: From: City of Newport Beach DEPUTY O[Gce of Planning and Research Planning Department a 1400 Tenth Street,Room 121 3300 Newport Boulevard-P.O.Box 1768 Sacramento,CA 95814 Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 (Orange County) County Clerk,County of Orange EDXX Public Services Division P.O.Box 838 Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk: Santa Ana,CA 92702 Public reviewperiod October 5 , 1993 - October 26, 1993 Name of Project. Alamo Car Rental facility, Traffic Study No. 89, Use Permit No. 3512 Project Location: 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach Project Description: Construction of a new one story building that contains 9,OOU sq.ft. , three new driveways on Birch Street, fueling and vacuuming facility and surtace storage area for automobiles. Finding: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council Policy K-3 pertaining to procedures audguidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act,the Environmental Affairs Committee has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the ca dament. A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting this finding is attached. The Initial Study may include mitigation measures that would eliminate or reduce potential environmental impacts. This document will be considered by the decision-makers) prior to final'action on the proposed project. If a public hearing will be held to considerrthis project,a notice of the time and location is attached. Additional plans,studies and/or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you would like to examine these materials,you are invited to contact the undersigned. , Ifyou wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document yourcommentsshouldbe submitted inwriting prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project,why they are significant,and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. There is,,no fee.for this appeal. If a public hearing will be held,you are also invited to attend and testify'as to the appropriateness.of this document. If you have any questions or would like further information,please contact the undersigned. Data _jar nhrr 1., i99.S John .1 ouglas,#IVP Envir n ntal CobAinator Revised 4/92 r ENVIMN E=AL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH BACKGROUND 1. Application Not TRAFFIC STUDY 110. 39, USE PERMIT MO. 3512 2. Project name: Alamo Car Rental Facility 3. Project location: 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach 4. Applicant: Robert Lee and Associates II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (See attached explanations) Yes Maybe No 1. Barth. Would the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? -- A b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction — or overcovering of the soil? — C. Change in topography or ground surface �( relief features? — 1� d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? — e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? — 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 any bay, inlet or lake? — q. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? — 2. Air. Would the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration v of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? — Environmental Analysis checkl 0— Page 2 V Yes Maybe ILO . 3. water. Would the proposal result in: e of a. Changes direction nof waters movements# inseither marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water — v in any water body? �c e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 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 withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts _ or excavations? the ount of water h. Substantiotherwise aavailable ofor npublic mwater supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water— related hazards ouch as flooding or tidal waves? q. Plant Life. Would the proposal result in: a. change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, _ grass, Crops, and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to thenormal species? replenishment of existing d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural — — crop? Environmental Analysis Checklist - Page 3 Yee Maybe two, S. Animal Life. Would the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity Of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell-fish, benthic organisms, or insects)? — b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? — C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ d. Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? — 6. Noise. Would the proposal result in an increase in existing noise levels, or exposure of people to severe noise levels? — 7. Light and Clare. Would the proposal produce new light or glare? — g. Land Use. Would the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area, or conflict with existing land use regulations \/ or policies? TX` 9. Natural Resources. Would the proposal result in an increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? _ 10. Risk of Accident. Would 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? — b. Possible interference with an emergency response or evacuation plan? — — 11. Population. Would the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of the area? — 12. Rousing. Would the proposal affect existing housing or create a demand for additional housing? — Environmental Analysis Chec+st - Page 4 Yes Maybe two _ 13. Transportation/Circulation/Parkins. Would the proposal result in: ; a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? '— Is. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? — — C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? — e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? — f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? ^- 14. Publi services. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need fors new or altered governmental cervices in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? C. Schools? — d. Parks or other recreational facilities? — -- e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? — — f. other governmental services? — — c 15. Ener . Would the proposal result in the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy, a substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or \ / require the development of new sources of energy? 16. utilites. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: Y a. Electricity or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water or wastewater? — — d. Storm water drainage? — [ e. Solid waste and disposal? 116 Environmental Analysis Checklo - Page 5 • ' Yes Maybe NO 17. Human Health. Would the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or exposure of people to a potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? 18. Aesthetics. Would the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? — 19. Recreation. Would the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? — 20. Cultural Resources. Would the proposal: a. Result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? — b. Result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects on a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? — — C. Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? _ d. Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 7X� III. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. 1. 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 California history or pre-history? — 2. 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 relatively brief, definitive period of time while long- term impacts endure well into the future.) _ — Environmental Analysis Check.10 - Page 6 Yes Maybe Two, 3. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may have an 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 h significant; or, a projectmay have incremental impacts that are individually minor, but are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of other past, present, or probable future projects.), 4. Does the project have environmental effects which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or 'indirectly? -- IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluations ( 1 I 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 significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached pages have been incorporated into the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION STILL BE PREPARED. ( ) I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Aziz M. Aslami ( Associate Planner ) Date; lu-4-1993 Prepared by: Signature: Attachment: Environmental Analysis Checklist Explanations f:\...\FORMS\CHECKLST. Revised 12/91 I�Q 1U i r NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will hold a public hearing on the application of Robert Lee and Associates for Traffic Study No. 89 on property located at 4361 and 4401 Birch Street. The pplication includes a request to approve a traffic study to allow construction of a 9,000 square feet of car rental office maintenance burins fueling and surface automobile stora e� area NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that a Negative Declaration has been prepared by the City of Newport Beach in connection with the application noted above. The Negative Declaration states that, the subject development will not result in a significant effect on the environment. It is the present intention of the City to accept the Negative Declaration and supporting documents. This is not to be construed as either approval or denial by the City of the subject application. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the Negative Declaration and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92659-1768 (714) 644-3225. Notice is hereby further given that said public hearing will be held on the 4th day of November 1993, at the hour of 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. For information call (714) 644-3200. Harry Merrill„Secretary, Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach. NOTE: The expense of this notice is paid from a filing fee collected from the applicant. 1� ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS CHECKLIST EXPLANATIONS Alamo Car Rental Facility Traffic Study No. 89 Use Permit No. 3512 Project Description The proposed project is a,car rental facility and maintenance operation. The site is located directly across from the Sheraton Hotel at 4361 and 4401 Birch Street (see Exhibit A). Currently there is a vacant single story building (approximately 6,000 sq.ft.) on the site which would be demolished. The proposed development involves construction of a new one story structure that is 9,000 sq.ft in size, three new driveways along Birch Street, fueling and vacuuming facility and surface automobile storage area. The height of the proposed building is 16'-6" and the subject site consists. of four contiguous parcels which encompass approximately 2.66 acres of land. Surrounding_Land Uses Sheraton Hotel is located to the east of the.proposed site. To the north and south of the project are office buildings. To the west of the site there is an automobile rental agency and additional office buildings. The immediate vicinity of this project is predominantly professional office buildings and financial institutions. Analysis The following discussion provides explanations for the conclusions contained in the Environmental Analysis Checklist regarding the proposed projects environmental Impacts. 1. Earth The proposed project would be built on a developed site. The demolition activities associated with the removal of the.existing one story building and the construction and installation of the underground and gasoline storage tank as part of the proposed development will result in some soil disruption and will require excavation, compaction and soil displacement.Compliance with the City Excavation and grading Code (NBMC Sec.15.04.140) would reduce the impacts to insignificant level. 2. Air Construction Impacts During the course of construction some dust and objectionable odor from diesel exhaust and asphalt paving may be created. However, dust will be minimized as a result of site watering required by The City and Air Quality Management District regulations. Odor effects shall be eliminated upon the completion of the project. No additional stationary equipment is proposed that could generate additional emission as part of the project. Operational Impacts On the basis of the project's trip generation characteristics, it is estimated that the proposed facility would not exceed the air pollutant thresholds considered to be significant in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management Districts CEQA Handbook. 3. Water The proposed project would take place on a site that is already developed, therefore no drainage impacts would be anticipated. Provisions for drainage requirements are contained in the City Excavation and Grading Code. Gasoline spill would be contained from entering storm drain system by the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code. Underground water contamination is discussed in item no. 10 of the analysis. The project is located outside flood hazard area. 4. Plant Life The proposed site is located in a developed area of the City and the project will not affect any natural vegetation. 5. Animal Life The project is located in an urbanized area of the community and no significant impact to wildlife would be anticipated. 6. Noise Existing noise levels are anticipated to be increased during the construction period primarily due to construction related activities, and operational noise produced by the forced air dryers, vacuum cleaners, horn honking and door slamming. Sheraton Hotel is located directly across from the subject site. Due to a greater setback distance of the Hotel building from the roadway and the Hotel parking lot location between Birch Street and the hotel, no significant noise impacts on the hotel would be anticipated. Other than the hotel, no noise sensitive uses are located in close proximity to the site. Construction noise is short term and insignificant since construction time is expected to be short due to the small scope of the project. The construction hours are limited to the hours of operation regulated through the provisions contained in the City Noise Ordinance (NBMC Chapter 10.28). No significant impact is anticipated. 7. Light and Glare If exterior lighting is required, the proposed project could produce light and glare that would adversely affect the adjacent properties. Although there aren't any residential building adjacent to the site or in the project's vicinity, the following mitigation would ensure that any exterior lighting is designed such that direct rays are confined to the site to the extent feasible. Mitigation Measure #1 Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that the lighting system shall be designed, directed, and maintained in such a manner as to, conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent properties. The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer, with a letter from the engineer stating that, in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 8. Land Use The site is designated for Administrative, professional and Financial Commercial by the City's General Plan Land Use Element and the Zoning is(M1A) which designates the site for Light Industrial development and support services subject to approval of a Use Permit prior to any construction on the site. The proposed operation of an automobile rental, storage and maintenance on the site is consistent with the City's general Plan and Zoning requirements. This project is located outside the Coastal Zone Boundary and Coastal Permit is not required. 9. Natural Resources The use of natural resources will not be significantly affected by this project. 10. Risk of Upset An underground fuel storage tank is proposed for refueling rental vehicles. Any liquid or non-liquid flammable and combustible substances on the site is controlled by Uniform Fire Code. Mitigation Measure No. 2 ensures that any foreseeable hazard due to upset would be maintained to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measure #2 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy,the applicant must demonstrate to the City' Building Department and Fire Department that the project is in compliance with the County of Orange Health Department and the City's Fire Department Regulations. 11. Population The proposed project would not cause any growth or reduction in the area's population. 12. Housing No additional housing demand would result from the project since minor employment increase is anticipated. 13. Transportation/Circulation/parking Currently the site is vacant. Additional vehicular movement will be generated as a result of the proposed development. The City's Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and determined that based on traffic data of published sources, trip generation rate for car rental facilities are higher than the general office use or any light industrial operation and a traffic study is necessary to evaluate the impact of the subject proposal on the City's existing Traffic Circulation. O�J The Traffic Engineer selected seven intersections that would have been affected by the proposed project and a traffic study has been prepared as required by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The one percent traffic volume test was applied to the selected intersections and only the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street exceeded 1% of the intersection traffic volume, therefore, further analysis of Intersection Capacity Utilization,(ICU) were required'for that intersection. The ICU analysis were performed for both a.m and p.m. peak hours and resulted that the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street is operating at acceptable level of service for both peak periods and the proposed project would not have any significant impact on the intersection operation. The Traffic Study for this project indicates that the proposed automobile rental, storage and maintenance facility would generate 696 trip ends per day. The a.m. peak period traffic is estimated to generate 160 trips and 173 trips during the p.m. peak periods(2-hour periods). The proposed project would not have any significant affect on the City's circulation system network. Access to the site is provided via Birch Street. The lay out of the facility indicates that adequate and safe internal circulation have been provided. There are 30 parking spaces that would accommodate for the employees and customers. 14. Public Services There are sufficient public or governmental services that serve the area and the project would not create additional demand for these services. 15. Energy No significant increase in the use of energy is anticipated. 16. Utilities and Service Systems The site has already been served by the utility System and no significant alteration or expansion of existing utility system is anticipated. 17. Human Health Although the proposed project utilizes hazardous materials on the site however, with the provisions contained in Mitigation No. 2, no adverse affect on human health is anticipated. 18. Aesthetics The site is located in a Light Industrial Zone, and the proposed car rental and maintenance would not result in any significant aesthetic impacts as compared to other commercial uses. 19. Recreation Recreational activities and opportunities would not be affected by the project. 20. Cultural Resources The parcel has been developed previously and no archaeological or paleontological resources are expected to exist on this site. There is no impact on the cultural resources or historic structures. Mandatory Findings of Significance 1. On the basis of the foregoing analysis, including the mitigation measures listed, the proposed project does not have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment. 2. There are no long-term environmental goals that would be compromised by the project. 3. No cumulative impacts are anticipated in connection with this or other projects. 4. There are no known substantial adverse effects on human beings that would be caused by the proposed project. `b5 Exhibit A VICINITY MAP Alamo Car Rental Facility Traflc Study No. 89 Use Permit No. 3512 ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT 4 t N ! :• 1 Sheraton Hotel Planning Department 10/1/1993 V�L�J MTTIGATIG, r MONITORING AND REPORT111PROGRAM Alamo Car Rental Facility Traffic Study No. 89 Use Permit No. 3512 I. OVERVIEW This mitigation monitoring program was prepared in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21086.6 (AB 3180 of 1988). It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the applicant and the City to ensure that all mitigation measures adopted as part of this project will be carried out. Attachment 1 summarizes the adopted mitigation measures, implementing actions, and verification procedures for this project. H. MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES Mitigation measures can be implemented in three ways: (1) through project design, which is verified by plan check and inspection; (2) through compliance with various codes, ordinances, policies, standards, and conditions of approval which are satisfied prior to or during construction and verified by plan check and/or inspection; and (3) through monitoring and reporting after construction is completed. Compliance monitoring procedures for these three types of mitigation measures are summarized below. A. Mitigation measures implemented through project design. Upon project approval, a copy of the approved project design will be placed in the official project file. As part of the review process for all subsequent discretionary or ministerial permits, the file will be checked to verify that the requested permit is in conformance with the approved project design. Field inspections will verify that construction conforms to approved plans. B. Mitigation measures implemented through compliance with codes, ordinances, policies, standards, or conditions of approval: Upon project approval, a copy of the approved project description and conditions of approval will be placed in the official project file. As part of the review process for all subsequent discretionary or ministerial permits, the file will be checked to verify that the requested permit is in compliance with all applicable codes, ordinances, policies, standards and conditions of approval. Field inspections will verify that construction conforms to all applicable standards and conditions. C. Mitigation measures implemented through post-construction monitoring. If any mitigation measures require verification and reporting after construction is completed, the City will maintain a log of these mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements, and will review completed monitoring reports. Upon submittal, the City will approve the report, request additional information, or pursue enforcement remedies in the event of noncompliance. Final monitoring reports will be placed in the official file. F.\w\avz-a\t mfrie\tpo89\mm-conr. Cnr ATTACHMENT 1 MMGATION MONffORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM SUMMARY Alamo Car Rental Facility(UP 3512) Mitigation Measure Implementing Action Method of Timing of Verification Responsible Person Verification 1. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant Condition of Plan check Prior to issuance of a Planning Department plan shall demonstrate to the Planning Department that Approval building permit checker the-lighting system shall be designed,directed,and maintained in such a manner as to conceal the light source and to minimize light spillage and glare to the adjacent residential uses.The plans shall be prepared and signed by a licensed Electrical Engineer,with a letter from the engineer stating that,in his opinion, this requirement has been met. 2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of use Condition of Plan check Prior to issuance of a Building Department plan and occupancy, the applicant must Approval certificate of use and checker,Fire Department demonstrate to the Citys Building occupancy Department and Fire Department that the Project is in compliance with the Countyof Orange Health Department and the City's Fire Department Regulations. F.'\_\aziz\Alamo\MM TAl3 E V� ' A CIVIL ��� Civil & Transportation Engineering TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO: Ms. Janet Divan Traffic Engineering City of Newport Beach Attention: Job Number:. 1ppa _11 C)� Date: 10/25/93 Job Name: Alamo Rent-a-Car Job Address: 4361 & 4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach, California We are sending you: Revised Traffic Impact Assessment for the above Project. If you have any Questions, please give Ahmad Olomi or myself a call. Thanks Remarks: Signed: Copy To: Phone: (714)261-2766 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B,Irvine, California 92714 Fax: (714)261-0449 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U P.O. BOX 1768,NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658.8915 °q<�FoaN�r PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 October 6, 1993 Mr. Gary M. Semling 1137 No. McDowell Blvd. Petaluma, CA 94954 Subject: Alamo Rental Car Facility Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study, 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach (TPO # 89) Dear Mr. Semling: The traffic study that has been prepared for the Alamo Car Rental Facility is being reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer. There were some minor technical changes to be incorporated to the report. It is expected to be complete and final by October 8, 1993. As part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirement, a Negative Declaration has been prepared and filed in the Orange County Clerk's Office on October 5th, 1993. The shortest public review period, required by CEQA,for a Negative Declaration is 21 days and therefore, the Planning Commission Public Hearing tentatively set for October 21, 1993, has been changed to November 4, 1993. A copy of the Negative Declaration is enclosed for your information. As soon as I receive the final traffic study report, I will send a copy of the report to your office. If you have any questions or would like more information, I can be reached at 644-3225. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By 0� h . Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner F:\WP51\...\Aziz-a\Traf[c\TW9LEr4 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach ADVANAD CIVIL Civil & Transportation Engineering September 23, 1993 Mr. Aziz Aslami Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Beach, CA 92659 Re: Alamo Rent-a-Car; 4361 & 4401 Birch Street Dear Mr. Aslami: Attached please find 5 copies of the traffic impact assessment (TIA) for the above referenced project for your use. Should you have any questions or wish to further discuss the contents of the report, please feel free to call me at 261-2766. Very truly your amid Bahadori, P.E. Project Manager Enclosures DQgOFESS/OHq� 11 �pFESS/p z\O y9p�m 'No 'Oo Noo.. 437990 No. 1617 Exp. W37" Exp. 31 slay cIV9j `r?AFf�''`:; OF CAL�FO c n Or V���"yam Phone: (714)261-2766 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B,Irvine, Califomia 92714 Fax: (714)261-0449 ADVANCrD CIVIL Civil & Transportation Engineering September 3, 1993 E.Eel eD ell tA1 NING DcPARiAIENT Proposal No. AC-09039301 a.y OF NFWPORT BEACH City of Newport Beach AM SEP 141993pM Planning Department M19001U11211i213i4i5,6 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 Re: Alamo Rental Car facility 4301 & 4401 Birch Street Newport Beach, California Atm. Mr. Aziz Aslami Associate Planner Gentlemen: Thank you for providing us the opportunity to submit to you this proposal for preparation of a traffic impact assessment (TIA) study for the subject project. We have prepared this proposal after careful review of the proposed project and subsequent review of the City's Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and consultation with City staff regarding the City's requirements for the scope and magnitude of the traffic analysis expected for this project. We are confident that in Advanced Civil we have the resources and expertise to prepare a TIA for the subject project according to the guidelines and requirements established by the City. Mr. Hamid Bahadori of our staff will be the Project Manager for this project. He is a registered civil and traffic engineer in the State of California with more than 12 years of experience in civil/transportation engineering in public, private and academia sectors. Also, a team of professional engineers and our engineering support and clerical staff will be assigned to this project to accomplish the required tasks in the most efficient and professional manner. SCOPE OF WORK According to our understanding of the project, we will be performing the following tasks: 1. We will review and evaluate the site plan prepared by the Architect for the adequacy of internal circulation and the access points compliance with the City's standards and safety requirements. Phone: (714)261-2766 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B,Irvine, Califomia 92714 Fax: (714)261-0449 Alamo Rental Car facility• • Page 2 of 3 2. We will calculate the project's total daily trip generation and its am&pm peak hour factors as approved by the City. 3. We will distribute the projects generated trips throughout the highway system based on the existing and proposed land uses and traffic patterns and to the best of our professional judgment as approved by the City. We will proceed with the remaining steps in this proposal for only those locations that meets the City's 1% test. 4. We understand that the City's Traffic Engineer requires the evaluation of level- of-service for the following seven intersections: i. Mac Arthur @ Compus Drive I Mac Arthur @ Birch Street iii. Mac Arthur @ Jamboree Road iv. Compus Drive @ Bristol Street (north bound) V. Compus Drive @ Bristol Street vi. Birch Street @ Bristol Street (north bound) vii. Birch Street @ Bristol Street 5. We understand that NO transportation modeling activity will be required for this project, and that future traffic projections will be based on growth factors and traffic generated from committed projects which both will be provided by the City. 6. subsequent to the data gathering and LOS calculations, we will formulate our recommendations including mitigation measures, if any, based on the City's established requirements. At this time after preliminary review of the project, we believe that most probably there will not be a need for mitigation measures requiring us to prepare 40-Scale layouts for. However, should our TIA findings prove otherwise, we need to amend our proposal to include such tasks at additional cost and time. 7. We will submit our draft TIA to the City staff for their review and comments, and we will finalize and submit a final TIA to the City for the purposes of evaluation of the proposed projects impact on the City's arterial system. Obviously, all the other minor miscellaneous activities associated with the aforementioned tasks are covered in this proposal. SCHEDULE Based on the information available to us at this time, we believe we can deliver the draft TIA to the City within 10 days after our receipt of the City's authorization and r Alamo Rental Car facility • Page 3 of 3 notice-to-proceed. However, should additional traffic counts be required, we extend this schedule by 7 days. COST Our financial compensation for professional engineering services required in performing the tasks indicated in the "SCOPE OF WORK" Section of this proposal is a lump sum fee of$4700.00. This figure does not include any traffic counts. Should additional traffic counts be required, each am/pm peak period intersection count (2.5 hours each) will cost $190.00 and each machine count will cost $70.00. PROJECT DELIVERABLES We will deliver the following number of copies to the City: . 5 copies of the draft TIA • 5 copies of the final TIA. Again, I would like to thank you for your consideration of our firm for this project, and we are committed to provide you with the highest quality of traffic engineering work. Should you have any questions regarding this letter or wish to modify any part of it, please feel free to call me at 261-2766 Very truly yours President • Advanced Civil • Work Classification & fees Effective:March 1 1993 Class Class Description Rate per hour Number 1 Word-processing/Clerical $35.00 2 Field Technician $35.00 3 Sr. Technician $55.00 4 Draftsperson $50.00 5 Staff Engineer $65.00 6 Project Engineer $75.00 7 Project Manager $80.00 8 Principal Engineer $90.00 9 Traffic Data Collection By quote Overtime will be charged at a rate of 1.33x regular time (Saturdays and work over 8 hrs.per day) Premium time will be charged at a rate of 1.5x regular time(Sundays and Holidays) A minimum of two hours will be charged for any public hearing attendance. MEMORANDUM TO: Aziz Aslami Associate Planner FROM: Rich Edmonston ' Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Proposal for Traffic Impact Study - Alamo Rental Car Facility, 4301 & 4401 Birch Street The proposal from Advanced Civil will provide the requirements for the City's TPO; however, a list of the consultant's hourly rates should be included with this proposal. Also, is there any provision for the study being completed "under budget"? Without an idea of the hourly rates, the lump sum shown is higher when compared to a study of approximately the same depth of analysis (Family Fitness Center) . For a study of this size, a separate evaluation by the traffic engineer for "unusual traffic patterns" in the peak periods seems like an unnecessary expense (page 3, item 5. ) . Let me know if you have any further questions. Thank you. ADVANA CIVIL Civil & Transportation Engineering September 3, 1993 Proposal No. AC-09039301 City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 Re: Alamo Rental Car facility 4301 & 4401 Birch Street Newport Beach, California Attn. Mr. Aziz Aslami Associate Planner Gentlemen: Thank you for providing us the opportunity to submit to you this proposal for preparation of a traffic impact assessment(TIA) study for the subject project. We have prepared this proposal after careful review of the proposed project and subsequent review of the City's Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and consultation with City staff regarding the City's requirements for the scope and magnitude of the traffic analysis expected for this project. We are confident that in Advanced Civil we have the resources and expertise to prepare a TIA for the subject project according to the guidelines and requirements established by the City. Mr. Hamid Bahadori of our staff will be the Project Manager for this project. He is a registered civil and traffic engineer in the State of California with more than 12 years of experience in civil/transportation engineering in public, private and academia sectors. Also, a team of professional engineers and our engineering support and clerical staff will be assigned to this project to accomplish the required tasks in the most efficient and professional manner. SCOPE OF WORK According to our understanding of the project, we will be performing the following tasks: 1. We will review and evaluate the site plan prepared by the Architect for the adequacy of internal circulation and the access points compliance with the City's standards and safety requirements. Phone:(714)261-2766 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B,Irvine, California 92714 Fax:(714)261-0449 Alamo Rental Car facility Page 2 of 3 2. We will calculate the project's total daily trip generation and its am&pm peak hour factors as approved by the City. 3. We will distribute the project's generated trips throughout the highway system based on the existing and proposed land uses and traffic patterns and to the best of our professional judgment as approved by the City. We will proceed with the remaining steps in this proposal for only those locations that meets the City's 1% test. 4. We understand that the City's Traffic Engineer requires the evaluation of level- of-service for the following seven intersections: i. Mac Arthur @ Compus Drive ii. Mac Arthur @ Birch Street iii. Mac Arthur @ Jamboree Road iv. Compus Drive @ Bristol Street(north bound) V. Compus Drive @ Bristol Street vi. Birch Street @ Bristol Street(north bound) vii. Birch Street @ Bristol Street 5. We also understand that the City requires an evaluation of these intersections be performed for the existing conditions and one year after project completion with and without project's traffic including all the system improvements that will be installed before one year after project completion. We will provide the LOS calculations for these intersections for the required horizon years for am&pm peak hours. According to the information provided to us by the City, we understand that there are some traffic counts available, and acceptable to the City as existing traffic. However, our proposal offers a separate cost item for counts, should additional ones be required by the City. Our traffic engineer will also personally field review these intersections during the peak periods for evaluation of any unusual traffic patterns. 6. We understand that NO transportation modeling activity will be required for this project, and that future traffic projections will be based on growth factors and traffic generated from committed projects which both will be provided by the City. 7. subsequent to the data gathering and LOS calculations, we will formulate our recommendations including mitigation measures, if any, based on the City's established requirements. At this time after preliminary review of the project, we believe that most probably there will not be a need for mitigation measures requiring us to prepare 40-Scale layouts for. However, should our TIA findings prove otherwise,we need to amend our proposal to include such tasks at additional cost and time. Alamo Rental Car facility Page 3 of 3 8. We will submit our draft TIA to the City staff for their review and comments, and we will finalize and submit a final TIA to the City for the purposes of evaluation of the proposed project's impact on the City's arterial system. Obviously, all the other minor miscellaneous activities associated with the aforementioned tasks are covered in this proposal. SCHEDULE Based on the information available to us at this time, we believe we can deliver the draft TIA to the City within 10 days after our receipt of the City's authorization and notice-to-proceed. However, should additional traffic counts be required, we extend this schedule by 7 days. COST Our financial compensation for professional engineering services required in performing the tasks indicated in the "SCOPE OF WORK" Section of this proposal is a lump sum fee of$5,400. This figure does not include any traffic counts. Should additional traffic counts be required, each am/pm peak period intersection count(2.5 hours each) will cost$190.00 and each machine count will cost $70.00. PROJECT DELIVERABLES We will deliver the following number of copies to the City: . 5 copies of the draft TIA • 5 copies of the final TIA. Again, I would like to thank you for your consideration of our firm for this project, and we are committed to provide you with the highest quality of traffic engineering work. Should you have any questions regarding this letter or wish to modify any part of it, please feel free to call me at 261-2766 Very truly yours e-Ilfiar[um S. aha President PORT 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U r P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658.8915 e� Cq�l FORN�P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 September 14, 1993 Mr. Gary M. Semling 1137 No. McDowell Blvd. Petaluma, CA 94954 Subject: Alamo Rental Car Facility Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study, 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach (TPO # 89) Dear Mr. Semling: Enclosed please find a copy of the revised proposal submitted by Advance Civil & Transportation Engineering regarding Traffic Engineering Services required for traffic phasing analysis for the proposed Alamo Rental Car Facility at 4361-4401 Birch Street in Newport Beach. The revised cost of the proposed traffic study is shown on page 3. Subsequent to having received a check in the amount of $ 5,170 on September 9, 1993, Advanced Civil and Transportation Engineering was authorized to proceed with the project. Assuming completion of the project's traffic study by September 24, 1993, the Planning Commission Public Hearing for the subject project has tentatively been set for October 21, 1993. For any further question or more information, I can be reached at 644-3225. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWICKER, Director By . � 464,� Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner F.\WP51\...\Aziz-a\Traffic\TS89LLrr3 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach �gW PO ° CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH U P.O.BOX 1768,NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658-8915 cqt,FO AN�P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 September 9, 1993 Mr. Ibrahim S. Baha Advance Civil & Transportation Engineering 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Irvine, CA 92714 Subject: Alamo Rental Car Facility Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study,4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach (TPO # 89) Dear Mr. Baha: This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation regarding the Traffic Study required for Alamo Rental Car Facility proposal. I have enclosed, for your information, the letter of authorization from Robert Lee & Associates. For traffic data or technical questions please contact Rich Edmonston, the City's Traffic Engineer at (714) 644-3344. Should you have any other questions regarding this project, or need copies of development plans, please contact me. Very truly yours, PLANNING DIRECTOR JAMES D. HEWICKER, DIRECTOR B Y 6 Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner F.\W P51\...\Aziz-A\Traf Gc\M91.M2 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach ROBERTR. LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1137 No. McDowell Blvd. (707) 765-1660 Petaluma, CA 94954 FAX (707) 765-9908 John W. Johnson, Architect James H. Ray, Civil Engineer TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 8, 1993 TO: Mr. Aziz Aslami Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92660 REGARDING: Alamo Rent Car Facility Traffic Study Authorization 4361 & 4401 Birch Street TRANSMITTED: [X ) AS REQUESTED [ I FOR YOUR APPROVAL [X 1 FOR YOUR USE [ ) FOR REVIEW & COMMENT QTY. NO. DESCRIPTION 1 check #12595 for the amount of $5,170.00 Per our phone conversation today, enclosed is the above check which authorizes Advanced Civil Engineering & Transportation to proceed with the Traffic Study. A 10 day turnaround for a rough draft of the traffic study to your department is expected. The fee is broken down into $4,700 for the traffic study plus 10% for the city administration fee. Thank you for help in taking care of this matter so expeditiously. Sincerely, ROBERT H. LEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. Gary . Semling Arch act cc: Chip Sabadash, DKBERT & Associates GMSISPECP M418-10.AA1 aEW PORT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH uP.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658.8915 CgGlppµN�P PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 September 9, 1993 Mr. Gary M. Semling 1137 No. McDowell Blvd. Petaluma, CA 94954 Subject: Alamo Rental Car Facility Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study, 4361-4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach (TPO # 89) Dear Mr. Semling: Enclosed please find a copy of a proposal submitted by Advance Civil & Transportation Engineering regarding Traffic Engineering Services required for traffic phasing analysis for the proposed Alamo Rental Car Facility at 43614401 Birch Street in Newport Beach. The proposal contains an outline of the required work, schedule of time, and estimated fee required for preparation of the task. The requested Traffic Consultant fees have been reviewed by the City. After discussing with the Traffic Consultant, due to the scope of work necessary to accomplish the task, item 5, page 3 was deemed to be unnecessary and eliminated. As a result the original traffic consultant's fee of $5,400 has been reduced to $4,700. As soon as I receive the revised version of the proposal, I will mail a copy for your information and file. The revised fee of $4,700 is considered appropriate and warranted. The fees are as follows: Consultant Fees $ 4,700 City Fees (109o') 47 Total Request: $ 5,170 Please submit a check in the amount of$5,170 payable to the City of Newport Beach. Your prompt response in this matter is appreciated. Very truly yours, PLANNING DEPARTMENT JAMES D. HEWIC�KER, Director By 0 - � . , Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner F:\WP51\...\Am4\Traffic\TWLM 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach PLANNING DEPARTMENT (714) 644-3225 September 2, 1993 Mr. Ibrahim S. Baba Advance Civil Engineering & Transportation 17911 Sky Park Circle Drive Irvine, CA 92714 Subject: Alamo Rent A Car Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study for 4361 & 4401 Birch Street, Newport Beach (TPO # 89) Dear Mr. Baha: The City of Newport Beach Planning Department has received an application for an automobile rental, storage and maintenance facility on a site that is located at 4361 and 4401 Birch Street in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed auto rental/maintenance services would require a TRAFFIC STUDY to determine the impact of the subject proposal on the City's Traffic Circulation System. The City invites you to submit a proposal to prepare a Traffic Phasing Ordinance Study for this project. If you are interested, at your earliest convenience, please submit a proposal to the City including project tasks, budget, and timing. Copies of development plans can be obtained from Mr.Arthur Lee Choitz of Robert Lee &Associates, 1201 So. Beach Blvd. # 203, La Habra, CA 90631 (310) 902-8024. For traffic data or technical questions please contact, Rich Edmonston, the City's Traffic Engineer at (714) 644-3344. Should you have any other question or more information regarding this project, please contact me. Very truly yours, PLANNING DIRECTOR JAMES D. HEWICKER, DIRECTOR By 6VYAM Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner F.\WP51\...\Aziz-A\Traffic\1W9Le t1 * CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT FAX(714) 644-3250 (charge code#2718) Mailing Address: Street Address: P.O.BOX 1768 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach,CA 92659-1768 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Advance Planning Division Current Planning Division (714) 644-3225 (714) 644-3200 ------------------------------; Fax Cover Sheet FROM: DATE: 9 / $ / 93 Aziz M. Aslami Associate Planner Title TO: Mr. Baha Business Phone 7( 14 ) 261-2766 ; FAX No. 7( 14 ) 261-0449 Subject: Alamo Rental Car Facility I ; ; No. of Pages (excluding cover sheet): 1 Special Instructions: Please contact me at 644-3225 after you review the Traffic Engineer's comments regarding the traffic study proposal . ; Thanks 04 0 CAMPUS IACAC/A ST) DRIVE CD g TRACT WP. M. 60-22 cc NO 320/ 24 25 26 27 2B 29 30 3/ 32 jg w / sa' 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 IS MAP WAS11E PARED FOR ORANGE OUNTY ASSESR DEPT.PURPOSES ONLY i E ASSESSORAKES NO GUARANTEE AS TO TRA T I S ACCURACYR ASSUMES ANY LIABILITY OR OTHER US NOT TO BE REPRODUCED. LL RIGHTS REWED. COPYRIGHT OR KE COUNTY ASSESSOR 1992 N 20 N 21 22 Ig 17 16 15 14 13 12 II w L33I AC. Q i NO 5/6 i 60 np P; 93' o STREET BIRCH 17 • Fd. 3�`brves cop per R/S 6419 COG/A/ TY OF ORANGE --- / h'39'OB73'E 4 ('2G4/.15 Fe.^ BPS. �4%9,� TcG3/ec .CCa,-ner-- - -- �- /44/.53' Fd IP "[ S 2383' /CTv Exist S N/Oter pine EasF'mPn7 B.r SG92�ai7 vwo' per 7i•Ocf NO 320/ } C (93 007-- -(/oo.00y— '- oa'l- - Yioo.ae7--i -(ioo.00l--I- -(ioo noJ--r 7i0o,ooJ —(ioa (�oo.oa J- (iao.ao%- Yioo qol -t _000.00J- oo'l--I-liooa C/ Tr, OF NEY�%PORT EACH BOUNOgRY I /P ellI ... i o I a41 y I 2383' fd S14"L P "I. S 2383 per Tioc/ *0. 320/ � I ' I per Troct No 320/ }- 00.007 (/O .00, /0000' .00' (io0.o0% /00,00) 00' ( I 000.00) //oO,OOl IiOO P.'saoo• /so.00' /0000 /oo.00' /oa.00' 700.00• ioo.co, /00-00' /oo.oo• /0000' /oO.oo' 200-00' Qs 0 OI o M o c o N IZ H Z Z Ivy•ti W :� � 0 a A N OI M V M 4 tp N a o V , e,u O on , 3 o g $ F $ Eri t 5 fib/er ZIll - 0A-G33�/969 oqR / �(3011(3011 ';G�Z� q2� ZZ 1 Lj Z(p3 jr 4 30 I6/ic Ut{ �y� Eosemeln> 1 w J �i /9s o07_ - 5a - - /FO.00' Oo' 1 ioa.oo'_. - /00 lf0' /o � Do� 442 3 !tQ q 3 44(,3 _ - /Gb 00'_ _ /OG100'I' /Oo.oO'_ _ _ _. 9L 79' _ _ _ �DT /g AlAl39'48'/5"E /09/. 79' _ - O /40 00' .._. B A? N Al39'4B'/s-E /0.9/ 79' S T R E E T �__- .✓391d%5'f # -. ..__ .__- __- _.. ____-___ G EZe per TiOCt No. 310/ O c 6'9gT\s± ?oi AC62J301/FM CTL 0009483 05-18-93 5:00 PM 1993-94 CITY/DISTRICT PARCEL LIST PAGE 614 DISTRICT NUMBER: 057A NEWPORT BEACH CITY PARCEL NO/ OWNERS ZIP PARCEL NO/ OWNERS ZIP PARCEL NO/ OWNERS ZIP TRA NAME AND ADDRESS CODE TRA NAME AND ADDRESS CODE TRA NAME AND ADDRESS CODE 427-121-03 SHATTUCK, WILLIAM N TR 427-121-10 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 427-121-17 KATCHERIAN, GEORGE Y 07-061 4242 CAMPUS DR ND 07-061 %KOLL-KW 07-061 4253 BIRCH ST NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 4343 VON KARMAN AVE NEWPORT BEACH, CA S2660 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 427-121-04 SHATTUCK, WILLIAM N TR 427-121-11 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 427-121-18 WEST, COLIN C TR 07-061 4242 CAMPUS DR ND 07-061 DKBERT ASSOC 07-061 16781 MITCHELL NORTH NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 P 0 BOX 350644 IRVINE, CA 92714 • FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33335 427-121-05 JACKSON, SCHUYLER W TR 427-121-12. IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 427-121-20 LAWRENZ, DONALD R TR 07-061 4300 CAMPUS OR #100 07-061 DKBERT ASSOC 07-061 4201 BIRCH ST NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 P 0 BOX 350644 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33335 427-121-06 IRVINE CO 427-121-13 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 427-121-21 LAWRENZ, DONALD R TR 07-061 %KISSINGER, RICHARD K TR 07-061 DKBERT ASSOC 07-061 2001 TAHUNA TER 3300 OCEAN BLVD P 0 BOX 350644 CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625 CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33335 427-121-07 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL CO 427-121-14 PACIFIC UNION ASSN 427-121-22 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 07-061 %NATIONAL DEPOSITORY 07-081 SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS 07-061 %LAWRENZ, DONALD R TR P 0 BOX N-3937 2586 TOWNGATE ROAD 2001 TAHUNA TER NASSAU WESTLAKE VILLIAGE, CA 91361 CORONA DEL MAR, CA 92625. BAHAMAS • 427-121-08 IRVINE CO 427-121-15 4321 BIRCH PARTNERS LTD 427-131-01 IRVINE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 07-061 COMMERCIAL & INDUST ENT 07-061 9582 HAMILTON AVE 07-061 %HIGGINS, L BOYD TR 7 COVE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92646 %THE ALISON COMPANY IRVINE, CA 92714 P 0 BOX 8040 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 427-121-09 BANK, COMMERCE CDN FOR 427-121-16 LEWIS, DONALD 427-131-02 D C WEST 07-061 GOUVIS, NICHOLAS 07-061 PHOTOMETRIC SYSTEMS 07-051 %HERTZ CORP %1ST PENSION 440 VIA LIDO NORD 225 BRAE BLVD 1507 W YALE AVE NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 ATTN: TAX DEPT ORANGE PARK RIDGE, NJ 07656 ATT: MARILYN DORTCH, CA 92667 N • ORANGE COUNTY ADDRESS REGIST14 1992.93 EDITION! OAtF IM YAL-!D OR[R xx PxONf re. SIP YSI fX IMfiPAYlft�/NIX II JA [O7 f/lf% /A✓. IN/l5 %M Yuf(-IR BIRCH ST --,•, 1/lf PAK/MS W/fJ IM Pdt•M BIRCH ST MILIAN;amE3f y .NJ---^•---••---••^^^• }pp 1405 S M IM'sABl. 92660 PI 32014243t•VS 19C of 29000 12s53 1/17/92 IYEe3i40$f2 1 ^• 5IR/17 ,26&Y°8b 39ss ° 41ob"v°bk61S"6a r:8uea.fA M wa ssA LMcfC . •-»--••»- Wl5/9$- ]975 re hNE FRg V N°E°A•5EE f11Of MDA[SS 7i01{21�---------------------- 131.15 M e5 29000 II I40 9/IW92 914.073.9E NFRtIRI.DA(_ 163.093.91 [ D --^ R01 { 65 I1140 9/18/92 1t09 $SA 1I V of R E w•s v N E A•511 SItO3 ADMFSS f27•�71, 111 29000 9/727ee.616199.92 _ »_•••„» 6/21/91 t1E/10 {001 re <N MPFR AL 0 1 y Ap 710.11b•10 •••'•^••--•••--"-' f023 re [tf BMpt In 92677 fn J201t27�131-IJ EIE N 29000 9600 Ii/77/91 0! 1f10 SSA FMM.Fv 9/24/92 pt 'SI4 6LVN NIWFL.CA ^�-^-•FM 128,401-87 �YAE [ppL �t 9 Hp 569.IOW1 I41, SSA WAi.��A ••»•-•� S/t9/a I 4043 re INIYIi.IDIE,fU43 6SIIfN Sr•NFMORi OEAtN.CA 9t660 IL 7201/t7�i11.12 SSS 05 2W00 )100 u1.1]7p°pCbS Y n hw3} 4<p E y}66 { (p Wot/1v 1415 s u j1i7i BI _••••» ....„^ I4b.036.90 ks l6wL DEYELOPRENi fOM•uu YON MMSW AW-NESVORt°IEA° 32p1{21`I Sf.il fli .M f.t9o.s17-- 1028 a16/116 9 f I 4063 re AY I A % (p5 f/Ot/79 Ii1S 5 SA €OR YIR41 ��pDp IIEx IEYfLor[N1(OAP!!43 Y0N PMAW AK•MR fING O e 3201{t)�131-pf0 6b7 W 751.a2.1a $/29/01 12b Oehlb 4101 re R INE hWfiRlAl f EX ppp� 1119 S 01 •-»•- 92660 IA Po06ft7-171.0E bbi 14i 1.2A Slbt-1 13/i3At I6I9161.15 ti19 3$A V xrMD-- 1/20/e7 12b=ij011 f200 re 16ofN°NVFSIPMOMpIyE�fEN En oR.9"T eufH.CA pI ) rip.x M, •-••-•• pip 4201Ee1RfN SI�NFVORi eEAtN.fA 9t660 S .....'7�121-20 291 67 51900 17005 3/0$/9t1 d27.t16�9z R22 5 SA D-Lll 9/2N17 1fI'E+�81 1423 S M /LOBES+� ••^• 4217 re eWtxi OOMLD n IR 92625 iN 5169121-I21-27 CIS VAt•lMD 765.537.93 x E v a/O2/a 12bIM; 4001 WARN IFR•C.CAR DEL MR.CA } 2e1.2d3°1i 1426 S fA 1426S6' pip pp ffi11{ IL 5169427-12f•II Ill 61C 29"0 716R-I 7/09/91 77 ft26 3 a ••-^fill 5/2Wa 151117E-11 B19 fb bF51KCOL NSEg1�,16711L111ICMFLL MMtx•1••^1!^VIM.tA if27 SSA 14V sFa 92660 [f J169 3 f01f 66 791{ 12/11/91 /01!21 1°i R77 S e •••-•• 4$dl re Mi(NERIM 6FMLE Y - - •- !/OS/19 i11.Ott-It MILMRIM.MIOHnrIE 4.4263 BIRO"SI•MS91 r BEAMCA 87-121•I7 f07 29 _•_ p ` OOppppPI 4so s u ia" e •----•^ ppippp q01 re VIS DOxLLD 92660 W 1161427-121.16 111 29000 9t09 7/1 S/9t 21{9{?1fD4Dpp1ppi0i �-^»--»-•_»• WOf/17 121�6{P11 !60 YIA LIDO NBYD•NEWOIf BEACH CA ^^. ypSt 5f9.029•IS 1fSi SSA µ1115,p S pip tlq 926f6 CR 5169{t7-121-15 66i °1 290DO 115114 t/01I92 6 ••••••11 e2 S/29/17 1zI�I64°1S 4121 re b31!NwIA5�56, 11NLIRl B[AfN.fA �_ y 00II l ODpppp 1431 S fA--fD{Ri E 9/O1191 int re SFYENIX DAfMDVFnIi Sif•2616 10WWIE AWD•W3il.U---I JR $169/27-121-14 {t1 69 2900014a2 R/31...MA IM _ 17t,e37-92 _ •------•^'^ 9/2W15 itJS f SA wEw. •••-_-^ _ 1 ppODpp 92799 CA $1a9{21-121-13 SS 126.71f•)1)5 ••,_.,.-,._......_.. 5129/B7 1211pL9-B7 4161 re E 27LEBOX 2S21-- C•f iTA•»AM.CA 9/29/917.t92.61f�11 1431 3$A I43 , 1 0t 1.".{3-12z-IS 95i 3106t ^._.-_„..._•••--• 3/11/90 16I'161°81 /f00 re M E°p°:ENTER N EPJXA•SEE slim A°DAESS 94 IS 143, SSA RODRI LvI __ _ _ 9t799 fR na9 RaDRlap •»^ 4401 re RY xE MOSIP Al [pVLfX {27.121.12 1'S1 66 21116 R0.2t7-)t ^ 1107 1/0J/9t 126.ISS•17 ISLIf DIMy, LEOPLF•P 0 BOX t52I1•fM1A AW.fA 11 11 -. _- copyright 1992 TRW-RE! coprBght 1992 TRWAREDI NnIDRwldf 1.800.345.7334 _ All Rlpnu flean.a All fliphl,fle,ene0 ORANGE COUNTY ADDRESS REGISTER 1992-93 EDITION axFn xvE PxGlt W. SIP YSI EX IMfI/Mff[ % E1I CA AM S°01111VIF SPAafAW W IMYK 1R BIRCH ST•.__ i / 1N/�S !M'Y-iR BIRCH ST Mn/Aen°°"EJ,._._._s.^^.-_-.•-•---„-••--"�_1"_'» 9/2ass Ifft SSA IOtt, -•--•-^••^•-»"-'•-pp-p7• <RJ re RY NF NDu31A A tOEL°EX 92799 In $169t27!i21-If Eti a 29000 121.971-IS ._ Will., 131.171°SS ESLI(•DE.VMAY.4EDk4E•P b 90X 25211•SMrA AM.CA -•� »..._._pf {)pip 29f1 B -• W02/17 0e pppl R6S re �I t�M BOf4�egiFiPM1 BEACH CA 9t651 PI 51a94t7ii 11^»�I1 _Sei dE 29000 6291 WJO/921.)If�111-92 1147 5 SA IR[O[R 11 k.94J-li } 1 tff{ SSA IWMU- ...,_..„_._ ff01^•-•IE 4pE6�DVq!'D �,•Lpxp IFAtN(A 90e06 Sf69/27 11h^ 1•0 Qki 61 1.OA 112/0 1/20/921.%iE E$4 s/i:n7 n1°o�tS°Bf qq11 e/:vn uu s$A °R L. 690 re A (IHJFR NEW MI R 92660 Pi Po11444f•I22•b/ bf1 LIA 9,917.257-19 gviMLA, »-'•"� iv2O/ve .et9•e7 �49(l4 Y(N XAMSWypAMYt awomr MAEN.(� }•6�p••t•,^.._.._._..__.--)«-p.7 1514 s sA^ffl:s ••-�•-_„^--»^» »ypppppp YUIIDI ,b PMI X:x1P•{611 i[lL[A AVE SORE I NEVPOR P0173f{S•If1.11 11k 1.796.17{-10 ._ 9/15/17 itb�I�l•11 <611 re IM iF N f „„••»^•^�_•„ ti/Id/IS 1SIS SSA JS -•••-.._.^^••-„-•_••^»_ _ t[ UU 926te P1 P0076 I b1 f�S f./A f,/69.{97.19 _... N06/92 labfb6b°$b 4601 re StSIAA1GduIdB SOIIE L-1•COS1A MSA.CA 4{S-21- Isis S SA AULDM p( } p� p7 1.117.916.7S MLOM ••-^•»^-^•7/i)/V 12I1168°16 4901 re 3YCNr BII(N IEVEI�OPREEW"CO•4901 BIRCH ST'KWOR lFAfn,fAR 9/f0445 1t1.12 lei 1519 5$A 91 Lv-• ••-•-•^••••••^ f910 re ALIIaW1A AiX(OAP 926a0 EA P0060 1{ 2.OU.159.91 �•,^..-.• 4/05/I1 115.709.11 NESIMUVJII XDIO./700 VON XAMM AVEI.K"1 BREACH, f4S-Iy31-OS 16i 1.7A 1522 S SA I511f' •-•-••••--»•^.... q�pp - 92660 PI 17624t1-I31.01 $bi 27948 4,194.971.09 1525 SSA--pq--pn 10te e/!0/91 Ub3000.92 4910 YN'1 EAAµy AY[•HFVPoAi/IAIN.fA } ) 10/13/78 1:11 6A0/11 I 0 4911 re TBIRCNLEIRfEEPP�E6r1ES•4911 BIRCH SVNEWOAI BEACH.CAO 97/040341.13 101 777,1f6.79 ^.--._.. 1,d281b AE _ y�� ?/wn11.211°16141s ts:a ssA R""R{1 -•-- ^•••••••-•'»'•» pip- 4921 re 1fEMMEO°EP�ER11f5 b100°(OIIFOt IOW OR 1109•SACKUINI0C6A 9/40445 141-10 161 ••-•••-'•••-"'-'• 5/21/11 12.061-61 ..._.•-••--••^•••^•••'• 1SJ0 SSA 1530 I 9t660 [A 9740 M 79 1(AMOI 1/I7/la .........»..... 2/2s/91 4931 re 11ECHINENE WINF1f931 BIRCH Sr•AFWWi BEAOH,CA-••^-.......-• 44J-1U-01 bit T I6911 pARALF 7s71 s{7eppaa �••............ 1 t0.t57-/7 -•^-----_„_ » --•^•••'•••••'-NN11 tln2179t.313r06t•10 16m $SA 10E t; •••••••••••••••••-••»•••""»••••••• $001 AN pAM PLAt6 ID 90107 IR 9a6f45•I41-16 b1t _._„_....._.... 110E 7/17/17 171,27t-17 IJfxSEN.JAIX•I72 AIYO ALJD CMAL�lO10 B[AfNCfA--•••„�..„-••-^•^•...._W..„_........- 9/25/92 160E SSA p 0 e •-••- »7/73/11 0)0 i SOIs re• ^^�7� �t�(H5 ^••-•• 7t711 t0 PO/tS{/S-Eti•SI lS1 1.500.000.9E _•Y,^•......... 11I.1�1~11 SAYINGS 253E OWCHI DA•IRY,NE.(A 1/21/11 1605 SSA 4P°w'1/• .....-_•-----•^•._..^�5"Ay_('__..__............... „92eft•Iq 10125.•^^.__•__•...•._.._.»..--..-/2 1.5a0.16M11 -.-.•--...------i:iie/ei••--'•^•- son re 1vbiAlkl�b b"I0X ISEdq°QWOR•^i•BEAf".(A... - 4ff-ltl-Zb 14C_ pip --.._....OF 111.02be7 „-------920a0 PI S PO7t29l0•b0.4IE bsi _ -609 SSA i6a� ..._.....__........_._»..._..... » f_..t..4.._r,._..._ .^.......................t....PT._..„_....__.»_.__...._q.1 994.E 24.0E 5/29/17 1 pp I 5120 re SA%fEN AL IBAI50.411b"IIIfN Si SUITE 2c0•HEWO9t 11�11M°.tA POIf29!_0.10•fbb _kfi •--•-•••••••^-•2 111.12E-17 1 s(opn1 •--»�•�•1^uy_0p0_p0p• 1610 SSA f01a _......_......_..»...__»........ .._.--...__»...._...t_.....p[ »....__ t ••-�••^••9t660 HO„ POtf29l0.b0.fII^ 167 5/12/921.tabS060.91 (Oli fR9//7 11E°D2b�1i SIfO re S CEVI[IM11"13 MEWORi EFA MA N 11 ,- c9pvnpm 199E '1R11V Ftl Copyright 1992 TRWeREDI NatiDgwiD.1.800.345.7334 All Rightt flestrye0 All flight,Ral@N.d ORANGE COUNTY ADDRESS REGISTER A'�7' 199E-93 EOItiIXE•� EIP YSI[A IMfi ffl �XEpM [Ot WE%MRµ�f YIR BIRCH ST IIR VAL•/D W/IfIM YM•AP BIRCH ST. ............. »......._.._..._.-.._.........„..-_ p .20,97•• S• % 51 a0 IB Y N S •- 92660 EA t POIf2970.10•III S9P ••••••••••••.•121,E34°Se 6°ie'rI eIA1h 11 bAprEI e�uxaA _ } ..._........................... oveo„•-i'o r Sa1s................................_... [E FIEV[x f3N AYF•xfWONt OFAfI1,EA660 PI POIOIt45.161.01 111I,,OA.•• .... . 3$160 re XOl FNI R N[ -- ... .. 19 t___ __ __ __ . ..... ..................•-•^•• ••• rrCNf N0, lIP V51 [• IRAfI l01 Ol0(k LIP IR ROgI!1 f9 II•I •OAIf IIR VAI•ID DµR NAV NRffl M1 I•7 N ... ....(11f PM•/AY ..... lA. IVf•IN 9na r7/Q/'f/ S7 xul J.w� .rnvnl . .. ., .� CPO ilr •!::';tF "'•a •ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FOR* i' ;I ;•.;,++rtali.r.l; , City of Newport Beach.planning Department Trzpp�-ta-,s�[UQy 8 1 t, $p;-r ,` t,fY;,{I r•.: v 3300 Newport, Boulevard, Newport Beach,, CA 92663• = 7 ';i •, 1 ,�+" ..ah, s,i,lr .. . v.i it (714) 644-3225 A. General information �j - ',;; . ! ,•l iIl tf. 1, Applicant/Agent: Q/ �T �} L ASSOC I�T�S _ Phone:PbD7/o�Jl�p(r�D li t ,, , ,. ..Alto Jol-fN W Jc'r}•t� II =. ' Address: 1137 N• McDoWEl�l- 5LVb reTrALU� I ' GPt ;I,I,,•2,.I;, Property,,lOwner: AL-Am0rL{ ��rT ��`t� C16TP- Phone: Sol ; re l:lr;� •G✓ XI 'r{ SI1�•-vl J{�IT'� 17a0 .. r �I� 1 'li r,,,,• ! . Address: . ,;� ,+'' , '•'t ', .• Ft• (�cuD���f•L� � mil_ 33301 t'' p . 8. r" ,P>ioiect'Description I „ r, .,Please attach the following materiale' for, the projects • Vicinity map , 1. Plans drawn to scale r i 1 f ;.M1, s„ • Proposed, revisions to zoning map Ij At least 3 different site photos mounted i� I; 'I' n;i' ='1• =ti n i land ,text using underling and on 8 1/2 X 11 cardboard with a key map I• st-nikeeub notation, if applicable showing the photo locations and ' ` i• j, „ ,,, ;; ;, + • ' • • direction o£ view 1., ^Project name: f' +. :,•,,, • + +'t rI �I' 131P�. STET f*)�tU��T > Gi� Cat ,t ! 2. , ' Project locations 3. Assessor's parcel 0: d 2T 12J- 2- OOt- 4. Permit application 0: I „� ` 5a:' Proposed uses fuI-tt ' CR2 5Talz�i ^• mAig-rr=- AtJ � GILIT`1 i j I' L ,! 61140 'I ' 5b.. project size (dwolling units, gross floor area, etc. ) rL 5e. :vite size: �� 5d. Building heights F 6. Existing land use designations: Zoning: General Plan: i •p ;,�; 'f it Specific Plan: •LCP: i'" � ';{,r•!e �^. , ,. .., .. ...r. . , . • • • . • • • +,, !,(;� ,'' " .,4,. +� '�•r'a•,��;1'�t.�•Li.^' •;1.i)n•"i..i;, 1,,;. i S 1 t@ul'�, ! ;� '•`1' I:', l�! ;7.r•yPrevious governmental'approvals: " Other governmental approvals required: :."r'Federal: State: r (. Regional: Local: , I, I 9.;,.Begin construction: 3/l Estimated occupancy: it A (date) (date) ' •t. 'C 'Potential Environmental Effects it .: ,.I,��iil.q�y','•.r.,ti:r./b4r 1''1�..r .,.+ '.f ,l ,�,th® tionis not t + •;;, ;On' admeparate`1page, please provide' the following in rm tion. t ',"applicable,, indicate Not applicable "None None { ,�® firthAt ... 1 N��Yp �; ';, 'r'�• ' 'f' 'Please describe the earthwork that will`"f�e required for the proftpp Include grading al, Irl7 'prt, tkantities�" 'and 'the' 'location" of, borrow 'or`''stockpile sites; ' antN routes; if, ,Fcapplicable': -Describe':any ' geotechnical J.or' 'soi'ls'i investigations t''EKat+l�have,,t been:, (a1. ,,,,•,J,conduaed.i, ,Include'exhibits showing"existing and proposed topography, 'retaining walls,• II .and, erosion control devices. 1 ' i t As 17. ?"' 'Describe any 'air' emissiona or odors that could result from the`project; .including';; emissions during construction, and any measures that are proposed, to reduce these tlb+•II ;; r b:f r, emissions. •gnJ;ti•,r�•tuYli,,,� . +.,ru:•r:.=,r ' ll'I; r" +{: r?K' II' •alp6'3 Water. ''i' 'l:! •: ' , c r .. rr!:vl Ln •1 I Describe existing and proposed site drainage, and measures that will be employed;to .reduce erosion and prevent contaminated runoff from entering the storm.drain 'system, .1 ""groundwater or surface water. Describe any changes that could occur in groundwatezl�� i -•' ' ^'• •-levele•or bodies of surface water. Is the project located in ,a•flood hazard zone? J 'I 4. - Biological Resources to-be removed.' 'Td'entifygany fish or wildlife that inhabit the site. " • '11 ' Describe the existing vegetation on the site, and an trees or large shrubs that are ,, , { I.: r r i, , ;�. 5. Noise y Describe any sources of noise that'impact the site,. and any'noise-generating equipment; that will be utilized on the property, either 'during construction or after occupancy.,i, y What means to reduce noise impacts on surrounding properties or building occupants ara{" ; proposed? I: ' :a i'• ' ,,4t„ 1 i ;6.! Light `and Clare., i i"""""':""'Describe exterior lighting that is proposed for•-the •project• and. means that will be utilized to reduce light and glare impacts on surrounding properties. '7'.1"'Des—Land be:'a) "the existing land uses and structures on the project site and on'ad acent: , • { � La d Use i .., j. with existing land use plans and regulations for parcels; b) the projecC's conformance4 •' II the' property; 'and c) its compatibility with surrounding land uses. 8. Public Health and- Safety Identify any aspects of the project that could present a risk to public health due to p normal operations, or due *to an explosion or the release of hazardous ''substances ,j , (inclu�ling,.,but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event ,,Lof an,accident or, spill'. Is there any possibility that the' site could'be contaminated ' yI due, •to,,previous, uses or dumping? if so, what measures aYe proposed Co eliminate the hazard or contamination? I, • , s 9, emulation/Housing/Employment a, If -the project is residential, please explain how the project will comply with g P P .. g ' the affordable housing policies contained in the Housing Element of the General Plan, and the' average household 'size 'ex ected: �i -•b. If the'-project'-is•commercial, industrial, or institutional, please, identify the II ; tenants and/or uses and the estimated-number of employees. t 10. Transportation/Circulation/Parkinr • Please describe how the project will comply with parking regulations, and identify any that are proposed as part o£ the Ili: changes or improvements to the circulation system I; project. !I• ll'. _Public-Services/Utilities public ' Please ,identify whether adequate capacity currently exists for„the ,£ollowinP i .......* rvices and utilities: If expansion is needed explain how it'will be accomplished. f capacity you have received from service Please attach any written confirmation o ' providers. •I Communications Systems • Electrical power...Fire protection • Natural•gas..• Parks/recreational facilities : Police,,protection •,I Schools Sewer systems or septic tanks Storm water drainage systems �� 'I - •• Solid,waste and disposal ••i .� •�' • 12. Aesthetics 'i Describe whether the project could potentially obstruct any scenic vista or view open Could public,;,or create 'an 'aesthetically offensive site open to public view. , ,I• �`; !' • the project block an private views? { y P '• •p 13, Cultural and Historic Resources ,A, : :Please,;identify any known,archaeological or paleontological resources that exist on the T. !Jns'�,,!' ,•-site.;.' project result in any adverse physical, or aesthetic effects to ,any building, structure, or object having,historical, cultural, or religious significance? i Certification �^rIi•certify.that the• statements .Eurnished above and in the attached exhibits are,correct and 'i •1complete;,to 'the best of my knowledge and belief.. . I am the legal owner.of the property that I , II; is the subject of this application or have been authorized by the owner to act on,his behalf t regarding this application. I further acknowledge that any false statements or information-• presented herein may result in the revocation of any approval or permit granted .on;the basis of, this information. ; ', ..nd•'I Uyt, , t.RxC'J f.,::C,.iS l.•,( , ,. . .. J• �.; .. j '. �fH"t �5"j , �\K-/r„"Soh.(, - 'R.�-}• l�� �• /�sSQ. ' Print name'of owner or representative gna ur Ii I',•, Date Date filed: _ Fee: Receipt No: ''By: �I• Rev. 12/91 f:\...\JD\FORMS\ENV-INFO. - -- August 30, 1993 Environmental Information Form Newport Beach Planning Department RE: ALAMO RENT A CAR FACILITY 4631 &4401 BIRCH STREET NEWPORT BEACH, CA C. Potential Environmental Effects 1. Minor site grading only. Site is essentially flat and will remain as close to existing as possible. 2. Automobile emissions only. Site will be parking and service area for rental cars. 3. Exist site is essentially flat. Currently paved parking areas drain to storm sewer. New facility to match existing grades as closely as possible with drainage to storm sewer. 4. Site primarily paved with landscaped areas. Site plan shows existing trees to be removed. No fish or wildlife inhabit the site. 5. Noise generated will be from automobile circulation, car wash operating and air compressor operation. Perimeter fencing and landscaping will reduce noise to surrounding properties. Air compressor located in enclosed equipment room. 6. Site lighting shown on site plan. Low level lighting used on street fronts. Typical' parking lot lighting levels to be provided. Fixtures to direct light down or away from property lines. 7. Existing and surrounding land uses area commercial—office on three sides, Sheraton Hotel across Birch Street. Proposed use is compatible with surrounding uses and is an allowed use for the site zoning. 8. Minimal risk due to automobile fueling area. Fueling are to meet all state, federal-and local codes. No public use of fueling area. 9.a. N/A 9.b. New facility will be maintenance/car parking facility for Alamo Rent a Car. Alamo to have fifteen to twenty employees per shift. ROBERT H. LEE & ASSOCIATES. INC. ti Page 2 • . August 30, 1993 Environmental Information Form 10. Visitors/employee parking area will meet all state, federal and local codes. Circulation on and off the site will be improved. Visitor and employee access will be through single drive. Separate entry and exit only drives will be provided for rental cars. 11. Adequate capacity exists for all public services and utilities. 12. No scenic vistas or open views exist. Four foot high masonry wall or six foot high chain link fence with slots, as well as perimeter landscaping screen all car storage areas. 13. No known archaeological or paleontological resources exist. No building structures having historical, cultural or religious significance exist. ROBERT H. LEE 6 ASSOCIATES. INC. RIVM9418.101ENVIROMM C.l ' 4 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLAN REVIEW REQUEST Date: October 13. 1993 X ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN) X TRAFFIC ENGINEER FIRE DEPARTMENT PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT. _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _PARKS & RECREATION _POLICE DEPARTMENT _MARINE SAFETY GRADING APPLICATION OF: Robert H. Lee and Associates FOR: Traffic Study No. 89 DESCRIPTION: Request to approve a Traffic Study to allow the construction of a 9,000 square foot automobile rental facility including administrative offices, automobile maintenance facilities, fuel facilities and a surface automobile storage area. LOCATION: 4361 and 4401 Birch Street REPORT REQUESTED BY: October 20, 1993 COMMISSION REVIEW: November 4, 1993 COMMENTS: 7</OT A<c /Ii�� r%✓� �� SO.�i�/�c �Ic Signature: Date: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLAN REVIEW REQUEST Date: October 13, 1993 ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION' X PUBLIC WORKS-DEPA-RTMENTZ PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RED) X TRAFFIC ENGINEER _FIRE DEPARTMENT _PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT. _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _PARKS & RECREATION _POLICE DEPARTMENT _MARINE SAFETY GRADING APPLICATION OF: Robert H. Lee and Associates FOR: Traffic Study No. 89 DESCRIPTION: Request to approve a Traffic Study to allow the construction of a 9,000 square foot automobile rental facility including administrative offices, automobile maintenance facilities, fuel facilities and a surface automobile storage area. LOCATION: 4361 and 4401 Birch Street REPORT REQUESTED BY: October 20, 1993 COMMISSION REVIEW: November 4, 1993 COMMENTS: This site is located in Statistical Area 14 and designated for Administrative Professional and Financial Commercial land use by the C&s General Plan Land Use Element The maximum floor area ratio for this site is 0 5/0.75. Automobile rental facilities are permitted use under the APF land use category. A traffic study has been prepared for the subject project and it indicates that the traffic generated by the proposed project would not adversely affect the Q4's circulation system. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan auidelines. Signature: oLu Date: I�118Ig3 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLAN REVIEW REQUEST Date: October 13, 1993 2C ADVANCE PLANNING DIVISION X PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT X PLANS ATTACHED (PLEASE RETURN) X TRAFFIC ENGINEER _FIRE DEPARTMENT _PLANS ON FILE IN PLANNING DEPT. _BUILDING DEPARTMENT _PARKS & RECREATION _POLICE DEPARTMENT _MARINE SAFETY GRADING APPLICATION OF: Robert H. Lee and Associates FOR: Traffic Study No. 89 DESCRIPTION: Request to approve a Traffic Study to allow the construction of a 9,000 square foot automobile rental facility including administrative offices, automobile maintenance facilities, fuel facilities and a surface automobile storage area. LOCATION: 4361 and 4401 Birch Street REPORT REQUESTED BY: October 20, 1993 COMMISSION REVIEW: November 4, 1993 COMMENTS: _ChP TnaL �U X�C�Y� ,QXe^ l�tn � �,. � �ntGk(,i A.v�c.e., Ly"F('�n ¢� f na�i'� ��aa.e•`c+1a. Signature: �l e� Date: D NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ' Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach will bold a public hearing on the application of Robert Lee and Associates for Traffic Study No. 89 on property located at 4361 and 4401 Birch Street. The pplication includes a request to approve a traffic study to allow construction of a 9.000 square feet of car rental office maintenance builgine fueling and surface automobile storage area NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that a Negative Declaration has been prepared by the City of Newport Beach in connection with the application noted above. The Negative Declaration states that, the subject development will not result in a significant effect on the environment. It is the present intention of the City to accept the Negative Declaration and supporting documents. This is not to be construed as either approval or denial by the City of the subject application. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the Negative Declaration and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92659-1768 (714) 644-3225. Notice is hereby further given that said public hearing will be held on the 4th day of November 1993, at the hour of 7-30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time and place any and all persons interested may appear and be heard thereon. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. For information call (714) 644-3200. Harry Merrill, Secretary, Planning Commission, City of Newport Beach. NOTE: The expense of this notice is paid from a filing fee collected from the applicant. ' � ADVANCED CIVIL �, Civil & Transportation Engineering 1 TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT ALAMO Rent-a-Car Located at i` 4361 & 4401 Birch Stree ��Q4tOFE3s��� ' gROFESS1py Newport Beach, California y� xo@��; SQz�ry4 ZA Bgygo W �1� No. 1'�6'�1.�7 �� x �3 r Exp.J „o l-1 o 4 790 N� r £gyp fa *17 FOR , 9Jfi'9A s ti Op CALVE ' fgrE pF co1`V,o, City of Newport Beach 3300 Neport Boulevard ' Newport Beach, California 92658 Project AC-1001-11 ' October 25, 1993 Phone: (7 ) 6 1-2 6 14 2 Sky Park Circle Drive Suite B, Irvine, Califomia 92714 Fax: (714)261-0449 76 17911 y lil 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION I ' 2. EXISTING CONDITION 1 3. STUDY INTERSECTIONS 4 4. COMMITTED PROJECTS 4 5. REGIONAL GROWTH FACTORS 4 6. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 5 6.1 Trip Generation 5 6.2 Trip Distribution 7 6.3 Traffic Assignment 7 I 7. ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS 7 S. INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION(ICU) ANALYSIS 14 9. SITE ACCESS 15 • 10. SUMMARY 16 I•' I LIST OF TABLES I •, TABLE PAGE 1 Study Intersections 4 2 Trip Generation and Peak Period Trips 6 ' 3 Study Intersections One Percent Analysis Summary 13 1 • 4 t 01 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE •' 1 Location Map 2 2 Site Plan 3 3 Project Trip Distribution- Inbound 9 ' 4 Project Trip Distribution - Outbound 10 5 Peak Period Project Traffic AM/PM - Inbound 11 6 Peak Period Project Traffic AM/PM- Outbound 12 • 4 01 APPENDICES APPENDIX •' A Committed Projects List B Regional Growth Factors ' C One Percent Analysis Work Sheets D ICU Worksheet • I� TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ' 1. INTRODUCTION •' The purpose of this report is to evaluate the system wide traffic impacts of the Alamo Rent-a-car project proposed to be located at 4361 &4401 Birch Street in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project site is a parcel of almost 2.66 ' acres abutting Birch Street across from Sheraton-Newport Hotel. The proposed • project will serve as a rental car maintenance/storage facility. The site is being designed to have a maximum storage capacity of 300 vehicles. However, it is anticipated that typically there will not be more than 100 cars kept at any single day at this site. The project will have a fueling area and a fuel storage tank, car wash bays, maintenance building and an office. All the support facilities such as car wash bays are used only for the rental cars, and there will not be any public use of them. Figure 1 shows the project location in the regional context. ' Currently there is an existing vacant office building in the site which is ahnost 6,000 square feet. The site currently has two driveway accesses onto Birch Street. The proposed project will remove both existing driveways and replace them with three new ones. The specific site plan of the proposed project showing the entrances and exits to Birch Street is shown in Figure 2. ' 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project has access only through Birch Street which is currently striped for two traffic lanes in each direction separated by a 10' wide dual turn median. The major ' thoroughfares providing access to the project are: MacArthur Boulevard, Campus Drive, Bristol Street and Jamboree Road. The area surrounding the project site is • well developed and is mostly office/commercial type land use. There is a well ' developed system of arterials and collector streets serving the traffic needs of this area. The proposed project is at close proximity to the Orange County's John Wayne Airport. All the major intersections in the area are signalized with exclusive turn lanes for right and left turn traffic. The access for the regional trips • made to and from the project will be through 405, 73 and 55 freeways. 1 1 1 � .1 vU S� qos O 1 N Plow Ik. 1 �ol� gym' i 1 Location Map PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 1 Figure 1 ADVANCED CIVIL M ) I { I I I � ) . �• � ----- ----------- ---------J PPEP AREA CMnnSn b ENTRANCE EXIT b TO BE RE OKODG IZOOO GALLON ' DNOFA_CR No RAGE TANK STORAGE TANK \ / • ' W/ ING mx+REA CA SOXXf CANDP. q 1 'Y VACUUM / ) xEn fi-0 HIGH CRAIN TINN ' I 500 G+L RENTAL STATION / ) FENCE MN CREY 1LASnc SEATS EASnNG}-0" LUBC CUBE L—J HICH WOOD FENCE — CARWASH/MAINT. TO BE REMOVED DISPENSER BUILDING 1 (TYP 2) CAR STO AGC AREA _ \\ CUSTOUER ENTRANCE ' I/ %/ PUNIER m_ .-•.ve� _�_�- - P( MR •• / ® VSTI.GF H BLOCK E TO BE REMOVED I ALL / \� 1 3 SO "MR ELEC / TUN M N T RECATE AND DGER TEETH E RETURN ' CAR ENTRANCE+nD Estt ) � • � EUPEOYEE tr I _ WS TOR \ PARKING 'DACES) El101NG GATE RENRN UnES — (+9$PACES) // •1\ - j26j20 fig' / 18 6 t9' 0' S' IB A U' BLOC FENCE EY yLli-cACE ¢c (J V EHTEA � � V EAc AETTAT W Of EXIT • CAA NEW DRIVEWAY v Cw s SITE PLAN HE.DRIVEWAY TO REVAIN vJ•G G- + ,vv ~ .- EXISnNG SHAREO TO RE. TREES _ DRIVENGY TO REMpIH µ+u0 uQHwErvr SIGN EXISTING SIOCWALA f'NIGH GREY$FLIT-FPCf (K«.�i�GG -G•HI(�+) BLOCK FENCE EASTING DRIVEWAY TO NEW ORIvEWAY BE REMOVED(TYP OF 2) 436i AND 44MRT CH STREET BIRCH STREET NewaoRr eelE nc>i CA e� 0 10 M b 00 M NORM Z�N O O SITE PLAN =zo-o Project No. AC-1001-11 Figure 2 ADVANCED CIVIL 3 1 3. STUDY INTERSECTIONS Seven intersections were recommended by the City of Newport Beach Traffic ' Engineer for evaluation of the proposed project's impact on them. The study intersections are listed in Table 1. The project's traffic impacts on each of the �1 seven intersections were checked according to a trip distribution scheme approved by the City and based on the City's Administrative Procedures for Implementing the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. ' TABLE 1 1 I. MacArthur Boulevard @ Campus Drive 2. MacArthur Boulevard @ Birch Street 3. MacArthur Boulevard @ Jamboree Road 1 4. Campus Drive @ Bristol Street(north) 5. Campus Drive @ Bristol Street 1 6. Birch Street @ Bristol Street(north) 7. Birch Street @ Bristol Street 4. CONMTTED PROJECTS ' The City Traffic Engineering stuff provided a list of committed projects (meaning projects having had prior approvals) and their cumulative traffic volumes on the 1 seven study intersections. Although the committed projects are in the various phases of their development, their full traffic impact on the study intersections have been accounted for. The list of the committed projects and their traffic contribution to the seven intersections is given in Appendix A. 5. GROWTH FACTORS 1 The traffic volume growth rates for all the major access routes to the project were provided by the City's Traffic Engineering staff. Appropriate growth rates,were applied to establish, based on the previous year traffic counts, to obtain volumes for one year after the project opening. The growth rates used (as supplied by the ' City) are listed in Appendix B. 4 1 6. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS This study analyses the proposed projects traffic impact on the City's street network for the year 1995. The proposed project is scheduled to become operational in the summer of 1994. According to the City's Traffic Phasing ' Ordinance requirements, the projects impact is analyzed for one year after the anticipated occupancy. The following is a description of this report's approach and assumptions regarding Trip Generation, Trip Distribution and Traffic Assignment. 6.1 Trip Generation ' The proposed project is a rental car maintenance/storage facility designed with a maximum handling capacity of 300 vehicles. However, it is very unlikely that at any given single day the facility will reach its maximum capacity. According to the information provided to us by the project applicant no more than 100 cars will typically be stored at this site. ' Regardless of this fact, to accommodate the worst case scenario, full capacity utilization was assumed for the project. The trip generation rate and its accompanying peak periods trip factors were provided by the City according to a study done by Austin-Foust in October 1991 for the City to establish a range of trip generations for car rental facilities. The summary of ' the total daily trips generated by the proposed projects and the number of the inbound and outbound trips made during the peak periods are presented in Table 2. Although there is an existing 6,000 square-foot office building on this site, the City procedures do not allow for a traffic credit for an existing land use if ' it has been vacant for one year or longer. Therefore, the total generated trips of 696 will be used for the purposes of our analysis. ' As can be seen from the data, the project generates a total of 696 trips daily with 160 and 174 trips during the morning and the afternoon peak periods, respectively. I � 5 1 ■ TABLE 2 Trip Generation and Peak Period •' Total Number of Daily Trips = 300 spaces X 2.32 ADT/Space = 696 Trips Peak Periods Trips ' Peak Period AM 7:00 to 9:00 a.m. PM 4:00 to 6:00 .m.) ' Direction I In I Outj Total I In I Out I Total Peak-Hour Rates 0.13 0.10 0.23 0.13 0.12 0.25 Peak-Hour Trip 90 70 160 90 84 174 1 1 • 6 6.2 Trip Distribution ' The trip distribution of the project was done through a review of the existing land uses (generators and attractors) and with consultation with the City's Traffic Engineering staff. A major factor taken into consideration was the existence of John Wayne Airport at close proximity to the project site. Also the locations of major hotels in the area and larger size office complexes were taken into consideration. This facility is planned to be used as the storage/maintenance ' yard for Alamo Rent-a-car. The majority of the trips interaction will be between the site and John Wayne ' Airport. Shuttle vans will be bring customers from the Airport to the site for car pick ups. However, according to the information provided to us by the Project Architect, there will be no public drop off service at this location either during business hours or afterwards. All the drop offs will be at the Airport with the Alamo employees returning the cars to this site. The trip distribution scheme ' developed for the project is based on the facility operation and its interaction with other major attraction areas in the region. The trip distribution for the project is shown in Figures 3 and 4 for inbound and outbound trips, respectively. 6.3 Traffic Assignment The percentages established through trip distribution scheme were converted into actual traffic volumes for both a.m. and p.m. peak periods. These numbers are presented in Figures 5 and 6 for inbound and outbound traffic, respectively. ' 7. ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS According to the City's guidelines, one percent(1%) of the 2 1/2 hour a.m. and p.m. peak period intersection traffic volumes are used to evaluate if the project's corresponding 2 -Hour traffic volumes exceed or are less than the above volumes for all the approaches of the study intersections. If the project's volumes are less than the established one percent of the intersection volumes (including the adjustments for growth and committed projects,) for all the approaches, then the project is considered to have an insignificant traffic impact on the intersection. Otherwise, the projects traffic impact has to be analyzed for an intersection where project traffic exceeds the one percent of the intersection 7 i volume for all the approaches. Table 3 shows the summary of the one percent analysis. As observed from the analysis summary presented in table 3, three of the seven study intersections fail to meet the 1% test. At the intersections of •' MacArthur/Birch and MacArthur/Campus the projects traffic exceed the 1% of the intersection's traffic for both a.m. and p.m. peak periods. However, at the intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree the project's trafffic eceed the 1% of the ' intersection's traffic only during the p.m. peak period. Therefore, ICU analysis were performed for these intersections as will be discussed in Section 8. • • 8 I' � 1 U Not to Seale lie" a �. tl r N Irvine �3 i 1 Newport B ach �1 Trip Distribution - Inbound PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 Project Tr 1 Figure 3 ADVANCED CIVIL a 1 . Not to Seale 1 v� w ,g� K Irvine Newport B act i project Trip DistrftUon - Outbound Figure CT No. AC—4 01-11 F ADVANCED CIVIL ,o o ,ice i Not to Scale 9 OS 14/14 APWm Dr. �\ c y\h N Irvine Newport n ach Peak Hour Project Traffic PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 ' AM/PM (Inbound) Figure 5 ADVANCED CIVIL 11 v Not to kale Or • Q 7, a O� IB12 s r r ' 7 s f U x a Irvine 1 � r O ' Y Newport n acl� ' Desk Hour Project Traffic PROJECT No. AC-1001-11 AM/PM (Outbound) Figure 6 .' ADVANCED CIVIL r12 TABLE 3 ' STUDY INTERSECTIONS ONE PERCENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY Does the Intersection Satisfy One No. Study Intersection percent Analysis A.M. P.M. •' 1. MacArthur @ Campus No No 2. MacArthur @ Birch No No 3. MacArthur @ Jamboree Yes No 4. Campus @ Bristol (north) Yes Yes 5. Campus @ Bristol Yes Yes 6. Birch @ Bristol (north) Yes Yes 7. Birch @ Bristol Yes Yes "Yes" Implies that the project's traffic "DOES NOT EXCEED" the one percent of the intersection's traffic on all approaches • 13 8. INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION (ICU) ANALYSIS ' Since the intersections of MacArthur/Birch, MacArthur/Campus and MacArthur/Jamboree did not satisfy the I% analysis, further evaluation of the ' intersection operation and Level-of-Service (LOS) was needed through Intersection Capacity Utilization(ICU)methodology. ' 1993 traffic counts were adjusted(by incorporating 3% and 1% growth factors for 2 years only to the MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road traffic, respectively) ' to obtain 1995 tragic volumes. Also, the traffic from the Committed Projects, as provided by the City, were added to create a traffic condition at the intersection for "without the project" case. Then, the projects traffic was added to the 1995 traffic ' volumes to analyze the impact of the project at the Level-of-Service of this intersection. ' ICU analysis were performed for both a.m. and p.m. peak hours for the "with" and "without" project conditions for the intersection of MacArthur/Birch and MacArthur/Campus. However, the intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree was analyzed only for the p.m. peak hour when the I% test was not satisfied. The ICU worksheets are provided in Appendix D. The results of the ICU analysis are ' presented below: ' W/0 Project W/Proiect lntersection W. ICii V/C LQU MacArthur/Birch AM Peak 0.57 A 0.59 A PM Peak 0.72 C 0.73 C MacArthur/Campus AM Peak 0.66 B 0.67 B PM Peak 0.79 C 0.79 C ' MacArthur/Jamboree AM Peak -- -- --- -- PM Peak 0.93 E 0.93 E ' As can be observed from the data presented above, the project has minimal impact on the operation and the Level-of-Service (LOS) at these three intersections. The intersections of MacArthur/Birch and MacArthur/Campus are operating at reasonable and acceptable LOS with or without the project. The intersection of MacArthur/Jamboree will be at LOS "E" with or without the project. The project ' contributes I I and 14 vehicles to the soudrbound and northbound directions, respectively, at this intersection during the P.M. peak hours. Of these two ' 14 movements only the southbound thru is a critical movement. However the addition of project traffic does not change the v/c value for the intersections. ' 9. SITE ACCESS, PARKING AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION ' Access to site will be provide through three new driveways as shown on Figure 2. These new driveways will replace the two existing ones. All the three driveways will access to Birch Street. The geometric of Birch Street can accommodate these driveways safely. However, we recommend that the City conduct a sight distance study at this location, after the driveways are installed, to establish parking ' restriction zones to maintain adequate line of sights for the driveways. Also, the construction of the northerly driveway appears to require the relocation of an ' existing bus stop on Birch Street. The proposed site accesses are adequate for the proposed use of the site and the number of trips generated during the peak periods. Although the volumes at this time do not justify the installation of a traffic signal ' on Birch Street at the site access points. We recommend that the middle driveway be lined up with the entrance to Sheraton-Newport to allow for a future installation of such a device should it become warranted. ' In addition, due to the frequent use of this middle driveway (which is the only ' uncontrolled access to the site)by the shuttle vans, we recommend that the driveway and the internal parking circulation be modified to allow for a counter- clockwise circulation of the vans in the parking lot. The projecfs architect is also required to check tha adequacy of the clearance between the parking stalls and the turn corners for the size of vehicles expected to ' use the facility. This is again specially important due to the frequent use of the parking lot by oversized vehicles bringing customers from the Airport to the site. ' Our review of the site plan indicated that there are ample parking space for both the employees and the customers at die-site. Comparing the design capacity of 300 ' rental cars with the anticipated daily operation of no more than 100 cars at the site provides additional confidence level for the adequacy of parking. However the proposed site plan shows only one handicap parking which sould be increased to 2 ' designated handicap parking spaces. The proposed site plan, after incorporating the recommendations of this report, will provide for a smooth and safe internal circulation in the site and at its access points to the city street network. 15 I ' 10. SUMMARY ' 0 The project generates 696 daily trips with 3200 and 348 trips during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods (2%s-hour periods), respectively. ' 0 A total of seven intersections were analyzed. ' All intersections satisfy the one-percent analysis, except for the intersections of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street, MacArthur Boulevard and Campus Drive and MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road. ' 0 The intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Birch Street will operate at LOS A and C during a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, in year 1995, ' with or without project. ' 0 The intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Campus Drive will operate at LOS "B" and "C" during a.m. and p.m. peak hours, respectively, in the year 1995, with or without the project. ' The intersection of MacArthue Boulevard and Jamboree.Road will operate at LOS "E" during the p.m. peak hour, in the year 1995, with or without the project. The project has insignificant traffic impacts on the City's street network. ' 0 The installation of the northerly driveway requires the relocation of the ' existing bus stop on Birch Street. The main driveway (middle one) has to be lined up with the entrance to ' Sheraton-Newport to facilitate the installation of a future traffic signal, should one become warranted. Also this driveway needs to be moved northerly to allow a counter-clockwise circulation in the parking lot. Driveways spacing has to be adjusted to avoid any need for the relocation of ' the existing street lighting post There needs to be at least (TWO) 2 designated hanidcap parking spaces in ' the public parking lot in front of office. �I ' 16 No after business hours drop off service is proposed for this facility. However, if in the future such service is being considered, the impact of the controlled access gates on the on-street parking has to be evaluated and ' addressed to the City staff s satisfaction. • The project architect has to ensure that all the site plan features (such as 6' ' high chainlink fence and the monument sign) comply with the City standards and requirements. • • 17 1 Appendix A ;P 'o_ / DATct 59/1u745 REPOiT ON APPROVED PRCJECT�VOLJHES •;54 AMEND NO 1 MCARTHUR COURT J52z OCCUPANCY / 056 AMENDMENT NO 2 FORD AERC 7Uiz OCCUPANCY u57 CARVER GRANVILLE OFFICE 1C_2 OCCUPANCY !SS CORONA DEL MAF hUMES 1(:X GCCUPt NCY ., y hI6 CANYUA VILLA OPTS. L$]X vCC UP ANCY / --,•! 147C DOVE STREET li•:X OCCUPANCY j61 11U3 QUAIL STREET u OCCUPANCY ,)62 SUPERSEDED OOJX OCCUPANCY J03 ROLL CENTER TFP AMEND. 4A JGoX OCCUPANCY ,Et SUNSETTED OCCUPANCY Jos ROSAN'S DEVELOPMENT ,4 5X DCCJP"CY r' „ob ALOCK 5Z3 NPT C.TR PROD l,;vX OCCUPANCY ,,u8 NEAPORT AQUATICS CENTER U45% CCCUPANCY J69 26'•) E COAST HWY 1C,X OCCUPANCY JASMINE PARR 1:.JX OCCUPANCY t71 SUNSETTED ..0 d Y, CCCUPANCY 172 14EMPORTER INN EXPANSION 10-. OCCUPANCY _7 SUNSETTED aGmA CCCuPtf CY i73 SUNSETTED )vv2 OCCUPANCY . ,;75 FASHION IS RENAISSANCE 1sJX OCCUPANCY �76 SUNSETTED Ct'UX OCCUPANCY )77 CUM SENI04 PROJcCT 77C•% OCCUPANCY . •;7i POINT DEL MAR 1•:JA CCCUPANCY 174 PACIFIC CLUE 1')X CCC UPAACY O8' SUNSETTED JUUX OCCUPANCY ubl NEWPORT SEPCREST APT 1^7X OCCUPANCY •,63 3800 CAMPUS DR(M-STORAGE) 1U:.X OCC UPHNCY •, E4 HOAG CANCER _CENTER J'_,X OCCUPANCY J EJWARDS NEWPORT CENTER '.J•:X OCCUPANCY 40 -J to SEASIDE APTS. (MESA II) 1vsX •3CCUPwNCY v87 VICTORIA STATION (OFFICE) 16u7. OCCUPANCY C 383 37oO CAMPUS DR(M-STORAGE) UOUX OCCUPANCY J89 NEWPORT IMPORTS 16vA OCCUPANCY 'v t• SUPERSEDED vUtX 3CCUPaKCY OCCUPANCY . J92 MARINERS' MILE MARINE CTR 11G,2 OCCUPANCY i93 15TH STREET APARTMENTS 394 SEASIDE APARTMENTS ICI 1Ui:''/. OCCUPANCY J95 NPT SAY RETIREMENT INN U863 OCCUPANCY f J96 NEWPORT CLASSIC INN UC:;X OCCUPANCY 697 MARINERS CxURCH EXPANSION JG..4 OCCUPANCY .94 4CLACHLAN-NEWFORT PL ,0,X OC-CUPANCY v49 15+J1 .SUPERICR MEDICAL 16•.7, OCCUPANCY 1,,Q FASHION ISLAND Ac OCU9 OCCUPANCY r 1'Al NEWPORTER RESORT EXPAND. UUUX OCCUPANCY 10'2 SUNSETTED G6UX OCCUPANCY 1 t;3 NEW RT LIDO MEO CENTER 096X OCCUPANCY 1G4 VILLA POINT W-Jl2 OCCUPANCY 105 SHOK RI 0.N UO(:X OCCUPANCY 1Zt 15TH ST AFTS vo' % OCCUPANCY 107 ROCKWELL EXPANSION vCC!X OCCUPANCY 108 ANDREW RESTAURANT CC:'X OCCUPANCY 139 9ALd % nPSHINGTON J6CX OCCUPANCY OCUX OCCUPANCY 11 ! NEWPORT IMPORTS REST.or m go m or v - - - - PPT NP: TE51•• TRAFFIC PhASING ORDINANC: DATE: C9/10/93 REPORT ON APPPOVED PROJECT VOLUMES PROJ-NcR ALL PROJECTS ON FILE: APPROVED VOLUME IS NtIPHTFD 5' 341 HUGHES AIRCRAFT 41 luuX OCCUPANCY :C2 SUNSETTED :J:JX OCCUPANCY =03 FAR WEST SAVINGS AND LOAN 1GvA OCCUPANCY uP4 SUPERSEDEC UCJX OCCUPANCY 1135 AERONUTRONIC FORD 1C:,'X JCCUPAKCY 006 RACK RAY CFFICE 1GJx OCCUPANCY )-J7 20YLE 61G1NEERING 1::Jx OCCUPANCY 6 CAL CANADIAN 7ANK I.VX OCCUPANCY :'.q C"IVIC FLALu (13YA OCCUPANCY d 1 C• CORPORATE PLAZA C3Uz OCCUPANCY 0.11 KOLL CENTER NEWPORT IC.2 OCCUPANCY J12 MAC ARTHUR COURT 1G3X OCCUPANCY Z13 SUPERSEDEC U-.i,X OCCUPANCY C14 SUPERSEDED t'.CJX OCCUPANCY �15 ORCHAPd OFFICE 10`2 OCCUPANCY 016 PACIFIC MUTUAL PLAZA Icu% OCCUPANCY O 517 3101 BIRCH CFFICE 10JX OCCUPANCY G18 N5kPORT PLACE 1001 OCCUPANCY 81G SUNSETTED U.Jx )CCUPANCY 120 LANK CA NEWPORT 1C•uX OCCUPANCY '1121 AAYSICE SCUAkE 1C:A OCCUPANCY 422 SEA ISLAKC 15uX UCCUPPNCY J23 BAYWOOD AF4RTMENTS 1Ou2 OCCUPANCY 024 HARBOR POINT HOMES_ 10cA OCCUPANCY C25 ROCER-S GARDENS 1:'JX OLCUPANCY U20 SEAVIEw LUTnERAN PLALA 1.-_% OCCUPANCY :27 RUDY BARON _ 10.;X OCCUPANCY 02L QUAIL BUSINESS CENTER IOUX OCCUPANCY 329 441 NEwPCRT BLVD. 106X OCCUPANCY U30 MARTHA•$ VINEYARD 1OLX CCCUPANCY ` ,31 V4LJEZ 1:,.X OCCUPANCY COAST hUSINESS CENTER 10•)X OCCUPANCY ,33 KOLL CENTER NAT NO. 1 TFP ji 5A OCCUPANCY U34 SEE PRCJtCTS 340 TO 343 lG;'X OCCUPANCY J35 ROSS MOLLARD 1U,3 OCCUPANCY C36 SUNSETTED _ VO!A OCCUPANCY '39 HUGRES AIRCRAFT 42 iG.X CCCUPANCY 14u SUPERCEDED 10vx OCCUPANCY C.1 FLAGSHIP HCSPITAL 1C•.:X OCCUPANCY ` u42 WIC CANYON 1U -2YA OCCUPANCY 043 FUN ZONE IUUX OCCUPANCY G44 MARRIOTT rlCTEL 103X OCCUPANCY 045 ST. ANDRE4S CHURCH 17_X OCCUPANCY ::40 YMCA U'J:x OCCUPANCY G47 ALLRED CONDOS 1vC6 OCCUPANCY '48 MURGAN DCVELOPMENT 15UA OCCUPANCY 049 FOUR SLASCNS HOTEL,. 7 JJX OCCUPANCY CSJ UNIV ATH CLUB TPP•+.4 EMKAY 1054 OCCUPANCY U�1 4-LOCK 4001 MEDICAL 1L JX OCCUPANCY 153 SdE PROJECTS 530 TO 533 Uf.:A OCCUPANCY ZPT FR: TE51_ TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE DATi.: J9/%-/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 111 2bTH ST MARINA PROJECT U5ux OCCUPANCY 112 AMBROSIA RESTAURANT v^.:.X OCCUPANCY 113 CRLTY/TOYOTA EXPANSION 1uu2 OCCUPANCY 114 OUR LADY DLEEN Of ANUELS 13v9 OCCUPANCY 115 ZONTA CLUJ RESIDENTIAL 1C_X OCCUPANCY 116 2ETM STREET ISLAND L'U-A OCCUPANCY 117 VILLA POINT 11 103% OCCUPANCY Ild TACO EELL (FAST FOOD) 1JJX OCCUPANCY 119 FASHION ISLAND TRANSFER 00JX OCCUPANCY 12'J PACIFIC BELL SITE L1:---X OCCUPANCY 121 NE%POPT VILLAUS C.�d2 OCCUPANCY 122 CASTAk AYS MARINA UO•?X OCCUPANCY 123 KOLL CENTER CARL'S JR 10:'X OCCUPANCY 124 CIVIC PLAZA 3G:OX OCCUPANCY 125 CORPORATE PLAZA K WEST (1GLX OCCUPANCY 127 BURGESS CC?.MERCIAL CENTE2 1t.•':X OCCUPANCY 125 HARBOR FACIFIC PLAZA JOUX OCCUPANCY 129 HOAG HOSPITAL EXTENSION j3„7. 3CCUPANCY 34-_ AMENDMENT NO. 1 FORD AE00 100X OCCUPANCY 341 AMENDMENT NO. 1 FORD AERO vOLlA 0 C C UP AhCY 342 4MENDMcNT NO. 1 FORD AERO UM OCCUPANCY 3-3 AMENDMENT NO. 1 fORD AERO :nX OCCUPANCY 530 AMEN 0:1 E NT NC 1 NORTH FORD 1SJI OCCUPANCY 531 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FORD IC�lX OCCUP4NCY 532 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FORD 10•JX OCCUPANCY 533 AMENDMENT NO 1 NORTH FORD iOJ'X OCCUPANCY 555 IFVINE PROJECT 000A OCCUPANCY )10 NEbPORT DUNE] uC:.X OCCUPANCY u20 BAYVIEH L;,?X OCCUPANCY v3:: CITY OF IRVINE ,DEV. UCJX OCCUPANCY C I L RPT HR: TE510 TRAFFIC PHAJINb UMDi NANCE C DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOUIMES 1 - SU_HRA'RY C � s INTERSECTION-NAME INT-NR :S („ 5 dRISTOL ST N / SIRCH ST 417G 6 2-1/2 HRrPM-PEAK - 1-HOUR PM-PEAK, L, a 9 YR Nd SU ES WB NL NT NR SL-- ST SR EL ET ER WL VT WR 10 1 0 18E 0 1— ln�— 50 a C 41 53 0 L. 0 593 2-1 /2 HR-_AM-PEAK _ 1-HOUR AM-PEA.K 3 _ 2 NO SB EA WA NL NT NR SL ST SR EL 'eT - s•_ _'7— Is 213 115 —" 5800 107 .0 -0 46 12 0 6 4 1• IB 1 3 3 5 V 9 Z . i JZL 13 8 All �(L�Y�'f 9 J 5 - 44 s - r RPT NR: TE51O TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE C DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES + - SUMMARY C : 9 < INTERS EC TION-NAME INT-NR US (, s BRISTOL ST / CAMPUS DR - IRVINE AV 4155 6 ] —2=17�2 NR-P M=PEK -HOUR PM-PEAK 1, 9 9 YR NE__ SB ES WB __ NL_NT NR,,_ - SL ST -SO EL- ET ER WL VT _ WR_ w 3v1 56�2 85 —Zi 3 __8 226 56 233 15 G 4i1 C L ++ +� 2-1/2 HR-AM-PEAK 1-HOUR AM-PEAK 3 +a NB S9 ES WS NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL 4T WR Is _ 493 226 69^ 8 0 51 196 .0 113 0 141 200 6 0 4 0 v n 9 L I 2 V 3 33 14 5 ' y 6 8 V 9 __. 1 r v e r 9 41 .1 jw 'e ,g � 0 91 3 Sa RPT MR: TE510 IkAttlC PHAJIN(J UKVlNAN%;c Q DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 'SUMMARY- 4 INTERSECTION—NAME INT—NR OS (" s BRISTOL ST N / CAMPUS OR 4172 _ 6 _ ] 2-1/2 HR—PM—PEAK - I-HOUR PM—PEAK V 9 9 YR NB SB EB WB ___ NL NT MR SL ST . SR EL .El ER WL MT WR 0 92 272 0 1309 4 43 U 30 106 0 0 0 203 485 0 r 11 rz 2-1/2 HR—AM—PEAK 1—HOUR AM—PEAK 3 v 11 NO SB EB WB NL N•T MR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL WT WR Is 205 65 0 626 5 97 0 0 11 22 0 0 0 100 213 0 _ I6 �. 1] 8 y 21 __ 2 L/ 3 J 6 e 9 1 2 5 B 9 �14� g 0 i � 3 5: 5 or RPT NR: TE510 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE D DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 SUMMARY - — - ,L z 41 INTERSECTION—NAME INT—NR S C, s JAMBOREE RD / MACARTHUR 0L 4275 6 7 —1-1---2 HR—PM--PEAK 1—HOUR PM-PEAK C 6 s YR NB SB ED WB NL NT NR St ST SR EL ET ER WL LT WR 20 200 50 15 249 124 177 779 5 57�7d 45 y 11 2 2-1 /2 HR—AM—_PEAK 1—HOUR AM—PEAK „ I< NB SB EB WB NL NT_ NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL UT WR Is 485 940 1239 715 5 195 43 11.0 27.0 92 1.8.4 417 20 54 297 10 _ I6 --- 19 V 1 \. 3 ) � 3 1 y 2 37 y 9 9 AZ 2 L• 0 3 J 11 C" `yam or fm RPT NR: TE510 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE DATE: 09/10/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES 1 SUMMARY' � 2 a INTERSEC7ION-NAME INT-NR S s MACARTHUR BL / BIRCH ST 4295 ] 2-1/2 HR-PM-PEAK 1-HOUR PM�PEAK a 9 YR Na SB E8 W8 NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER--WL _ WT WR m ---690 423 171 150 ._^ -- "�- 0 3� 211 0 32 54 _ -G39 30 J j n IT 2-1/2 HR-AM_PEAK 1-HOUR AM-PEAK ,` la N8 SB EB we NL NT NR SL ST SR EL ET ER WL UT WR Is 324 647 144 38 10 142 12 0 325 0 17 56 0 12_ 7 0 _ I6 p 1) 19 1 y 3 � a 1 _ 2 37 0 1 3 i 0 2 l T ! PT NR: TE510 TRAFFIC PHASINb UNDINANLt DATE: 09/1G/93 REPORT ON APPROVED PROJECT VOLUMES _ SUMMARY I fil ERS EC N-NA(1c — MACARTHUR OL / CAMPUS DR 4SGG _ 2-1/2 HR-PM-PEAK -HOUR PH-PEAK -- YP, N8 58 EO WB NL NT NR SL ST. 'S R- EL ET ER WL _ WT WR 736 461 34 23b-- 0 333 U 18 204 D 0 17 0 6� 48 61 2-1/2 HR-AM-PEAK 1-HOUR AM-PEAK NS SB EB W8 NL NT NR SL ST SR• EL ET ER WL UT WR 306 724 112 47 ___ _ 0 154 0 49 315 0 0 56 0 _ 0 _, 13__ 11____ __ _ 1 ' 1 1 1 Appendix B 1 w' tCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGIONAL TRAFFIC ANNUAL GROWTH RATE ' COAST HIGHWAY •' East city limit to MacArthur Boulevard 2% MacArthur Boulevard to Jamboree Road 2% ' Jamboree Road to Newport Boulevard 2% • ' Newport Boulevard to west city limit 4% IRVINE AVENUE All 2 .5% JAMBOREE ROAD Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road 3% San Joaquin Hills Road to Bison 2% Bison to Bristol 1% Bristol to Campus 1% ' MACARTHUR BOULEVARD • ' Coast Highway to San Joaquin Hills Road 6% San Joaquin Hills Road to north city limit 3% NEWPORT BOULEVARD ' Coast Highway to north city limit 1% Street segments no t listed are assumed to have 0% regional growth. 1 01 PROPOSED ALAMO RENTAL CAR FACILITY - 4301 & 4361 BIRCH STREET ' Preliminary Information on Project - 7800 sq. ft. of space • - 3 service bays ' - 2 car wash bays ' Traffic Study (applicable for non-residential projects generating more than 130 daily trips) • ' Rates for trips per rental space AM (7 TO 9 a.m. ) PM (4 to 6 P.m. ) ADT In Out Tot In Out Tot In Out Tot . 13 . 10 .23 . 13 .12 .25 1. 1 1.22 2 .32 1 • t i 1 1 1 1 • t Appendix C 1 i 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection MacArthur Blvd. Birch Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM •, Peak 2Y2 Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%:Hour growth Volume Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1569 95 324 1988 20 28 • Southbound 1967 119 1 647 1 2723 1 27 128 ' Eastbound 991 0 1 144 1 1135 1 11 1 64 Westbound 629 0 1 38 1 667 1 7 1 64 J ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/z Hour Traffic Volume. ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2% Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. • (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 1 • ' Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection MacArthur Blvd. Birch Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM •' Peak 2%2 How Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2'/:Hour growth Volume Peak 2'h Hour Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2'F.Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1737 106 690 2533 25 28 • I Southbound 2121 130 1 423 1 2674 27 28 ' Eastbound 1182 0 171 1353 13 74 Westbound 1746 0 150 1896 19 74 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 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. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard • 1 •1 •' Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 •1 4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection Campus Dr. Bristol St. (north bound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spreing 1992) AM •' Peak 2'/z Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%z Hour growth Volume Peak 2!/2 Hour Peak 2%z Hour Peak 2%z Hour Peak 2%z Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 5389 0 205 5594 56 12 • Southbound 1218 0 65 1283 13 10 Eastbound 1 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A Westbound 1 2641 0 626 1 3267 1 33 1 4 4J ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2%z Hour Traffic Volume. •' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2'h Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. •t • •' Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 4 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis 1 Intersection Campus Dr. Bristol St. (north bound) (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winttr/Spring 1992) PM .1 Peak 2%:Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%:Hour growth Volume Peak 2K Hour Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2'h Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 3436 0 92 3528 35 12 . Suhbound 3569 0 272 3841 38 12 1 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 1 N/A I N/A Westbound 6255 0 1309 7564 1 76 1 6 4A © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. 1 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 1 1 1 I. 1 '•1Date: 9/21/1993 1 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 •1 4 1 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Drive ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) AM 0, Peak 2'/2 Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2 V2 Hour growth Volume Peak N Hour Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%n Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1525 142 306 1973 20 36 Southbound 2924 271 724 3919 39 10 Eastbound 2284 1 0 1 112 1 2396 24 0 Westbound 911 1 0 1 47 1 958 10 18 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/2 Hour Traffic Volume. 1 0 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 01 (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 1 1 01 1 ' Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 ■ ■ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis ' Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Campus Drive (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) PM Peak 2'h Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2'S Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak 2V2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2365 219 736 3320 33 42 Souhbound 3581 332 461 4374 44 10 ' I Eastbound 1 1699 1 0 1 34 1733 1 17 1 0 Westbound 1 2817 1 0 1 230 3047 1 30 1 18 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2tY2 Hour Traffic Volume. 1 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak N Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization(I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 1 • 1 ' Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 I � 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Jamboree Road ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM •' Peak 2%:Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%n Hour growth Volume Peak 2%Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 2841 173 485 3499 35 28 • Southbound 1166 71 940 2172 22 To- Eastbound ' 3257 1 66 1239 4562 1 46 1 0 Westbound 1 2014 1 40 1 715 2769 1 28 1 0 JX❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z 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. (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 2 X 1% Growth Factor For Jamboree Road • 4 Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 01 I ■ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection MacArthur Blvd. /Jamboree Road (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM •' Peak 2V2 Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%Hour growth Volume Peak N Hour Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%Hour Volume (1) Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 1831 112 533 2476 25 28 • Southbound 2876 1771 774 3827 38 22 ' Eastbound 2208 44 919 3171 32 0 Westbound 3631 73 975 4679 47 0 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than I% of Projected Peak 2%2 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. ' (1) 2 X 3% Growth Factor for MacArthur Boulevard 2 X 1% Growth Factor For Jamboree Road • •t Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch Street Bristol Street ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM Peak 2%Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2h Hour growth Volume Peak 2%x Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2V2 Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 473 0 36 509 5 0 • Southbound 578 0 81 659 7 6 ' Eastbound 4336 1 0 1 861 5197 52 6 Westbound 0 1 0 1 0 0 N/A N/A ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 21/2 Hour Traffic Volume. 1 •' ❑ 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. 1 1 • Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 I01 4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch Street Bristol Street (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM Peak 2%z Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%z Hour growth Volume Peak 2'/z Hour Peak N Hour Peak 2!/2 Hour Peak 2'/z Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Northbound 634 0 10 644 6 0 • Souhbound 1336 0 64 1400 14 8 ' Eastbound 3982 0 1 696 1 4678 1 47 6 Westbound 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 N/A N/A ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z Hour Traffic Volume. •' ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 1 • 4 Date: 9/21/1993 Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 01 4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch St. Bristol St. (north bound ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) AM • Peak 2%:Hour Approved ' Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%:Hour growth Volume Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2Y2 Hour Peak 2%z Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 2436 0 213 2649 26 6 • Southbound 711 0 115 826 8 4 ' Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 2519 0 586 3105 1 31 10 ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/: Hour Traffic Volume. ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2'/z Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. • 1 •' Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Birch St. Bristol St. (north bound) ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1992) PM Peak 2%Hour Approved ' Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%:Hour growth Volume Peak 2%s Hour Peak 2%a Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2'h Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 1192 0 110 1302 13 6 • Southbound 2937 0 188 3125 31 6 Eastbound 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 Westbound 4532 0 1180 5712 57 10 ® 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 N2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. • •, Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 ■ 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Drive Bristol Street ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) AM • Peak 2%:Hour Approved Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2!/2 Hour growth Volume Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Peak 2%:Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 3952 0 493 4445 44 0 • Southbound 991 0 226 1217 12 0 ' Eastbound 1 6645 0 1 690 7335 73 1 18 Westbound 0 0 0 0 N/A N/A ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 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. • 1 •' Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 4 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Campus Drive Bristol Street ' (Existing Traffic Volumes based of Average Winter/Spring 1993) PM • Peak 2%2 Hour Approved ' Approach Existing regional Projects Projected 1%of Projected Project Direction Peak 2%a Hour growth Volume Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%2 Hour Peak 2%2'Hour Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume ' Northbound 3002 0 301 3303 33 0 • Southbound 2823 0 456 3279 33 0 ' Eastbound 1 5600 1 0 1 602 6202 1 62 18 Westbound 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 N/A N/A 4J ® Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2tY2 Hour Traffic Volume. 1 ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2t/2 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. 1 • 1 1 •' Date: 9/21/1993 ' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Revised: 10/7/93 • 1 •t 1 1 1 • I'I ' Appendix D 1 ' ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersectio MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) an Birch Street (east /west) ' Analyzed A.M Peak Period ( to ) •, Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 9/22/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C ' Movement Lanes Capacity W/O Project W/O Project W/ Project W/ Pro'ect NL 1 1,600 79 0.05* 1 93 0.06* • ' NT 3 4,800 720 0.15 720 0.15 NR Free N/A 127 N/A 127 N/A SL 1 1,600 128 0.08- 128 0.08 ST 3 4,800 918 0.25* 918 0.26* SR 0 -- f 3031 1317 -- EL 1 .5 2,400 991 0.04 117 0.05 ET 1 1,600 315 0.20* 320 0.20* ER 0.5 800 70 0.09 80 0.10 WL 1 1,600 36 0.02 36 0.02 ' WT 2 3,200 221 0.07* 233 0.07* WR Free N/A 54 N/A 54 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.57 0.59 ' Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A N/ Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.57 0.59 ' ICU J___ A I0i we lcu ' A 0.00 to 0.60 • s 0.61to0.70 * Critical Movement c 0.71 to 0.80 East-west Direction is split phase D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ • ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersectio MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) an Birch Street (east /west) ' Analyzed P.M Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 9/22/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C ' Movement Lanes Capacity W/O Proiect W/O Proiect W/ Proiect W/ Project NIL 1 1,600 154 0.10* 168 0.10* NT 3 4,800 990 0.21 990 0.21 NR Free N/A 35 N/A 35 N/A SL 1 1,600 56 0.04 56 0.04 ST 3 4,800 912 0.23* 912 0.23* SR 0 L191 , -- 205 -- EL 1 .5 2,400 272 0.11 293 0.12 ET 1 1,600 290 0.18* 295 0.18* ER 0.5 800 26 0.03 37 0.05 WL 1 1,600 130 0.08 130 0.08 ' WT 2 3,200 686 0.21 * 698 0.22* WR Free N/A 1 128 NIA 128 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.72 0.73 ' Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A �� ; 'N/ Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.72 0.73 ' ICU V/C ICU ' A 0.00 to O.60 E 0.61 to 0.70 * Critical Movement C 0.71to0.80 East-west Direction is split phase ' D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ 1 it•' ' ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) and Campus Drive (east /west) ' Analyzed for AN _ Peak Period ( to ) •' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 10/7/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C Movement Lanes I Capacity W/O Proiec W/O Project I W/ Proiect W/ Proiect • NL 1 1,600 45 0.03 451, 0.03 ' NT 4 6,400 807 0.13* 821 0.13* NR 1 1,600 53 0.03 57 0.04 SL 1 1,600 365 0.23* 365 0.23* ST 4 6,400 1,272 0.20 1,277 0.20 ' SR 1 1,600 200 0.13 200 0.13 EL 2 3,200 334 0.10 334 0.10 ET 2 3,200 801 0.27* 801 -0.27 ER 54 54 ' WL 1 1,600 51 0.03* 60 0.04* WT 3 4,800 299 0.06, 299 0.06 •' WR Free N/A 94 N/A 94 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.66 0.67 ' Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/A •.• N/ • Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's o.66 0.67 ' ICU IL 13 V/C ICU A 0.00 to 0.60 • a 0.61too.70 * Critical Movement C 0.71 to 0.80 D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to LO F 1.0+ • ' ADVANCED CIVIL Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) ' and Campus Drive (east /west) Analyzed for P.M Peak Period ( to ) •' Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car Analyst: HB Dat 10/7/93 No. of Volume V/C Volume V/C ' Movement Lanes Ca pa( W/O Pro'ec W/0 Pro'ect W/ Proiect W/ Prolect • NIL 1 T,600 104 0.07* 104 0.07* ' NT 4 6,400 1,220 0.19 1,236 0.19 NR 1 1,600 65 0.04 70 0.04 SL 1 1,600 227 0.14 227 0.14 ST 4 6,400 1,121 0.18 1,126 0.18 1 SR 1 1,600 7841 0.49* 784 0.49*' EL 2 3,200 254 0.08 254 0.08 ET 2 3,200 424 0.16* 424 0.16* 01 ER 77 77 ' WL 1 1,600 107 0.07* 116 0.07* WT 3 4,800 1,031 0.21 1,031 0.21 •' WR Free N/A 165 N/A 165 N/A Sum of Critical V/C's 0.79 0.79 ' Adjustment Factor for Lost Time N/Al N/ • Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.79 0.79 ' ICU ' V/C ICU • A 0.00 to 0.60 s 0.61 to 0.70 * Critical Movement C 0.71 to 0.80 D 0.81 to 0.90 E 0.91 to 1.0 F 1.0+ • ADVANCEDr CIVIL intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Worksheet Intersection of: MacArthur Boulevard (north/ south) and Jamboree Road (east /west) Analyzed for. P.M Peak Period ( to ) Project: Alamo Rent-a-Car AnalystHB __. Date 10/7/93 I Volume Volume V/C� Volumel V/C Exist. No. of Growth Approved without without Ptojeot With I with ' Movemen Volume Lanes 'Volume Ca aci Proiects Pro'ect Project Traffic Proiect l Project NL 286 1 17 1,G00 20 232 0.20% 323 0.201 t I NT ` 391 3 23 4,800 195 609 0.17 14 623 0.18 NR 159 10 45 _ _ 214 214 - SL 172 1 10 1,600 15 197 0.121 197 0.12 ST ^ 874 3 1 52 4,800 251 1,177 0.25 11 1,188 0.25' ' SR 470 Free 28 N/A 125 623 N/A 623 N/A i EL 229 2. 5 3,200 _ 177 411 0.13' 411 0.134 ' ET 640 3 13 4,800 279 932 0.19 • 932 0.19 ER 16 Free 1 1 N/A I 5 22 N/A ? 22 j N/A WL 505 2 10 3,200 64 579 0.18 , 579 0.18,I WT 1299 3 26 4,800 378 1,703 0.35' 1,703, 0.35' ' WR 67 Free 1 N/ _ 451 113 NIA i i 116' N/All gm Sum of Critical V/C's 0.93 AA0,93 >- 7 i r Adjustment Factor for Lost Time i N/ NIPa Adjusted Sum of Critical V/C's 0.93 ... ' vtC tcu A 0,00 to 0.60 ' B 0,61 t00.70 " Critical Movement C 0.71 to 0.80 D 0.81 to 0.90 ' B 0.01 to 1.0 P 1.0+